Short Review: The media reports of Tom Cruise’s kid’s feces being bronzed may be in error. As it turns out, it may have actually been the shooting script for this film.


There are two big issues with this Tom Cruise movie:

1. Tom Cruise
2. The movie

My issue with Cruise is that he is Tom Cruise in nearly every movie he appears in. He is not an actor. He is a personality. I'm not a fan of personalities.

Looking beyond Cruise, which normally involves simply standing up, you will find Alias and Lost creator JJ Abrams at the helm of this project. This was his first feature film. I enjoy Abrams’ television work. His shows are vacuous and embarrassingly simple. His characters are emotional single-line caricatures but are given enough clever flints of dialog to make them likable. His shows are what they intend to be, disposable yet addictive fluff.

This film is just as disposable as Abrams' TV work. The difference is that this film actually prompts you to throw it away.

Where Abrams’ Alias can get you to suspend your disbelief so you’ll buy that Jennifer Garner can smuggle a XM8 Lightweight Assault Rifle in her camisole, his big fat McMovie can’t get beyond its own bloated subplots. This whole film is one big Alias episode without the benefit of Garner’s charm or Kevin Weisman’s (Marhsall Finkman) humor. Abrams goes so far as to insert, for no reason, Greg Grunberg (Alias’ Eric Weiss) into the first act. This would be like Leonard Nimoy striking it out on his own back in the 70’s but refusing to take off his pointy ears.

Absent the distraction of Jennifer Garner in a body sock shooting a TM-203 Grenade Launcher, Abrams' adoration of cheesy scripting is made just that much more obvious.

If you haven’t seen the film you may want to stop reading, I’m about to spoil the works. Although now that I consider my warning, I'm not sure that's really possible. Can you spoil trash?

The central point of the film is that super-spy Ethan Hunt tries to prove to himself (and others) that he can have a normal life with a wife and the whole shebang. All of this is wrapped up in a muddled plot which pushes Hunt to obtain “The Rabbit’s Foot”. This is currently in the pudgy hands of bad guy arms dealer Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman). Yes, the villain’s name is really Owen. Owen. " Oh, no here comes Owen." "I'm so scared of Owen!" Why not Karl, or perhaps Irwin?

“The Rabbit’s Foot” is a toxin Owen is looking to sell to bigger badder guys. Actually, we’re never told what “The Rabbit’s Foot” is and why we should care. For that matter, we’re not given the identity of the bigger badder guys and why they're so scary. Everything is nebulous, which means they are meaningless.

Owen, while performed well by Hoffman, is not an ominous figure. Since he and Ethan aren’t the focus and the conflict between the two is not clearly established, the climatic scenes lose their wind. Any momentum found in the first act is spent by halfway through the film because Abrams is too intent on wedging in a conspiracy subplot into the piece that the film simply can’t support.

Here is a heads up for all of the big time, huge budget Hollywood goofballs; If you have a big, fat McMovie and you need to reach a broad international audience, the recipe is easy:


What this does is create a firm central plot from which you can hang subplots and any other nonsense you want.


If you’re a fan of JJ Abrams’ work, stick with his small screen products. This film, while offering a few well crafted moments, will ultimately waste your time. If you’re going to do that you may as well see Jennifer Garner kill a dozen guys with a flame-thrower while parachuting wearing nothing more than a teddy.


Related Reviews:
Tom Cruise movies
War of the Worlds (2005)
Vanilla Sky (2001)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Film School Rejects
Beyond Hollywood




Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: Billy Crudup, Eddie Marsan, film, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Keri Russell, Laurence Fishburne, Michelle Monaghan, movie review, Philip Seymour Hoffman, sequel, Simon Pegg, Tom Cruise, Ving Rhames

Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: Eddie Marsan, film, Gemma Arterton, movie trailer

Short Review: If you can stomach seeing Sherlock Holmes beating up a guy with nunchuck-looking things, hear his British accent fail him at the end of long sentences and seem more like Tony Stark than the classic character, you'll be just fine.


It takes about three seconds for the movie to reveal that this has as much to do with Sherlock Holmes as Austin Powers has to do with James Bond. The new and improved, space-age Sherlock (now with extra zing!) shares a name and some traits with his literary twin, but other than that, leave your knowledge of the old guy at home. He will only serve to get in the way of his newly minted cinematic doppelganger.

Taking the film for what it is, a plump, squishy, nonsense-laden hunk of crap from Hollywood, it is very effective. It offers attractive characters with bouncy dialog and some amusing moments of peril. The film entertains, which is better than I can say for most Hollywood deposits over the past twelve months.

Robert Downey Jr.'s Holmes is a British version of Tony Stark who is less sexed and has baggier facial expressions. Downey is fantastic at balancing himself on the edge of over-acting without ever crossing over. To me, this is his draw. He is charismatic and often overtakes the other actors around him. But he at least does us the favor of being worth watching while he distracts from everything else.

Downey is a solid actor and is finally delivering on the promise he showed way back when he made Chaplin. He spent a lot of years wandering the back alleys of Hollywood doing very stupid movies and simpleton roles (One Night Stand, Natural Born Killers, Two Girls and a Guy, Only You), but clean and sober, he has finally found his niche - regular stupid movies and relatively stupid roles. Yes, he's still slopping burgers at McDonalds, but the fact is that he is the best kid working the fry machine.

Opposite Downey is Jude Law as Dr. Watson. Other than offering to step in and dispatch of some toothless, dingy minions, we're not clear as to his purpose. He offers Holmes some banter and plays Felix to Holmes Oscar, but otherwise he follows the detective around like some intern assistant.

Law's performance does manage to keep up with Downey's work. The two mix well together and give the production a comfortable and friendly vibe. Law also looks the part of a Englishman. His presence, and steady accent, help to remind audiences this is supposed to be taking place in London, not Lot 13 in Burbank.

The film isn't without its downsides. The casting of Rachel McAdams is a notable fault. She has a pretty smile and near perfect skin. That wraps up the depth of her character Irene. McAdams wilts in comparison to both Downey and Law. She never finds her footing and fades into the background, even when she's the only one on screen. It is as if she was given her lines moments before stepping in front of the cameras, whereas Downey and Law had plenty of rehersal time with ample opportunity to explore their dialog, non-verbals and reactions. The two will have a scene with complex dialog, filled with lively exchange. Downey will then spend time with McAdams and their whole conversation could be reduced to grunts and eyebrow wiggling and little would be lost. In McAdams' defence, Irene is thinly written. Her dialog is far less dramatic and her motivations are clunky.

The other troubling part of the story is the mystery at the heart of the film is no mystery at all. Instead it is a plot that gets quickly unraveled on our behalf by Holmes. The audience has nothing to do with it. The fun of mysteries is for the viewer to attempt to uncover the truth before the hero. We are either outsmarted by the villain, or are as bright as the hero. Here, Holmes deciphers a complex plot and explains his logic in the final moments - a string of logic that would be impossible for any audience member to come to on their own. This drains what could have been, should have been, a great payoff for us. Then again, they had to concentrate on making sure Holmes as like all awesome and stuff.

I recommend the movie but I warn you it is a frosted, high-fructose, McMovie served in a dome-cup.




Related Reviews:
Robert Downey Jr. movies
Iron Man (2008)
Tropic Thunder (2008)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Austin Chronicle
Eric D. Snyder

Labels: Eddie Marsan, film, Guy Ritchie, Jude Law, Mark Strong, movie review, Rachel McAdams, Robert Downey Jr

There’s some good bits to be found. Sally Hawkins (Cassandra’s Dream) gives an endearing performance as Poppy, a spunky school teacher. She deserves much of the praise she has found from critics. The film as a whole simply doesn’t work because it is as distracted and unfocused. The heart of the story is in the relationship between Poppy and her acidic driving instructor Scott (Eddie Marsan (The Illusionist)). The pairing gives the film its most enjoyable and meaningful moments. Unfortunately, this interplay is shoved into the background in favor of wandering scenes of Poppy in normal life. This is like listening to someone sing a new song, hit a few perfect chords and then descend into a yodeling mess never recognizing the wonderful potential composition they’ve left behind.

Life is too short for quirky, sloppy messes.



Related Reviews:
Quirky films
About a Boy (2002)
Lars and the Real Girl (2007)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
The One-Line Review
Ill-Informed Gadfly

Labels: British Cinema, Eddie Marsan, film, movie review, Sally Hawkins

Screenwriter: Mike Leigh (Naked)
Director: Mike Leigh (Vera Drake)
Actors: Sally Hawkins (Cassandra's Dream), Eddie Marsan (Hancock), Alexis Zegerman, Kate O'Flynn and Caroline Martin

Labels: British Cinema, Eddie Marsan, film, movie trailer, Sally Hawkins