Monday, January 7, 2013

The Descendants

Occasionally a movie is released that you really want to see.  For whatever reasons, you just don’t find time to make it to the theater until it is too late.  This happens to me about four or five times a year.  This is the case with The Descendants.  To be truthful, I don’t even remember when it was out and I definitely don’t remember seeing show times for it at the theater.  Somehow, I just missed it.  Lucky for me, there is cable television.

At first glance, there doesn’t seem to be much to The Descendants.  It is just a nice little movie with George Clooney set in a beautiful Hawaiian locale.  There is a sad story; Clooney’s wife was in a boating accident, is in a coma, and isn’t going to recover.  Matt King (Clooney) has to deal with that reality and he has to connect with two daughters, to whom he hasn’t been much of an active parent over the years.  A nice little story but nothing special.

Then WHAM!!!  A twist.  I don’t think I am giving anything away with this.  It is part of the given premise of the film.  Some may consider it a spoiler but it is actually what the whole film is about – this twist.  King finds out as he is preparing for his wife’s death, from his rebellious teen age daughter no less, that his wife had been having an affair prior to her accident.  King’s world falls apart.  The movie then follows his journey, and that of his girls, as he tries to find the man and bring closure to the situation, for his own piece of mind. 

The theme isn’t the most happy, perky story ever told but it is honest and real.  There are some lighter moments and some nice humor but not so much as to be inappropriate to the overall mood of the picture.  Clooney is at his best – angry, hurt, confused.  He begins forming relationships with his daughters though he has little clue on how to do this.  He even seeks advice from his daughter’s semi-idiotic boyfriend (or maybe just boy friend).  It turns out there is more to the boy, Sid (Nick Krause) than King thinks.  Shailene Woodley is terrific as the oldest daughter, Alex, whose maturity surprises her father and helps him through this tough time.  There is a side story that is kind of intriguing that ties into the main plot but I will leave some mystery for those who haven’t seen the movie yet.   

Sometimes the best movies are those that are just snapshots of the lives of relatively normal people - a snapshot of a crisis in their lives, maybe the only exceptionally interesting time of their lives.  This is the human element of films - the dramas that each and every one of us experience in our lives at some point.  The fact that the situation, the crises itself is unique, and probably doesn’t resemble specific in our own lives, doesn’t matter.  It is the recognition that the people on the screen are dealing with a crises in their lives, just like we all do.  That is the connection we make with the movie.

The Descendants is a terrific drama.  It won some shiny awards for writing and acting and they were well deserved.  There aren’t any car chases and nothing blows up but that was all right.  This movie flew by for me.  I fell into the story that easily.  It is not appropriate for all audiences as there is some adult language and sensitive children could be bothered by the prevailing premise.  If you see this film pop up on your favorite cable movie channel, or Net Flix, to yourself a favor and watch it.  If you like dramas, you will love this film.

Follow me on twitter @jawsrecliner.  Thanks for reading.

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Wedding Band

WEDDING BAND (Saturdays on TBS)

Seldom am I just pleasantly surprised by a television program.  I am often disappointed that a new show on TV is much worse than I expected but it is not very often a show exceeds my expectations.  My wife convinced me to give this new show a try and I finally displayed the good sense to listen to her and I gave Wedding Band a try.  My expectations were very low and I was in for one of those rare pleasant surprises.

Wedding Band will never win any cool, gold prizes but it matters not.  This program is funny without being mean.  At times, it is silly but it doesn’t fall into stupid or idiotic.  It is a fun, carefree program which never tries to be more than what it is.

The premise is a simple one.  Four friends have a wedding band called “Mother of the Bride”.  They are scratching out an existence playing gigs at cheap hotels.  They lucked out when an old girlfriend talks her corporate event planner into hiring “Mother of the Bride” for the ex-girlfriends wedding and they become the planner’s go to band.  There is no rocket science here - just fun and laughs.

The hi-jinks are good natured and the characters are likeable.  The laughs are fast and smart.  The dialogue isn’t dumbed down here.  The actors are having a blast and it shows in every scene.  Some of the scenarios developed through the weekly plots verge on the silly but somehow the program never sinks into the easy, cheap jokes lesser television shows rely on.  It would be quick and easy for Wedding Band to sink the icky level so many sit coms have relied on in the past but this show likes to use actual wit and intelligence to harvest the laughs.  I find myself laughing out loud several times each episode.

And this isn’t just a sit com.  It is an hour long and while it is seldom serious, the characters are good hearted and always end up helping someone with something.  No, it is not deep thinking.  As the title would hint at, music plays a big part but not so much that is it just about the music.  The band knows just about every song in the history of music and is willing to perform in tune with whatever the theme of any particular event may have.  As with the rest of the program, the music is upbeat and boisterous with plenty of sing along moments – like playing “Don’t You Forget About Me” at a funeral.  That’s good stuff.

The cast is terrific, led by 90210 vet Brian Austin Green (has trouble pulling off ballads but is good on the up tempo stuff – the producers seem to be aware of this), Harold Perrineau (Lost and Sons of Anarchy), Peter Cambor (NCIS:LA), the hilarious Melora Hardin (The Office and Monk), and Jenny Wade (personal favorite The Good Guys and Reaper).  The cast has great chemistry and are obviously having a great time.  The guys in the band are believable and you never doubt they love what they do.  There is a great mix of background for the characters and their personal lives provide plenty of fodder for show plots without grinding out the same old situations we’ve seen a thousand times. 

As I mentioned earlier, Wedding Band is not any great Shakespearean work of art that will dominate any award show but it is good enough, and smart enough to be more than a guilty pleasure.  I highly recommend giving this program a look.  It is on TBS so you should be able to watch all episodes On Demand on most cable carriers.  The first episode is simply called “Pilot” and all the rest have song titles as episode titles.  I must warn everyone that some of the comedy is adult comedy and there is a tad bit of language, so it is not appropriate for all ages.  Watch and enjoy.

Catch my thoughts on various sports topics at and follow me on twitter @jawsrecliner.  Thanks for reading.

Monday, December 17, 2012

The Hobbit

Let me get one thing clear right from the start.  For what he did with the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, I think Peter Jackson is a genius.  I was disappointed when I first learned he was not going to be involved in the making of the prequel The Hobbit and I was elated when he was brought aboard.  The love he has for the original material was obvious in the mastery of how the book (s) translated to the big screen.  He left out exactly the right things and expanded the events and characters that needed extra time.  Therefore, I will give him the benefit of the doubt this time around.

For one thing, in many ways, making The Hobbit offered difficulties the first movies didn’t have to deal with.  The Lord of the Rings was a deeply thought out, patient book with its own developed history.  The Hobbit was part of that history.  Publishers had already broken the original The Lord of the Rings up into three relatively equal parts and it was easy to break those down into three movies.  The book The Hobbit is not only a much smaller book, it was also written in a much simpliar prose.  Tolkien wrote it for his young pre-teen son and thusly it is much easier to read.  I am not sure Tolkien ever intended to have any of his works even published.  He was wrote this epic for himself. 

The fact the studio and producers decided to break The Hobbit into three movies is flat out a money grab on their part.  They know we will go see all of them.  The fact remains though; there isn’t enough material to stretch this epic into nearly nine hours.  Fortunately for us, Peter Jackson is in charge.

Just as Jackson knew exactly what to add and subtract in the first three installments, it appears he has not lost his touch.  One big issue with breaking The Hobbit into three parts is that there is no real villain for most of the book.  Jackson had to come up with one for the first film in this series.  He delved into the Tolkien penned histories and came up with one.  Azog is mentioned in the book but has no part in it.  Jackson developed this character into the story’s early villain, using Azog to stretch the story and the action.  He does it so well, if you have not read the book, or haven’t read it recently, you might not even be aware this part of the story is all Jackson.  It fits.  It is almost as if Jackson channeled Tolkien to find out what would be the best character from the histories that would fit into the film.  Rather than distracting from the overall story, this plot line only adds to the finished product, expanding the action and drama.

At first, I was disappointed in the added villain but on further contemplation, I think it was necessary (as long as they were going to stretch this into three films).  I wouldn’t want anyone other than Peter Jackson even attempting this.  His love for the books is obvious and I trust him completely not to change anything that will take away from the whole experience of these films.  The villain did add much to this installment and I am just going to trust that Jackson will push the right buttons.

Another issue Jackson had to deal with is one he didn’t handle as well in this early movie.  There are just too many characters.  As opposed to the seven Middle Earth folk who take on the quest of the ring, twice as many head out on this quest.  Unlike the first trilogy, where the characters are parted and have stories of their own, all the characters stay together for the most part in The Hobbit.  The result is that there are just too many characters to develop properly.  Although we already know two of the characters pretty well, that leaves twelve undeveloped.  Even though the film runs nearly three hours, it isn’t enough time to get to know everyone.  Really, Jackson only scratches the surface on no more than four of these newly introduced characters, all dwarves, by the way.  It has been a while since I have read the book but it is my guess that even in the book, many of these characters were not developed very thoroughly.  If my memory serves me though, all will have a part to play in the story as it unfolds.

One other small issue I had was at times the dwarves and Gollum are hard to understand when they speak.  Part of it is the accents but some of the dialogue just isn’t clear.  This is not a major issue and it was only during a couple of scenes so don’t discount the film on these rare instances. 

Speaking of Gollum, we finally learn (if you haven’t read the book) how Bilbo acquires the ring.  This is the key development which directly leads to the events that unfold in the Lord of the Rings.  It has little to do with this story in and of itself but one should never forget that The Hobbit takes place sixty years before Frodo begins his adventures.  It does have a part to play in this story, but its importance is as history in Tolkien’s larger story.

The book is also lighter hearted than the books on which the first trilogy was based.  Again, it was written for a younger audience.  This picture isn’t as dark and forlorn as the first three and some of the lighter scenes are included but there is still plenty of violence.  Like the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, is not human on human violence but dwarf on goblin, or dwarf on orc violence, if that matters.  There are some battle scenes that will not be appropriate for younger audiences.  All in all, this is still a must see picture, not only as part of the larger story but as incredible movie making.  Peter Jackson’s status as a genius is solidified in my opinion.

Follow me on twitter and get updates @jawsrecliner and catch my sports blog at  Thanks for reading.

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

My All Time Favorite TV Dramas

A few weeks ago, I posted my list of my all time favorite TV comedies.  Now I am going to offer up my all favorite TV dramas.  This list was actually harder than the first.  Dramas, as a television genre, have changed so much over the decades.  With the emergence of cable and premium cable, the creators of dramas have so much more leeway in what they can get away with.  Raw, gritty, sometimes brutal, realism is the norm as opposed to the campy, dated dramas of the past. 

Dramas also are more difficult to follow than comedies.  Unlike their funny counterparts, dramas don’t sell as well on DVDs, especially the older programs.  It is not near as easy to go back and watch episodes of older dramas in syndication.  The options are slimmer.

One more consideration – my age.  I just don’t remember many dramas prior to 1980.  I was too young to stay up and watch the 9 p.m. (Central Time) programs.  I remember my parents watching detective shows like Mannix, Columbo, and Kojak, but remember few specifics.  Programs like The Waltons and Little House on the Prairie were about as dramatic as I got as a young child.  Also, I was in high school and college for the whole decade of the1980s and watched very little television during that time, except for some very specific shows.  Unlike comedies, some of those older dramas weren’t being shown on late night TV for me to see and enjoy for the first time.  Therefore, almost all of my entries are post-1990.  I also believe modern dramas are just better, especially those on cable and premium cable.  They have a sense of realism that just hasn’t been copied as well on network television.

With all of these things in mind, here is my baker’s dozen.

Honorable Mention – Hill Street Blues – I only watched a few episodes of this pioneer drama but everyone knew at the time that this show was changing network television.  It was gritty and realistic and proved that TV dramas could be more than cheesy and campy.  I wish I could have seen more episodes.

13) Magnum, P.I. – One of the few shows in the 80s I hated to miss.  Who couldn’t love the charming Thomas Magnum who lived for free in a Hawaiian mansion’s awesome guest house and got to drive a Ferrari?  There was some camp value for sure, but there was also a lot of heart, fun, and action.  A great locale, good cast chemistry, and a terrific hero played with aplomb by Tom Selleck made this one of my early favorites.  Plus, who can forget the iconic theme song?

12) Parenthood – The poignant family dramas follows the joys and tribulations of three generations of one family.  Brilliant veteran actors meld with talented young actors to portray issues that many of us are familiar with on a day to day basis.  The writers on this provide believable storylines we can all relate to.  Issues such as unemployment, adoption, cancer, young love, Asperger’s, alcoholism, and the plight of veterans are just a few topics this program has tackled over its four year run.  This is as realistic of a family show as has ever been aired and it continues to get better and better.  Viewers can truly believe these people are all part of the family as they fight and love just like all real families I’ve ever known.  This one is a gem.

11) Justified – Despite Timothy Oliphant’s quiet, subtle portrayal of the “hillbilly whisperer”, he is not the reason this currant drama ranks so high.  That reason is a series of truly villainous villains.  Each season has been filled with intelligent, evil, bad guys for Olyphant’s Raylan Givens to battle, not just physically, but intellectually as well.  Who knew the rural hills of Kentucky was filled with such shenanigans.  I can’t wait for the next batch villains to emerge in season four.  Kudos as well to the one continuous nemesis, Boyd Crowder, played to perfection by Walter Goggins.

10) ER – I was a late comer to ER.  I am not sure why I waited so long to add it to my viewing list.  It wasn’t until I was laid up after rupturing my Achilles tendon in 2000 that I started watching reruns and became addicted to the life in this Chicago emergency room.  Brilliant writing was the rule, overcoming several complete cast turnovers, without seeming to miss a beat.  ER helped launch numerous careers and made stars out of such actors as George Clooney, Julianna Margulies, and Noah Wylie.  There was always a great mixture of work and personal storylines and the character development was superb.  I still miss my weekly trips to the ER.

9) NYPD Blue – To me, the program’s essential and continual theme was the growth of a single character, Andy Sipowicz.  This is one of my favorite television characters of all time, played with genius by Dennis Franz.  Sipowicz was a hard nosed detective whose attitude about the people and the world around him was out dated with prejudice and racism.  The program was a twelve year journey of self realization and growth for Sipowicz.  Franz’s portrayal of Sipowicz was magnificent; this was not an easy role.  As hateful and backward Sipowicz was at times, deep down in his heart, he knew he was wrong and he had to change and overcome a lifetime of behavior.  The show had warts though – the bad guys always seemed to confess under questioning and never requested lawyers.  I always felt the weekly investigations wrapped up too nicely but this was Sipowicz’s story and the police work was just the back drop. 

8) Rescue Me – This is one program that will probably won’t not be on many radars.  There was always something that clicked with me about this Denis Leary vehicle.  I loved Leary’s incredibly flawed and weak hero, firefighter Tommy Gavin.  There were few vices in which he did not indulge.  Despite this, viewers always hoped he would finally do the rights things but he seldom did.  I also really liked the firehouse scenes.  I have read many critiques of Rescue Me over the years and the biggest complaint about it was the barbaric and childish language and behavior of the firefighters.  I always felt these were some of the most realistic scenes.  Believe or not, for better or worse, a lot of men, in groups of other men, behave in this manner.  Gavin’s life was tragic, insane, dangerous and heroic all at the same time.  It was a good mix.

7) Mad Men – Who knew the 1960’s were so fun?  John Hamm is incredible as the dour Don Draper, a creative genius ad agent in New York City.  Another flawed hero, Draper is brilliant at work but a mess personally.  He lives his daily life with one heck of a secret and most of his personal troubles are due to his wondering eye for the ladies.  This program finds ways to draw out drama from innocuous situations, often making them intense and uncomfortable.  The audience is drawn into their world of high stakes, high stress advertising.  Viewers find themselves rooting for their relatively small ad agency to find success and to compete with the bigger boys.  In their private lives, we wait to see if they will straighten out their lives outside of work and if the characters will do the right things.  They seldom do.   Draper, in particular, never seems to do his best work when his home life is calm.  He needs conflict to excel.  Incredible writing, directing, and acting place Mad Men firmly on my list.

6) Freaks & Geeks – probably the most surprising entry.  This sweet period piece only has 18 episodes, a few of them not even aired originally.  There is a nostalgic reason for my love of this show.  The main characters are brother and sister and the boy is entering high school as a freshman in 1980, just as I did.  The pop culture references and the music that filled this program really take me back in the best possible way but it the realistic trials and tribulations of kids trying to find their way in the jungles of high school that really is where Freaks & Geeks is special.  Through the eyes of kids who are not jocks or in the cool cliques, we get a look the lives of the normal, average high school student rather than the stuff portrayed on television more often.  The angst is more relatable because more of us fit into these niches than the normal Hollywood version of high school.  This program is funny, sweet, nostalgic, realistic, and brilliant, from the home lives to the issues of every day life in high school.  It also features one of the most brilliant casts of all time.  This show launched the careers of James Franco, Seth Rogen, Busy Phillips, Jason Segel, Linda Cardellini, John Francis Daly, Ben Foster, Johanna Garcia Swisher, Lizzy Caplan, Martin Starr, and others.  It also put writers Judd Apatow and Mike White on the fast track to success as well.  If you get the chance, get the series on DVD and enjoy.  I often wonder if NBC ever regrets canceling this show so quickly.  I doubt they knew what a treasure they had.

5) The Shield – There are a few programs  I think have changed the history of television in that they changed what programming was aired.  The Shield was one of these programs.  It was a pioneer as to how far an envelop could be pushed on basic cable as far as language and violence were concerned.  This program, along with my #3 entry, really set the bar for the flawed, not-so-good hero.  Michael Chiklis was sublime as the vicious Detective Vic Mackey.  Mackey was very good at what he did – get scum bags off the street – but his methods were brutal and corrupt.  Murder, theft, intimidation, assault, and blackmail were just a few of Mackey and his Strike Team’s tactics to accomplish their goals.  The Shield was an intense action drama that left viewers on edge during the show and anxious with anticipation for the next episode as soon as the ending credits popped onto the screen.  For seven terrific seasons, Mackey crushed the law and the constitution, as well as many a criminal, as various fellow cops and detectives worked to bring him and his Strike Team down.  CCH Pounder and Jay Karnes each played fellow detectives who worked to bring Mackey to justice.  Walter Goggins, a Justified staple, got his start as Mackey’s loose cannon and right hand.  Forest Whitaker had an awesome turn for a season as an Internal Affairs officer driven to the brink in his effort to bring Mackey down.  Chiklis’ portrayal of Mackey was absolutely spot on.  He was as bad a guy as any criminal he ever pursued, yet the viewers never wanted him brought down.  This also featured one of my favorite series finales of all time.  F/X has done a great job coming up with these popular shows anchored by the anti-hero and this was just the first (see # 11, 8, & 4).

4) Sons of AnarchySons owes its success to my previous entry.  The criminal hero (anti-hero?) is in center stage in this magnificent story of a California motorcycle club that makes its money traditionally by running guns.  The main character, a modern day Hamlet with a little Godfather sprinkled in for good measure, is Jax Teller, played in a subtle and down to earth manner by Charlie Hunnam.  Jax wants his club to return to its days as a profitable entity based on more legitimate, socially acceptable means of business, as per his murdered father’s dreams.  Unfortunately, Jax’s world is filled with greed and violence.  Jax battles rival gangs, determined law enforcement officials, fellow club comrades, family members, and international drug and gun dealers.  In its fifth season, Sons continue to pile up a shocking body count, both series regulars and brief guests.  Jax ultimate goals are to extract his club from its dangerous business dealings and he wants to get his family away by riding off with them safe and sound.  Protect his family and friends – that’s it.  The violent world around him keeps him ensnared and he is forced to retaliate with brutality for brutality.  Unlike Vic Mackey in The Shield, I don’t get a sense that Jax is evil – he is just willing to do what is necessary.  Ultimately, he just wants what is best for his family and his club.  Creator, director, producer, writer, and occasional guest star Kurt Sutter is an absolute (and unapologetic) genius.  Everything about this show hits the perfect note, even down do to an incredible sound track week in and week out.  Sutter likes to do things his own way and seems to battle Hollywood executive types.  My advise to them it get the heck out of his way and let him just do what he does.  I would be remiss in not mentioning Sutter’s real life wife, the former Peg Bundy, Katey Sagal.  Her mantle should be filled with golden trinkets for her work on this program, week in and week out, every single season.  The fact she is not even getting nominations is utterly ridiculous.

3) The Sopranos – the showed that made mobsters cool again.  This HBO classic is the pioneer of the modern genre of violent anti-hero’s we love but shouldn’t.  What is more original than a mob boss with an anxiety disorder and suffers anxiety attacks.  What a brilliant premise!  When it began, this series’ violence and storylines probably could have only been aired on premium cable but soon cable networks, mainly F/X, were following HBO’s lead, as did the other premium movie networks.  Now, these programs are prevalent.  The Sopranos started it all, and luckily, they did it the right way to set the example.  Great writing and direction, coupled with terrific acting, is the formula still used to produce these programs today, 13 years later.  James Gandolfini, Edie Falco, and Michael Imperioli were the stalwarts on a great cast but this show always had great acting throughout the seven seasons.  Unlike mob movies, where we just get a 2-to-3 hour glimpse of mafia operations, in this series, we get to see the mundane, every day life of our mobsters.  We see that no matter where their violent lifestyles may lead them, these bad guy bosses have many of the same issues in life as the rest of the population.  Factitious wives, troublesome children, crazy relatives, and incompetent employees are just a few of the every day issues Tony Soprano had to deal with, plus there was always the threat of being wacked – no wonder Tony had some anxiety.  I loved this show and I believe it started the whole cable genre of the anti-hero.

2) Law & Order and Law & Order: SVU - I’ve cheated here.  I have put these two together even though they are really two completely different shows with somewhat different premises.  L&O classic spent half of each episode dealing with the criminal investigations and the other half on the prosecutions.  It was a very successful formula as the program ran for twenty seasons (should have been more).  It wasted little time on the personal lives of the characters, leaving more time for the storylines.  This also made it easier to market the show in syndication because it has few continuous storylines, unusual for dramas.  The original suffered through many cast turnovers but that never affected the quality.  The show also focused on relevant social issues and showed both sides of the story.  I often found myself on one side of an issue but realized I was on the other side by the end of the program.  SVU didn’t split up their episodes near as clearly as the original and didn’t have as much “Order”.  It focused more on the “Law” part of the equation, more and more so as the series has gone on.  This spin off focused more on the sexual crimes rather than homicides.  SVU also avoided continuous storylines.  Sam Waterston, S. Epatha Merkerson, Jerry Orbach, Chris Merloni, and Mariska Hargitay are just a few stellar performers from these series.  There are many, many more.  These series are also well known for their incredible guest star performances and nearly every non-superstar has made an appearance on one of these shows.  These two programs have also been on television a combined 34 years and there are darn few bad episodes.  They easily could be 1-2 on people’s list with little argument.  I combined them to save time.

And finally…

1) Friday Night Lights – I don’t think there was a single bad episode in the 5-season, 76-episode run.  That is not to say there weren’t a couple of storylines I didn’t think were very good or dragged on a bit too long, but the writers seem to know what wasn’t working and ended those quickly.  I also think this program had the most realistic characters and relationships in television history.  Coach Taylor and his wife Tami, played flawlessly by Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton, could have been married.  Their interaction was so real and believable and relatable.  Coach’s relationship with his players struck true and played a key part in the success of this show.  FNL was never a ratings horse.  I always thought that too many people associated the show with the movie.  The movie was a football movie.  The TV show used football merely as a backdrop to the lives in a small Texas town.  In fact, after the first season, very little screen time was allotted to football.  We got some brief glimpses of games and practices but the focus was on the characters themselves.  Some outstanding performances were put in by Zach Gilford, Michael B. Jordan, Taylor Kitsch, in addition to the Chandler and Britton.  I think this was a heartfelt, realistic, touching look at life in a small town.  There has been nothing like it on television – ever.  There were few just outright villains.  For most of us, life is complicated enough without villains and FNL writers got this.  I loved this show and wish it was still on.  I miss it and the characters.  Go back and watch season one and you will be hooked.  You do not have to be a sports fan to enjoy it.  If you are a fan human drama, this is the series for you.

There you have it.  I know this got quite long and I apologize.  Keep in my mind this is my personal list.  I know my brother loves NCIS but I never watched it.  I got tired of CSI and hated the spin offs.  Grey’s Anatomy is too soapy, though I like it.  There are several cable shows I could have included – Shameless, Broadwalk Empire, Trieme, The Walking Dead, Homeland, Game of Thrones, and Suits are some of my favorites and all are very good.  At another time, any of those could make my list. 

I had a lot of fun writing this and I thank you for reading.

Monday, November 19, 2012


When you have one of the most accomplished directors in cinema history directing arguably the greatest actor of our generation who is portraying the United States’ greatest President, you expect great things.  You can also expect an abundance of hardware over the next three months as well.

Lincoln doesn’t disappoint.  Daniel Day-Lewis is the greatest of character actors; he completely immerses himself in his roles.  This one is no different.  As an amateur historian, I have done more than my fair share of study on our sixteenth president and Day-Lewis is as an accurate portrayal as any I’ve seen, and there have been many good ones.  The mannerisms such as his gangly, slightly hunched, lurching gait to his slow, and back-woodsy story telling, in his high pitched voice, are believable in every sense.  This IS Abraham Lincoln.  Day-Lewis is entrancing in the role, so much so that as the modern day viewer, you get to be the proverbial fly on the wall.

Another great performance in Lincoln is Tommy Lee Jones as radical Republican leader Thaddeus Stevens.  For me, Jones has a career littered with as many poor, disinterested performances as great ones.  He was at his best in this film.  Stevens was a fierce abolitionist who had a reputation for supporting minorities and the downtrodden his whole career.  Historically, he is blamed for the strict Reconstruction enforced upon the South after the war.  The film briefly touches on the difference of opinion about Reconstruction between Stevens and Lincoln, who favored a much gentler, forgiving stance than did Stevens and the radicals.  Lincoln’s death took away Stevens’ biggest obstacle in his wish to punish the South.  John Wilkes Booth did as big a disservice to the South as any man in the Post-Civil War era.  Lincoln would have promoted a forgiving Reconstruction and instead, Stevens got his way and the rest is, well, history, and led to a century of hatred and misundersting between the two geographical factions.

A few more names need to be mentioned for their performances in this picture.  James Spader was delightful as W.N. Bilbo, who was what we might categorize as an early lobbyist of sorts.  Sally Field as the mentally unstable Mary Todd Lincoln and Lee Pace as Representative Fernando Wood also stood to me.

Historically, Lincoln was very accurate.  Spielberg encompassed as much of the President’s story as he could within the restraints of only one month’s time of his presidency.  Lincoln suffered from melancholy, which today we know is depression.  This was a life long malady for the President, made worse by the stress of the job, casualty figures (from both sides), and the death of his son Willie, which is dealt with in the film.  The President also had to constantly deal with what we call today a high maintenance wife.  Mary Todd Lincoln, while probably not outright insane, was a constant burden during his presidency.  There were battles between the First Lady and Congress, which are subtly alluded to in the film, that didn’t help Lincoln at times when dealing with his political opponents.   Lincoln also suffered from nightmares and premonitions.  He was a darker man than is widely known by the general public.  He put up a good front with his light, upbeat, unpolished mannerisms.  Lincoln does a great job of giving us a true sense of his personality.

Ultimately, Abraham Lincoln was a grand manipulator and a political genius.  That is why he is considered our greatest president.  Every politician in Washington, from his enemies to his cabinet, all thought they were smarter than Lincoln.  The President was a patient man who was willing to slowly lead people to his way of seeing things.  In the case this movie focuses on, the passing of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, the President does not have time to be patient.  Everyone knows the war is coming to an end and if the amendment isn’t passed before the war is over, it would never pass.  Honest Abe was willing to bribe and cajole opponents into voting his way.  There is a line in the film that was perfect.  To greatly paraphrase, it went something like this – never has such a just cause been won by such corruption by such an honest of a man.  You get the picture.  Lincoln did what he had to insure the passing of the most important legislation to our country’s history since the Bill of Rights.  If Lincoln had not pulled this rabbit out of his stove top hat, how long would it have been before it would have passed?  No one knows but it would have probably been decades because the southern states would not have ratified it if it passed after they returned to the Union.

My favorite scenes are the ones that take place on the floor of the House of Representatives during the month long congressional debate over the 13th Amendment.  It was a different time and the debates were much more entertaining back then.  The insults were not subtle and were made face to face, not through the media.  Congressional debates were loud, almost tavern brawling affairs (Senator Charles Sumner was beaten as his desk in the Senate Chamber by Preston Brooks for an insult during a debate).  The film does a great job giving us a flavor of the times through these accurately depicted scenes.

The movie wasn’t perfect.  The story did drag down when it was focused on Lincoln’s oldest son Robert, who wanted to join the army against his parents’ wishes.  While this was a real issue in Lincoln’s life, the film puttered along during these scenes.  Also, I wish Spielberg would have done a better job informing the audience of some of the historical, satellite characters.  If you don’t have a degree in History, there is a good chance you don’t know who Preston Blair was or his role in the government, yet he has a significant role in the film.  Lincoln’s cabinet, maybe the President’s biggest opponents in Washington, goes largely unidentified in the movie, even though they are in a couple of major scenes.  There are a couple of very minor inaccuracies in the film but they really have little to do with the momentous events which take place in the scope of the film and only the history dorks like myself will have noticed. 

I highly recommend this movie.  It is an incredibly important part of our nation’s history and there are lessons to be learned in the current political arena.  The film deals with the importance of bipartisan cooperation on points of great bearing.  Today’s politicians should take notes.  The movie is rated PG-13, mainly for a bit of swearing and two brief, yet gruesome battle related images.  Whether you love history, or well acted, well directed films, this is a must see and will certainly win its fair share of hardware in the coming months.  The film drew significant applause during the showing I attended at it was well deserved.

Get twitter updates for both of my blogs @jawsrecliner.  Thanks for reading.

Monday, November 12, 2012


In its amazing fifty year cinematic history, the James Bond franchise has followed a tried and true formula with incredible success.  Through 23 films (I count Never Say Never Again – a rogue production) and six Bonds, the suave and debonair 007 used gadgets, sexy Bond girls, and incredible action to find a favored spot in our movie going schedules.  Every film featured several signature actions scenes that were just too hard to believe but we just didn’t care.  Those unbelievable action sequences are part of the Bond legacy and we have come to expect them, and even look forward to them.

Skyfall deviates from that old formula.  Daniel Craig’s modern, 21st century 007 is more physical and brooding than his more suave and debonair predecessors.  Skyfall is more story than action and we receive more of Bond’s personal background than in maybe all of the other films combined.  Craig’s Bond isn’t as witty or outgoing as previous incarnations but there is more effort put forth in this film.  Craig’s Bond is more serious and less interested in looking dapper.  Daniel Craig’s Bond, after three movies, is a truly unique Bond and the franchise seems willing to go along.

The formula is truly broken in Skyfall.  There is a Bond girl – sort of.  The femme fatale, Severine, makes a brief, yet memorable appearance and I guess she get the title of Bond girl henceforth.  Yet, she was hardly a blip on the old radar.  Those signature action scenes were fewer and much more believable.  Except for just a couple of small things, they were realistic even.  In following with Craig’s previous Bond flicks, this builds upon the theme of a more personal story line and is central in Skyfall.  Historically, the 007 franchise has kept its distance from the personal.

Finally, the villain.  Silva, portrayed with creepy brilliance by Javier Bardem, is a traditional Bond villain in appearance and personality.  You know what I mean, just a little weird and eccentric.  It is the plot, though, that goes off the beaten Bond trail.  Silva doesn’t seek anything as mundane as world domination.  He isn’t working for any grand organization who wants to sell arms or state secrets.  He is not trying to control the world’s oil supply, or news, or anything so grand.  Silva wants but a single, simple thing – revenge.  Skyfall is a story of simple, festering vengeance. 

I am torn a little by the new direction the Bond franchise seems to be heading.  On one hand, the story and the acting are much better than is traditionally the case.  Bardem is terrifically flamboyant.  Dame Judi Dench gives a performance that is worthy of a Supporting Actress nomination.  Daniel Craig’s mentally and physically battered, imperfect Bond is a much deeper, realistic 007.  The characters and the plot have much more flesh and depth to them than any previous entries.  All in all, Skyfall teeters on the brink of being a real movie of substance.

On the other hand though, do we want Bond to take himself so seriously?  One of the great attributes of the 007 franchise was its escapism.  The breathtaking, impossible stunts and action scenes were a pure joy.  What would they come up with this time?  There was always anticipation for that fantasy aspect of each and every Bond film.  Do we really want to lose that?  Do we really need another dark, brooding, moody hero?  This is the conundrum I have with James Bond right now.  Skyfall is truly a good movie with more depth and feeling but is that what we truly want from our 007?

Lastly, for some of the reoccurring characters in the Bonds movies, this edition is clearly a transitional movie.  Without going into it too much and giving too much information away, this franchise is going to grow and move forward with several of its supporting characters.  I know Daniel Craig is going to do one, probably two more, Bond films, but I doubt it will be more than that.  There is clearly a plan to continue the series indefinitely.  I have always loved Bond, no matter what Bond incarnation (even those two Timothy Dalton disasters).  I will go see each and every one, whether they are action fantasies or serious movies with action.  Regardless, it is still 007 and that is enough for me.

Monday, November 5, 2012


There can be little argument Denzel Washington is one of the top three or four American actors of this generation.  Over the past twenty past years, he has worked prolifically as a leading man, starring in nearly fifty pictures.  He has had more than his share of clunkers (The Bone Collector, The Mighty Quinn, to name a couple) to go along with his great performances.  In some of the films, it is as if he knows the script is crap and he seems disconnected with the role.  When he is into the role, he is very, very good.  Such is the case in Flight.

I don’t know how his role as beleaguered hero, Whip Whitaker, will stack up with is other great performances in films like Glory, Training Day, and Man on Fire, but Flight should easily land in Denzel’s top ten performances.  Washington always seems to be at his best when the role is multiple dimensional, when there is a definite dark side to his character.  He isn’t a comedy actor and he isn’t an action star, although he can do both.  He is a dramatic character actor and he shines when his characters are edgier.  This the key to his best roles.

Whip Whitaker certainly qualifies.  It is a tough role because Denzel is in nearly every scene in the movie except for a few briefs scenes early in the film that set up anther character on a parallel timeline.  The film focuses almost completely on Whip Whitaker, the brilliant pilot and the weak, often unlikable person.  Whitaker is filled with demons and flaws and he is very good at hiding them in general.  He is filled with a self loathing that reveals itself in a couple of intense scenes where he is by himself.

In the theater, the audience was entranced by Washington’s performance.  We wanted Whitaker to do the right thing time and time again and he let us down time and time again.  Several people even applauded at one point in the movie because they thought he finally was going to conquer an evil demon.  The audience has a stake in Whitaker’s personal battle.  We wanted him to exorcize those demons, despite his sometimes loathsome actions.  In the end, it was the whole focal point of the film.  After disappointing himself, and his friends, his family, and the audience so many times, would he in the end have the strength to do the right thing?  That will be for you to find out for yourselves.

There were some nice supporting performances, especially the ever terrific Don Cheadle, but this was Denzel’s spotlight.  He made us care for Whip despite all of his issues.  Director veteran Robert Zemeckis proved he hasn’t lost his touch over seeing a live action film.  There were some fine directorial moments in this film, namely the plane scene, but there were a lot of subtle moments as well.  Zemeckis did a great job giving us quiet scenes with just Denzel that showed Whitaker’s inner battle playing out on his face and in his soul.  Zemeckis also knows when you work with an actor like Denzel Washington, just get out of his road and let him do is thing.  It was certainly a successful combination here.

I love dramatic character studies.  They may be my favorite type of movies.  Flight falls squarely into this category and I wasn’t disappointed.  The film was a little over two hours long but I was so entranced that it flew by.  I didn’t check my watch even once.  Denzel Washington was at his best and I will be shocked if he doesn’t earn another nomination for the gold statuette.  He is worthy but I have a funny feeling that it is going to be tough to beat out Daniel Day-Lewis.  Regardless, Denzel deserves whatever awards come his way.  Flight is rated R at it fully deserved that rating.  This film is not appropriate for younger audiences and I do not recommend it for pre- or young teens.  Don’t let that stop you from having a date night and going to see this great movie.

Check in with my sports blog, and follow on twitter @jawsrecliner