Reviews
Antitrust
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Directed by: | Peter Howitt |
Written by: | Howard Franklin |
Starring: | Ryan Phillippe, Tim Robbins, Rachel Leigh Cook, Claire Forlani |
Released: | April 26, 2001 |
Grade: | A- |
I caught Warren Beatty’s Bulworth on Showtime twice last weekend and it’s still one of the most important, topical and influential films ever made. For those unfamiliar, the film brilliantly captures the paradox of American politics. Election campaigns are funded by America’s wealthy and it’s often a case of “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”. Why is it that 1% of the population controls 97% of the wealth and the government does nothing to balance the ledger?
Bill Gates falls into the above category and is the obvious inspiration for Antitrust’s Gary Winston (played by Tim Robbins). Gary is battling his competitors in trying to become the first to develop technology with the ability to link every electronic medium in the world.
With his much publicised product launch just 42 days away, he recruits young computer genius Milo Hoffman (Phillippe) to solve the major technical glitches that continue to plague the software. For Milo, this is a career defining opportunity and girlfriend Alice (Forlani) is equally excited by the money on offer.
After settling in for a few weeks, Milo comes to learn that something isn’t quite right about the organisation. Every time he’s stuck in a programming jam, Gary provides a near-immediate answer to his problems. Just where is Gary getting his information from? He doesn’t have time to program all this language himself so are there others working for him or is he part of conspiracy that’s stealing ideas from his rivals?
Whilst it may appear targeted at a teen audience (with the casting of Phillippe and Cook), Antitrust is a sharp thriller with legitimate perspectives on the “antitrust” laws. Milo feels the software should be free to the public given its importance and puts this question to Gary who responds by saying he’ll use the billions raised to fund future projects and make technology even better. Is that a valid argument? As I walked out of the cinema, I saw an advert boldly proclaiming that Westfield is donating $1,000,000 for computers in schools. Are they doing it to further our children’s education or are they just doing it for publicity? Just what is their motive?
Political statements aside, Antitrust also looks at the simple importance of trust - something we can all relate to. Gary’s money and power give him a lot of friends so just who can Milo turn to when he senses something is wrong? As fellow worker Lisa (Cook) says to Milo, “how do you let go of a secret without telling the wrong person?” Sometimes we get it right but sometimes we get it wrong and pay the price.
Director Peter Howitt (In The Name Of The Father, Sliding Doors) has made as heightened the suspense of this edge-of-your-seat thriller thanks to some slick music from Don Davis, speedy editing from Academy Award winner Zach Staenberg (The Matrix) and dazzling sets from Doug Byggdin and Rose Marie McScherry. The eye-catching opening credits set a high standard that is lived up to. Ryan Phillippe shows he can carry a film and Tim Robbins again proves that he’s one of the few actors in Hollywood who can play both a good guy (as in The Shawshank Redemption) and a bad guy (as in Arlington Road) really well.
The catchphrase reiterated throughout the film is that “a good chess player always knows his opponents moves before he makes them”. It’s kind of the same way I look at films - I like it when the film knows what I’m expecting and then surprises by taking a different direction. Antitrust is one such film so make sure you check it out. Don’t worry, you can “trust” me.
The Mexican
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Directed by: | Gore Verbinski |
Written by: | J.H. Wyman |
Starring: | Brad Pitt, Julia Roberts, James Gandolfini, J.K. Simmons, Bob Balaban |
Released: | April 26, 2001 |
Grade: | B |
Jerry (Pitt) and Samantha’s (Roberts) relationship is a little strained. Sam thinks that Jerry is selfish and Jerry thinks that Sam is overreacting. How so? Jerry’s just been called on another gangster assignment and has to go to Mexico to pick up a gun with great value known as “the Mexican”. Sam says that if Jerry goes, the relationship is over but of course if he doesn’t go, he’ll most probably be killed.
With no other option, Jerry heads to Mexico and Sam nicks off to Las Vegas to start a new life. There’s a lot more at stake here and Jerry’s about to find out just how much the gun is really worth. It seems everyone wants the gun for their own and a hitman know as Leroy (Gandolfini) has kidnapped Sam in Vegas to use her as leverage in securing the gun. When he finds that Sam and Jerry have split, he’s determined not to lose the edge and with his compassionate side, shows Sam just how much she still loves Jerry and vice-versa.
It’s hard to fit this film into any particular genre - there’s a mix of comedy, drama and romance but in all honesty, the story is juvenile. Both Pitt and Roberts are unexpectedly impressive but most will agree James Gandolfini stands out and will provide the film’s talking points. I did enjoy the way the story was told. Apart from the opening ten minutes, our two stars do not share a scene for over an hour and watching both their adventures provides more material.
The Mexican is different but not in a positive or negative way. You can tell you’re watching a classy production made by the best in the biz but you’re never really captivated by the story nor are you able to gauge how you’re supposed to feel. Important characters are killed but not enough seems to be made of their demise as if secondary to the whole Pitt/Roberts thing. The film also proposes to give lessons in love which I felt were best left implied rather than spelt out.
Box-office figures haven’t been huge and I’m Dreamworks will be disappointed given the star billing. It shows you need a script to make a movie and to be truly successful, you need your audience to like it and recommend it to others. This is not one of those films.
Best In Show
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Directed by: | Christopher Guest |
Written by: | Christopher Guest, Eugene Levy |
Starring: | Christopher Guest, Parker Posey, Michael Hitchcock, Eugene Levy, Catherine O’Hara, John Michael Higgins |
Released: | April 12, 2001 |
Grade: | B+ |
It made its world premiere at last year’s Toronto Film Festival and has been honoured with praise since. A fictitious documentary, Best In Show is the story of five different dog owners as they prepare their prized pooches and head to Philadelphia for the prestigious 125th Annual Mayflower Dog Show.
All these contestants are different. Some do it for love, some do it for fame, some do it for money, and some do it for a combination of all three. I remember laughing heartedly during the film and it brought back memories of Rob Sitch’s The Castle and The Dish. We have a good chuckle at how simple and idiotic these characters are but we feel and care for them at the same time.
There’s not a lot of story in Best In Show and it’s left to the characters to make the movie. They are all riotously funny but I have to single out Fred Willard who plays a commentator at the big show. He knows nothing about dogs and bluffs his way through the broadcast by talking nothing but crap. Who knew commentating a dog show could be so much fun?
Director and screenwriter Christopher Guest is a leader in the independent film world. In his career to date, Guest has directed films such as Waiting For Guffman, written and composed for films such as This Is Spinal Tap, and provided small acting roles in a string of films including A Few Good Men and The Princess Bride. Not only that, he’s featured as a regular comedy writer for America’s Saturday Night Live. Assisting Guest in the screenwriting department is the equally talented and fellow co-star Eugene Levy who many will know as Jim’s dad in American Pie.
If you haven’t heard of Best In Show prior to this, you’re not alone. With TV ads flogging everything from Say It Isn’t So to Crocodile Dundee In Los Angeles, a smaller release will undoubtedly be swamped by the competition. As a nominee for best comedy at the Golden Globes, best director at the Independent Spirit Awards and best screenplay at the Writers Guild, Best In Show doesn’t deserve to be overlooked. If you’re looking for comedy that doesn’t have jokes about cats giving blowjobs and guys wrestling crocodiles, this could be the perfect Easter movie for you.
Exit Wounds
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Directed by: | Andrzej Bartkowiak |
Written by: | Ed Horowitz, Richard D’Ovidio |
Starring: | Steven Seagal, DMX, Isaiah Washington, Anthony Anderson, Michael Jai White |
Released: | April 19, 2001 |
Grade: | C |
Okay, the film stinks but it wasn’t like you didn’t already know that. I’m still in shock having just visited the Internet Movie Database and discovering that Exit Wounds is based on a novel! Can’t say I’ve actually read it (or even heard of it) but from what I saw on screen, it must have been a very loose adaptation. I’m sure the book had more that just car chases and gruesome action.
Steven Seagal (aka Orin Boyd) saves the vice-president in a blaze of glory after a huge shootout with a militia group. Instead of the praise he expected to receive, he’s demoted for having stepped on the toes of the Secret Service and stealing their thunder. Now in the 15th Precinct (as low as it gets), he’s still out to settle unfinished business on the streets.
He discovers a drug dealer by the name of Latrell Walker (DMX) who is setting up something big and is getting help from inside the ranks. It seems there are corrupt officers getting a slice of Walker’s pie in return for police protection. So just who can Boyd trust? Pretty much no one so he takes the law into his own hands and brings down the whole cartel (crooked cops and all).
Like any porno, the plot is secondary to the action. That doesn’t excuse the film but at least you know what you’re getting when you see a film like Exit Wounds. Personally, I found it pathetic but that’s because I had no desire to see it. However, there were audience members cheering and clapping as Seagal blew things up and butchered his victims. It’s all in fun but be forewarned that it is more violent than you’re usual action film.
Seagal may be a great action lead but he can’t act and will be left with roles like this until he either dies or retires. He lacks the wit of an Arnold Swarzenegger but he’s definitely got more pizzazz than a Jean Claude Van Damme or Dennis Rodman (that’s not saying much). He just walks around looking serious, talking tough and always finding a way out of impossible situations. For example, in Exit Wounds, he manages to escape from a moving car despite being handcuffed and surrounded by 4 armed men. Don’t ask me how.
You can forget the “wounds” because all I was looking for was the “exit”. Then again, I was stupid enough to go through the “entry” and deserved the punishment I endured. If I haven’t convinced you not to see this film then I’ll give you one final piece of advice that should provide proof without a shadow of a doubt - Tom Arnold is a co-star.
Crocodile Dundee In Los Angeles
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Directed by: | Simon Wincer |
Written by: | Matthew Berry, Eric Abrams |
Starring: | Paul Hogan, Linda Kozlowski, Jere Burns, Jonathan Banks |
Released: | April 12, 2001 |
Grade: | C- |
Someone had to be desperate to come up with this. Crocodile Dundee 2 was released back in 1988 (following the release of the original in 1986) and both were smash hits at both home and abroad (each topping $100m in the States). Times have changed though and why Universal Pictures would revive this series is beyond me.
The script is pitiful and I will name both Matthew Berry and Eric Abrams as those responsible (along with Paul Hogan) in the hope they will never work in Hollywood again. In this “adventure”, Mick Dundee (Hogan) and his long time companion Sue Charlton (Kozlowski) now own a pub in the Northern Territory outback. Sue gets a call from her father asking her to come to Los Angeles for a few weeks. It seems an employee at his publishing company has died and he needs Sue to fill in while he looks for a permanent replacement.
So off they head to L.A. with their son Mike (played by George Negus’s 9-year-old son Serge Cockburn). Once there, Sue quickly picks up the pieces and uncovers a big story (believe it or not). A string of really bad movies are being made by a new studio company. The first film flopped, the sequel went straight to video and somehow a third movie is in the works. Curious as to how the studio can remain open, Sue investigates, uncovers a conspiracy and with Mick going undercover as an extra in the film, she’ll soon find out the truth behind the mystery.
With every film like this I see, I develop an even bigger appreciation for the Austin Powers films. I don’t know why film studios pursue with over the top supervillans given that Dr. Evil has taken the mickey out of all those that have gone before. Somehow, these ludicrous storylines continue to haunt us as seen here and in the recent Miss Congeniality.
I am not taking this film too seriously. Anyone who says “oh, it’s just a bit of fun” deserves a slap across the face and a good hosing down. When someone makes a bad joke, you don’t laugh just because you’re supposed to. I never laughed once and there were stages in the first half hour where I was tempted to just get up and walk out (for those that have seen the film, a scene in a spa bath caps off what I’m talking about). The acting was dreadful and the jokes so lame. Spontaneity has no meaning.
Don’t even get me started on the culture issue. Australians do not walk around in akubras all day. Australians do not wrestle crocodiles for a living. Australians do not serve nothing but beer in pubs. Australians are not idiots who cannot understand anything about America. Do we feel satisfied portraying such an image to the world? Maybe ten years ago but aren’t we better than that now.
If you need supporting evidence, check out the documentary, Cunnamulla, which screened recently in Brisbane. Could you imagine how shocked Americans would be to find out what really goes on the outback. Desolate towns filled with doll bludgers, deadbeats, criminals and 13-year-olds having sex. That is our true culture, whether we like it or not.
That is all I have to say. I am sorry to have wasted your time in having to read this but it serves a purpose - to make sure you don’t see Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles. I rest my case.
Tomcats
- Details
- Written by Matthew Toomey
Directed by: | Gregory Poirier |
Written by: | Gregory Poirier |
Starring: | Shannon Elizabeth, Jerry O’Connell, Jake Busey, Horatio Sanz, Jaime Pressly |
Released: | April 19, 2001 |
Grade: | C+ |
We’ve seen nothing but cleavage and scantly clothed women in the TV ads and one would expect all to be revealed in the movie itself but not so. Despite having more sexual references than any film I’ve seen, there isn’t a single shred of nudity or sex in Tomcats which may disappoint the audience at which it is targeted. It’s like taking a guy to a strip club and then finding no strippers inside.
Aside, the film stinks anyway. It’s the story of seven guys who make a “tomcats” bet. They all put a couple of hundred dollars a year into an investment fund and the last man to get married gets the whole pot. Five are married in the space of seven years which just leaves two - Michael (O’Connell) and Kyle (Busey) to fight for the kitty which has now reached $500,000. When Michael goes on a casino gambling spree (trying to impress a young lady), he finds himself $51,000 in debt and 30 days to find the money or else...
If you haven’t already predicted it, the only way Michael can come up with the money is to get Kyle married but that’s going to be a task in itself. Kyle’s goal in life is to sleep with every single woman on the planet. He constantly uses women and then dumps them when he’s finished with their services. The only true love he ever had was a girl he met at a wedding known as Natalie (Elizabeth). Michael knows he has to track down Natalie and get her to woo Kyle to the altar.
To show just how pitiful this film is, let me give you an example of one scene. Kyle has cancer of the testicle and has it removed in an operation by his doctor. Not wanting to leave a part of him behind, he asks Michael to search the hospital and steal the jar that contains his removed testicle. Michael finds it but drops the jar leaving the swollen testicle on the ground. It a barrage of coincidences, the testicle is kicked around the hospital until it finds itself in the cafeteria on a tray of sticky buns. The buns are spilt and the testicle is now on the lunch tray of the doctor who promptly takes a juicy bite. Classy.
Not my kind of film and judging from the trailers before it, more sick garbage is on the way. Previews for David Spade’s Joe Dirt and Tom Green’s Freddie Got Fingered show that just when you think we’ve sunk to a new low, we somehow find a way to sink even lower. Gross out comedies are over produced and when people of the future look back, they’ll wonder how such trash came to be made. It must be kind of like us looking back on the late 80s and cringing at titles such as Revenge Of The Nerds 4: Nerds In Love and Police Academy 6: City Under Siege. At least things aren’t that bad yet, are they?