Filmshelf

After some nitpicky early reviews I was fully prepared to see Hancock, the "suckfest without meaning". Boy, what a pleasant surprise. Hancock ist not the same-old, same-old in new clothes. There are a couple of different ways to "read" Hancock, though, more on that later.

Iron Man doesn't want to produce weapons anymore, The Incredible Hulk hates the whole Hulk-thing/uncontrollable violence and now there's Hancock (Will Smith), a depressed and jaded superhero who cares more about saving lives than appearances and money. His sidekick of sorts is PR-specialist Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman). Ray fights the good fight not on the streets but in the office. When he presents his concept "All heart" to a bunch of deep pocket suits, however, their reaction is disheartening. Rays concept is very simple: he suggests the pharma industry hand out meds for free to those who can't pay to stay alive. I suppose he didn't expect that saving lives could not be priority. Not even if that would help restore the industry's tarnished image. Ray's concept "All heart" seems DOA.

After we've seen Ray fail, a drunk Hancock saves his life - once again causing a few million $ worth of damage followed by media outrage. Ray wants to repay the favor by helping Hancock build a new image for himself. We fully expect his project to go the way of "All Heart" but it doesn't. Hancock gets a make-over, a new attitude, goes to jail, attends anger management group therapy - and waits. Finally, he gets released in order to help with a hostage situation.

There, Parker (Eddie Masran, who plays a similar role in the upcoming Happy-Go-Lucky) wants to force Hancock to hand over 30 million in exchange for the hostages. That doesn't fly and he temporarily ends up behind bars. He swears he'll come after Hancock....

When he's not on the job, Hancock hangs out with Ray and his son Aaron (Jae Head), who's a big Hancock-fan. Ray's wife Mary (Charlize Theron) considers Hancock to be a loser and bad influence but Ray doesn't care. He's found someone who shares his vision, a true friend. In the final scene their connection is made perfectly clear in a sweet and innocent way. I'm sure some will find it corny.

Yes, there are plenty of big action scenes including a "battle of the superheroes" scene. That one is not just cool action but it's also very funny due to some facts I cannot divulge (spoilers). I have to say, though, that sometimes I wondered if Will Smith was shaky on his feet because he was supposed to be drunk Hancock or if the editing was lousy. I could almost see the strings Smith was tied up in. On the other hand, Hancock the movie doesn't take itself too seriously. Once in a while it's a tad spoofy and that's not necessarily a bad thing, either.

Now, regarding the ways the movie can be read. I've chosen the innocent kind of reading that's about charity and goodwill, about sharing the wealth rather than obsessing about stock prices. There is of course another way of reading Hancock: Does "hated superpower saves lives to the tune of millions of $ in damages which causes the public to demand superpower quit saving lives" ring any bells? Does Ray and his soft approach, his focus and the suggestions he makes to Hancock (including he be more polite, appreciate what others are doing/collaborate (police), be more careful/cause less damage)? Does the collaboration of super-powered Hancock and near-powerless Ray give you any ideas? Exactly.

In that context the notion that two superheroes can't reside in the same area without losing their powers might even make sense. It makes sense that one superhero has to leave. Coming to think of it - it also makes sense that a superhero hides his abilities in order to ditch the responsibilities that are part of the superhero job description...

Will Smith is great, so what else is new (not counting shaky feet moments)? Charlize Theron didn't fully convince me but that's in part due to one of those horrible crying scenes with instant red eyes (take # 100?). Look how Will wells up - that's more honest than crocodile tears from eyes so red they'd be perfect for those artificial tears commercials. Jason Bateman didn't have that much to do, sexy and sweet he does well.

Supposedly there will be Hancock 2 - if this one does well. $ 4000+/theater does look promising, especially because the viewers don't seem to agree with the nitpickers. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.


Hancock
screenplay: Vincent Ngo & Vince Gilligan
director: Peter Berg (Kingdom)

Hancock Cast:
Hancock - Will Smith
Ray Embrey - Jason Bateman
Mary Embrey - Charlize Theron
Aaron Embrey - Jae Head
Red - Eddie Marsan
Jeremy (cameo) - Johnny Galecki (The Big Bang Theory)

M. Night Shyamalan's new thriller The Happening will hit US-theaters Friday 13th. Here's my review of his screenplay dated January 2007. Please also note the update on the bottom of this post. Thanks.

Final thought after reading The Happening: this would make a great novel. A film? Not so much. A thriller without thrills. Talk about unfilmable danger (b/c it looks like Shyamalan wants to keep the threat real), a reactive protagonist who can't do anything other than think (unfilmable), flee, and observe, an underdeveloped romance and some great ideas that drown in piles of dead bodies. A little girl that mirrors the antagonist - nice touch.

Science teacher Elliot (Mark Wahlberg) loves his wife Alma (Zooey Deschanel) and won't accept that the relationship has hit rock bottom. Alma has made up her mind. She takes her wedding band off, she's going to leave him. Then disaster hits. Large numbers of people kill themselves for no apparent reason.

As always in disaster-movies, the couple will get back together, right? We know this just like we know the ending of a romcom. What's interesting is the 90 minutes in between argument and kiss. Shyamalan doesn't care what I'm interested in. People need to talk and trust each other - problem solved.

Elliot and Alma flee the city together with their friend Julian (John Leguizamo) and his daughter Jess (Ashlyn Sanchez). Soon Julian leaves, he wants to search for his wife.

We learn that it's a neuro-toxin that causes the suicides and about 30 minutes into the film we know who spreads it around the globe. There's no way to stop it, only a chance to hide. Elliot collects more clues (observe, think, react) and they keep on running from danger. [Btw: If you think about ways to kill yourself look no further. Here's 50 ways to off yourself.]

It's an interesting topic Shyamalan picked and I love the story-idea. It's clever. It would make a great novel. One could add characters, a backstory, develop the Alma/Elliot relationship, get more into Elliot's head and perhaps even Alma's, and the many suicides might end up having more of an impact than they do in the script and probably will have on the screen. One thing I particularly like involves a ring. That could get more time in the book as well.

A protagonist who can't do anything and who saves himself and his family by thinking isn't much to look at. My only hope is that the movie will be much different from the script (and the trailer).

Update: Meanwhile I've seen a preview and I'm impressed. Though essentially the same story, it's been taken apart and re-assembled in a different manner and some of the things I hated in the script have been re-written. What I liked has been emphasized. See my detailed review, coming up Thursday. It's fascinating to see what a rewrite and editing can do.

Last time I saw Eva Mendes, she was making out with Joaquin Phoenix in We Own The Night. This time around, she's by herself. And man, that's even hotter.

Star-Photographer Steven Meisel (he who also took the famous pictures of Madonna for her Sex Book) had the pleasure of working with Eva Mendes for italian Vogue magazine. The result is not just molto erotico - it's also molto artsy (yupp, my rudimentary Italian just went bye-bye, now I'm drawing blanks).

Vogue published a 13-part-photo-story in which we see Eva Mendes in ever-changing wigs. In one photograph she reminds one a lot on Sophia Loren. I'm digging the pics .... well, there are two (in one she's sucking her toe, in the other one Eva Mendes plays a table) I could do without, but the others a great.

See for yourself - which ones are you digging? Link >>Eva Mendes Vogue Photo-Story

Chop Shop was screened at the Berlin International Film Festival 2008 and is now in limited release. Only lead actor Alejandro Polanco was present and available for Q & A at the 2nd Berlin screening.

Chop Shop - Genre: drama -- Running time: 84 minutes. Festival suggestion: PG-13

Filmmaker Ramin Bahrani's (Man Push Cart) feature Chop Shop shows the daily struggle of an orphaned 12-year old boy in the Willet's Point area of Queens, aka The Iron Triangle. In the beginning we see Alejandro "Ale" (Alejandro Polanco) and a friend sell candy in the subway. Ale points out that he's not doing that for school, that indeed he isn't in school at all, but..."If you want me to go to school, I got candy for you". Pretty genius little spiel he got there - people are buying. Too bad he doesn't mean it, his plans don't include school.

It's a cool little scene but it's also deceptive. It sets up expectations that aren't going to be fulfilled. Chop Shop is one of those "important" films about important topics that you wish would also tell an interesting story in an entertaining way - but they don't. Instead, you're in for a dose of the filmmaker's style that gets in the way of storytelling.. lingering shots without subtext to warrant them, repetitions that never pay off but seem to be there simply to ensure Jane & Joe Shmoe don't miss that one action, painfully long stretches during which nothing much happens. Some rave reviews from the usual sources felt compelled to call this style "poetic".

Why, if a topic is that important, one chooses to present it in such a way that warrants only a (very) limited release, will appeal to few people and be accessible to even fewer? It's art, you say. It's showing off the filmmaker's talent, it's a showcase. That bugs me to no end. I kept on editing my review and putting its publication off. Until...

....I came across an interview (in a press release) with Stefan Ruzowitzky, whose feature The Counterfeiters won this year's Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. In this interview, Ruzowitzky supports my view when he talks about "a moral obligation to tell the stories in such a way that the largest possible audience can be reached".* Though Ruzowitzky talks specifically about Holocaust-stories, I'm sure he'd say the same thing about any relevant fact-based story. I'm betting 5 bucks that he would. Back to Chop Shop.

I really do like the Alejandro character, he seems real. Ale is a true survivor. He knows the value of money, but is completely illiterate. Trust? No way. Alejandro trusts nobody, period. He does believe in the power of money, though. Money will buy him a better life, he thinks, money is the solution to all his problems. You see, he saves up for a vending truck.

Ale works for a car shop - they tell him what parts they need, he goes and steals them. He treats this like a regular job, gets paid, has a room upstairs and is allowed to use the shower. The man who owns the place we see a number of times with a dangerous-looking dog. You know, just like in regular movies questionable characters get to walk around with cute little doggies to tell you: "he's not all bad, look, he's got a dog!"? This dog shows his teeth quite a few times so you start to think something's up with the dog, but then - nothing. Just a prop, just shorthand. That's art, people.

When Ale's older sister Isamar (Isamar Gonzales) shows up, he talks her into staying with him and works hard to convince her that that vending truck isn't just a dream, it's a goal, it will become a reality. Isamar could quit her job at the diner, he could quit the Chop Shop and all will be swell from there. What Ale doesn't tell Isamar is that he knows she's turning tricks, too.

Isamar, on the other hand, is a piece of work. She's too comfortable with her situation and has the friends to go with it. Money is spent on outfits, there's partying, you get the picture. This place is her world. She can't see beyond its limits. In a way, this character is far more interesting than Ale, who's a typical victim that gets victimized over and over while he tries so hard to be like you and me. Work, work, busy bee and dream the American dream. Isamar works and also tries to have fun, but she lacks an ingredient that's actually the stuff that sells Hollywood movies: The American Dream.

One thing that doesn't work for Chop Shop is its focus on Willet's Point as a microcosmos. It makes it too easy to forget that this place is actually located in the US. I remember at one point thinking: is this in South America? Occasionally showing Shea Stadium may work for New York residents and/or baseball fans, but it did nothing for me.

Another weak point is Ale. I'm not even going to talk about the acting in some scenes that were far from convincing. (After all, Alejandro Polanco isn't a professional actor and neither are most of the other cast members. Polanco told us he was hired by the filmmaker who cruised schools searching for Spanish-speaking kids.) It was the emotional distance that was the bigger problem. We don't know what he's feeling and that ultimately prevents us from investing our feelings.

What this flick provides is fodder for the let's-infer-meaning game. Alejandro Polanco sure wasn't any help when one viewer inquired about the meaning of the pigeons. If his answer "Ale wanted to entertain Isamar" is any indication, we're thinking way more about what stuff in the film could mean than its creators. My shot at the pigeons: Pigeons - "flying rats" - genpop feeds them or kills them at will - they might represent Ale and Isamar. There you go, certainly none the wiser.

Not very many people attended the 2nd Chop Shop screening at the Berlin International Film Festival. We were told before the show "if you like the film, please tell your friends. We still got tickets left for the other two screenings". Word of mouth won't work for this flick, I'm afraid.

Screenplay: Ramin Bahrani and Bahareh Azimi
Director: Ramin Bahrani

Chop Shop Cast:
Alejandro Ale - Alejandro Polanco
Isamar - Isamar Gonzales
Carlos - Carlos Zapata
Ahmad - Ahmad Razvi
Rob - Rob Sowulski
------

* (translation mine)