Daddy's Home (2015)

* ½ out of ****

I don't know if there has ever been a movie star that I've hated to love and loved to hate more than Will Ferrell. Most of his movies are so stupidly asinine that I would rather gouge out my own eyes with a barbeque fork than watch them a second time, but occasionally he does a movie that is so funny it hurts. “Elf”(2003), “Anchorman”(2004), “Stranger Than Fiction” (2006) and “Step Brothers” (2008) are all brilliantly funny.... but as far as I'm concerned you can take all of his other star vehicles and burn them for the benefit of humanity.

“Daddy's Home” isn't quite the offense to the senses that most Ferrell vehicles are, but it isn't anything worth remembering either. Ferrell is Brad Whitaker, a wet-rag type who appears to have learned everything he knows from self help books. He's married to divorcee Sarah (Linda Cardellini) and he loves her and her two kids. The kids at first resist him but eventually come to love him thanks to his constant involvement and endless patience. Brad can't have kids of his own, and as he is one of those guys for whom being a Dad is all that matters, the evolution of his family has his life exactly where he wants it.

That is until the kids' real father Dusty (Mark Wahlberg) shows up. Dusty is a “bad boy” type, and when he hears that his kids have a new father figure he rushes back planning to sabotage the family and insert himself back in. He and Brad do everything possible to undermine each other, and Dusty always seems to be one step ahead.  This convinces Brad that he's in a fight to maintain his relationships with Sarah and the kids, as he doesn't realize is that it's his responses to Dusty's behavior that is causing rifts, not Dusty's behavior itself.  To save the family he just needs to find himself again and stop trying to be "better than Dusty".

How warm and fuzzy.

While all the shenanigans are going on, I found this movie extremely tedious. There are a few laughs but the characters behave at all times like half wits, so even when something funny befalls them it is more stupid than comic. It's enough to pass the time but little more. This changes somewhat in the last reel, once Brad believes he has lost the love of his wife and kids – there is some real feeling and some nice moments in those last 20 minutes. But you do have to sit through 75 minutes of pretty ridiculous crap to get to it.

Overall it's one of Ferrell's better “bad” efforts, but nowhere near being good enough to be one of his good ones.

Forsaken (2015)

** ½ out of ****

“Forsaken” is a mostly forgettable western with one fairly unforgettable thing in it. Which absolutely makes it worth seeing......

Kiefer Sutherland plays John Henry Clayton, a Civil War veteran who became a gunman and assassin after finishing his military service. He hasn't been back to his hometown in many years, and as the film begins he feels the need to return. There he finds his father William (Donald Sutherland), the town Reverend, who is none too welcoming because of John Henry's past. He also finds the girl he left behind (Demi Moore) and the rest of the hometown contingent, some of whom are welcoming and some who would have preferred he stay away. John Henry wants to hang up his guns and live a simpler life..... but of course the town is being taken over by roughnecks working for a land baron intent on buying up all the local farms.

Sound familiar? It should – we've seen it a million times.

But it plays out pretty nicely, despite the familiarity of the story. It's also really great to see Kiefer and Donald playing father and son, as I don't ever recall them sharing the screen before. The story they give us is all very predictable and melodramatic, despite everyone doing everything they can in a script with no surprises in it.....

….but then something surprising happens.....

I have always enjoyed Kiefer's acting, though I have never thought him a particularly gifted thespian. He's been solid if unspectacular, and very occasionally does something really poorly (like his southern accent in “A Few Good Men”). But he plays a scene late in the movie that actually floored me. In it, he and his Reverend father sit in the church as John Henry describes the events that have driven him to want to change his life. Kiefer is really, really fantastic in this scene. The pain and self hatred he portrays – I really felt it. In my opinion, that one scene may very well be the apex of his career. I hope history doesn't completely lose it buried in this otherwise unmemorable film.

If you enjoy a decent western where you aren't going to be challenged to think much, this is a perfect film for you. That isn't meant to be an insult, as I genuinely love some similar movies (“Shane” for instance, or “Pale Rider”). Rather it's one where you can turn off your brain, hate the bad guys and wait for them to get their come-uppance, which everyone knows they eventually will.  I think there will always be a place in cinema for that.

The Abyss (1989)

*** out of ****

James Cameron clearly isn't afraid of the water. Historically some of cinema's biggest losses have been with films based on or under water, but time and again Cameron finds a way to make it work. “The Abyss” was his first of many forays into filming at sea, and it's a magical adventure story that is totally engrossing despite a slightly preachy message.

A US naval submarine loaded with nuclear weapons has sunk in international waters after an encounter with an unexplained underwater phenomenon. The navy hires an undersea oil rig to quickly travel to the site of the wreck to look for any survivors trapped inside. They send down to the rig the chief mechanical engineer (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio) and a handful of Navy Seals (led by Michael Beihn) and it crawls the sea bottom to the wreck site. Among the crew are captain Virgil "Bud" Brigman (Ed Harris) and a paranoid techie, Hippy (Todd Graff). Together the group begin to search the wreck for survivors.

But it turns out that the Navy Seals have an ulterior motive. They're under orders that if they suspect that the Russian Navy is in the area, they are to scuttle the wreck to ensure that the nukes don't fall into enemy hands. Confusing the situation though, strange things begin to happen which eventually prove to be the result of some alien intelligence at the sea bottom. The military, in typical movie fashion, assumes that these aliens are actually Russian bogies and the civilian crew and the Seals begin to clash.

Add to all this the fact that due to a hurricane at the surface, the folks on the rig are completely isolated and forced to work without any input from above. Eventually it becomes a fight to save themselves and possibly also the alien enclave living at the sea bottom.

“The Abyss” was a movie I went to see at the theatre way back in the day with an old friend, and I had no idea going in what the plot of this film was. I was lucky enough to have it all unfold wondrously for me and almost from the very beginning it had me completely captivated. The characters, in particular Ed Harris's “Bud Brigman”, are all so likeable, the story so riveting and the special effects so magical, that I almost didn't want it to end. Beihn is wonderfully villainous in his role, and the interaction between the leads is all just terrific. As the story unfolds and the danger becomes more real, and the aliens become more active, it becomes a real thrill ride. Cameron's storytelling is (as always) so excellent that you are able to lose yourself completely in the story.

The only complaint I have about “The Abyss” is that the ending is a bit disjointed. I get the idea that they weren't exactly sure how to wrap the story up, trying to give a big "message" and also conclude the drama. So the last 10 minutes lose a little of the locomotive-like steam the film had up to that point, but it isn't enough to derail the whole ride. A really remarkable and fascinating saga, and one that I have revisited many times since I first saw it decades ago. Very highly recommended.

The Divergent Series: Allegiant (2015)

* ½ out of ****

I hate to admit it, but I kind of enjoyed the first two movies in the “Divergent” series. I can't really explain why – they were pretty nonsensical and hinged entirely on completely unexplained mental/emotional phenomena, but I was interested enough in how everything played out that I was curious to see if they could do it again.

Unfortunately, they couldn't.

“Allegiant” is what the first two movies should have been – so buried in its own completely foreign mythology that it is impossible to care about what is unfolding on the screen. We find Tris and company now having to escape Chicago because the formerly powerless “factionless” have nailed the city down, taking over as a new totalitarian force since the old one has now been defeated. Tris and Four, along with a couple of others, escape to the wasteland where they are eventually taken to the outer realm's leaders. Here they are told that the factions and locked down city were an experiment meant to find genetically “pure” individuals, of which Tris is the first. Finding her is somehow the route to remove all the genetic “damage” of pretty much everyone else.

Make sense? Of course not. It makes no sense at all. It's such a terrible explanation for the previous two movies that it's just plain silly. Tris even comes to be so devoted to this oddball cause that she follows it instead of her true love, Four, who goes off in hopes of preventing war back in Chicago.

This movie was painful to sit through. It was visually appealing and had plenty of action, but the plot was too ridiculous for any of that to matter. I have thoroughly enjoyed Shailene Woodley in every film I've seen her in up to this point, but even her talent couldn't rescue this turkey from the roasting pan. That they are continuing to plan one more movie to finish the series mystifies me.... where the hell can they possibly go with this, other than to pull a “Newhart” and make the whole damn thing a bad dream?

The inexplicable magic that made the first two movies interesting is gone. Avoid this film – it stinks.

Sisters (2015)

** out of ****

Amy Poehler and Tina Fey are clearly the female version of Ackroyd and Belushi, working off each other often to hysterical effect. Unfortunately they also fall into the same trap of thinking that everything they do is funny, resulting in uneven outcomes.

But the films certainly starts out funny. Sisters Maura and Kate (Poehler and Fey) are told by their parents (Dianne Wiest and James Brolin) that they're selling the house the girls grew up in. Maura is a perpetual do-gooder who is too concerned with the happiness of others to have found any for herself, and Kate is a lifelong party girl who has never accomplished anything. Both long for the “good old days” of growing up in that house, and try to discourage their parents from selling. When they are unsuccessful they decide instead to have the ultimate blowout, recreating high school parties of the 80s/90s for one last night of immature fun.

There are a lot of things in “Sisters” that are funny, including some hilarious exchanges of dialogue and some crude humour reminiscent of “The Hangover”. Unfortunately it can't maintain the momentum throughout and by the end has lost any real semblance of being funny. Falling into the more traditional “chick flick” style, the ending becomes more about the girls finding happiness – Kate with her daughter and Maura with a boyfriend. Yawn.

It all starts to come apart when the party picks up steam. Up until then it is really funny and has some moments of cringing embarrassment. But as soon as it starts to feel like “Weird Science”, it lost me altogether and by the end I didn't care about these characters at all. Devolved into stupidity, really.

The two star rating has more to do with how much I enjoyed the first half of the movie, but it just isn't a very good film in the final analysis. Fey and Poehler are enjoyable, and Weist and Brolin are often really funny, but when it's all said and done it's just another forgettable chickflick with some quotable moments.

Concussion (2015)

** ½ out of ****

Sometimes the obvious is so obvious that it escapes the attention of just about everyone, sort of like “only a crazy person would vote for Donald Trump”. Such was the case at the turn of the century with how many NFL players were dying young with serious issues in the mental stability. It took the autopsy of Pittsburg Steeler Mike Webster by a forensic pathologist before someone recognized that dead footballers often had brains that were smashed almost to pudding.

The forensic pathologist was Ben Omalu (Will Smith), an immigrant from Nigeria with no ties to professional sports. But he started an investigation that led to his discovery of CTE, a brain injury caused by repeated minor concussion sustained over a long period of time. When his findings were published, the NFL went far out of it's way to try to discredit both Imalu and his findings, because if it were true could eventually cause the downfall of the entire professional football system.

Coming to Imalu's defense is former Steelers doctor Julian Bailes (Alec Baldwin), and Imalu's boss Cyril Wecht (Albert Brooks). But their small team seem no match for the multi-billion dollar NFL, especially when considering the NFL had unlimited screentime and are America's favorite sport. But Imalu's refusal to back down, and his personal conviction that it was important to get his work recognized for the protection of the players, eventual leads to people starting to listen.

Will Smith is actually extremely good in this role, affecting a Nigerian accent almost flawlessly and really committing to the doctor's cam passion. Baldwin is also surprisingly poignant as the NFL “defector”, a man more concerned with protecting people than his career or reputation. You spend much of the film shaking your head over the actions of the NFL in trying to suppress Imalu's findings, but the passion of the film is pretty toned down.

It isn't riveting viewing but it's a story well worth watching, with some strong performances that make it all worthwhile. Will Smith continues to pick smaller profile films than he used to, but often (as here) it results in more interesting films.

Trumbo (2015)

*** out of ****

When “Breaking Bad” was in its third season, some friends were telling me that I should watch the show because I'd love it. I was in no hurry though, because I had a hard time believing that the Dad from “Malcolm in the Middle” could be very convincing as a ruthless drug lord. Little did I know it would soon become one of my favorite shows of all time, and that Bryan Cranston would be such a versatile talent.

Here he plays Dalton Trumbo, one of dozens (or even hundreds) of Hollywood figures that were blacklisted in the 1950s for “anti-American activities”. In Trumbo's case, he was a member of the US Communist Party. Thanks to the Senate's “House Committee on Un-American Activities”, these individuals were condemned to be deprived of their ability to work for not cooperating with the committee. In order to cooperate, they would have to admit to have been holding Anti-American views but now have changed their ways, and name the names of anyone else they knew who held similar ideals. Trumbo and nine other Hollywood writers basically told the committee to shove it, and as a result most spent time in prison for “contempt of Senate”. Trumbo himself did 11 months.

But that wasn't where it ended, because when they were freed they still found themselves blacklisted in Hollywood, unable to work. Any moviemaker who employed them would be attacked by the committee and risk blacklisting themselves. As a result, Trumbo, who had previously been one of Hollywood's most respected and successful writers, now had no way to work. Highly secret ghost writing became his only source of income, and the high volume and stress threatened to tear his family apart.

Cranston is forced to walk a fine line in this role, affecting a regional accent and a physicality clearly lesser than his actual one, but he carries the role well without excessive overacting. Diane Lane is also excellent as his long-suffering wife, and a surprising Louis CK as a fellow blacklisted writer does much better than anyone could have expected. But it is the story that is the star here, as we see the travails Trumbo and his fellows were forced to endure for more than a decade. Like many true stories where injustices occur, it's hard to watch without becoming highly annoyed that such things were allowed to happen. But thanks to modern day travesties like the Patriot Act, the same thing goes on today, only with much less fanfare.

Cranston received an Oscar nomination for his portrayal of Trumbo, and I feel it was well deserved. Sad that such a story exists to be told, but it's a well crafted film meant to make a point. And since you surely can't miss that point, it can't be considered anything but a success.