Movie Review: "Black Mass"

Black Mass (2014)

R

4 Stars out of 5

Director                                Scott Cooper
Writer                                   Mark Mallouk and Jez Butterworth (screenplay)
                                               Dick Lehr and Gerard O’Neill (book)

Johnny Depp                       James “Whitey” Bulger 
Joel Edgerton                      John Connolly, FBI
Benedict Cumberbatch     Billy Bulger
Kevin Bacon                        Charles McGuire, FBI
Dakota Johnson                  Lindsey Cyr
David Harbour                    John Morris, FBI
Julianne Nicholson            Marianne Connolly
Corey Stoll                          Fred Wyshak, U.S. Attorney

 

It is so nice to see Johnny Depp play a real person again, and to play the character so well that it is his performance that is the primary reason to see the movie in which he plays that character, James “Whitey” Bulger. This is the second time Depp has had an outing as a gangster; the last time was in 2009’s “Public Enemies” where he played John Dillinger. In each movie, he disappears into the role, not a trace of Depp is to be seen. This is in stark contrast to his “comic” portrayals as the fey Captain Jack Sparrow; a role that was amusing in the first version of the series, but quickly degenerated into little more than a cash machine for Depp and Disney. Depp had a distinguished career in the 90’s but once the new millennium began and with the exception of his two gangster movies and 2007’s “Sweeny Todd…” there is precious little to praise about his roles or performances. This time in “Black Mass” he has redeemed himself and given substantial heft to the movie’s overall effect on the viewer.

In 1975 rising FBI star John Connolly (Joel Edgerton) returns to his South Boston hometown in order to bring down the regional Italian mob locally led by the Angiulo Brothers. Connolly goes to great lengths to convince his highly skeptical boss, Charles McGuire (Kevin Bacon) and contemporary, John Morris (David Harbour) that he, Connolly can get Whitey Bulger to act as an informant to the FBI and thus bring the Angiulos to justice. Meanwhile, the film depicts Whitey as a part-time father and husband to Linda Cyr (Dakota Johnson) and their young son. Bulger’s real life is that of a small time mobster, one who is losing ground to the far more successful Italian mobsters, the Angiulos. Whitey’s politician brother, Billy (Benedict Cumberbatch) sets up a meeting between the former childhood friends Connolly and Whitey where Connolly presents his plan to Whitey. Whitey initially refuses in typical gangster fashion, but as the Angiulos increase their pressure on him, he eventually changes his mind.

The movie then begins a multi-year examination of the manipulation by Whitey over Connolly, not the intended contrary. Connolly infatuated with his “success” via the Whitey Bulger connection gains prestige within the FBI but slowly and sickeningly in fact becomes one of Whitey’s pawns. Connolly starts to dress in a more flashy style, ignores the worried advice of his wife, Marianne (Julianne Nicholson), and even drags fellow FBI agent, John Morris into Whitey’s web. Connolly’s subornation by Whitey goes so far that not only does Connolly dismiss information linking Whitey to the murder of two competitors, but he also feeds Whitey information regarding a betrayal of Whitey by one of his own men; that man losing his life in the process at Whitey’s hands. The height of irony is revealed later in the movie when it is shown that almost all of the “intel” supplied by Whitey to Connolly was information already supplied to the FBI by other informants. Thus, the only real “intel” being exchanged was from Connolly to Whitey, and not the other way around.

The story is an excellent one beyond the powers of Depp to become Bulger. We see with increasing dismay as the once moral and capable Connolly ignores the worries and concerns of his non-South Boston wife and the continued reluctance of his boss McGuire, and is instead slowly seduced by the power of Whitey’s personality. He tells his wife and co-workers because of their shared childhood history he knows Whitey and trusts him. And he continues to trusts him even as more and more evidence of Whitey’s criminal brutality slowly comes to light. A good but flawed man is taken down the road of corruption. Equally insightful is the portrayal of Whitey’s brother, Billy by Cumberbatch. Billy a very successful and influential Boston politician would like so many that knew the true nature of Whitey, greatly prefer to merely turn his gaze away from what he did not want to see. Billy was in many cases as much an enabler of Whitey’s crimes as the confused Connolly. Connolly’s wife Marianne could see the truth about Whitey; she would in time leave Connolly in an emotional stew of fear and frustration over Connolly’s behavior. Whitey’s common law wife, Lindsey would also clearly see the truth. But she like Billy would turn away her gaze. She would eventually leave as well, but only after the death of their son left her with nothing. When it was convenient to avoid the truth as both Connolly and Billy did, Lindsey would ride the gravy train just as surely as Connolly. The lack of any moral compunction is rampant in the people surrounding Whitey Bulger.

This rosy set-up for Whitey comes to a crashing halt when a new US attorney comes to Boston, Fred Wyshak (Corey Stoll). This one comes with a backbone. Here is a man that would not be coerced, diverted or controlled. He could see clearly the incongruity of Whitey’s crimes and the failure by the FBI to follow up on them. He would not stop digging until the whole sordid affair was brought into the light. This kind of the story is not told for the first time by this movie, but it was refreshing nonetheless to witness. This film’s depiction of how Whitey raised himself and his gang through the misguided, but active participation of the FBI is a clear lesson in how fuzzy the lines can become between the criminals and the undercover means used to bring those felons to justice. This movie also emphasizes how childhood connections can create stronger alliances, stronger even than the marital, legal or moral equivalents in the later adults. A man might very well as Connolly does in this story throw away his wife, job and reputation as he almost blindly falls into patterns of dominance and submission that were set up in childhood. It is interesting to note the ones that seem to see the problem most clearly do not have an intimate connection to South Boston: FBI agent McGuire, wife Marianne, and US Attorney Wyshak.

 The individual childhood cases from South Boston aside, this movie’s story of corruption is primarily significant because it tells the story of how power corrupts. For their corruption and their resulting crimes of cover up and worse, Connolly will go to jail, as will Whitey’s brother, Billy. Not surprisingly, many of Whitey’s criminal crew will go to prison as well. What is surprising is that even several of the crew will be so repulsed by the moral depths that Whitey will go to and require his crew to go to, they will be self-driven to become State Witnesses. All of these friends, cohorts, and allies would eventually be caught up in the web enclosing about them set by Wyshak; all but Whitey himself. He would escape and remain in hiding for over two decades before he too would be finally caught and sentenced to life in prison.

This is an excellent movie in terms of acting, directing, and story content. It carries a truly meaningful message about the corrupting influence of Power. It is not an easy movie to watch, and should certainly only be seen by mature adults. But it is both entertaining and informative; a movie well worth seeing.

Movie Review: "Transcendence"

Transcendence (2014)

PG-13

2.5 Stars out of 5

Director                                Wally Pfister
Writer                                   Jack Paglen
Cinematography                Jess Hall
Music                                    Mychael Danna

Johnny Depp                      Will Caster
Rebecca Hall                       Evelyn Caster
Paul Bettany                       Max Waters
Cillian Murphy                   Agent Buchanan
Kate Mara                           Bree
Morgan Freeman             Joseph Tagger

 

Science Fiction can be such a wonderful canvas on which to paint visual forms of ideas that conventional drama can touch only lightly, or maybe not at all. Consider what “Under the Skin" worked so successfully to demonstrate: that our modern definition of human is truly skin deep; or consider what the failed 2014 version of Robocop tried to illustrate: a person’s basic humanity can triumph over evil and soulless technology; and now consider the almost equally failed “Transcendence”: when does helping someone (no matter your intentions) cross the line between helping and enslaving. “Transcendence” tries to cover other territory, too: the border between human and machine, or the border between Man and God. These are lofty questions and topics, and when done right, can be entertaining and thought provoking, but when done poorly, the viewer’s reaction might range from dismay to something far less than transcendence.

“Transcendence” is a story that is rooted in the concept of Artificial Intelligence and how that AI will interact with mankind. The film begins with an introduction to an AI researcher played by Johnny Depp, Will Caster and his equally brilliant wife, Evelyn Caster (Rebecca Hall). Will is assaulted by a team of neo-Luddites (the movie’s term, though for Luddites they seem awfully comfortable with technology). As his condition worsens, his wife Evelyn decides to make a copy of Will’s mind and transfer it into a computer. She enlists the help of Will’s co-worker Max Waters (Paul Bettany). As leader of the neo-Luddites, Bree (Kate Mara) strives to prevent Evelyn from allowing virtual Will to reach the internet; but to no avail. Once there, virtual Will begins to amass power and abilities that ultimately alienates all of his former colleagues, even Evelyn. There is (small surprise) a concluding battle between Will and a remarkably small sample of the US Army, Bree and Will’s college crowd. The final scenes show a somewhat remorseful Max musing over whether or not Will has found a way to overcome his adversities and unite in some manner with Evelyn.

The problems with this movie are symptomatic of bad science fiction films: over-reach in terms of the protagonist’s abilities and ironically, a ridiculous always present Achilles Heel (think the nonsense of the vent on the Death Star that Luke uses to destroy it). Virtual Will is confronted with multiple examples of people indirectly verbally classing him with God; mostly in the context of his virtual existence, but indirectly foreshadowing his God-like abilities to come. And his abilities do come: he masters the Stock Market in minutes, he invents nano-robots that can repair and improve Humans in months, he defies gravity, and yet, and yet – darn those pesky viruses. He can wreak havoc with logic and science but just like those omnipotent aliens in “Independence Day”, and unlike the Aliens, he knows the attack is coming and the nature of the attack, and yet he too is powerless to defend against the virus.

Bad science, bad logic, and a pointless focus on a modern equivalent of the villagers in “Frankenstein” storming Victor’s castle is the approach taken by first-time Director, Wally Pfister. Was it because it was Cinematographer Pfister’s first time out as a Director that led to such a flaccid story? With the truly brilliant writer/director Christopher Nolan acting in the role of executive Producer on the team, one really has to wonder, did no one see the weak and uninspired film that came out of this effort. Imagine a story that took the movie’s opening premise of downloading a mind, and perhaps even include the second premise of how that mind might expand when allowed to function at internet speeds and in connection with internet-sized mountains of data. Could there not have been a Stanley Kubrick visionary view of this concept similar to “2001”? Is there no other storyline but the one used by Mary Shelly over a century ago in the original Frankenstein?

Arthur C Clarke wrote in the mid-twentieth century about how any science sufficiently advanced would appear indistinguishable from magic; or to paraphrase him, from God. Clarke explored this idea in the book form of "2001", and Kubrick led the viewer right up to that point where a God-like Dave floated, poised above the Earth, pondering. Would Clarke or Kubrick have turned the next scene into a raging battle with tanks and jets, and I’m sure, a car chase or two (yes, I know a fleet of rockets were sent skyward, but what then happened, any explosions?). Or is there some more subtle next step that might have occurred; something that might demonstrate or at least define what being Human and what being God-like might be? Is there a better way to explore the subjects noted above in the first paragraph that doesn’t involve explosions? The answer is yes; go back and watch “Under the Skin” a second time, and you will see some hope for intelligent and nuanced explorations of these subjects.

 

Movie Review: Into the Woods

Into the Woods (2014)

Three Stars out of Five

PG

Cinderella: Anna Kendrick

Baker: James Corden

Baker’s Wife: Emily Blunt

Witch: Meryl Streep

Director: Rob Marshall

Writer: James Lapine

Writer (musical): James Lapine and Stephen Sondheim

Stephen Sondheim’s musical “Into the Woods” reached Broadway in 1987; while there it won three Tony awards, including Best Score. Several attempts were made to convert it into a movie in the 90’s, and Disney finally finished the job in 2014. Just like the musical, the movie version included James Lapine as the writer and many of the original songs by Sondheim. It had Rob Marshall who has the movie version of Chicago on his resume, and it had Meryl Streep breaking her own rule of not playing a witch, playing a witch. So, despite being nominated for three Oscars, what went wrong?

For me, the movie is a string of pearls separated by many onions – they may be pearl onions, but they’re still onions. The first reel of the movie opens charmingly enough. We are introduced to a childless couple of Bakers (James Corden and Emily Blunt), their witch of a neighbor (Meryl Streep), Cinderella (Anna Kendrick), Jack of the Beanstalk fame (Daniel Huttlestone), and Little Red Riding Hood (Lilla Crawford). They each have an agenda to work through: the Bakers want a child, the Witch wants her youth back, Jack and his mom (Tracy Ullman) need money, and Little Red Riding Hood is evidently hungry. There is undoubted cleverness at weaving the Grimm Brothers' version of each tale into a unified story, and indeed, the first part of the movie does a very good job of creating an interesting narrative. But then, following anti-climax after anti-climax, the movie just kind of peters out after a couple of hours. There are some serious overall story arc issues with this movie.

While the acting and story-telling in the first part of the movie are interesting and cogent, the singing (for the most part) and the lyrics in the early part of the movie were tiresome and not melodic. It was as if someone were singing the words from a movie that was not a musical, and not singing them at all well – I’m looking at you Wolf/Johnny Depp. Of the pearls in this movie, the duet by the two princes (Chris Pine as Cinderella’s dreamboat and Billy Magnussen as Rapunzel’s) did a great job in their song, “Agony”. It was actually a song that was melodious and sardonic. Another great song was the very short one by Cinderella’s mother/tree Johanna Riding, who easily had the best voice in the ensemble. The final song, “Children Will Listen” may have had a confusing message, but it was surely pleasant to listen to.

Acting was at a very decent level with James Corden as the Baker, and most particularly with Emily Blunt as his wife and Meryl Streep as the Witch. The high point of the movie was the witch’s initial entrance into the home of the Bakers. Meryl Streep’s eye-rolling, not quite over the top performance in these very early scenes really captured a sense of comedic acting and summarized brilliantly why the first reel of the movie was the best. Anna Kendrick’s performance as a very irresolute Cinderella was also noteworthy; especially the scene of the Balls’ third night and her third fleeing from the Prince as she finds herself caught in tar and in a moment of time. This kind of clever little aside moment for Cinderella was something that would have benefited the movie had there been more such clever scenes.

What you see for the most part are mistakes like a badly miscast Little Red Riding Hood and associated Wolf. Both characters are written very broadly as sly, wink-wink kind of characters. But neither Lilla Crawford nor Johnny Depp comes anywhere close to infusing their performance with anything but a very superficial resemblance to comedic irony. The oddly typecast Giantess (Frances De La Tour – see the Harry Potter series in order to see her play another Giantess) is a character that does not do anything but mindlessly scream for Jack and then proceed to stomp around. These characters and their scenes not only do not add to the movie, but frankly detract from it.

Is there any message in “Into the Woods”? The odd lyrics in the final song suggest a movie theme but then don't stick to it any consistent manner. In a another song near the end of the movie there might be Sondheim’s and Lapine’s message: “No One Is Alone”. This song is a reasonably decent song to listen to, and the message is certainly a fine one; a message that has special resonance in a post-911 America. Another message is to be found on the movie's poster, "Be Careful of What You Wish For": each of the major characters find out that getting their wish isn't always a good thing - Cinderella finds out what a cad the Prince is, Rapunzel is really not that sure she wants to leave her tower, the Baker’s wife believes she loves and wants her husband, but a little fling in the woods in the Prince is fine too – at least until the Giantess makes her pay for her indiscretion, Little Red Riding really should stick to the path, etc., etc. - mostly minor messages, minor songs, minor performances. As always, Meryl Streep pleases beyond what just about what anyone else can come close to doing. And for me, there were some little surprises like Cinderella on the staircase that make the movie watchable; but again, overall the movie just seemed to go nowhere, and to take a while to get there.