TRAVOLTA TERRIFIC IN NEW FILM

If you were heading into an extremely dangerous place and you could take just one guy with you for your personal protection, who would it be? (If I could pick anyone male or female, I’d choose Beatrix Kiddo from the “Kill Bill” saga, but for the sake of argument, let’s limit it to a male.)

Well, one of the first guys that comes to mind is Jack Bauer from “24,” but let’s not forget Martin Riggs from the “Lethal Weapon” movies, or John McClaine of “Die Hard” fame. And if we go back even farther, we have “Dirty” Harry Callahan. I’d feel safe with any of these dudes, but after seeing John Travolta as Charlie Wax in “From Paris With Love,” I think I’d have to say that Charlie is my man. This guy is one BAD ASS! And “From Paris With Love” is a terrific escape film filled with outstanding action, suspense, and a great twist.

When the film opens, we meet James Reese (Jonathan Rhys Meyers), an American living in Paris, where he enjoys quite a nice life. He serves as the personal aide to the U.S. Ambassador in France, and in addition to his prestigious job, he spends his free time with Caroline (Kasia Smutniak), his stunning French girlfriend. Reese also serves as an operative for the CIA, but all of his work for that organization is the kind that involves no danger.

Now you would think that the fellow would be happy, but what he really wants is be a field agent for the CIA and get in on the kind of case that makes headlines and heroes. Thus, when he gets the chance for an assignment like this, he jumps at it. And then he meets his new partner, Wax, who thrives on gun battles and fist fights, and learns that the two of them are supposed to take out a terrorist cell. Now Reese is not so sure that he wants to be in the field any longer.

With Wax and Reese as partners, we have the perfect odd couple of special agents. On the one hand, Wax is a human weapon of mass destruction whereas Reese is Mr. Goody Twoshoes, who is frightened of his own shadow. Watching these two guys work together is simply a lot of fun. Under the direction of Pierre Morel, the film achieves a wonderful blend of comedy and action, and in the film’s production notes, Morel explained what the movie is trying to achieve.

“This project is more about the relationship between the two guys who aren’t supposed to work well with each other, but they have to, and that’s what makes it fun. It starts out like a funny buddy movie and evolves, slowly but surely, into a darker plot, all the way to the final twist.”

Both Travolta and Rhys Meyers are perfectly cast in their respective roles, and they complement each other beautifully. With his shaved head and his brash I-don’t-give-a-damn attitude, Wax is the very antithesis of the quiet, reserved, and somewhat diffident Reese. In the production notes, both provided some interesting insight to their characters.

“Charlie Wax is one of those guys who, because he’s so good at what he does, can afford to be a little unethical,” Travolta said. “He’s the kind of guy that would be hired, for a lot of money, to go into very dangerous situations, war zones and so on, to do espionage type of work, undercover type of work, and he’s got it nailed. He’s not afraid of death. He has the war mentality.”

“Even though he’s a very grown-up guy and a very responsible guy, Reese has this idea of what being a spy is all about, and it’s mainly stuff out of comic books. That element makes him like a child in a sense,” Meyers said. “But then slowly he starts to realize that it’s not all James Bond cars and nice suits and covert operations. It’s very dirty and bloody and messy and disgusting – the real world.  He’s sort of living out his fantasy and the fantasy turns into a nightmare in front of him.”

If you are a Travolta fan, you should absolutely love him in this part. From the first time we see Wax until the final scene, he is cocky, profane, reckless, tough, and constantly entertaining. And as you watch him in this film, it’s easy to see that Travolta absolutely revels in the role. He looks as if he is having a blast in every scene.

If you’re looking for humor, action, mystery, action, suspense, and more action, “From Paris With Love” (Score it an 8.) definitely delivers the goods. Also, it’s a real hoot watching Travolta’s character beat the bad guys to a complete pulp. And that’s not fiction!

MAD MEL ON ‘EDGE’ IN NEW FILM

Nobody conveys the emotion of anger on the big screen any better than Mel Gibson. When the character he’s playing becomes upset, he manages to instill an incredible maniacal gleam in his eyes. If you don’t know what I mean, check him out as Max in the “Mad Max” films, or as “Tom Mullen” in “Ransom,” or as Martin Riggs in the “Lethal Weapon” movies.

Now Gibson hasn’t starred in a film in seven years, but he’s returned with a vengeance in “Edge of Darkness,” and trust me when I say that gleam is definitely back in his eyes. In addition to being a riveting action thriller with plenty of suspense, this is also a revenge film, and I love films that deal with this subject because too often the judicial system doesn’t adequately deal with scumbags.

“Edge of Darkness,” which is based upon the 1985, six-part British miniseries, is set in Boston, where Thomas Craven (Gibson) is a veteran homicide detective. As the film opens, we find Craven waiting at the airport to pick up his daughter, Emma (Bojana Novakovic), who has returned home for a visit. She is a graduate of MIT, and she is an intern with a government agency.

It doesn’t take Craven long to learn that his daughter is not well. She becomes violently ill on the way home, and when they arrive at Craven’s house, she confesses that there is something wrong with her. Before she can continue, another siege of nausea hits her, and when she begins to vomit blood, Craven realizes that she needs to get to the hospital in a hurry. But they never make it. When they open the front door on their way to the car, someone shouts “Craven” and opens fire, killing Emma.

At first, everyone involved in the ensuing investigation assumes that Craven was the target, but as the story continues to unfold, we learn that Emma was indeed the intended victim. What kind of trouble had Emma attempted to flee by returning home? And what was the nature of her mysterious illness? And most importantly, who killed her?

All of these questions and more are answered during this fascinating crime thriller about a distraught father who pulls out all the stops to bring his daughter’s killer to justice. This is a film that will grab you almost from the very first scene and not let go of you until its unpredictable denouement.

Under the stellar direction of Martin Campbell (“Casino Royale”), who also directed the British miniseries that spawned the film, “Edge of Darkness” is packed with action, adventure, suspense, mystery, and several completely unexpected twists that will keep you guessing. It’s also an emotionally charged film because it deals with a heartbroken father trying to get to the bottom of his only child’s murder while he’s also attempting to cope with the shock of her untimely death.

Gibson, who looks noticeably older than he did the last time we saw him on the big screen, portrays Craven perfectly even down to a flawless Boston accent. Throughout the film we consistently feel compassion for Craven and what he is going through because Gibson is so skillful at conveying his character’s emotions by his facial expressions and his body language. Some of the close-ups of Craven’s face will break you heart, and it is really good to see Gibson back in a starring role. In the film’s production notes, the two-time Academy Award-winning actor explained what drew him to the part.

“It was an intriguing story. That’s the main thing—if I think it’ll be compelling and entertaining to an audience, I’m on board. I was intrigued by the characters, and how they reacted to what was happening to them. At the same time, it’s a very compelling mystery involving issues we’re all uncertain about, and uncertainty is scary to most people.”

One of the things Campbell insisted upon during the making of the film was the idea of making it as realistic as possible, and he commented on this in the production notes.

“Realism in the film was absolutely important.  When Emma died, we had real forensic people, real cops, all of that. The action in this film is really grounded in a relations history, so making it all appear very real was essential. So stylistically, we shot it very simply, in a very uncomplicated manner; there are no pretentious or slick shots.”

With some of absolute junk Hollywood has been churning out lately, it was really refreshing to watch a quality police thriller. “Edge of Darkness” (Score it an 8.) should keep you on the edge of your seat.

‘BOOK’ SHOULD STAY CLOSED

I really dislike dirty movies.

No, I’m not talking about pornographic films, although I don’t have any use for them either. I mean movies in the post-apocalyptic genre. Films in this category feature barren landscapes, decaying car carcasses, empty shells of buildings, and people who look as if they haven’t bathed in 10 or 15 years.

“The Book of Eli” is one of these dingy, depressing films, and despite the presence of Academy Award winner Denzel Washington, it’s pretty much of a dud. The only purpose I can think of for this film is to show it to people who think the world is a miserable place because it should certainly improve their outlook on life.

The film is set in the near future approximately 30 years after a war that has decimated the earth. As it opens, we watch one man make his way through the landscape littered with dead bodies and crawling with feral cats that feed on them, and Eli (Washington) in turn kills and roasts the cats for his nourishment. Sound like fun so far?

As the movie progresses, we learn that Eli has been on the road for 30 years, and his mission is to deliver a very important book to somewhere in the West. Now despite the rampant ruination, Eli isn’t the only survivor. His world is populated by marauding gangs, and all of these people, including Elli, are in desperate need of a shower.

As Eli continues his cross-country trek, he often encounters those who would try to rob him, but he is an incredibly strong and gifted warrior with both the bow and the blade, and he is a guy you do not want to challenge. However, in one shell of a town lives a man named Carnegie (Gary Oldman), who has set himself up as the lord and ruler of a ruthless gang, and he wants the book that Eli carries with him. This establishes the basic conflict in the film as Carnegie dispatches his thugs to relieve Eli of his burden. Living with Carnegie is his adopted stepdaughter, Solara (Mila Kunis), and the fact that she, through a series of circumstances too numerous to mention here, ends up traveling with Eli heightens the tension between Eli and Carnegie.

“The Book of Eli” offers some nicely choreographed fight sequences and a few interesting (not spectacular) special effects, but overall the film no better than mediocre, and Washington’s talents are virtually wasted. Washington is the consummate professional, however, and the production notes reveal that he spent months in training so that he would not need to use a stunt double during the fight scenes.

When I watch a movie focusing on one character, I like to know as much as possible about that person, but in this film we really don’t learn anything about Eli or the genesis of his mission. But in the film’s production notes, director Allen Hughes (“From Hell”) said that the mystery surrounding Eli is intentional.

“A character like Eli, the enigmatic lone warrior, is almost mythical. You know there’s a rich back story, but it shouldn’t be entirely revealed, and Denzel was conscientious about doing little things that would shed light into his past without spelling it out. One of his ideas was for Eli to bear a burn scar on his back as a mark of the catastrophe he has survived. He was very good at painting in those kinds of details that would add to Eli’s mystique.”

Perhaps the most glaring weakness in this movie (Let’s give it a 5.) is the big twist at the ending. It is such a stretch that it’s more laughable than it is surprising.

Now of course one of the questions in the film revolves around the mysterious tome that Eli has been lugging around for 30 years. If you really think about it, you can probably figure it outs, but I’m not going to tell you what it is. Let’s just say that Carnegie thinks the book holds the secret to controlling all of mankind. Oh yes, it also is supposed to be the last copy on earth.

Obviously there’s a market for films like this because Hollywood continues to make them, but I can’t find anything much to like about them. Give me clean, well-dressed people to watch on the screen any day. Those are the kinds of characters that are the best in my book.

‘Lovely Bones’ Is a Bittersweet Film

“My name Salmon. Like the fish. First name Susie. I was 14 years old when I was murdered on Dec. 6, 1973.”

With these words, Susie Salmon, the narrator/protagonist of Alice Sebold’s 2002 bestselling novel, introduces herself to readers of the book and now to viewers of the hauntingly different new film of the same name directed by Academy Award winner Peter Jackson.

Susie (Academy Award nominee Saorise Ronan) lives with her parents, Jack (Academy Award nominee Mark Wahlberg) and Abigail (Academy Award winner Rachel Weisz), her sister, Lindsey (Rose McIver), and her brother, Buckley (Christian Thomas Ashdale), in Norristown, Pa. She is a happy teenager in an equally happy family, and she loves writing her bike and taking pictures with a camera she received for her 14^th birthday.

Now living on the same street as Susie is a man named George Harvey (Stanley Tucci), a quiet fellow whose hobby is making dollhouses.  But George is not what he appears to be. In fact, he’s a killer who preys on young girls, and he has targeted Susie as his next victim. One day while Susie is on her way home from school, George lures her into a unique hideout he has built, rapes her, and then murders her.

From this point on, Susie is trapped in that nebulous realm between heaven and earth, and she observes how the members of her family cope with her disappearance and how the investigation of her case proceeds. At first, Susie’s family members have no idea what has happened to her, but as the days continue to pass, they become increasingly terrified that she’s no longer alive.

As you would expect, Susie’s untimely disappearance has a devastating effect on her parents and siblings. Her father is completely unsatisfied with the effort the police are exerting in trying to find her, and his obsession with the case causes friction between his wife and him. In the meantime, Lindsey is becoming increasingly suspicious of George.

Although in typical Hollywood fashion “The Lovely Bones” takes a number of liberties with the book, it still is a unique combination of a fantasy, mystery, thriller, and drama. Some of the scenes are as tense as anything you would find in a Hitchcock film, whereas others unfold like a surrealistic dream. Some of the images in the heaven sequences are stunningly beautiful and provide a stark contrast to what is occurring on earth.

In addition to being a fascinating blend of different genres, the film also boasts some absolutely stellar acting. Ronan exhibits poise beyond her years in front of the camera, and she is irresistible as Susie. She imbues her character with a perfect combination of diffidence, innocence, and childish enthusiasm.

Both Wahlberg and Weisz are effective in the key roles as Susie’s parents, and in a recent interview, Weisz explained what drew her to the character of Abigail.

“My character Abigail is a very ordinary lady. She’s not a heroine; she’s not noble. In fact, she falls apart when the tragedy happens. I liked that about her. She’s a very ordinary woman who is frail and weak like the rest of us.”

Although parts of the book contain extremely graphic violence, Jackson chose to tone the film down so that it would not receive an R rating, and it the film’s production notes, he said he had a definite reason for this.

“Fran and I have a daughter who’s very similar to Susie’s age. We wanted Katie to be able to see this film. There’s a lot of positive aspects of this film, and it’s not something that I think I wanted to shield our daughter from. So, it was important for us to not go into an R-rated territory at all. Movies are such a powerful medium with the music and the effects and acting and performance, the editing and the lighting and camerawork, that to show a 14-year-old girl being murdered in any way … no matter how briefly, it would completely swing the balance of the movie, and it would, frankly, make it a film that I wouldn’t want to watch.”

Tucci also turns in a chilling performance as the creepy killer. He has very few lines, but the maniacal glint in his eyes speaks volumes. Several of his scenes create unbearable tension, George definitely is not a guy you would want to meet in a dark alley.

As the film reaches its bittersweet and somewhat unsatisfying conclusion, Susie sums up her feelings.

“These were the lovely bones that had grown around my absence: the connections — sometimes tenuous, sometimes made at great cost, but often magnificent — that happened after I was gone. And I began to see things in a way that let me hold the world without me in it. The events my death brought were merely the bones of a body that would become whole at some unpredictable time in the future. The price of what I came to see as this miraculous lifeless body had been my life.^“

“The Lovely Bones” (I give it an 8.) is not a film for everyone because of its delicate subject matter, but I found it at once fascinating, beautifully acted, and superbly photographed, and some of its imagery was simply lovely.

STREEP BARELY SAVES ‘IT’S COMPLICATED’

Meryl Streep is one of our national treasures.

With a record 15 Academy Award nominations and two wins during her illustrious career, the 60-year-old native of Summit, N.J., is inarguably the most accomplished film actress in the history of cinema. Her range is so broad that no role transcends it, and she is a virtual master myriad accents.

She has appeared in such critically acclaimed films as “The Deer Hunter,” “Kramer vs. Kramer,” “Out of Africa,” “Sophie’s Choice,” “Doubt,” and countless others. Even if she is in a film that is not particularly noteworthy, Streep always is worth watching, and unfortunately, she’s just about all that “It’s Complicated” has to recommend it. With its outstanding cast, this new comedy had the potential to be very special, but it turned out to be quite ordinary.

Streep portrays Jane Adler, the mother of three grown children who has been divorced from attorney Jake (Alec Baldwin) for 10 years. In the meantime, Jake has remarried, but Jane has remained single and devoted herself to managing her highly successful bakery and restaurant in Santa Barbara.

Throughout the years, Jane and Jake have maintained an amicable relationship, but their son’s imminent college graduation reunites them at an out-of-town venue with surprising results. Through a series of circumstances, they find themselves alone at a hotel bar, and one drink leads to another and another and another and finally to an intimate dinner. Before they can say, “remember how good we were in bed together,” they find themselves in bed together.

Instead of being just a one-night stand, the incident awakens strong feelings in both of them, and they realize that perhaps their divorce has been a mistake. As they attempt to cope with these new developments, Jake has to deal with his current wife’s desire become pregnant, and Jane must decide whether or not to accept the advances of Adam (Steve Martin), an architect that she hired to help her do some remodeling.

Now if you go to this comedy expecting to be rolling in the aisles with laughter, forget it. Although the film does offer some funny scenes, the script does not use Martin’s comic genius to its fullest, and Baldwin is pretty much bland throughout the movie.

The film was written and directed by Nancy Meyers (“Something’s Gotta Give”), who earned an Academy Award nomination for helping to write the screenplay for 1981’s “Private Benjamin,” which starred Academy Award winner Goldie Hawn. In the film’s production notes Meyers explained what she was trying to achieve with the film.

“I was drawn to the post-divorce world that exes find themselves in and how their relationship, in many ways, never really ends: the bumping into one another, figuring out how to still parent together, how to live in the same town together. I noticed how much the word ‘together’ still exists once you’re divorced. The idea of exes reuniting surreptitiously was intriguing. The comic possibilities were very rich, and the repercussions of this ex-couple back in each other’s lives seemed dangerous and liberating at the same time. This story really pulled me in. The ‘What if?’ factor was just so complex that it had so many levels to it, and then there was a new man to bring into the mix just to complicate it even further.”

Undoubtedly the main thing this film has going for it is Streep’s presence. She is so incredibly natural on the screen that you forget you are watching someone play a role. Streep has the rare ability of actually becoming the character she is portraying, and this is why she is able to bring such depth to her parts. Jane is no exception. Streep often lets us know what Jane is thinking without saying a word because she can communicate so effectively with her body language and facial expressions.

Unlike Streep, however, Baldwin seems flat and almost uninterested in the part of Jake. He shows very little emotion throughout the film, and thus Jake lacks any real personality.

The biggest waste in the movie, however, is Martin. This guy has the ability to be incredibly funny, but his part here never gives him the chance to unleash fully his comic gifts. He comes close to doing what he does best during a party scene late in the film, but just when he begins to hit his full stride, the scene switches to something else.

Despite it’s all-star cast, this film never evolves into a classic romantic comedy, and that’s a real shame. The script just doesn’t make the most of the performers’ gifts, the story is shallow and predictable, and the result is just another in the long line of ho-hum, forgettable comedies that Hollywood loves to churn out. Unfortunately “It’s Complicated” (Give it a six because of Streep.) is just a bit too simple.