The Zero Theorem (2013)

Title: The Zero Theorem (2013)

Director: Terry Gilliam

Cast: Christoph Waltz, Lucas Hedges, David Thewlis, Matt Damon, Tilda Swinton, Peter Stormare

I hold director Terry Gilliam in very high esteem; he has been one my favorite directors since…forever. He and I have a kinship, we are on the same channel, we see the world in the same way, a world  filled with bureaucracy, big corporations and governments trying to feverishly stomp out what’s left of our humanity, our imaginations, our dreams. It’s this particular world view that is always mirrored in his films. There’s this theory in the world of cinema that says that every director keeps making the same film over and over again until he or she dies, this theory holds true for many directors. They don’t always tell the same exact story, but they do play with the same themes over and over again. For example, Gilliam’s films usually deal with characters that escape the horrors of this world by dreaming of a better one. In Gilliam’s films, the great escape is our minds. One of Gilliam’s first films, Time Bandits (1981), is about a little boy who avoids his dismal family life by escaping to the fantastic worlds he finds in his books, in The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (1988) the Baron helps an entire town escape the horrors of war by entertaining them with his tall tales and in The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus (2009) Gilliam showed us how our imaginations are really a mirror of ourselves. How what he shows us in his films, is really a reflection of us, of humanity. And now we’ve got The Zero Theorem (2013), does Gilliam play with his favorite themes once again?

The man, The myth, The Legend, Director Terry Gilliam on the set of The Zero Theorem

 In The Zero Theorem we follow the life of Qohen Leth, a computer programmer, who works for a company called ManCom. The problem with Qohen is that he’s tired of the repetitive work; he hates to go out into the world, face the noise. In this way he reminded me of the man who turns into a cockroach because he doesn’t want to leave his home to go to work in Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis. In The Zero Theorem, Qohen believes he can be more productive working from his home, so he wants to meet with management to propose the idea to them. To his surprise, management says “yes” but on one condition, that instead of doing the usual work he does, he must instead attempt to solve “The Zero Theorem”. What exactly is the Zero Theorem and can Qohen solve it?

The original title for Terry Gilliam’s Brazil (1985) was ‘1984 ½’, this unused title referenced both George Orwell’s dystopian masterpiece ‘1984’ and Federico Fellini’s  8 1/2 (1963), so from very early on in his career Gilliam had an affinity for Orwell’s dystopian masterpiece and Fellini's surreal film. In Orwell's 1984 the government has sucked the wonder out of life and people simply work to produce, to form part of the whole. In this novel, all individuality has been eradicated from society. All these Orwellian themes can be found in The Zero Theorem; for example, when Qohen talks, he refers to himself as “We” never as “I” which lets us see he is so oppressed by ‘the system’ that he has ceased to stop thinking of himself, he only thinks of the group. The Zero Theorem also echoes Federico Fellini’s 8 ½ because it’s a film whose main character is constantly dreaming in an attempt to escape the hectic demands of his life; Qohen escapes to the virtual world, the only place where he can find peace. So yes, this new film has all the usual Gilliam influences, with the added element that Gilliam now comments on the digital age we live in, in The Zero Theorem his characters don’t just escape to their dream worlds, they escape to virtual dream worlds. 

A lot of folks are referring to The Zero Theorem as the last chapter in Gilliam’s ‘satirical dystopian trilogy’ a trio of films consisting of The Zero Theorem, 12 Monkeys (1995) and Brazil (1985). The reason being that these films all share the same idea of man trying to survive in a crazy, out of control future where a totalitarian government has brought humanity to a horrible, lifeless end. For example, the main character in Brazil was Sam Lowry, an office dweller who works in a small cubicle, crunching numbers, not at all that different from Qohen, who feverishly works on his computer, without a second to blink. There’s a moment in which Qohen (brilliantly played by Christoph Waltz) is trying to solve the Zero Theorem and as he is almost there, he’s face lights up in ecstasy, like he was high on some drug, not all that different from when we plug into a video game and solve it. I’m sure Gilliam was commenting on this as well, we work hours in an office only to come home and unwind in front of a television screen, trying to solve a meaningless puzzle, called a video game. Every time we pass to the next level, we get this little rush, this feeling of achievement which amounts to nothing? This reminds me of how the film constantly reminds us that 100% = 0.

The Zero Theorem also explores the idea of religion and the existence of God; yes my friends, on this film Gilliam ponders the big questions. Why are we here? What does it all mean? Is God real? You see, throughout the film Qohen is always waiting for a phone call, a mysterious phone call that will give him an answer to a question that even Qohen doesn’t fully understand, yet he’s waiting for it. Kind of like those people waiting for God to talk to them, they spend their entire lives waiting to hear that voice. In the film, it is understood that Qohen is suffering from some type of insanity because of this illusion he lives under, not unlike your typical Jesus Freak, always expecting for God to talk to them, always waiting for God to solve their lives, to tell them what to do, to answer the big questions for them. Even though the film alludes to Qohen being insane, I wouldn’t say he is. He’s simply living a lie, slowly uncovering the truth, learning that he’s been taken for a fool. The truth is ‘the call’ is a delusion. No one is going to call you. You gotta take the reins of your life. It is sad to see Qohen under such mental stress over these matters, which is probably what the filmmakers want us to notice, the unnecessary mental struggle that religion puts you through. But still, those big questions remain unanswered. Who will answer them? Will they ever get answered?  

There’s so much more to The Zero Theorem than what I’ve mentioned here, it’s the kind of film that begs to be seen more than once. I for one need to give it a re-watch, I love it when a film does that to me. It compels me to watch it again, almost immediately. Last time this happened to me was with David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive (2001). So yeah, this movie is like a puzzle, it’s a brainy film. It’s made for those of us who like to get all existential and philosophical, all others will probably end up scratching their heads, asking themselves what the hell this movie is about. Is it Gilliam’s best film? Not if you ask this Terry Gilliam fan, but I don’t blame Gilliam himself. The man is working with micro budgets when compared to the gazillion dollar movies he used to make during the 80’s and 90’s. Sadly, this is an ailment that many an auteur suffers from.  Big studios won’t give directors such as Gilliam the big bucks to make the big movies they could be making because artful films are risky, and studios hate to lose money on a film. So this is why we’re getting this ‘low budget’ version of Terry Gilliam, which as it turns out, is still amazing. Because it’s not the money behind the movie, it’s the imagination and creativity behind the camera that brings a film to life. And to be honest, films like this mean a whole lot more to me then the latest, brainless Hollywood blockbuster. Terry Gilliam remains the soul of true dreamers, fantasists and artists out there, a director who makes films against all odds, my hats down to you sir. You’ve won yet another battle and have given us another soul searching film.

Rating: 4 out of 5    

Pain & Gain (2013)

Title: Pain and Gain (2013)

Director: Michael Bay

Cast: Mark Wahlberg, Dwayne Johnson, Anthony Mackie, Tony Shalhoub, Ed Harris, Rob Corddry, Ken Jeong, Peter Stormare

Review:

After Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2013) came out, action director extraordinaire Michael Bay said he’d leave the Transformers franchise alone because he wanted to try and make a “smaller budget film” (which in Bay’s world means 25 million dollars) called Pain and Gain; the story of three crazy bodybuilders from Florida who decide to kidnap a millionaire, torture him, make him sign over his fortune to them, then they’d kill him and take over his life. Unfortunately that’s all easier said than done because this millionaire is one tough cookie who just won’t die! Interesting part about this story is that it happened for real! How true to life did the film turn out to be? And is it any good? 

Pain and Gain is a film that garnered some controversy because people (including victims involved in the crime) didn’t like the idea that these criminals were going to be glorified somehow, they didn’t like the idea that audiences were possibly going to sympathize with the criminals; unfortunately, those comments are completely without merit because we don’t side with the criminals in the film. These guys are despicable and we’re not meant to like them. True, they are funny dudes, because Wahlberg, Johnson and Mackie play them that way, and this is after all a black comedy, but even though they make us laugh with the craziness of the situations, we’re not meant to empathize with them, so you can throw those concerns out the window. These characters are not the heroes of the film, they are the villains. Pain and Gain is for all intents and purposes a morality tale. Like a Tales from the Crypt episode, the bad guys always pay in the end; in the end the film shows the age old idea that crime does not pay and that there is no short cut to the American Dream.

Even though this is a departure of sorts for Michael Bay who normally works with movies that cost over 200 million dollars, Pain and Gain is still very much a Michael Bay film. Keeping true to his style, there’s lots of color, there’s lots of cool cars, sunsets, scantily clad hotties, I mean, everything you’ve come to expect from Michael Bay. One thing is missing though: explosions, this is the one Michael Bay where there isn’t an explosion every five minutes, so Mr. Bay, I salute you for stretching your directorial muscles even for a bit. But same as every other Michael Bay movie, characters talk at lightning fast pace, I was going to say “as if they were coked up most of the time” but they are coked up…all the time! The chemistry between Wahlberg, Dwayne Johnson and Mackie is awesome; they truly are what keeps us watching the film. Here’s a Michael Bay film that doesn’t keep us interested via visual effects or action, what keeps us watching is the insane situations and the funny dialog, these three muscle bound criminals are so stupid! At one moment while they are planning a murder Wahlberg’s character says “I’ve watched a lot of movies, I know what I’m doing!”

Credit has to be given to Tony Shalhoub, a guy who normally plays quiet, introspective characters, yet on this show he plays against type, the rich, loud butt hole whom everybody hates. I thought it was interesting how he plays “the victim” but at the same time he is a completely despicable guy. Funny thing about Shalhoub’s character is that he was a low life in real life as well! After he helped catch the “the Sun Gym Gang” he himself was also prosecuted for committing fraud and embezzling money, though this part of the story isn’t touched upon in the film. Speaking of changes from life to screen, Of course, there were some changes, primarily with the character played by Dwayne Johnson. In real life, Johnson’s character was a wimpy looking dude, not a body builder at all. But these types of changes are to be expected, directors love to jump at the chance to make their film more dramatic, or more action oriented, bigger, louder, especially in a Michael Bay film. This is why Bay, seeing the opportunity with the always ultra charismatic Dwayne Johnson, turned his character into a 300 pound crank freak. But so what, in the end, this film is a hyperbole, an exaggeration and a very entertaining one. So mission accomplished in my book; I was laughing all the way. And just when you think the story can’t get crazy enough, Dwayne Johnson starts a bbq with human parts, the film freeze frames and a text comes up on screen saying “this story is still based on real life events”. And then it slaps you in the face, crazy people like the ones depicted in Pain and Gain could be your personal trainers at the gym, or your barbers, so think it over before telling anybody your personal affairs, they could be plotting to overtake your empire. 

    

Rating: 4 out of 5

The Last Stand (2013)

Title: The Last Stand (2012)

Director: Jee-Woon Kim

Cast: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Forest Whitaker, Johnny Knoxville, Peter Stormare, Luis Guzman, Jamie Alexander

Review:

Read an article the other day on Deadline that said that Arnold Schwarzenegger’s come back vehicle The Last Stand was dead upon arrival, that it’s officially a huge flop and that “nobody wants to see Arnold anymore”. Speak for yourself is all I say, I want to see Arnold again alright, and I want to see him kicking ass like he used to, so of course I went to see The Last Stand in its opening weekend. But of course, this is the day and age when the success of a film is determined by it’s opening weekend grosses and sadly, according to box office numbers, The Last Stand only made an abysmal 6.3 million on its opening weekend…which of course immediately marks this one as a turkey in the eyes of its producers and the film industry in general; especially when its budget was 30 million. But is the slow turn out for this movie representative of its quality? Is The Last Stand a shitty come back film for Arnold? Read on my friends, read on.

In The Last Stand, Arnold plays an aging sheriff who was part of the L.A.P.D. during his younger days,  but has moved to the quiet little town of Summerton to live a simpler life; to live his last days in peace. But of course, there’s no rest for the wicked and so a big time Mexican drug dealer has just escaped the grasp of the F.B.I. and is looking to make his way to the frontier, so he can make the quintessential getaway to Mexican territory. In order to do so, he’s acquired a modified Corvette ZR-1, ensuring in this way that his getaway is a speedy one. Too bad for him that in order to crossover to Mexico, he has to go through the town of Sommerton and Sommerton is Arnold’s town, you do the math.

So that’s your basic premise for this very basic movie. I think that the reason why this film isn’t making huge bank is not because “nobody wants to see Arnold anymore” because I think in the public’s eye, and in movie fans eyes Arnold is as cool as he’s always been; people do want to see more of Arnold. They just want to see him in a better movie thats all. A problem the film suffers from is that it's  premise is far too simple, one look at the trailer and you know exactly how everything is going to go down. There’s nothing remotely novel about the film, and that’s always a dangerous deal. Well, the big draw is of course seeing Arnold being an action star again and making fun of himself, but that’s not enough, you have to pull people in with some sort of entertaining or cool concept, otherwise audiences will wait for the dvd, which is what will probably happen to this here film. It seems to me that for Arnold’s big cinematic comeback, we needed something a little more bombastic then Arnold fighting off a small group of goons, in a small town. If you know anything about Arnold Schwarzenegger then you know that ‘small’ just doesn’t fit into his vocabulary. Arnold has always been about bigger and badder things. This story just seemed too small, to laid back for what you’d expect from Arnold Schwarzenegger.

But the question remains: was this a bad movie? Hell no. Truth be told The Last Stand is actually a fun romp, an entertaining flick that’s decidedly smaller in scope, but not any less entertaining because of it. Hey, at least this isn’t another Collateral Damage (2002), Arnold’s lowest point in my opinion. The Last Stand actually has a couple of good things going for it, first off, there’s the joy of seeing Arnold back on the silver screen in his first solo role since Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003). The only difference here being that Arnold is no longer the indestructible action hero he once was. On this one he shows signs of vulnerability and old age, which he wisely makes fun off. On this one he’s the Sheriff who just wants to enjoy his day off. Of course it’s cool to see Arnold raising his gun, pointing it straight at the camera, shooting some bad guys and saying things like “Welcome to Sommerton!”. Movie buffs who have seen Arnold on screen since his Predator (1987) or Commando (1985) days are gonna get a special kick out of that, I know I did! Then we got the supporting cast which was fun to watch, Luis Guzman in my opinion was one of the funniest and most entertaining things about the film, he really livens up the movie with his comedy. Johnny Knoxville plays the resident coo-coo, but he does it well. Not so sure he deserved top billing on this film though, his role is minimal. 

Then we have the other star of the film, the cool as hell Corvette ZR1 which instantly goes down on my Memorable Movie Cars list, this is one of those cars that becomes an essential part of the film. It has its moments, for example, there’s a car chase that takes place right smack in the middle of a corn field, pretty cool sequence. We also get a cool shoot out at the end of the film, if you wanna see Arnold shoot some big guns, you shouldn’t be disappointed; and yet another cool extra is seeing Arnold go on a ‘mano a mano’ with the main villain of the film. It’s interesting seeing an aging action star doing his best to show us that he’s still got it even though he is well into his 60’s, like Conan the King wanting to have a good fight before going to the heavens with the gods in Valhalla. My final word on The Last Stand is that it should’ve been a bigger film, Arnold should have chosen something more explosive for his big come back, it’s too small in scale to call any attention upon itself. At least Arnold’s still got two more films to prove his still got some box office draw. There’s The Tomb (2013) which he’ll co-star with Sylvester Stallone and finally Ten (2014) which I’m looking forward to because it’s directed by David Ayer, the writer/director behind such awesome films as Training Day (2001) and Harsh Times (2005). Let’s just hope that these two films make more money than The Last Stand did or there’s little chance we’ll see that proposed Legend of Conan film we keep hearing so much about, now there’s an idea for a comeback!

Rating: 3 ½ out of 5

Lockout (2012)

Title: Lockout (2012)

Directors: James Mather, Stephen St. Leger

Cast: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Peter Stormare

Review:

I love films that take place in space because space always has this aura of danger to it. In these kinds of films you have to deal with the idea that humans were not made to be in space, it is very obviously not our natural habitat. Not only that, space is quiet and lonely; I’ve never been up to space, but you kind of get the idea that if you float a couple of hours up there in all that darkness, you’ll end up feeling disconnected from humanity. To me, it’s that quiet, that isolation, that imminent danger and risk factor that makes it such a great setting for a movie to take place in. Plus, space is the great unknown, we know next to nothing about it except that it’s vast and seemingly never ending. That mystery surrounding space is what pulls me in to these type of movies. So it’s no surprise that once Lockout was release I was there as soon as I could to see it. How was it?

Lockout tells the story of a guy named Snow. He is wrongfully accused of a murder, so he is being sent to this super jail in space called MS-1 where he will be held in suspended animation for 15 years to pay for his ‘crime’. At the same time, the presidents daughter, a young lady be the name of Emilie Warnock, is visiting MS-1. She’s making sure that the prisoners are being treated correctly and that the process of cryo-stasis is a reliable one. Rumors are running around that turning convicts into popsicles has secondary effects on the inmates. Supposedly when unfrozen from a long sleep an inmate can suddenly suffer from space dementia or a bad case of the shakes. Others say that you can have nightmares while under cryo-stasis. Imagine having a nightmare that lasts for 15 years! Problems start when every single one of the inmates in MS-1 is unfrozen are released! Now all the loons and psychos are running free through the ship. First order of the day? Kidnap the Presidents daughter as ransom for their demands! So now, instead of being turned into a Popsicle himself, Snow is going to MS-1 to rescue the presidents’ daughter! Can he pull it off right smack in the middle of a major jailbreak?

Guy Pierce plays the super tough Snow, a guy who takes a licking and keeps on ticking. You try and punch out a confession out of this guy, and he’ll spit a one liner for every punch you give him. You tell him he’s going to be frozen for the next fifteen years for a crime he didn’t commit and he tells you he’s looking forward to it. That’s right boys and girls; this is the kind of movie Lockout is, like something straight out of the eighties. Which means this is not a movie to be taken seriously at all, and if you didn’t get that from simply watching the previews, well then I’m telling you, this movie is brisk, fast paced and quick with a one liner. In fact, after a while you kind of get the feeling that that’s the only language Snow speaks, not a single line of dialog from this guy is serious! He is a non stop barrage of jokes and sly remarks. Guy Pierce as the wisecracking Snow is part of what makes this flick a little more watchable then it should be, other wise, had it starred someone like Mark Wahlberg, I don’t think I would have enjoyed it as much.

This kind of film is tailor made for me; I’m the audience that studios targeted to merchandise this film. I was raised on a steady diet of 80’s action films like Die Hard (1988), Commando (1985), Lock-Up (1989) and Escape from New York (1981). So of course I was going to go and watch this one. I mean the previews hailed it as a mix between Blade Runner (1982) and Escape from New York! But of course, previews will tell you anything to get your butt inside the movie theater. And that they did because this film is nothing like Blade Runner, I don’t know where they dug that one out of. But it is a lot like Escape from New York, so I guess they only half lied on their advertising campaign. Same as Snake Plissken in Escape from New York, Snow is a guy who’s treated like crap by the system. He’s going to be the scapegoat to pay for someone elses crimes, he’s the guy the system loves to stump with their boot. Until the day they need him. When they need him they quickly change their attitudes. They offer him a full pardon, give him all the weapons and gadgets he needs and send him on life threatening mission. What producers won’t tell you is that this film is also a bit like Escape from L.A. (1996) because it’s also about having to go into a dangerous penitentiary to rescue the presidents’ daughter. Lockout also has elements from films like Stuart Gordon’s campy and gory prison break film, Fortress (1992), but if I’m to be even more accurate I’d say its closer to Fortress 2 (2000) which takes place in a maximum security prison out in space. The point is that this film is not very original, at all. Expect no surprises. This is a compilation of a lot of films that came before it.  

    

But so what, while watching Lockout you’ll notice that it’s obvious these guys knew the kind of b-movie they were making. They wanted a film filled with wise cracks, fast action and a happy ending. It’s a film made by French guys playing the Hollywood game note for note. Luc Besson knows what American audiences want to see and he’s giving it to them. It’s not unlike what the Italians did back in the day with films like 1990: The Bronx Warriors (1982), which by the way also has some similarities with Lockout. Another way to look at Lockout is that it works just like The Transporter films. You know they are not the best action films ever made or ground breaking or though provoking on any level. What The Transporter films do is play with a pre-established formula for an action film; but who cares right? Because it’s always cool to see Jason Statham driving fast cars and kicking some ass. Lockout is the same type of picture; originality is not a priority, this film is simply playing with the genre, which of course can be fun. Believability is not the main concern here either; the filmmakers’ main concern is that you have a good time at the movies. They want you too laugh and say “cool!” every five seconds. Unfortunately some of the effects work won’t make you say “cool” every five seconds. There’s this completely laughable and terribly achieved effects sequence that has Snow stealing a futuristic motorcycle and ensuing on a high speed chase. The whole sequence was computer generated, but not in a good way. I nominate this sequence for worst computer animated sequence of the year. I mean, this one is right up there with the crappy aliens from TheDarkest Hour (2011). Worst part of all is that the filmmakers chose this terrible sequence to open their movie with!

   

I respect Luc Besson as a filmmaker. When the guy is on, he makes films like Leon: The Professional (1994) and The Fifth Element (1997). Currently he keeps directing European films that never see the light of day in America, and produces many others that do. As a producer, he doesn’t really care about making quality films; he cares more about making money. The Transporter films are a good example of this. Not the best films in the world, but they make a pretty penny, and they also allow new upcoming directors to stretch their artistic muscles and learn a thing or two about filmmaking. Lockout is one such film. It was directed by a duo of Besson protégés called James Mather and Stephen St. Leger; two guys with not a lot of real filmmaking experience in their hands, save for their short films, but hey, that’s how many great filmmakers start out, so maybe these guys will be the future. For now, we get their first steps in filmmaking with Lockout. Final words on Lockout: I love space faring adventures as much as the next guy (and this one had its moments) but some of the effects work on Lockout are amateurish! At least the quick action and the numerous one liners will keep you entertained. Unfortunately this is the kind of movie you forget as soon as you leave the theater. It’s a quick fix for sci-fi junkies like me self, but not a full course.

Rating: 3 out of 5