Bruno

Sacha Baron Cohen returns to play the second of his personalities, Bruno- a gay, Austrian, fashionista who leaves for America in an attempt to achieve fame after a career-ending mistake forced him off of his Australian television show.

URBAN: A tour of the United States with another Sacha Baron Cohen creation.

If you liked Borat, then you will like this one as well. The humor is the same. Many of the jokes are of the same nature. The humor is a little less biting, but the big operatic ending to this story is even farther over the top.

At its worst, Borat was simply funny in a completely offensive way. At its best, it played this amazing joke on American consciousness, forcing us to question if we are who we say we are. On a stranger note, viewers had to contend with an unquestionable glee regarding the discomfort of those on the screen. This film goes even further, punking with a glee, and this time the target is not only the anonymous, but is able to get a number of big time celebrities as well.

Cohen's jokes do not only focus on gay jokes,,, although visual humor of the sort is definitely the staple. Questions of fame, parenthood, marriage, and migrant furniture create situations that bring back the biting humor and social satire that typifies Borat/Bruno/Ali G at his best.

For the finale (its not exactly the end of the movie, but it should be), Bruno seems to have mastered his homosexuality. As an effort to communicate this he hosts a UFC fight night, complete with octagon cage, barbed wire, and screaming redneck fans. The result is completely over the top and is the single moment in the film which will polarize viewers. It is able to do sot to, because many people who go to this film will see themselves as the characters on the screen.

Read on...

Public Enemies

Michael Mann directs this gangster-era throwback with his trademarked style. He also makes good use of his star power which is supplied in great volume by Johnny Depp and Christian Bale.

URBAN: Public Enemies was on my list as one of the films that I was most looking forward to this summer and I have to say that this is one that didn't disappoint-however-it doesn't overwhelm either.

In all of his films-Michael Mann, most well known for his work on the Miami Vice television series, has created a distinct cinematic signature. Lots of shots of guys riding in boats with the wind blowing through their hair. Lots of quick shots of dark interiors, serious people giving each other serious, but telling looks. And lots and lots of scenes shot at night that combine both of the above against neon lights. This style made Collateral a really cool and underrated film. This same combination taken to the extreme made a really cool looking but unintelligible story on the film version of Miami Vice. This same style really doesn't translate well to the 1930's.

For one thing, most of the action takes place in the bleakest parts of Indiana or in the wilds of Wisconsin. Not exactly the cool neon/noir places that take advantage of Mann's style. Prohibition Chicago is the focal point of the film, but the only scenes that really play up the glitz are the final scenes near the movie theater.

Johnny Depp has a lot of charisma, playing John Dillinger pretty straight. It was an odd choice, for an actor who has become famous for putting outrageous spins on the characters that he plays. He makes it work by focusing on the parts of Dillinger that appeal to the audience (moviegoers and bank goers alike). He does so by playing all the time as Dillinger supposedly was in public-image conscious and highly professional. Christian Bale comes across as a convincing lawman who not only wants to succeed, but also to do so in the right way. In other reviews, I have read that some were impressed by Billy Crudup's sendup of Jay Edgar Hoover, and his radio ready voice from the era. I felt that it was forced and seemed out of place considering that most of his speeches were with only one listener or while talking on the phone.

In my summer preview I mentioned that I loved films like this, where the ending is never in doubt, because it allows the filmmaker and the viewer to focus on the telling of the story, rather than the story itself. This film, in its second half, does an impressive job of tightening the moral framework. From here, Dillinger is not only the smooth criminal, but also clearly devoted to his girlfriend and keeping his promises. At the same time, it is apparent that his attention and devotion primarily cause pain in the lives of those with whom he associates. This apparent contradiction comes alive for the viewer as well when the FBI declares its "war on crime". Clearly, the public (and moviegoers) would like to end crime, but what lengths would we be willing to go to eradicate it? In the film, the attention and increased devotion of law enforcement eventually completes its goal of catching the public enemies. This same attention and devotion lead to many accidental deaths and interrogation techniques that are difficult to accept. It forces one to ask the question of whether or not the achievement of the goal is worth it.

Director Mann has created an interesting and entertaining film that is built from a solid foundation of epic characters and great actors. His film takes on serious ethical concerns as well as asking questions regarding the nature of fame in this country. He does all of this while maintaining his very individual signature. Unfortunately, the film does not do an excellent job of combining these two elements. Ultimately, I think that the film does a great job of telling the story and grabbing the attention of viewers, but fails in that its style would be best fitted in a different time,,, or at least a different place during that time. The quick moving camera, suffused with multiple shots and quite a bit of hand-held work would be much better fitted to flashy documentary or a crime/heist film with an ensemble cast. The style and substance do not match. The result is that the viewer is left wanting more. It feels like something is missing. This style of filming is made for individuals walking through dark clubs, members of a team getting ready to make the move they have been planning the whole movie, fight off a last attack. None of these things happen. Instead, these characters face down the effects of their actions and the hero of the film.... he dies ignominiously, not in a hail of gunfire breaking out of prison, but by being shot in the head as he leaves the cinema.

URBAN: Recommended

Read on...

Readers Respond: 5 Favorite Films with Matt Balach

Readers Respond-5 Favorite Films with Matt Balach




You may know him from the TV show, "Fixing Cars With Matt Balach". He's an executive officer in the United States Army and a beast in the weightroom. It's Matt Balach and these are his 5 favorite films.

5. Star Wars IV: A New Hope

This film started the franchise. It's fun, easily the most fun movie in this series. Not over ethically indulgent as some of the others, very light hearted, and none of the scenes seem forced upon you.

4. Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan

This is a real step for the Star Trek series as it is the first film where one of the major characters dies. Ricardo Montalban is a great enemy that is actually a little bit frightening. The subplot about Will Shatner getting old is extremely interesting and Kirstie Alley is hot! I also just love it when Chekov says "Wessels"

3. The Godfather

"I'm a very powerful man". Need I say more? The montage scene here is probably the greatest I have ever seen. Quotes, I love the quotes in this movie. When Santucchi drives out to kill Paulie, "Leave the gun. Take the Cannoli."

2. Tombstone


"You'll have to excuse me if I don't shake hands". Very topical considering the swine flu epidemic. It's better than Wyatt Earp, another film about the gunslinger. It's a great mix of violence with a thoughtful story. Oh yeah, Dana Delany is hot!

1. Pulp Fiction


Do I have to say anything about this one? Most quotable movie ever, especially the apartment scene. Quentin Tarantino is my favorite director and it revived the career of John Travolta.

Read on...

Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen

Michael Bay directs the second installment of the Transformers series. The Decepticons are back to revive their leader and their designs on the entire planet. Of course, Optimus Prime will do everything he can to save Sam Witwicky and the rest of the human race.

URBAN: I almost left after the first 45 minutes. After that, there is a rebound, but it still contains at least 2 big blunders.

This film contains essentially the same overall framework as the first Transformers film.

1. It begins with a flashback to a prior earth visit by the Decepticons
2. Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) acts nervous around girls
3. Robots Enter
4. Robots and military destroy several large set pieces
5. Optimus Prime gives a motivational voice over

The main differences are that this one is much longer and that the focus changes from the human characters to the transformers/technology.

To be completely honest, I almost left the theater after the first 45 minutes. It is seriously that bad. Maybe it's the Terminator 3 style girlfriend, maybe its the tired "I'm nervous around girls" bit that LaBeouf does, but my money is that the biggest problem with this movie is Michael Bay's ridiculous need to appease the younger crowd as evidenced by his taste in humor. This film has some funny lines that complement the action quite well. For the most part, John Turturro handles the funny role quite well, but Bay has unfortunately also seen it fit to include to wisecracking robots who are clearly racist stereotypes. It is not their accents that are necessarily negative, (a la Jar Jar Binks) but rather the gold teeth and illiteracy.

These are only the major issues that occur within the first 45 minutes (out of 150). There are two issues which occur near the end of the film that were simply laughable. The first is the Heaven's gate vision which occurs as Sam (LaBeouf) lies dead in the sand. Sam's vision is of the robot ancestors. They tell him how to use the Matrix of Leadership (MOS). Yes, the secret to saving our planet is the Matrix of Leadership (I know it is from the comic book, but it is the dorkiest name ever). This is the second laughable issue that this film raises at the end of the film, where it should be reaching its peak.

To be fair, there were some parts of the film that were worthy of recognition. The film did a good job of presenting its mythology. The mention of this mythology is one of the only things that holds the weak plot together, and is probably the only thing would draw me to another sequel in this series. This film also did a much better job that the first entry in portraying the robot vs. robot violence. In the first film it was often quite difficult to identify the robots as they battled (the quick cuts didn't help). This shortcoming is corrected by depicting all of the Autobots in bright colors and all of the Decepticons in gray. The only time that I had trouble differentiating between the two groups of robots was during the battle between the US military as they attempted to defend the village against the Decepticons.

The first film worked because it was able to portray interesting characters and make the viewer care about their story. In this film, it seems that director Bay has attempted to switch this strategy around. Here, the human characters; Sam, girlfriend, roomate, family and the military characters are not featured as prominently as the robots and military technology (well, maybe the girlfriend was). What I mean by this is to say that the most compelling parts of this film all had to do with the robot characters. The fight scene where Optimus Prime defends Sam against 3 Decepticons and eventually sacrifices himself is the only part that draws any true emotion. Likewise, the United States military, which seemed woefully underpowered against the Decepticons in the first film, has upgraded their firepower in order to provide a reliable option.

In closing, this film, like the first looks good on the screen. It has great effects with fights between robots and dips into an interesting mythology. Even with several things going for it, the film just fails miserably on several key points,,,,, points that really aren't necessary for this film to succeed. In reality, I believe that the best use of this film is to explain the need for our full-fledged support of General Motors.

Think about it...

The world is being threatened (the recession) by a small parasitic group looking for energy (greedy Wall-Street executives). If we lend our support to the Autobots (General Motors) through the NEST agreement (Bailout) they will continue to protect us (from losing our automobile manufacturing jobs) and give us the Camaro (Consumer Society).

On a serious note, this film does seem to have a very clear and positive message on behalf of interventionist politics. It is too bad that this feature was not explored more prominently.

URBAN: Not Recommended

Read on...

Coming Up, Friday June 26

URBAN:
As you probably expected, this week it has got to be Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. This film hasn't been reviewed well, but it is still the biggest show in town, having already taken in $16 million at the box office.

The first edition in this franchise did a good job of making viewers take interest in the human characters, focusing on their story as a part of the larger robot mythology. Of course, director Michael Bay will be serving up plenty of explosions and effects that will be interesting. I just hope that the robot fight scenes come off a better this time around.

Read on...

Terminator Salvation

McG directs Christian Bale as John Connor in the fourth installment of the Terminator series.

URBAN: Extremely Kinetic, way better than T:3

URBAN:
This was one of the films that I was looking forward to this summer. Once again I am dissapointed, but only slightly this time. The film keeps the viewers interest with great action and pacing, but ultimately is a failure in the way it fails to add to the Terminator legend.

I don't know why this film got such terrible reviews. It probably had something to do with the dark themes and often frightening sequences involving dehumanizing mechanical forces (which visually recall the holocaust). While I thought the film had several shortcomings, these issues are largely personal and deal primarily with the lack of meta-arch information. One area that the film really hit on the head was the action. The opening sequence, especially the helicopter crash, all look outstanding and set the dark tone extremely well. Despite the focus on John Connor, the character of Marcus Wright is actually the most interesting and the one who drives most of the plot. With regard to the action, he provides important balance to the fight scenes, which would have been overwhelmingly just shots of Christian Bale getting a beat down.

More importantly, the character of Marcus Wright drives the plot forward and provides the only window through which the viewer can approach the key philosophical questions that the Terminator series brings to the table. His ability to fully reason and participate in human community-while also having a fully mechanized endo-skeleton, provide an interesting answer to the primary component of humanity.

The film fails to answer any of the questions regarding artificial intelligence or tell the history of the first battles between man and machine that provide the setting for all of the Terminator films. The unwillingness to share on these issues nearly forces this film into the same category as the completely derivative T:3. Despite the new, post-apocalyptic environment in which this film is set, it is only the new characters and the intense action which keep it out of this zone.

Alas, great action is reproduced and improved upon every summer. Five years from now the effects used in this film will begin to feel outdated (Check out The Matrix now and tell me the cg doesn't stand out). McG goes for the pure adrenaline rush and largely succeeds. Success of this kind doesn't directly correlate to any type of long lasting status. We will probably forget about it by the end of the summer.

URBAN: Recommended

Read on...

Sony PSP Delivers on the smallest screen

Urban: I'm back from the desert.

While this is not explicitly about movies, it does touch on a number of points along the distribution element of the film business. Portable formats are a viable format which will only continue to grow as the platform expands.



While sitting in a tent in the middle of the Mojave Desert I had the pleasure of watching Ridley Scott's Alien on the most recent edition of the Sony PSP. I was pleasantly surprised. The screen was wider than those offered by both Apple's iPod and Microsoft's Zune. The sound was an initial dissapointment, not containing the necessary volume to please a viewer of feature films containing copious amounts of conversation. This problem was overcome with a pair of headphones, which yielded surprisingly good sound across all levels.


The width of the screen approximated a viewing experience that at very least recalled a movie screen. Different lighting conditions are handled well by the PSP with an option that can change the amount of lighting behind the screen.

Currently, only the biggest movie releases are able to see the light of day in the UMD format that the PSP employs. Certain classics have been given the greenlight as well, but these focus on on only the biggest hits of the 80's and 90's and today (kind of like a radio station). True diversity and depth of film viewing is not offered by this platform and it is rumored that, despite their press, may be attempting to move away from the platform in the next generation of PSP.

This issue is minimized by the ability to play computer media files. The primary issue here has to do with memory. Watching a ripped DVD normally calls for 7-8 gb of memory, which must be purchased as a memory card when using the PSP.

Read on...