Ford v Ferrari

First Hit: I love good car movies, and this one qualifies as one of the best.

It’s been a while since I’ve been to a night showing of a film. In picking this evening time and this film, it was both pleasing and irritating to be in a nearly full theater. The fun part is that I often see films where there are less than 15 people in the theater, and seeing an almost full theater gave me hope that others will continue to support going to movie theaters.

The irritation part is the noise that people make during the film presentation. Why someone thinks their remembrances of the period, or what they think about what they’re seeing on the screen is essential to spout out while the film is playing, is beyond me. The gentleman sitting next to me turned around just as I did the same thing and together we asked them to be quiet. It took us doing this twice for them to get that they weren’t at home watching cable TV.

Despite the noise interruptions, this film unfolded in a fun way. Remembrances of the 1960s abounded with cars from the era on the streets. Yes, they were perfectly restored vehicles, but it was easy to gloss over the prettiness to enjoy the beauty of those old cars reflecting their time and place in my life. There were Shelby Cobras, Porsches, Ford Falcons, a Mini, a woody (fake wood) wagon, Ferraris, and Ford GT 40s.

The film is about how Enzo Ferrari (Remo Girone) turned down Henry Ford II’s (Tracy Letts) offer to buy 90% of Ferrari’s car production company. While turning down Ford’s offer and partnering with Fiat, Enzo made unflattering remarks about Ford and his cars to the Ford negotiation team. Angered by the personal comments, Ford vowed to beat perennial 24 Hours Le Mans race winner, Ferrari.

Chief Ford negotiator, Lee Iacocca (Jon Bernthal), was then tasked with finding a car builder who will build a Ford-based car to beat Ferrari. Finding Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon), the one-time winning driver of the 24 Le Mans, to make the car, Ford believes they found their man. Henry Ford gives Shelby carte blanche to build this car.

Shelby, in turn, hires his friend and race car driver Ken Miles (Christian Bale), to be his test driver and co-builder. The main reason is that he can trust Miles as he knows cars and feels their abilities and problems as he drives them. Miles is also creative when figuring out how to make cars work better. The downside of Miles is that he’s a maverick in his thinking and hates to conform to rules and being told what to do.

Miles is married Mollie (Caitriona Balfe), who’s amused by her husband’s friendship with Shelby and there are couple scenes that this loving amusement shows up. One such scene is when Shelby and Ken fight near the miles home. Mollie bringing out a folding chair to watch the frecus was hilarious. One thing the film makes clear is that Ken is a loving devoted father who loved showing his son Peter (Noah Jupe) the ins and outs of racing.

The film spends time showing Miles and Shelby developing the GT40 to race in Le Mans, but when it comes time to ship the car off to the race, Leo Beebe (Josh Lucas) Senior VP at Ford, chooses another driver to drive the vehicle at the Le Mans race.

Shelby is pissed, Miles is severely disappointed, and of course, the new driver doesn’t feel the car like Miles would have and ends up blowing it apart during the race.

Ford wants to fire Shelby for the failure, but the meeting between Ford and Shelby is fantastic because Shelby convinces Ford that he, Ford, has Ferrari where he wants him, scared. Scared because Shelby’s car, with another driver, was faster than the Ferrari, especially on the straightaway at Le Mans. This was a great scene. It’s reflecting Shelby’s legendary ability to sell anyone on anything.

Ford tells Shelby to fix the car and get it ready for the next Le Mans and that Shelby has control over the driver.

The rest of the movie shows how they develop a stronger, lighter, faster GT40 car. But when Beebe intercedes again about Miles being the driver at Le Mans, Shelby takes Ford out in the GT40 and scares the crap out of him, literally, and at that moment negotiates with Ford to let Miles drive. As part of the deal he offers Ford his Shelby American company if Miles races and loses.

It’s scenes like this that are fun to watch and reminded me of the time that a friend of a friend, gave me a ride in a Lamborghini Miura, and scared the crap out of me while racing around a sizeable empty factory parking lot at a very high speed.

There were sections of this 152-minute film that could have been trimmed, but I was engaged enough to not care about the lulls of uninteresting or engaging material. Other characters added to this story and made better. One such person was Chief Mechanic Phil Remington (Ray McKinnon). His ideas about creating a way to change the brake assembly were brilliant.

Bale was intensely and independently outstanding in this role as race car driver Ken Miles. HIs ability to show tenderness and love towards his family while being aggressively focused on making the car faster was terrific. Damon was wonderful as Carroll Shelby. The scene with Ford after the first loss and his fight with Miles in front of Mile’s home reflected the off-told stories about the legend of Carroll Shelby. Bernthal was good as the famed Iacocca. Balfe was convincing as Ken’s wife. Her support and understanding of her husband were excellently portrayed. My favorite scene shows Balfe driving Ken home while pressing him on his whereabouts. Her focused intensity was sublime. Letts was priceless as Ford II. The bullying way he used around his staff and factory followed by his being humbled by the spin in the GT40 was fun to watch. McKinnon was excellent as devoted Chief Mechanic for Shelby. Beebe was appropriately arrogant, self-serving, and sharp as a foil to Shelby’s vision. Girone was satisfyingly perfect as Enzo Ferrari. Jez and John-Henry Butterworth wrote an expansive script that could have been shortened and made crisper. However, there are some outstanding scenes in the film. James Mangold directed this film. Racing scenes can get old quick, and Mangolds transcends the genre with excellent editing and cinematography, which make the racing scenes in this film come alive.

Overall: I liked seeing this film for multiple reasons, including that the subsequent Ford built Shelby Mustang GT-350 and GT-500 had parts made by my father’s company in the late 1960s.

Downsizing

First Hit:  Slow, tedious, and, at times, funny and the only thing that made it worthwhile was Hong Chau as Ngoc Lan Tran.

Tran doesn’t appear until the last third of the film, but she changes the film and energetically makes the film interesting and better. Up until then the main character, Paul Safranek (Matt Damon), is generally depressed and lacks any energy.

Damon is too good an actor to phone it in, and therefore he must have been delivering what director and writer Alexander Payne wanted.

There is a point to the film and it’s about how humans are systematically destroying the planet. Norwegian scientist Dr. Jorgen Asbjornsen (Rolf Lassgard) wanting to find a way to slow down the destruction, comes up with making people smaller. In this case a normal 6’ person gets shrunk to about 5”. Asbjornsen figures it will allow humans to consume fewer resources and give us time to figure out how to save the planet.

The upside to downsizing, as it is called, is that your money is worth about one hundred times as much. This makes it worthwhile for people to downsize as they can afford to live a life of luxury. Paul and his wife Audrey (Kristen Wiig) are struggling financially and if they choose to downsize they can life a great life.

As Paul finds himself living a less than stellar life as a downsized person he has some regrets. When he meets, and spends a bit of time with his neighbor Dusan Mirkovic (Christoph Waltz) his life begins to change.

However, it really begins to change and the film begins to get interesting when Paul gets involved with helping Tran. Tran organized and led protests in Vietnam, survived prison time for her involvement, was downsized by the government, and escaped Vietnam inside flat screen shipping box. She became famous for this escape from Vietnam so Paul recognized her when he saw her.

Given her past, she works to help anyone who is struggling to survive in the downsized city they live in. Paul becomes inspired by her.

The visuals of the downsized world are excellent. The comedy comes from this and some of the interactions between the characters.

Damon was mediocre and I don’t know if this was a poor performance by him or by the script and direction. There were times I could sense and feel Damon trying to make the scene better but to no avail. Waltz was mediocre as well. He’s another reliable actor who can deliver and I’ve got to believe that script and direction failed him. Lassgard was OK as the discovering scientist and leader of the movement to downsize and survive. Wiig had a very small part in this film and her scenes seemed strained and pressed. Chau was priceless. It was worth the price of admission just to watch her perform in this film. She was spot-on sublime. Payne and Jim Taylor wrote the script which ended up being restrictive and pressed. Payne had no business directing this because the vision was too restrictive as the acting showed. He had great tools but it didn’t work.

Overall:  I had high hopes for this film and liked the characters, but it came up short, real short.

Suburbicon

First Hit: A poorly conceived attempt to be relevant, darkly funny, and mysterious.

I generally like films written by Joel and Ethan Coen. I've previously enjoyed films directed by George Clooney. Actors Matt Damon and Julianne Moore always make roles better than they are written so I was looking forward to seeing this film. However, the mixture of this group didn’t resonate as something valid or comprehensive.

There were out-loud funny moments in a dark humor sort of way, but most of the time, the lack of information to string the film together had me a bit flummoxed.

Based in 1959, planned clean beautiful communities were sprouting up all over the United States. In Suburbicon there are two major stories. One, is about a black family moving into this all white neighborhood and how they are treated. Horribly is the answer to this part of the film. The second is how does Gardner Lodge (Matt Damon) respond to being pressured to repay an outstanding loan? Not very well.

The set up to the neighborhood of Suburbicon is that this is an upcoming proactive modern community that allows everyone to be prosperous. Everyone can live there, unless you have a different skin color. That's what Mr. and Mrs. Myers (Leith M. Burke and Karimah Westbrook respectively) quickly find out. Each night neighbors gather around their home and shout racist epithets at the home. Each night, the crowd gets larger. And the Myers simply, elegantly, and clearly ignore the rants.

In a symbolic scene in the grocery store, the store manager stands behind the checker and tells Mrs. Myers that each item she wants to buy is $20.00, is pointedly outrageous; “bread? $20.00, Milk? $20.00.” Instead of raising her voice and acting out, with a smile on her face, she leaves the store to go shop somewhere else.

The upside of this aspect of the story is that the Myers' son Andy (Tony Espinosa) strikes up a great friendship with Nicky (Noah Jupe) who is Gardner and his wife Rose’s (Julianne Moore) son. They ride bikes together and play catch with a baseball together. Both boys are surviving their own private hell.

Gardner’s story is more elusive in that we don’t know why he’s in debt. We are introduced to him and his wife Rose, who is in a wheelchair, as they are being shaken down in their house by loan enforcers. His wife dies from the incident but we later learn that Gardner may have something to do with the death, just like he had something to do with her being in a wheelchair. Margaret (also Julianne Moore), who is Rose's twin sister is visiting them and helping to manage their household.

The way Gardner deals with the death of his wife, the inclusion of his wife's sister into the household, the moralistic and societal way he tells his son that he’s too young to understand what is going on in the family and the world, and how the violence is used to resolve his issues, just didn’t work well. There were too many unanswered questions nor was there a clear plot line.

There seemed to be an element of this film that was trying to be cutesy while also being edgy and it just didn’t work. Many of the sets were nice to see as they reminded me of growing up in that time period. I didn’t think the two major stories were integrated very well and certainly weren't well matched to make it work holistically.

Damon was OK and it wasn’t his acting that failed, it was mostly the script and Clooney’s poor direction of the poorly conceived script. Moore was OK in both roles and I thought the best part was her being interviewed by the insurance investigator. Westbrook was probably brought the best acting to the film. She embodied the role of smiling through the racist actions against her and her family. Jupe did a really good job as the son trying to figure out why his mom is gone, his dad is fighting people, and his aunt Margaret is living with them. Espinosa was very good as the neighbor kid who was attempting to put the racism behind him and just be a young kid. The Coen’s script had some bones but it wasn’t a good final product. Clooney just didn’t have a handle on a unifying theme and objective point to this film.

Overall:  Not worth the time to see it.

The Great Wall

First Hit:  Although visually arresting at times, there's nothing believable about this story.

The problem with fantasies are that if they aren’t done well, the audience slips out of the story and is left with just watching interesting pictures and waiting the next piece of action. That is what happens here.

It begins with a group of horsemen being chased by another group of horsemen in the middle of a desert. How did they get there, where did they come from, why are they there?

We don't get much background, but when William (Matt Damon), the main character, speaks, because of the film's time period, it is hard to buy his American accent and dialect because the English hadn't occupied the United States yet.

This isn't the only problem in this film, but it is one of the first the audience encounters. We learn that his band of marauders is in search of gunpowder as it has been rumored that the Chinese have discovered a black powder that can kill many people with one use. After the initial chase scene, the men are getting restless because they've not found the powder and they keep losing men. William's closest ally in this ever decreasing small group of men is Tovar (Pedro Pascal) who at least has an appropriate European accent.

While hiding in a cave from the latest group trying to kill them, they get attacked by some beasts. The beasts kill everyone except Tovar and William. On the run again, they ride into The Great Wall with warriors all around them and dressed in beautiful, colorful, and striking uniforms. It is a wonder of the world. The warriors are manning the wall because a 60 year cycle is complete and the beast are coming to kill them, get past the wall and head towards the capital of China.

The warriors on the wall have various skills and techniques to kill the beasts. Catapults that use large balls covered with oil and lit on fire. There are bow and arrow teams. There are spear teams and teams of women who jump off the wall tethered to the top of the wall and are pulled up once they throw their spears. The leader of this bungie team is Commander Lin Mae (Tian Jing) who is also in line to be a higher-level leader. She has learned English from a previously captured man named Ballard (Willem Dafoe).

When the beasts come, William shows his bravery and kills many beasts and earns the respect of the Chinese Army leaders.

The film goes on, and on, which is part of the problem because, nothing is explained or validated and the audience is supposed to just accept the premises and buy into the story. This is the failing of this film to me.

It seems as though this film was created to show something about the wall, the glory of big and beautiful sets, bravery of Chinese warriors, and that they alone invented gunpowder. I kept thinking why didn’t they use the gunpowder against the beasts at the beginning?  Why did they wait until near collapse of the capital? And even in the end, I kept asking where did William come from?

This question and many others kept coming up while watching the film and made the experience rather unfulfilling.

Damon was OK, but I never bought his accent or his story. Doing this may have been a good idea, but in the end I would sense that Damon would like to forget it. Jing was too beautifully made up in each of her close-ups to believe she was in a war for her life and the life of her country. Pascal’s was one of the best parts of the film. There was a level of irreverence in his character’s dialogue that made the film fun. Dafoe was wasted in this role. Seemed as though he was only there as a way for Mae to learn English so that she could speak to William. Carlo Bernard and Doug Miro wrote a skeptical screenplay. There was little to get the audience to buy into, engage with, or believe about the story. Director Yimou Zhang seemed far more interested in big picture beauty and chorography versus putting a story together that engages the audience.

Overall:  The pictures were pretty; the story flimsy and execution was mediocre.

Jason Bourne

First Hit:  Unnecessary shaky camera work got in the way of a sub-standard story about Jason Bourne.

I don’t mind shaky camera work when it adds to the excitement of a scene in a film. In some films it works really well (think “Breaking the Waves”). It can also be helpful when the audience is following someone who is running and other scenes like this. The technique becomes a mindless technique and distraction when unnecessarily used to create excitement.

The story needs to be exciting first and foremost. Paul Greengrass used a ton of unnecessary shaky camera work in this film. Examples abound, like when a sniper is setting up to shoot, the camera needed to be as still and calm as the in-breath and out-breath of a sniper making a clean shot. Internal and external landscape shots of an area so that the audience knows the the lay of the land instead of haphazard shots creating confusion for the audience.  

When I have the thought "why can’t the camera stop shaking", it is a distraction. The director doesn't want the audience thinking about why they cannot tell what is happening on the screen.

Greengrass may have used this technique because the story is less intriguing than the previous Bourne films (The Bourne Identity – 2002, The Bourne Supremacy – 2004, The Bourne Ultimatum – 2007, and The Bourne Legacy – 2012). The first three captured my attention mostly because the story was great, had passion, intrigue, and suspense. In the 2012 version, Matt Damon wasn’t playing Jason Bourne directly and therefore the film lacked the amazingness he brings to this franchise.

This version had Matt Damon back as Jason Bourne seeking to piece together his father’s death and involvement in Blackbriar while attempting to settle his own personal struggles of identity.

As an overall storyline it wasn’t the best, yet it did have a side story about today’s issue of using technology to track people and their actions. Here, the company creating software that can do this is lead by Aaron Kallor (Riz Ahmed). But the story and film are about Bourne and Damon is such a strong actor that he brings this character to life like no one else can. He makes Bourne complex, charming, physically capable, and chivalrous, or as much as a undercover CIA agent can be chivalrous.

The villain is still the agency as they believe he knows too much and will continue to expose their illegal covert programs. It was wonderful to see Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles), his previous supporting agency agent, helping Jason to get additional information helping him to piece together the puzzle.

The film showing the kind of technology available to the CIA was very good and interesting. The new CIA Director Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones), as always, wants Jason eliminated. He uses an Asset (Vincent Cassel) to do the dirty work and like, Bourne he’s relentless.

Another bright spot was CIA Agent Heather Lee (Alicia Vikander) who takes on the previous Pam Landy (Joan Allen) spot as head of the task force to bring Bourne in (or take him out). Lee, like Landy, connects with Bourne as a person and shows a level of compassion for his plight. One last note, I thought the car chase through downtown Las Vegas overdone and unnecessarily unrealistic.

Damon is Jason Bourne. In my eyes he’s the only guy who can pull off the character Jason Bourne because he created him. As usual, I loved his performance. Jones was OK as the crusty, old school, CIA Director but felt he was too crusty to run an agency that is filled with new progressive technology. Vikander was perfect for the part. Her strong, aggressive, and young female portrayal of a top CIA Agent in this world of progressive electronics was perfect. She was the opposite of Jones. Stiles was great to see again and her role really helped tie together Bourne and the new players in the agency. Cassel was perfect as the Asset. He does focused single minded action as good as anyone. Ahmed does a good job as being a software vendor who got into bed with the CIA and now wants out. Paul Greengrass and Christopher Rouse wrote a barely adequate script, but it was Greengrass’s direction that lowed the Bourne bar.

Overall:  Although shaky, it is watchable because Damon makes it work.