The Last Days on Mars

First Hit: This was a painfully poor film in all ways.

The film begins with people outside on a landscape that is supposed to be Mars but it could have been California, Utah, and Arizona or somewhere in the Middle East where the landscape is void of vegetation and it is both rocky and sandy.

The set up was extremely poor and when they finally tried to frame the story with shots from above the surface of the planet, it was too late. The premise that this group was on Mars was null and void from the very beginning. Briefly the rest of the story is that the group on the planet is just about ready to leave the surface and head back to earth, when at the last minute, they think they find some sort of life. In a snap decision two of the crew goes out and get sucked up by the organisms which make them zombies. They come for the rest of the crew.

Liev Schreiber as Vincent tried to make his character thoughtful and intense but it didn’t work. Romola Garai played Rebecca who was the one thoughtful character. Elias Koteas, Olivia Williams, Johnny Harris, Goran Kostic, Tom Cullen, and Yusra Warsama were all part of the crew that suffered both the script and direction of this poorly conceived film. Sydney J. Bounds and Clive Dawson wrote this lame script. Ruairi Robinson directed this and he’s got a long way to go to figure out how to tell a story worth telling.

Overall:  Nothing about it made sense and there is no way this should have found a screen.

Homefront

First Hit:  Average Statham thriller where he takes on all comers and wins.

Phil Broker (Jason Statham) is a former DEA agent who is taken on an anonymous life with his daughter in a Louisiana small town.

Being outsiders their behavior is scrutinized and when his daughter Maddy (Izabela Vidovic) punches out a classmate, the kids parents decide to make Broker’s life hell for this indiscretion mayhem ensues. Mayhem is headed by the town Meth cooker Morgan “Gator” Bodine (James Franco). He discovers Broker’s past and gets one of Broker’s convicted prisoners to send people to kill Broker. Assisting Gator is Sheryl Mott (Winona Ryder).

Statham is always solid and here he shows up as usual. It will never win an Oscar doing action films, but he’s very solid. Vidovic is great as the 10 year old daughter. One scene when she is lamenting about her recently past mother is great. Franco is pretty good as a “not all at home” meth cooker. Ryder is either a pretty good actress showing the perfect nervousness as a tweaker, or she just showed up showing her past struggles and put them on the screen – she didn’t look very good. Sylvester Stallone and Chuck Logan wrote the screenplay which was solid. Gary Fielder directed this well-paced action thriller.

Overall: Solid action film.

Out of the Furnace

First Hit:  Although there is some very good acting, this film floundered and was unorganized.

Unorganized for me means that there seemed to be two different films or storylines, mashed together by the supposed storyline written by Brad Ingelsby and Director Scott Cooper.

This story line is revenge. However, some of the shots by Cooper were fantastic. For instance, the opening shot, where the camera starts from high and moves into the back of a car sitting in a drive in movie theater is really good. The shot shows the types of cars/trucks while the sense of segregated community (separated by their older cars) but all watching the same film.

The second scene is inside the car where the next bit of dialogue and action sets up the angry uncaring life of Harlan DeGroat (Woody Harrelson). He comes from the hills in New Jersey where law and order is defined by who is toughest and meanest, not the police. This view of Harlan and his cohorts is one film. 

The other film is about Russell Baze (Christian Bale), his brother Rodney (Casey Affleck), and Russell’s love Lena Taylor (Zoe Saldana). The mashup is Rodney’s struggle to find a life after a number of tours of Iraq. Being angry and lost he gambles, gets into debt to John Petty (Willem Dafoe) who is indebted to Harlan. This is where the stretch doesn't work.

I won’t move the storyline any more here, but despite the wonderful individual performances the story felt disjointed and forced.

Harrelson was in the vein of his roles in “Natural Born Killers” and “Zombieland”; dark, caring only about himself, and mean. He does this well and I like it. Bale is fantastic as a guy trying to do right by his family and girl while be caught by his wish to take care of his brother. Affleck is strong as a smart good looking guy carrying the struggles and demons he builds through war and family life. Saldana is wonderful as a woman who wants stability and family in her life. Dafoe is very good as the guy who owns a bar but makes book on the side. Forest Whitaker is intense and wonderful as a friend of Baze and as Police Chief Wesley Barnes in a small steel town in Pennsylvania where the Baze’s live. Sam Shepard is strong in a minor role as a Baze relative.  Ingelsby wrote an interesting script but it was either this script or the direction of Cooper that had it go off track.

Overall:  In parts, great. As a whole the film was mostly incongruent.

The Counselor

First Hit:  When all is said and done, there were a few outstanding moments of acting in a film that tried to make a statement.

The question is: What is the statement Director Ridley Scott wanted to make with this film? Was it about greed? Was it about accepting the consequences of the path chosen?

This film begins with a very luxurious soft, emotionally available scene where the Counselor (Michael Fassbender) and Laura (Penelope Cruz) are lying under the sheets in a beautiful modern bedroom. Their mutual attraction physically and emotionally drips off the celluloid.

Then we see that the Counselor must be doing well for himself as he’s driving a Bentley motor car and lives in a very nice home. He visits a client/friend Reiner (Javier Bardem), who we learn quickly is a major player in the drug trade. He enjoys his riches and the accouterments of his home, but he never looks or feels like it is his, it is more like he’s a guest in his home.

Bardem also seems this way in this character; he doesn’t look or feel like he is at home with this character and I never felt like I knew if this was on purpose or not. The best acting of the film came from Cameron Diaz as Malkina who, with her silver nail polish and cold look, defined an I don’t give a f&%# attitude.

Additionally, Brad Pitt as Westray a drug deal middle man carried the right amount of emotional detachment, sleaziness, and peacefulness at the path he’s chosen. The obvious point of the film's main character is: Was The Counselor prepared to pay the price for a big drug deal gone bad? The answer seemed to be not really.

There are major dialogue segments by Reiner, Malkina, Westray, and Jefe (Ruben Blades) that warn him about what the price is, but he still takes the chance. However, questions remain; why is he in this drug deal (excitement, money, greed)? What is the motivator?

Then again, maybe this film is just may be a Ridley Scott vehicle to give his advice on living life.

Fassbender was very good, however I didn’t care about him or his character. There was no background about why he would risk love for more money? Cruz was good as Fassbender’s love interest. Bardem, seemed lost in this role. I never got he was in the role but rather speaking the lines. Diaz was fabulous, showing the ability to be a strong dark presence and make each scene she was in interesting. Pitt was really good at having a laissez faire presence while carrying a clear message to the main character. Cormac McCarthy wrote the script but I don’t know if it was him or Scott that decided to glaze over providing enough information to care. Scott, created some amazingly beautiful scenes and shots but did he just want to tell us his version of the saying; you get what you pay for OR you have to be willing to pay the price?

Overall:  This film was forgettable by the next day, although Diaz’s performance will land her more roles.

The Fifth Estate

First Hit:  Although interesting, don’t think I learned much about Assange through its 2+ hours.

This film is very topical in that the US Government just sent Bradley Manning to prison and Edward Snowden is now living in Russia.

The tie between these two is the publication of documents showing the underbelly of our government. However, the film and camera spends a lot of time on Julian Assange (played by Benedict Cumberbatch) but outside a few statements about his past, he ends up being an enigma. Do his decisions make sense? Sometimes.

Does he really believe in what he is doing? It appears so. Does he use people? If the film is to be believed, yes at times. One statement in the film that seemed to fit the character as Cumberbatch portrayed him was: “Julian is out for himself.” For the 2+ hours we float from scene to scene watching and waiting to see how Wikileaks handles the exposure of a plethora of US Government documents.

The suspense is minimal, because we know the answer already. The worst part of the film is that it didn’t leave much of a lasting impression about Assange. I did feel compassion for Daniel Berg (Daniel Bruhl) as he was a believer of Assange’s drive and belief, but ended up feeling betrayed by him.

Did the film move forward the Wikileaks cause? I don’t know. My personal dilemma with Wikileaks is that, although I think exposure of information is really good, if it is posted anonymously, one has to trust that the information is fully validated before it goes public; else it becomes a personal bitch Yelp posting. So far so good; I can only hope it stays that way.

Cumberbatch is excellent at giving the illusion of an enigma of a person. Bruhl is really good as Berg and I could feel him become a believer and how he provided traction to the cause. Daniel Domscheit-Berg and David Leigh wrote the book on which the film is based and it shows the elusiveness of Assange. Bill Condon seemed lost, as we spend 2+ hours getting to the big test of Wiki Leaks but the breadcrumbs along the way weren’t necessarily interesting or engaging.

Overall:  Maybe this film comes too early in Assange’s life. It might have been a better film if there was in-depth character development – as there was none here.