Tag: Jesse Eisenberg

Café Society

Cafe_SocietyPosterKristen Stewart is only 26, but she feels as though she could’ve been in Woody Allen’s movies since the ‘70s. The camera loves her face, her hair, and the way she dresses. Stewart was one of the biggest movie stars on the planet following “Twilight,” and in “Café Society,” a movie that’s all about how culture and class changes and effects people, Allen sees her as authentic.

Stewart plays Vonnie (short for Veronica), the center of a love triangle between her fun and care free boyfriend Bobby (Jesse Eisenberg) and her wealthy and married lover Phil (Steve Carell) nearly twice her age. Set in the 1940s in the heyday of Old Hollywood, Bobby has just moved to Los Angeles to get away from New York and try and make it by doing work at his uncle Phil’s agency. Of course, this is a Woody Allen movie, and Bobby can’t resist saying how much different and better New York is than LA at every turn. In fact Allen probably couldn’t have tolerated LA in any other period than the ‘40s, using it as an excuse to talk about jazz, so here we are. Continue reading “Café Society”

Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice

Zack Snyder’s follow-up to “Man of Steel” pits Superman and Batman against each other.

BatmanSupermanPosterHave blockbusters really come to this? We’ve grown so desperate to make superheroes dark, gritty and realistic that we’ve fallen to sticking Superman, in full spandex, in front of Congress? “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” has it all: senatorial hearings, editorial newsroom meetings, CNN, Charlie Rose? It’s the spectacle of the new millennium!

Director Zack Snyder has officially made superhero movies no fun. Whereas Snyder’s “Man of Steel” was depressing, overly tragic and evoked disturbing 9/11 mayhem for action, “Dawn of Justice” is messy, overstuffed, boring, and still manages to double down on “Man of Steel’s” doom and gloom.

“Dawn of Justice” opens with a revisit of Bruce Wayne’s tortured childhood, when his parents were killed in a mugging. Anyone even remotely familiar with Batman will know this story, so Snyder’s just making exploitative melodrama. The super slow motion gun chamber blasts and falling pearls from Martha Wayne’s shattered necklace are laying it on a bit thick, no? Snyder then takes us back to the titanic battle at the end of “Man of Steel,” with Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) horrified at the havoc Superman can wreak. Bruce swears to find a way to beat Superman, while Clark Kent (Henry Cavill) believes Batman to be the dangerous criminal and vigilante.

18 months later, Superman is the figure of heated political controversy. Has Superman been sent by God, is he human, or is he God himself? And if he has the power to bring about our destruction, can he be trusted and held accountable? Except Snyder doesn’t actually explore or consider any of these themes through drama and storytelling. We have to endure an endless torrent of TV talking heads spouting claptrap analysis on cable news, or Superman being called before Congress in an oversight committee held by Senator Finch (Holly Hunter). Snyder even dragged Neil DeGrasse Tyson into this mess.

When it’s not Anderson Cooper debating the moral dilemma behind Superman, it’s Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg), the head of a massive, nebulous company called Lexcorp. What movie exactly does Jesse Eisenberg think he’s in? Dressed in a baby blue suit and white sneakers with a wild mane of dirty brown hair, Eisenberg delivers a fast-talking, wide-eyed performance as less an ironic, tongue-in-cheek, super villain and more an eccentric mental patient. Luthor has for some reason declared his own war on Superman, and by extension a vengeance against God, utilizing his infinite resources to gain access to Superman’s only weakness, the mineral Kryptonite, and devise experiments on the body of the defeated General Zod.

Snyder goes all over the place in this story (written by “Argo’s” Chris Terrio and “Man of Steel’s” David S. Goyer). There’s an apocalypse dream sequence complete with a desert wasteland and unexplained mutant hornets policing the planet. There’s the sexy Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) needlessly inserting herself into Bruce Wayne’s business. And there are more than a few diversions to introduce the other members of the upcoming Justice League movie.

At no point however does Snyder tease out a strong main tension for the movie, a reason to care for the outcome of a fight between Superman and Batman or even urging us to root for a particular side. If it’s the fate of the world at stake, “Dawn of Justice” needs to do a better job than superficially profound lines about morality. “The world has been so caught up with what he can do that no one has asked what he should do,” or, “Devils don’t come from hell beneath us. They come from the sky.”

Snyder has also lost all his credibility as a visual stylist. While not as washed of color as “Man of Steel,” “Dawn of Justice’s” ending epic battle is a dizzying CGI laser-light show, in which Superman and another unstoppable behemoth wail on one another without consequence. And while some critics took Christopher Nolan to task for some sloppy editing and continuity within “The Dark Knight,” the car chase here is simply incomprehensible.

Affleck is a fine Batman, but his version of conflicted and tortured means being slow and lumbering. Cavill doesn’t fare much better as a perfectly bland Clark Kent. Eisenberg simply feels out of place. And poor Amy Adams. She’s taking Lois Lane far too seriously than this movie requires.

Every origin story has been told, every universe explored, every franchise booted and rebooted, and now as superhero movies have dominated popular culture, filmmakers have taken it upon themselves to fit their comic book idols into the real world. “Dawn of Justice” poses questions of governmental oversight that no one cared to ask, and in the process, the genre itself has ceased to be fun. Perhaps in the sequel, Superman can take out a mortgage and settle down into a nuclear family.

1 ½ stars

The End of the Tour

Jason Segel, alongside Jesse Eisenberg, shines as ‘Infinite Jest’ author David Foster Wallace in James Ponsoldt’s latest.

In Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris,” the young writer Gil asks Ernest Hemingway if he would offer an opinion on the book he’s writing. “My opinion is I’ll hate it. If it’s bad, I’ll hate it because I hate bad writing, and if it’s good, I’ll be envious and hate it all the more. You don’t want the opinion of another writer. Writers are competitive.” It’s not a real Hemingway quote, but it feels like one, and it gets at the dilemma of another great writer, David Foster Wallace.

In “The End of the Tour”, Director James Ponsoldt (“Smashed”, “The Spectacular Now”) documents the last few days of Wallace’s book tour for his American literary classic “Infinite Jest”. Rolling Stone reporter David Lipsky planned to spend a few days with Wallace and pick his brain, but the two are each insecure and in awe of the other. Their competition and their conversation gets the better of them, and in their pursuit to tell a good story, they realize they’ve created more conflict than this story deserves.

Ponsoldt’s film might be the best movie about writing since “Almost Famous”, and it avoids the trap of actually being forced to sit through the tedious visuals of writers writing. Jason Segel is wonderful as Wallace, and “The End of the Tour” recognizes that the best writing isn’t always about the story itself, but the details.

Ponsoldt opens the film with Lipsky (Jesse Eisenberg) learning of Wallace’s suicide in 2008, acknowledging that there’s a hint of grief and pain hanging over Wallace’s character and why Lipsky feels in part responsible. It then flashes back to 1996, shortly after “Infinite Jest” was first released. Lipsky picks up Wallace’s book, and like the writer he is proclaims, “Shit”, at just how good it is.

Lipsky himself is a struggling novelist in addition to his work as a journalist, and he feebly offers Wallace a copy of his own published work, expecting to be humbled by the opinion of a literary genius. Lipsky is so in awe and generally polite he praises Wallace’s winter view in Southern Illinois. “Thanks, I can’t take credit for it,” Wallace says thanks to Segel’s wonderfully understated and amicable tone. But while they talk of the fear of the rise of technology, of writing and of issues of fame, Lipsky is shocked at how easily they’re able to shoot the breeze. Together they eat baloney sandwiches after discussing existentialism. They confess their love for Alanis Morissette. Wallace tells an embarrassing story about being a pool towel boy for a writer he just sat on a panel discussion with, before Lipsky flips a switch and asks about Wallace’s suicide attempt. Their conversation is pretty and profound in a sloppy, ultimately human way.

What’s most revealing and honest about the story however is that there isn’t really much of a story here in the first place. Lipsky thinks Wallace is playing down his brilliance in a way that’s not only guarded and false, but also condescending. Lipsky’s editor even urges him to push Wallace for details about his past suicide attempt and rumored drug addiction.

The reality however, something Ponsoldt captures in his plain, intimate cinematography and Segel nails in his quietly deep, yet charming and relatable performance, is that he’s not faking it. There’s not a genius here but a person. When he wears a bandana, he’s not doing it as a “trademark” but because it’s a “thing” he likes. There’s no hidden mastery behind this guy who teaches English in Southern Illinois, and that shouldn’t change his achievement. We want the person on screen or on the page to be larger than life, and Ponsoldt and Segel help bring it down to size.

With all three of his previous films, Ponsoldt has found the modesty in his characters to flesh out their humanity. With “The End of the Tour”, he’s made a film about such modest proportions and demonstrated its value.

3 ½ stars

Side by Side: The Double and Enemy

Two films were released this year about people who look identical, but they’re highly different films.

“You’re in my place.” That’s the opening line to “The Double,” and it’s the on-the-nose thesis to both that movie and a similar film also released this year, “Enemy.” In each film, a timid and lonely protagonist comes face to face with a more confident doppelganger, causing the original’s life to unravel.

Two copycat movies in a given year is a jarring coincidence, but to call them doppelgangers of each other would be a misnomer. However, it certainly doesn’t help that both are based off books called “The Double” and that neither is particularly good.

More so than a replica of “Enemy”, “The Double” is actually a pastiche of Orwellian dystopias, most notably Terry Gilliam’s “Brazil”. Director Richard Ayoade’s first film was yet another cinematic pastiche (or homage if you prefer) called “Submarine” that reimagined the French New Wave with its own dark comedy turns. This new film owes Gilliam a lot, with drab colors and cold, boxy, ‘80s machinery and technology filling every part of the set design. Continue reading “Side by Side: The Double and Enemy”

To Rome With Love

“To Rome With Love” is a disappointing follow-up to Woody Allen’s delightful “Midnight in Paris.”

Woody Allen’s “To Rome With Love” is a movie about living out your fantasies of love and discovery. Its stories aren’t likely, so it’s a fantasy of its own, but not in the way of “Midnight in Paris.” Rather, it’s like the warm and gooey dream that feels embarrassingly stupid after you wake up.

In the last few years, Allen has made a trilogy of films in Europe, first in Barcelona, then in Paris and now the Italian Eternal City of Rome. The first problem is that this feels more like a travelogue than any of the others. It invites you into the city and makes time for sightseeing and an admiration of architecture, but then it makes its native Italians into goofy caricatures.

We see Romans as adulterers, Communists, sex craved, tabloid craved, wanderers with no sense of direction and angry mothers brandishing butcher knives.

The movie itself has this two-handed approach to its fantasies. “To Rome With Love” simultaneously tries to pull you toward and away from the romance of the story. The four anecdotes it tells are too dopey to be taken seriously and too familiar and incidental to really laugh at. Continue reading “To Rome With Love”

Zombieland

Can I recommend a movie simply because Bill Murray is in it? Can I justify a likeness for a film if it contained five great minutes in comparison to 75 more lackluster ones? I’m not kidding when I say “Zombieland” features a cameo so hilarious it may just be worth your money and time. So should you see this movie? If zombies are your thing, have a blast.

Oh! You were expecting more of a review? Anyone going to see “Zombieland” can guess the film is just a goofy monster movie, and for these people for this movie, a simple thumbs up/thumbs down should suffice. Anyone else is waiting to hear if this is another genre-defying “Shaun of the Dead,” in which case, don’t leave the comfort of your witty, quirky Judd Apatow or Wes Anderson comedy just yet.

In fact there is nothing clever about the dozens of zombie murders that pepper the film. Kills are less amusing and more gruesome. They amount to little creativity other than baseball bat to the head, car door to the head, banjo to the head, and on one occasion, grand piano to the head. Continue reading “Zombieland”

The Social Network

“The Social Network” is both a vivid, inventive fantasy and a dramatically realistic portrait of the 21st century. It succeeds at being both because Director David Fincher has touched on a subject that has become so ingrained in the subconscious of everyone who’s ever heard of the Internet while expanding on the biopic subgenre in a way as revolutionary as the idea of Facebook itself.

The film is not about Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg), the founder of Facebook, or Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield), Mark’s one-time best friend, or Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake), the inventor of Napster and co-owner of Facebook or even about the Winklevoss twins, Cameron and Tyler (both played by Armie Hammer), who claim Mark stole the idea of Facebook from them. Aaron Sorkin’s inspired screenplay weaves through time and different perspectives to create a powerful story about no hero, villain, victim or winner.

“The Social Network,” with all its rapid-fire, whip-smart dialogue, is a stirring metaphor for the complexities and tragedies of life on a web site where everyone is connected. And yet it is not pro or anti Facebook, the Internet or technology. It is a character sketch for what happened to these people in this screenplay in a time where the only friends Zuckerberg has are the ones we see, and not the 500 million users around the globe. Continue reading “The Social Network”