Latest Reviews

Entries in Channing Tatum (8)

Thursday
Jun122014

22 Jump Street

If someone asked me what the most surprisingly good movie in recent memory has been, I would confidently answer, “21 Jump Street.” The film took a largely forgotten show from the late 80s/early 90s and abandoned much of its dramatic personality, replacing it instead with flavorful comedy and clever spoofs of the buddy cop action movie genre. Even the two lead stars seemed incompatible, but it proved to be a “don’t judge a book by its cover” type of movie, firmly planting itself as one of the funniest and smartest comedies of that year. Its sequel, wittily titled “22 Jump Street,” isn’t quite as successful, as its monotonous story gives it a mild case of “The Hangover Part II” syndrome, but the difference between that film and this one is that, while it reused similar situations from its predecessor, the jokes are fresh and more often than not manage to produce some big laughs.

“22 Jump Street” begins with a routine action scene—one involving an octopus of all things—a poor start to a sequel whose first movie nobody remembers for its action. Shortly after, it sets up its story through a quick meeting with Deputy Chief Hardy (Nick Offerman) where he explains to Schmidt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum) through some obvious, but still funny meta-humor that nobody expected them to succeed. To bring the old Jump Street program back was a risk, but they were successful enough to keep the program running and this time with a bigger budget. He explains that their next assignment is exactly like their last, an obvious jab at the played out “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” Hollywood sequel mentality, only this time they’re going to college. There’s a new drug called Whyphy (pronounced Wi-Fi) making the rounds and, just like last time, their job is to find the dealer and stop the drug from being distributed nationwide.

Of course, just because a movie is aware that it’s copying itself doesn’t generate an automatic forgiveness for its narrative laziness. Despite a twist or two, there is nothing new here to keep one interested as it succumbs to the very same “rehashed sequel” issues that it repeatedly makes fun of through its nearly two hour runtime. Even its drama is rehashed, only this time it’s Schmidt that’s jealous of Jenko’s newfound popularity rather than vice versa. The only clear difference between this movie and the first one is that the lousy, ineffective drama is actually increased, needlessly pervading the entire thing and causing the film to fail even harder because of it. And yes, there’s another drug trip scene.

“22 Jump Street” is one of the most self-deprecating movies I’ve ever seen, since it jokes about redundant sequels even as it relies entirely on those redundancies to form its story. Luckily, some genuine effort was made to be funny and the chemistry between Hill and Tatum is as strong as ever, which makes up for most of the film’s shortcomings. There are some terrific bits here, including the most awkward fistfight ever put to screen, and also like its predecessor, it cleverly skewers filmic clichés, like the traditional “meet cute” scene. It’s safe to say that if you laughed in the first movie, you’re likely to laugh here as well, as Hill and Tatum play off each other about as well as any comedic duo has onscreen.

Also notable is the very welcome and surprisingly serious (albeit short-lived) plea for tolerance of homosexuals, though you’d have to be reaching pretty far to argue “22 Jump Street” is a message movie. Its intention is to simply make its audience laugh and sometimes that’s all you need. Despite its copy and paste story, unwanted increase in drama and one egregious moment of product placement involving Doritos as Jenko walks down a dorm building hallway, logo to camera, without actually eating them, the film works. Although it’s unlikely to leave as much of an impression as the first movie, it’s just plain funny. It does exactly what it promises it will do, which will be enough for most viewers who want more of the same, but let’s just hope a third outing spices things up a bit.

22 Jump Street receives 3/5

Friday
Jun282013

White House Down

It was only three months ago that we sat through “Olympus Has Fallen,” the Gerard Butler action picture where terrorists took over the White House to make a future that matched their skewed ideologies. For all intents and purposes, this week’s “White House Down” is a remake of that film. It’s more humorous and it changes a few things around, but it’s essentially the same movie. A comparison of the two is inevitable and their different tones will split many audiences, half of who will favor the more violent, grittier nature of “Olympus Has Fallen” over the toned down cheese-fest presented here, but they both have their merits and work independently of each other, despite similar premises.

Cale (Channing Tatum) is an ex-soldier who served over in Afghanistan and is now working as a Capital police officer assigned to protecting Speaker of the House, Raphelson (Richard Jenkins). He’s divorced and has a young daughter named Emily (Joey King) who doesn’t particularly like him, but is stuck with him for the weekend. Despite her age, she’s a political junkie and blogger and is a big fan of the current President Sawyer (Jamie Foxx), so she’s thrilled when Cale tells her that they’re going to the White House and he’s going to be interviewed for a Secret Service position. Unfortunatley, he’s quickly rejected by Finnerty (Maggie Gyllenhaal) due to his low school grades and unreliability, but before he even has time to process this, the White House is taken over by a group of mercenaries. He’s soon separated from his daughter, so he takes it upon himself to rescue not just her, but also the President and maybe even the country itself.

“White House Down” is a movie that’s so idiotic, it’s actually kind of enjoyable. That’s about the best outcome director Roland Emmerich, the man behind disasters like “10,000 BC,” “Godzilla” and “The Day After Tomorrow,” could have hoped for. His hackneyed approach to directing a movie, which includes his insistence on peppering humor throughout tonally dire moments, has made him a director to hate and with good reason. But given that the mostly straight faced and excessively violent “Olympus Has Fallen” has already delivered on the promise of a gritty White House invasion movie, Emmerich’s weaknesses become his strengths here. “White House Down” is so absurd, so monumentally silly, so preposterously ludicrous, that it proves itself to be wholly entertaining.

Every character in the film is a cliché or caricature and every moment is seemingly ripped from another movie. It mixes the action and humor of the “Lethal Weapon” movies with the concept and protagonist from “Die Hard” and the fearless, gung-ho president from “Air Force One.” One line, as the terrorists force Emily to tell Cale that they have a gun to her head, is even ripped shamelessly from that latter film. But in a weird way, combining all these elements, coupled with its drastic tonal shift from “Olympus Has Fallen,” gives it a unique identity, even as it (probably knowingly) rips dialogue from other movies.

President Sawyer is one of those presidents that doesn’t seem to have a single detractor, someone who makes everyone in the room smile when he walks in. He’s caring of others and puts them and the country above himself. He’s the type of guy who seems to constantly speak in “speech” and whose vocal tone can only be described as patriotic. The movie reinforces this by backing him with slowly swelling patriotic music nearly every time he begins to speak. It’s a manipulative ploy used by many amateurish filmmakers to manufacture the likability of their characters and it’s somewhat insulting to the discerning viewer, but in “White House Down,” it becomes just another dumb thing to laugh at.

And laughing is a big part of what makes the film so enjoyable. Despite the grave circumstances they’re in and the great loss of human life they’ve incurred during it, the film remains as goofy as can be. It’s not the intentionally placed jokes that work the most (though they do offer up the occasional guffaw); it’s the entire situation that is one can’t help but laugh at. A good example comes when the president loses his shoe in one scene and ends up in front of his closet in his room. Instead of grabbing the polished footwear one would expect a president to wear, he grabs his Air Jordans. While it admittedly makes sense given the situation (you’re going to need the flexibility of movement shoes like that will provide), it’s nevertheless endlessly amusing.

Even more amusing is the most worthless Secret Service agents ever assigned to guard a president. They hardly get any shots off at all as the terrorists pick them off one by one, tagging them all with one quick bullet to the head like they’re master arms men, that is unless they’re shooting at Cale or President Sawyer. Then it’s like they’ve been blindfolded and given a gun for the first time. This is standard action movie procedure, so it’s not so much a detriment to the film as it is a necessary element, yet the fact remains, this movie is blissfully stupid.

“White House Down” has stinted, inconsequential dialogue, complete with none-too-subtle foreshadowing bits (“It’s going to be a busy morning, boys,” the Speaker of the House says before everything goes to hell), and the CGI, particularly in the exterior scenes, is downright abysmal. Although fun, in terms of entertainment, it’s not quite as good as “Olympus Has Fallen.” The overrunning of the White House is a bit more believable here, but both are so outrageous that if you’re going to go for it, you might as well go all out. “White House Down” unfortunately plays it a bit closer to the chest than “Olympus Has Fallen,” no doubt to get that coveted PG-13 rating, but that doesn’t mean it’s without merit, even if in this case the merit is that it’s so bad, it’s good.

White House Down receives 2.5/5

Thursday
Mar282013

G.I. Joe: Retaliation

One mustn’t expect much when sitting down to watch “G.I. Joe: Retaliation.” It’s based on a silly Hasbro toy meant to portray the fighting spirit of the American soldier and as such, one should expect nothing more than mindless entertainment. In this case, the film nailed the “mindless” part, but forgot about the “entertainment.” Having seen the original movie only once, it’s hard to say which is worse—they appear to be equal in terms of quality—but this is action at its most basic. Only junkies of the genre will find anything to enjoy and even they might be put off by the lousy script, horrible puns and desperation seeping through this thing. “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” is an early contender for one of the worst movies of the year.

According to franchise lore, the Joes are an elite covert special mission unit operating under the supervision of the US military. They’re given all the difficult jobs, the ones where a lesser group of soldiers wouldn’t make it back alive. However, they’re about to be set up and most of them are about to be put into retirement for good. After a successful mission with no casualties, an air attack comes by and wipes them out. Only a few survive, including Roadblock (Dwayne Johnson), the new leader of the Joes. Along with his remaining comrades, he sets out to discover who double-crossed them and bring them to justice.

Of course, other prominent franchise characters play their roles as well, like Snake Eyes (Ray Park), Storm Shadow (Byung-hun Lee) and Cobra Commander (Luke Bracey), though keeping track of them all is a daunting task for the uninitiated. So many characters appear, some of whom look similar enough to be indistinguishable from each other, that it’s sometimes difficult to tell who is on whose side. To blame this entirely on the existing franchise would be unfair, however, as it’s primarily the screenplay that does such a poor job of establishing them. “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” has the most hackneyed screenplay of the year so far and it’s filled with so much expositional dialogue that you’d be playing the odds if you bet that the rest of this year’s movies combined wouldn’t equal its amount.

It’s insulting, quite frankly. Characters, motivations, schemes, places, all are explained almost entirely through exposition, as if the audience is too dumb to figure it out for themselves. When so much of that exposition is interrupted with some of the lamest jokes this side of “Jack and Jill,” it becomes difficult to handle. One attractive woman introduces herself as a reporter for Fox News. “That must be why you look so fair and balanced,” the man says in reply, as if that somehow makes sense. Early on, one Joe tells another to prepare for extraction and he replies, “Extraction? What are we, teeth?” The villain even refers to himself as the “quicker blower-upper,” a clear play on words of Bounty’s paper towels.

These moments will make you roll your eyes so far into the back of your head, you may put yourself into a catatonic state. The only thing that could have saved “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” from total irrelevance is its action scenes, but they’re hardly exciting. Aside from one impressive, though CGI-fueled, battle on the side of a mountain, what is presented here is generic of dozens of other shoot ‘em ups that have come before. To make matters worse, the action scenes are too short and too few while the narrative sections are unnecessarily stretched out, despite their simplistic nature. One example of this simplicity comes fairly early on (so this can hardly be considered a spoiler) when the Joes figure out that the President isn’t actually the President. “Last week, he said soda. Now, he says pop!” one Joe proclaims. “When he crossed his fingers together, the right thumb rest on top, but now it’s the left!” she follows. If this is all the deduction it takes to uncover a terrorist plot, we would all be super soldier sleuths.

“G.I. Joe: Retaliation” is awful, yet it doesn’t even realize it. It doesn’t play off its own obvious deficiencies with a playful wink and nod. To the contrary, it actually thinks it’s good, but its dramatic moments are flat, its humor is desperately unfunny and its action scenes are unimaginative. Let’s hope next time someone double crosses the Joes, he takes them all out so we won’t have to sit through another one of their movies.

G.I. Joe: Retaliation receives 0.5/5

Friday
Sep212012

10 Years

When you’re younger, ten years seems like an eternity. With so few years under your belt, the thought of ten years passing is unimaginable. It isn’t until you’ve lived through those years that you realize just how quickly they went. With my ten year high school reunion not too far off in the future, I’m finally beginning to understand this. I don’t really know what life holds for me or where I’ll be in the next 10 years and I’m longing to hold onto my childhood, but I know I have to grow up. It’s a sad, but inevitable revelation. The characters in writer/director Jamie Linden’s movie, 10 Years, are transitioning through the same time period I am and having the same thoughts. Perhaps this is why I connected with it so much, but by the end, I, strangely, didn’t feel sad about my now gone childhood. Instead, it gave me a newfound appreciation for those years and the good times I had while also giving me an excited optimism about the years to come.

The story follows a group of friends as they reunite for their 10 year high school reunion. Jake (Channing Tatum) is now dating Jess (Jenna Dewan-Tatum), but he still seems to hold some feelings for his high school flame, Mary (Rosario Dawson), and he needs to sort that out. His buddy, Cully (Chris Pratt), is using the event to make up for past mistakes, apologizing profusely to any “nerd” he may have bullied back in the day. Their mutual friend, Reeves (Oscar Isaac), has actually become a world famous musician and, despite the annoyance of his former classmates’ desires to take pictures with him, he begins to connect with his old science class buddy, Elise (Kate Mara). Meanwhile, their two reckless friends, Marty (Justin Long) and AJ (Max Minghella), are causing their own trouble and attempting to get close to the girl they considered the hottest in school, Anna (Lynn Collins).

Throughout each story, a lesson is learned; lessons about expectations, friendship, love and even waiting for love (they say love is patient, after all). Most of these stories involve characters who miss their high school days. Some are stuck in jobs they hate and long for the carefree days of high school while others, like Reeves, have done something interesting with their lives, but feel like they have unfinished business to take care of. What each story has in common, though, is that they’re all about growing up and moving on. They’re about holding onto the good old days while forging new memories in what will hopefully be better days to come. For someone who is relatively new to this whole “being an adult” thing, I understood what these characters were feeling, as will anyone who has made that bittersweet transition into adulthood.

As with any movie of this type, one that tells multiple stories with many different characters, it’s a bit uneven. Some are unpredictable while others you’ll see coming from a mile away. Some are genuinely emotional, while others are a tad too cheesy for their own good. Some feel incredibly real, while others seem like little more than manufactured melodrama. The surprise, one that deviates from your typical intertwining vignette picture, is that the better stories don’t completely overshadow the others. Most are so close in quality that the word “superior” becomes a relative term.

This is no doubt thanks to an incredible cast full of names and faces you’ll instantly recognize who craft characters that are charismatic, three-dimensional and likable. Even the ones who clearly had a shady past in regards to the way they treated others, like Cully, are genuinely redemptive, even if their attempts at that redemption are too forceful to reach full effect. In the end, 10 Years turns out to be an unexpected delight. It’s a happy and optimistic movie with a love for life, both for what is to come and what has already passed, and it will leave you with a smile on your face.

10 Years receives 4/5

Friday
Mar162012

21 Jump Street

A great comedy is hard to come by. A great film adaptation, be it of a book, graphic novel, video game or television show, is even harder to find. To find one that is both an adaptation and flat out hilarious seems impossible, but this week’s 21 Jump Street reminds us that both are possible. It takes a largely forgotten show from the late 80s/early 90s and reinvigorates it with style. It deviates from the drama of the original show, spicing things up with over-the-top humor and action cliché spoofing. Much like Bridesmaids last year, it probably won’t make many definitive December awards lists, but it should go down as one of funniest genre exercises of the year.

Schmidt (Jonah Hill) used to be a nerd. He dressed like Eminem (complete with dyed bleach blonde hair), wore braces and had no chance of getting the pretty girl in high school. Jock and fellow schoolmate, Jenko (Channing Tatum) was the exact opposite. He was a popular, good looking sports star that was loved by the ladies. Flash forward a few years and they’re both trying to become cops in the Metropolitan City Police Department. Schmidt isn’t the athletic type and Jenko isn’t brainy, so the two join forces to help each other in their weaker departments. After graduating, they become best friends and are assigned to the Jump Street division, where they go undercover posing as high school kids to find whoever is supplying a new synthetic drug called HFS before it spreads to other areas.

This new film adaptation may not sound like a funny movie, but it most certainly is. Laughs come flying from every direction in 21 Jump Street, with only the occasional lull to bring it down. It’s a buddy cop comedy, action film, parody and self-parody all in one. It specifically makes jokes at the expense of its own existence, commenting on how Hollywood is recycling old ideas hoping no one notices. It embraces old action stereotypes only to mercilessly skewer them moments later, like a late movie bit regarding explosions. For all its zaniness, the writing is sharp, a pitch perfect parody of police procedurals, undercover investigations, and typical teenage behavior. The kids in this movie, for instance, are environmentally aware and study during their free time. The normal pyramid of popularity is flipped upside down, the athletes seen as conformists and the nerds as technical and scientific wizards, able to work together with Jenko as he employs them to tap suspected drug runner Eric’s (Dave Franco) phone.

21 Jump Street is good, smart, vulgar fun. It has more laughs per minute than any movie in recent memory (including Bridesmaids). Much of that is due to the pairing of Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum, the latter of which has done so little in his career to impress, it would be easy to write him off here as a poor casting decision, but Tatum is spot on. His action movies may be bland and his parts as a romantic lead unconvincing, but his comedic timing is near perfect. Who knew? The only faults that come with his character are purely of the screenwriting variety, which forces him to develop a feeling of jealousy towards Schmidt for now becoming the popular one while he’s seen as the nerd, a status he’s certainly not used to. When he overhears Schmidt talking down about him, presumably for the purpose of the case, his feelings are hurt, a ridiculous and meaningless narrative progression. These dramatics don’t work and serve only to distract from what is otherwise a very funny movie.

A couple other problems drag 21 Jump Street down as well, including an awkward romance that blossoms between Schmidt and high school student, Molly (Brie Larson). Although it doesn’t go too far (at least not until the very end of the film), he’s a cop and she’s likely underage. It’s uncomfortable and unnecessary, but it’s a small oversight in an otherwise hilarious movie. Fans of the original show have every right to be skeptical of the film’s new comedic direction, but this is one of those few times where those skepticisms can be put to rest with relative ease. It’s not the most faithful adaptation in the world, but 21 Jump Street simply works.

21 Jump Street receives 4/5