Showing posts with label James Vanderbilt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Vanderbilt. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

Truth

For F*** Magazine

TRUTH

Director : James Vanderbilt
Cast : Cate Blanchett, Robert Redford, Dennis Quaid, Topher Grace, Elizabeth Moss, Bruce Greenwood, Stacy Keach
Genre : Biography/Drama
Run Time : 126 mins
Opens : 17 March 2016
Rating : M18 (Some Nudity And Coarse Language)

The Bible tells us that “the truth shall set you free”, but there are times when it can feel like the truth can hold you prisoner, as Cate Blanchett finds out in this drama. Blanchett plays Mary Mapes, the producer of CBS’ primetime news program 60 Minutes Wednesday. In the months leading up to the 2004 presidential election, 60 Minutes airs a story about President George W. Bush receiving preferential treatment from his superiors at the Texas Air National Guard, with memos allegedly authored by Bush’s commander Lt. Col. Jerry Killian as proof. Mapes, her team and veteran news anchor and 60 Minutes presenter Dan Rather (Redford) come under fire after the program is aired, with multiple viewers calling the veracity of the documents procured by 60 Minutes into question. Rather, hitherto a widely respected figure in broadcast news, finds his reputation threatened as Mapes scrambles to defend herself and prove that 60 Minutes did not lie to the American public.

            Truth is based on Mapes’ 2005 memoir entitled “Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power.” Writer/director James Vanderbilt adapted the book for the screen and he makes his directorial debut with this film. Because Mapes’ account of events is the primary source, it cannot be expected that Truth is an objective depiction of the Killian Documents controversy, which came to be colloquially known as “Memogate” and “Rathergate”. The 60 Minutes story was one of the first pieces of investigative broadcast journalism to be dissected and torn apart online by bloggers and CBS was blasted for apparently exhibiting a liberal bias by running the anti-Bush story without thoroughly verifying these documents. Somewhere in there, there’s a gripping tale of the profound responsibility that journalists must uphold and Truth did get this reviewer invested in Mapes’ journey, but the film is pervaded with a sense of heavy-handed portentousness and turns out to be far less incisive than it thinks it is.


            Contrary to its title, Truth can’t help but feel phony at times. While this is a slicker, better-made film than many directorial debuts, Vanderbilt’s attempts to drum up the excitement and establish grave stakes feel slightly overblown. One of the culprits is Brian Tyler’s musical score, which heaves with bombast and sounds like something out of Air Force One. Quaid plays Col. Roger Charles, a member of Mapes’ investigative team, and it seems his primary function is to dispense exposition. There is a cringe-worthy scene set in a plane in which Charles explains to freelance reporter Mike Smith (Grace) that Mapes’ father physically abused her and that Mapes sees Rather as a father figure. There are also so many “what have I done?” moments in which realization dawns on Mapes that the scandal has taken another terrible turn, that it borders on self-parody.

            Vanderbilt’s trump card is his cast, especially lead performers Blanchett and Redford who are expectedly excellent. In spite of how many times the story trips over itself, the duo carries it to the finish line in tandem. Blanchett’s Mapes is doggedly persistent and suffers no fools, someone who is dedicated to her job and witnesses her life’s work crumbling around her. Truth would very much obviously like us to take Mapes’ side, and Blanchett’s portrayal of her ensures that we do – at least up until the movie ends and we start reflecting on the proceedings in-depth. Redford bears little physical resemblance to the famous newsman, and when playing someone so recognisable, perhaps physical resemblance should count for something. However, he has no trouble at all creating a warm, trustworthy and respectable figure and the interaction between Redford and Blanchett does possess a degree of heart.


            The rest of the characters are disappointingly two-dimensional; propping up the story as it progresses – Grace is the comic relief, lying on the couch, tossing a baseball in the air and asking the rest of the people in the room “you guys feel like pizza?” Quaid, as mentioned earlier, recaps things “as you know”-style for the audience. Moss, as associate producer Lucy Scott, has precious little to do. The various CBS higher-ups grumble/yell at Mapes and her team, occasionally flinging objects across the room in frustration. It turns out that securing Blanchett and Redford is a casting coup not just because they’re talented actors but because there’s little else to recommend in the film beyond them.
            Truth is made with polish but lacks finesse, an indignant cry that is far from altogether convincing in making us re-evaluate the events of over 10 years ago. The film desperately wants viewers to see Mapes and Rather as righteous martyrs laying their careers on the line and going down with their ship, a point of view that CBS has slammed. It’s not a case of “here are the facts; draw your own conclusions” because of the side the film takes, but the look behind the scenes at the politics of journalistic ethics, however flawed, is nonetheless fascinating. Perhaps Vanderbilt did as a good a job as possible with the stipulation that Mapes and Rather must be portrayed as the good guys, but then again, it feels like the title “Truth?” would be a better fit.



Summary: Truth is clumsy, preachy and Oscar-baity, not entirely successful in convincing viewers that its protagonists’ lapses in judgement were justifiable and forgivable. However, it’s impossible to overlook Blanchett and Redford’s stellar performances.

RATING: 3 out of 5 Stars


Jedd Jong 

Monday, June 25, 2012

The Amazing Spider-Man

For F*** Magazine, Singapore


Movie Review                                                                                                             25/6/11

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN
2012

Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Denis Leary
Directed by: Marc Webb

            After Spider-Man 3 became something of a critical and commercial letdown and plans for a sequel fell through, the folks at Marvel Entertainment and Columbia Pictures developed a case of itchy reboot button syndrome and immediately put The Amazing Spider-Man into production to swing in and save the franchise. Many fans rolled their collective eyes and the web (heh) was abuzz with fiery opinions – it was as if those in charge wished they had the memory-erasing neuralyser from another blockbuster franchise to make us forget that it hasn’t been very long since the last Spidey flick. Early looks and promotional materials seemed generally underwhelming, and the film quickly became buried by bigger releases such as The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises and Prometheus. However, this red and blue spider has become something of a dark horse and has somehow risen to greet detractors with a shot of webbing to the face.

            The film’s basic plot should be familiar to most who are fans of the comic book and/or Sam Raimi’s trilogy, with several tweaks. The prologue shows a four-year-old Peter Parker (Max Charles) being handed over amidst panic and secrecy from his parents Richard (Campbell Scott) and Mary (Embeth Davidtz) to his Aunt May (Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen). In the present, Peter (Garfield) is an awkward but likable high-schooler who stumbles across information hidden by his father, which leads Peter to Dr Curt Connors (Ifans), a one-armed scientist in the employ of Oscorp working to develop a regenerative serum to re-grow his amputated arm.

Then, the fateful incident when Peter sneaks into a secret lab in the Oscorp building and gets bitten by a genetically-enhanced spider happens. As Peter comes to terms with his newfound superhuman abilities, he also nurses a crush on classmate and Oscorp intern Gwen Stacy (Stone). A tragic personal event serves as the catalyst for Parker taking on the guise of the vigilante Spider-Man, fighting street thugs with the help of high-tech web-shooting gadgets and a slick homemade costume, in addition to his powers. However, Gwen’s dad Captain George Stacy of the NYPD isn’t a big fan of Spidey – and in the meantime, Dr Curt Connors’ flawed treatment turns him into the monstrous Lizard who has biological warfare on his mind.

In spite of the poor first impressions left by the news of an almost-instant reboot and sneak peeks at the movie, one would be hard-pressed not to admit that The Amazing Spider-Man is actually a competently-made, enjoyable flick. The approach that the aptly-named director Marc Webb of (500) Days of Summer fame took brings to mind last year’s surprise hit Marvel flick X-Men: First Class, in that in combines the youthful appeal of teen drama with relatively large-scale super heroics and action sequences. This film does not repeat the mistakes of Spider-Man 3 – instead, we have character development and interaction and clear and easy-to-follow plot progression. Peter’s job at the Daily Bugle, his boss J Jonah Jameson and a few other elements have been wisely left for later, and one won’t notice them missing.

Spider-Man has always been a hero all readers could relate to, with his transition from outcast to hero and his various personal, real-world struggles. Andrew Garfield, sexy nerd incarnate, is an ace casting choice. The actor has said that playing Spider-Man has been his dream since he was a young boy and the role went to the right guy. Garfield has an effortless, genuine charm and his slightly lanky proportions do seem very reminiscent of the Peter Parker of the comics, particularly the Ultimate version. For all the strengths of Tobey Maguire’s interpretation of the character, Garfield’s somehow rings more true. Whether he’s being a smart-mouthed do-gooder, a teen sorting out his issues with his well-meaning aunt and uncle or a young lover unsure of how to go about a relationship with his dream gal, Garfield is in great form.

Speaking of his dream gal, Emma Stone does a similarly good job of playing Gwen Stacy. Many were confused after Stone was cast and then announced as playing a different character from Kirsten Dunst’s. Gwen did pop up in Spider-Man 3 played by Bryce Dallas-Howard, and is touted as Parker’s first love. In an interview, Stone states that “Mary Jane fell in love with Spider-Man, but Gwen Stacy fell in love with Peter Parker”. Gwen is smart, kind and funny, surely what every guy looks for in a girl, and her role in the story is just the right size. Sure enough, the chemistry between Stone and Garfield is among the strongest of onscreen couples in recent memory and it’s no surprise that the couple continued their romance off the set.

One has to feel bad for Dylan Baker who portrayed Dr Curt Connors in Spider-Man 2 and 3 but never got the chance to transform into the Lizard after the cancellation of a fourth entry in Raimi’s series. Rhys Ifans fills those shoes, and he marshals a tragic figure who hopes to better society and to fix his own perceived physical flaw. This definitely will push the excellent actor further into public consciousness, and he does a decent job. However, Connors’ split-second snap from rational scientist to raving mad supervillain does seem a tad rushed and the design of the Lizard, as has been stated before, is pretty goofy. Also, the relationship between Connors and Parker, while given some attention here, could have benefited from a little mo re.

The rest of the supporting cast is good too. Martin Sheen is easy to buy as the earnest, down-to-earth uncle and father figure who serves as an upstanding role model to his nephew, and so is Sally Field as his concerned, protective wife May. Casting these veteran film industry stalwarts was certainly a good move, especially since this retelling doesn’t particularly focus on the two but does convey their involvement in Peter’s life. Denis Leary is also well-cast as the Inspector Javert-type Captain Stacy, who could have been an over-the-top, “squash Spider-Man dead!” figure. Instead, Leary makes him a stern but well-meaning authority figure and gives him a good dynamic with his daughter and Peter. His resemblance to Willem Dafoe, aka Green Goblin from the first Spider-Man film, is a little distracting though.

In terms of aesthetics, the movie looks sleek and dramatic – director Webb uses his ample experience shooting music videos in the right way. While it could have been something like the horrid Catwoman movie, there is instead clever use of lighting and composition and the action sequences are kinetic yet coherently-shot. This reviewer isn’t a giant fan of the costume, produced by the people at Cirque du Soleil (really) and the afore-mentioned facial features of the Lizard. The large amounts of digital effects supplied mostly by Sony Pictures Imageworks (also responsible for last year’s Green Lantern film) are also a cut or so below expectations for a big-budget superhero movie, but these don’t significantly hurt the end result.

The film brings up the issue of Peter’s parents but never fully addresses it, with a slightly ham-fisted mid-credits sequel hook hinting at what is to come. The Amazing Spider-Man has been marketed as “the untold story”, which is rather bold given that it’s only been ten years since Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man and five years since Spider-Man 3. Still, it defies expectations and is thoroughly entertaining. Untold story? Not quite, but well-told story? Definitely.

SUMMARY: Put aside your misgivings and ignore your tingling “bad-reboot” senses: surprisingly, The Amazing Spider-Man mostly lives up to the adjective in the title. Who would’ve guessed?

RATING: 4/5 STARS

Jedd Jong Yue