Change Your Image
bluejay52
Reviews
Dead Man Down (2013)
Perfect blending of plot and emotional story
Let me say right up front that this film is utterly superb. Perfectly scripted, cast, performed, and directed, it delivers all one could want and transcends its genre.
I'm shocked it doesn't rate higher in IMDb, but on reflection the reason is pretty obvious. Most of my fellow reviewers clearly wanted and expected the usual formulaic "guy flick" and didn't really know what to make if this film.
The standard action film favors plot over character development. "Chick flicks" do the opposite. Instead of falling in the former camp as one would expect from the title, Dead Man Down threads a skillful path between the two.
To have a completely satisfying movie, one needs plot and emotional story in balance. Too much of the former and you have a film reliant on guns, explosions, and helicopters to hold attention; too much of the latter, and a disproportionate focus on character and interpersonal reactions risks dismissal as a "chick flick."
In Dead Man Down, the objective and external story (i.e., the plot) and its underlying subjective and internal underpinnings (i.e., emotional story) are economically but poignantly blended by a director who coaxes understated performances from a stellar cast. And eliminating any doubt as to what this film is about, a peripheral character opens the film by stating its theme (it'll go right by you if you're not listening so pay attention). That's all I'll say here as my intent is to avoid spoilers.
Above all, I was struck by the clarity of storytelling, its avoidance of obvious or heavy-handed writing, and an over-the-top climax that's as satisfying as any guy-flick aficionado could want. I'm left feeling I know and care about the characters, and admiring the film's ultimate goodness of heart. For this, credit goes to the screenwriter. I'm his new greatest fan!
Blitz (2011)
Minor and badly flawed
Blitz is like an extended television show that drags on too long, fails to make you care much about the characters, and features an excess of gore and violence in hopes its audience will overlook a badly flawed plot.
*****Spoiler Alert*****
If you care about story lines, for example, you'll be bothered by the matter of fifty thousand pounds that this screenplay inexplicably botches to the point of utter absurdity, shattering any pretense of a rational and logical story. The perpetrator stays at a hotel following his murder of an informant and theft of the victim's thick, open manila envelope stuffed with the cash. When police on a tip raid this malefactor's room, he flees out the window and leads Jason Statham on an extended foot chase. He's wearing light clothing and obviously does not have this bulky envelope on him when he's finally cornered and arrested in a railroad yard. Why, one wonders, would he leave the cash behind?
Next thing you know, he's released for lack of evidence following police interrogation and is handed this same envelope along with his personal effects as he laves the station. How did the police get it since he didn't have it on him (did they find it in his abandoned hotel room?), and why didn't they discover the money since it was open? And since they could not have failed to see the cash, why didn't they put together that it was the same fifty thousand pounds an informant had just been killed for, directly linking the man they were setting free with a brutal murder? You get the picture.
Yet another example of unforgivably sloppy screen writing is when the murderer calls and boasts to a newspaper reporter, who records him. When police are tipped to this fact, for some reason not one of them thinks to get the recording from the reporter to analyze the voice and compare it to that of their prime suspect. It doesn't reflect well on London's finest. Thank heavens no police force would ever be this abysmally stupid in the real world.
In short, unless you feel that violence and clichés trump a ridiculous plot and insipid character development, you will probably find Blitz a gross insult to your intelligence.
Kansas City Confidential (1952)
A real gem with a perfect ending
This film has it all: a tightly scripted and constantly intriguing plot, excellent cast, sharply defined characters (even the peripheral ones) who all respond credibly to their motivations, and a protagonist you can and do care about. As for the love interest, it's represented by a surprisingly progressive female role model for the period, and there's genuine chemistry between her and the protagonist.
For lovers of film noir, Kansas City Confidential offers the expected high-contrast b&w photography and close camera angles conveying both immediacy and menace. Balancing out the latter is real humanity and heart that's generally absent from other more formulaic films of the period.
If you only know John Payne from his superb performance in Miracle on 34th Street, you'll like him even more after this film, which gives him greater opportunity to show his considerable skills as an actor. Payne took full advantage of it, bringing to the role a compelling blend of strength, fear, audacity, and determination that leaves viewers both admiring and identifying with him right to the very end.
Which brings me to what's best about this movie: its conclusion. Without revealing anything here, I can say that it's so unexpectedly satisfying and complete a resolution that I watched it all over again and marveled at the skillful scripting. Nothing superfluous, nothing wasted--just great storytelling done on a shoestring.
I almost didn't watch Kansas City Confidential because its title didn't grab me or seem particularly promising. In retrospect, I'm truly grateful I gave it a chance because I've discovered a new personal favorite. The only reason I'm not giving it ten stars is that it was obviously done on a severely limited budget. But hey, that's part of the joy of 1950s film noir, isn't it?
Above and Beyond (2006)
Well intentioned but dreadful
Here is a television mini-series that one wills to be good, but all the wishful thinking in the world can't forgive its flaws. On the plus side, the setting is authentic in terms of greater geographic area and the cast does fairly well despite a sophomoric and uninspired script. Poor Joss Akland does his best although he is badly miscast as Winston Churchill. On the minus side, the film's budget was too low to allow the story to be well told or the period convincingly evoked. There are simply too many historical inaccuracies, too few of the right types of airplanes (and many that are inappropriate), and too much reliance on amateurish and unconvincing computer-generated aerial sequences that serve only to squander credibility. Sadly, the more one knows of history, the less forgivable these failings become.
I should perhaps reserve judgment because I did not see more than a third of Above and Beyond. I turned it off (something I rarely do with aviation films) in utter disgust after a Lockheed Hudson makes a crash landing due to an engine fire. The orchestration of this emergency and its cheesy digital realization were so ludicrously inept that the producers should have fired their technical adviser on the spot. That is, if they even had one. I suspect they didn't because the interior mock-up of the Hudson cockpit entirely lacked a pilot's side window. Hello! All in all, this mini-series was a promising concept that ended up doing a disservice to those who actually organized and performed those transatlantic ferry flights early in World War II. Here was an opportunity -- unfortunately missed -- to make up for Captains of the Clouds, the 1942 Jimmy Cagney film that likewise ends with an unconvincing depiction of Hudsons being ferried from Canada to the United Kingdom.