Cyber pulp fiction

“Untraceable” is rated R for grisly violence, torture and some language.

Tempo grade: C+

Review by Rick Romancito, The Taos News

If there’s one thing that can be gleaned from the pulp fiction at the soul of “Untraceable,” it’s that the Internet has become a cesspool of humanity’s worst intentions and that we should be grateful there are cyber-cops surfing with the aliens.

The setup is simple. Someone in cyberspace has created a Web site that opens with a teaser question, “Kill With Me?” Upon entering, visitors see a real human being hooked up to a device that will gradually kill him or her depending on the number of people who log on. Alongside the live video feed is a chat room where visitors can add their comments, which generally tend to egg on the proceedings. This, of course, makes everyone who visits the site an accomplice to the murder. Because of the Web’s perceived anonymity — which, big surprise, is known to appeal to the worst instincts of users — the site is an instant hit.

There is a real promo site associated with the movie called www.killwithme.com.

When you go to it and click on “enter,” a prompt appears that says, “Warning, visiting this site could cause harm to innocent people. Do you still want to enter?” If you click “yes,” prepare to have your little hand smacked by a statement that says “91 percent of you ignored the warning. Where are your morals?” Ouch.

Back to the movie: The daily grind for single mom and FBI cyber-crimes agent Jennifer Marsh (Diane Lane) is usually made up of investigating illegal download providers and ferreting out potential child exploitation creeps. At first, when she and her team find out about the site, they think it might be a hoax, but a little more digging reveals that the victim is real and what happens is equally as genuine.

What follows is a fairly suspenseful cat-and-mouse thriller that comes off as one of those bad paperback suspense novels you pick up at a flea market because you had a couple of nickels rattling around in your pocket, something in which Director Gregory Hoblit (“Fracture,” “Primal Fear”) seems to specialize.

Deriving much of its momentum from hints of torture porn hits like “Saw” and TV police procedurals like “CSI,” Hoblit’s movie banks on the fact that quite a few Web-users still regard this investigative domain of basic instinct as mysterious and somewhat magical. This can only explain why filmmakers continue to depict tech-savvy criminals and cops conducting clearly impossible hacker tricks. But mixing obviously fake wizardry with for-real functions makes a movie like this seem plausible to anyone who used that free disc they got in the mail to obtain their Internet service.

That’s not to say somebody could come up with a heinous concoction like this, but with real cyber cops out there peeking in on your IP address, who’d want to try?

This review was published in the Jan. 31, 2008 edition of Tempo, the arts and entertainment magazine of The Taos News. Visit www.taosnews.com.

Smash hit

“Cloverfield” is rated PG-13 for violence, terror and disturbing images.

Tempo grade: B+

Review by Rick Romancito

It’s all about finding ways to make an old penny shiny again.

For every horror or sci-fi hit movie, there are usually a zillion imitators waiting in the wings to drain the fun out of the experience — like letting drunken Uncle Arnold jump into your brand new wading pool with his golf shoes on. See, I had the pleasure of seeing “The Blair Witch Project” before the haters got on board and wet themselves trying to be the first to say how bad they thought it was. But, I loved it. Now, before the haters start guzzling gallons of Gatorade for “Cloverfield,” I want to go on record saying I loved this too.

So there.

Yes, it’s hard to make a tired genre seem new again, but this one did it. And it did it in a very clever way by taking something that obviously had bloated special effect potential but squeezing it through something wholly unexpected. I know, that sounds ridiculously vague, but, trust me, there’s a reason.

First of all, the title means nothing. It’s like the government didn’t think up “The Manhattan Project” as a way of announcing to the world “Hey, we’re making an atomic bomb over here!” It’s deliberately mysterious because from the movie’s first frame the titles alone pose something ominous. Basically, it means this is a top secret video somebody found in the rubble of what was once New York City and we’re seeing it from the perspective of a strange and probably bleak future in which the stuff we see is like viewing long lost home movies of the Big Apple skyline punctuated by those two gleaming towers.

As the movie opens, we are introduced to a group of friends who are throwing a going away party for a guy named Rob (Michael Stahl-David), who has just landed a great job in Japan. Rob can’t wait for a young woman named Beth (Odette Yustman) to show up. In clips on the tape we see that Beth and Rob had the beginnings of a sweet romance, but something happened between them. Suddenly, Beth does arrive, but she’s with some other dude, which, of course, creates all sorts of melodrama.

We witness this through the lens of a video camera that was originally handed to a kind of dufus named Hud (T.J. Miller) as a way of recording testimonials wishing good luck to Rob from all his buddies.

Then just as events at the party start looking like a cross between “The O.C.” and “Big Brother,” all hell breaks loose and what was once a fun party becomes a fight for survival. Something huge and scary is ripping apart buildings and has even flung Lady Liberty’s head down the street looking like somebody played Whack-A-Mole with Uncle Arnold’s noggin.

In much the same way Steven Spielberg brought “The War of the Worlds” down to earth, this move reduces an epic “Gojira”-sized catastrophe to human terms. At first, Rob, his brother Jason (Mike Vogel), Jason’s girlfriend Lily (Jessica Lucas), a party guest named Marlena (Lizzy Caplan) and Hud try to evacuate from the city amid a disquieting scene that recalls the real life horror of Sept. 11. Then, Rob gets a garbled cell phone call from Beth, who sounds injured and trapped somewhere back the way they came. Choices have to be made and the most unbelievable experience in their lives is captured by Hud’s camera.

My only quibble is that I wished Hud would’ve taken his role as documentarian a little more seriously, because a few steady shots might’ve helped make the struggle for survival a bit less dizzying. Still, for fluff and a few good sized jolts, this isn’t bad. Not bad at all.

This review was published in the Jan. 24, 2008 edition of Tempo, the arts and entertainment magazine of The Taos News. Visit www.taosnews.com.

Friends for life

“The Bucket List” is rated PG-13 for language, including a sexual reference.

Tempo grade: C

Film review by Rick Romancito, The Taos News

Is cancer something to laugh at? Well, maybe not at, but many patients and their doctors certainly do believe in the power of laughter. It helps to put things in perspective, focuses one’s energy on living, and illuminates the joy we should all be seeking for ourselves and those around us. I would love to say that Rob Reiner’s new film is a celebration of all that, but so much junk gets tossed in the road that avoiding it dilutes the message.

For instance, there is a nagging question that isn’t stated out loud, but is inherent through the picture: If you knew you were going to die within about a year or so, how would you spend your remaining time? For a lot of people, the answer might mean putting right some wrongs, spending days awash in the love of family and friends or finding peace. Unfortunately, though, far too many are burdened with skyrocketing medical bills and an inadequate health care system that makes putting off the inevitable seem almost cruel.

But in Reiner’s syrupy sentimental world, it means checking off items on a “bucket list.”

The film stars Morgan Freeman as a working class auto mechanic named Carter Chambers and Jack Nicholson as a cantankerous corporate billionaire named Edward Cole — who also happens to own the hospital in which both men find themselves after being diagnosed with cancer. How these men end up in the same hospital room together is one of the many contrivances we’re supposed to accept, posed by way of an opening sequence in which Edward declares with Scrooge-like pomposity that he doesn’t run health spas, he runs hospitals “two beds to a room, no exceptions.” But, if Ed’s so rich, why can’t he afford to be treated by the world’s top physicians in the best setting possible? The answer, of course, is that if he did these two guys wouldn’t meet and develop their elderly version of “bro-mance” with each other.

Back in the stone age, a freshman philosophy professor gave Carter’s class an assignment to list the things they’d like to do before they “kicked the bucket.” When Carter starts one, Edward, being the worldly, filthy rich, multi-divorced, no-strings-attached kind of guy that he is, asks why don’t they set about fulfilling it? So, they do. And then we, as the audience, are subjected to several strained sequences in which Edward and Carter travel the world doing and seeing all the cool things they always wanted.

Now, about those nagging questions.

Here’s a few more: If Ed’s so rich, why doesn’t he make sure to take along a highly paid doctor or at least a nurse to make sure the trip goes OK for them? And, why does the fulfillment of the bucket list seem so terribly trivial, especially when Carter’s got a wife, children and grandchildren wondering why grandpa took off with some rich stranger?

But, the worst has to do with the sadness that unintentionally lurks beneath the fantasy. Because Carter’s new friend is so wealthy, he has no worries about how all of this, even his health-care costs, will be paid. Which means any working class schmo like him in the audience who has ever been faced with the issues surrounding cancer and the crushing debt it creates, not to mention the inconvenience of organ failure, has to wonder about how flimsy it all seems. The structure of Reiner’s film then becomes its greatest hindrance and the seriousness it hopes to express lightly becomes the elephant in the room.

As a two-man show, the humor exchanged between Nicholson and Freeman is pretty choice at times, but it deserves a better vehicle than this broken down clunker with too many factory defects.

This review appears in the Thursday Jan. 17, 2008 edition of Tempo, the arts and entertainment magazine of The Taos News, Taos New Mexico, USA. Visit online www.taosnews.com.

Childhood lost

“The Kite Runner” is rated PG-13 for strong thematic material including the rape of a child, violence and brief strong language.

Tempo grade: B+

Film review by Rick Romancito, The Taos News

People need stories, but often the storyteller gets no respect.

In this film, a storyteller, who entertained an uneducated friend with his fanciful parables while they were boys in pre-Communist invasion Afghanistan, finds himself with the biggest story of his life as an adult. But, is it one he has the courage to tell?
Marc Forster, who did “Monster’s Ball,” “Finding Neverland,” “Stranger Than Fiction” and is slated to direct the next James Bond picture, seems an unlikely choice to take on Khaled Hosseini’s highly acclaimed best-selling novel, mostly because it might be assumed he’d try to wring even more tears from an already emotionally charged-tale.

To his credit, he lets the story simply unfold and allows the power of its telling be the vehicle for how the audience reacts.

At it’s core, this is the tale of two boys, one rich by Afghan standards and the other the son of his father’s servant, whom the first will not acknowledge is his best friend because he is of a lower class.

Amir (played by Zekeria Ebrahimi as a boy and by Khalid Abdalla as an adult) lives a relatively privileged life as a Pashtun boy in the years during which Afghanistan was ruled by a monarchy. His father, Baba (Homayoun Ershad), is a businessman who loves to give parties which display the hint of western decadence that will make him and Amir a target once Soviet tanks begin rolling through the streets of Kabul. Until then, Amir enjoys reading his stories to Hassan (Ahmad Khan Mahmidzada), whose pure, unadulterated joy is evident whenever they are together.

Their best times are during the big kite contests, during which children flip and soar their kites through the sky in an effort to cut another’s string. Hassan is the best “kite runner” around, a boy who displays an innate ability to know just where an opponent’s kite will fall in the city. But despite their friendship, Amir is a bit of a coward, allowing others to fight his battles for him.

One day, the greatest day for both, Hassan runs off to collect a kite that Amir has defeated. But he encounters a bully named Assef (Elham Ehsas) and his cohorts, who use the age-old method for spoiling one considered to beneath their stature. Out of fear, Amir chooses not to intervene. This incident will have far-reaching consequences as both boys grow older and world events intervene.

The majority of this tale is actually told from the point of view of Amir as an adult, who now lives in California, USA, where he and his father have taken refuge. Although they are unable to live as richly as they did back home, Amir at least is able to graduate from community college and eventually falls in love with a beautiful young woman named Soraya (Atossa Leoni), who is the daughter of a former Afghan general.

In many ways, Amir has put his life in Afghanistan behind him, a gnawing memory of betrayal that cannot be redeemed because by now the Soviets have been defeated and the nation is ruled by the ruthless Taliban. But life has a way of coming full circle when you least expect it. This happens when Amir is asked by a family friend to return to Afghanistan to address some unfinished business and in so doing learns of a secret that shatters his world.

Now, he is faced with having to right a past wrong, which no one but him knows about, in order to finally “be good again.” This is a powerful film which offers a rewarding experience, even though its journey is a difficult one.

This review was first published Jan. 10, 2008 in Tempo, the arts and entertainment magazine of The Taos News.

‘Juno’ avoids the hand of harsh judgment

MPAA rating: PG-13 for mature thematic material, sexual content and language
Tempo grade: A-

Film review by Rick Romancito, The Taos News

Most movies about teens tend to focus on peculiar stereotypes, gleaned most likely from tightly controlled focus groups or repeated screenings of that old “Fast Times at Ridgemont High” flick.

The sad thing, at least from my perspective, is that these movies tend to be more about an adult filmmaker’s fantasy — how they wish they had it back in the day — which is why so many end up with R ratings and youthful-looking actors in their 20s and 30s who are legally willing to do the things the filmmaker dreams up.

This movie, written with glittering aplomb by first time screenwriter Diablo Cody, and confidently directed by Jason Reitman (son of director Ivan), moves through the cinematic ether as if none of that existed. And, while Cody and Reitman provide the words and creative impetus, it is actress Ellen Page who creates a character so memorable, next year’s TV schedule will probably be filled with wisecracking wannabes.

Page plays a 16-year-old girl named Juno MacGuff, who, after one night of offhand intimacy with her friend Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera), gets pregnant. At this point, most people might expect the hand of harsh judgement to come down and squash any notion that this is, like, ok, y’know? But Juno is very lucky. She has a loving and supportive dad (JK Simmons, whose deadpan acting style can sometimes he screamingly funny and poignant at the same time) and stepmom (Allison Janney, always good no matter what the role). Plus, she’s no empty-headed, overwrought young woman who finds herself in the middle of a life-changing crossroad and wants everyone to know how danged whack it all is.

Juno, big surprise, is smart and fully aware of how important each decision she makes will be, but it’s how she uses the effect of her witty teen patois, courtesy of Cody’s whip-smart screenplay, that gives her character such authenticity. When Juno’s friend Leah (Olivia Thirlby) remarks about her growing belly by saying “Dude, that thing looks freaky,” Juno replies “I am a sacred vessel; all you got in your stomach is Taco Bell.” Or when she greets prospective adoptive parents Vanessa and Mark Loring (an absolutely radiant Jennifer Garner and understatedly thoughtful Jason Bateman), Juno offers “You should’ve gone to China, you know, ’cause I hear they give away babies like free iPods. You know, they pretty much just put them in those T-shirt guns and shoot them out at sporting events.”

But for all of Juno’s smarts and cute wisecracks, she is, after all, a teenage girl who is poking her way through the darkness of an adult world in which simple friendship is packed with all sorts of hidden meanings and startling assumptions. And finally, even with her best intentions carried out with sensitivity and great heart, she takes nothing for granted and knows, above all, she has been given a shining opportunity to do the right thing.

A lot of people will probably wish the hand of harsh judgement did come down on poor Juno to teach her, and other young people watching, a lesson that having children at this age will ruin their lives. But, if you watch closely, you begin to realize that Juno, more than anything, realizes this is true and has probably made that judgement herself. The difference is that she’s decided to do something honest and real about it. That alone makes us love her even more.

This review was published in Tempo, the arts and entertainment magazine of The Taos News. Visit online www.taosnews.com.

Best and worst films of 2007

Review by Rick Romancito, The Taos News

Among my favorites for 2007 were a number of “message” movies, ones that were created to make a point about issues of concern to us all.

Best films

At the top of this list was Michael Moore’s “Sicko,” a scathing indictment of the United States’ healthcare system and its heartless domination by insurance companies. This was one film that resonated strongly with regular Joes and Janes fed up with how their safety net can so easily be yanked out from underneath them if a profit can be found elsewhere.

A few outstanding films also hit home with portrayals of how the war in Iraq has left an indelible impression on anyone touched by its violence and uncertainty. Most, however, tended to be more noticed by critics than audiences, who probably surmised they need a certain distance from the ongoing conflict to look at how things will eventually shake out. I considered “In the Valley of Elah” and “Lions for Lambs” to be the best of the lot, partly for the way they humanized the struggle, but also how they took complex ideas and made them emotionally resounding.

More plentiful were strong dramas that, surprisingly, found ways to lead audiences down dark pathways. I’ve always enjoyed movies that don’t telegraph every minor plot point, which is a quality near impossible to find these days. The Coen Brothers’ “No Country for Old Men,” David Cronenberg’s “Eastern Promises” and Ben Affleck’s “Gone Baby Gone” made me believe it was still possible. In the case of “No Country,” the Coens crafted a brilliant and violent landscape filled with the poetry of western speech and western ideals that still motivate people here today, while Affleck’s take on a Dennis Lehane novel left me baffled at how the “Gigli” actor has matured into such a confident filmmaker.

Speaking of the page-to-film translations, Stephen King’s “The Mist” proved to be a huge relief in the hands of director Frank Darabont, who hit the nail right on the head with not only its terror-in-a-supermarket premise, but an ending not in the book that was a genuine jaw-dropper.

Other outstanding dramas I saw in 2007 were “Children of Men,” “Perfume: The Story of a Murderer,” “The Lives of Others,” “Little Children,” and the finely made contemporary musical, “Once.”

Best guilty pleasures

Of course, one cannot forget all the guilty pleasure flicks that critics hate to acknowledge they liked but would hate to be pinned down on for a dinner party conversation.

Topping this list was the science fiction thriller “Sunshine,” which was pure “2001”-meets-“Silent Running” but made epic on a near-anime scale. For humor, there was, of course, the ultra raunchy “Superbad,” which left me gasping for air more than anything other so-called comedians could produce this year.

For all-out sex and violence fare, you couldn’t beat “Grindhouse” from Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino, although Tarantino’s contribution was surprisingly dull up until its final moments. For the little kid inside manly men, there was Michael Bay’s rock ’em sock ’em “Transformers,” tarted up with digital effects and the
charms of Megan Fox.

And for that walk on the wild side there was “Mr. Brooks,” which featured Kevin Costner as a respectable businessman whose serial killer mania is treated as an addiction, and Matt Damon’s elevation to action hero status in “The Bourne Ultimatum.” Who’da thunk it.

The worst of ’07

In 2007, comedies tended to wind up on the worst list, with the bigger the star the more putrid the fare.

For me, the absolutely worst of the lot was Eddie Murphy’s “Norbit,” the big stinking pile of crap that came out on the heels of his fine performance in “Dreamgirls,” and probably had a hand in losing his Oscar too.

Next, in no particular order, were “Fred Claus” (Vince Vaughn at his wise guy worst), “Ghost Rider” (featuring Nicolas Cage as a dead guy wearing a really bad wig on a motorcycle from hell), “Are We Done Yet” (with Ice Cube looking like he needed to fire his publicist ASAP), “The Invisible” (which made the emo look really icky),
“License to Wed” (cementing Robin Williams as the smarmiest actor in the universe), “Daddy Day Camp” (which showed that even an Oscar winner like Cuba Gooding Jr. can hit the skids big time. Incidentally, he also starred in “Norbit” too); and finally “The Heartbreak Kid” (which was proof that the Farrelly Brothers have run out of ideas and that Ben Stiller really is not funny. Really).

In space, no one can hear you go ‘eh’

Aliens Vs Predator Requiem
Tempo grade: D+

Film review by Rick Romancito, The Taos News

The idea sounds really cool — pitting two of science fiction cinema’s greatest monsters against each other with present-day earth as their battleground. But why did the first “Alien Vs. Predator” movie, and now the second “Aliens Vs Predator – Requiem,” seem so inept? Basically, it’s because the trilogy of films that preceded them were so good. The first “Alien” picture was directed by Ridley Scott, the second by James Cameron and the third by David Fincher, each top notch directors and each providing an interesting and inventive take on the classic creature feature. Add “Predator” by “Die Hard” director John McTiernan and you have the makings of a major league smackdown.

Then, as is so often the case, a gaggle of marketing hacks probably had a meeting and hatched the idea of doing a “King Vs. Godzilla” on these bad boys, starting of course with a comic book in the late 1980s and a video game a few years later (according to the lore, in “Predator 2,” an alien xenomorph head apparently made a brief appearance as a trophy).

Certainly a great deal of talent went into creating both mechanical and digital incarnations of them for the new movies, but what about a decent story? The first match-up (2004) was set in the Antarctic within a mysterious Rubik’s Cube-like pyramid that indicated earth’s historic link to the Predator culture’s coming of age warrior ritual. Having a human female (Sanaa Latham) be the sole survivor who gained the respect of the Predators meant there might be another story featuring her. Maybe, maybe not.

In this sequel, the only thing that provides a connection is that at the end of the first movie, a Predator aboard the space craft heading back to its home planet has been impregnated by an Alien xenomorph. So, at the beginning of this one, that little guy has burst out and created havoc on the ship, forcing it to crash land back on earth. This one has taken on some of the genetic characteristics of his host, which means he now has dreadlocks and is hard to distinguish between him and his foe. In the meantime, a Predator back on the home world gets word of the crash and immediately rockets to earth. This dude is a “cleaner,” a creature who comes in with a vial of blue juice that dissolves any evidence of extraterrestrial presence.

Sounds interesting, right? Well, all that grinds to a halt when writer Shane Salerno decided that its setting, Gunnison, Colo. (actually British Columbia), had to feature a bunch of no-name stock slasher film characters caught up in a teen soap opera situation. One has to suppose this was an effort to snag an obvious demographic, but it is lame, needlessly mean spirited (targeting pregnant women and small children), and totally boring, even if it does feature a blonde hottie in her underwear. Plus, directors Greg and Colin Strause — who operate the Hydraulx digital effects house out of Santa Monica, Calif. responsible for enhancements in movies like “300,” “Poseidon” and “X-Men: The Last Stand” — cannot shoot their way out of a paper bag. Murky, badly lit, filmed with a shaky cam that wouldn’t pass muster on “America’s Funniest Home Videos,” they deserve to have their Director’s Guild cards yanked.

The irony of all this is that I might have been genuinely disappointed with this movie if I invested some degree of expectation into the AVP franchise. Guess how much? There was one bright moment, though. Before it was screened there was a trailer for “Hellboy 2,” directed by Guillermo del Toro. Now, there’s a sequel worth waiting for.

“Aliens Vs. Predator: Requiem” is rated R for violence, gore and language.

Cinemafile by Rick Romancito

These are film reviews that appear in The Taos News, Taos New Mexico USA. Visit the original site at www.taosnews.com