Change Your Image
knxg
Reviews
The Sentinel (2006)
A positive review for this film can only be the result of cognitive dissonance.
The production notes for 20th Century Fox's "The Sentinel" describe it as an "unpredictable" political thriller that tells the story of "the agents assigned to protect the President and the First Lady". A more accurate description would be that the film is a prime example of what happens when you give a $60 million budget to people who should never have been allowed near a camera.
Michael Douglas stars as Peter Garrison, a Secret Service agent who uncovers a plot by group of assassins who wish to kill the President and have the aid of mole from inside the agency. During the investigation, Garrison is framed as the traitor and is forced to go on the run to continue his investigation. Kiefer Sutherland is a former protégée of Douglas who is sent to track him down along with the help of rookie agent played by Eva Longoria. As Douglas uncovers more and more of the deadly plot, he must struggle to evade his own organization, in an effort to clear his name and save the President's life before it's too late.
It's hard to know where to start when reviewing a cinematic disaster, except to say that the least offensive element in "The Sentinel" is the acting. Douglas is competent, if entirely forgettable as a senior agent whose years of experience must be called upon to save the day. Sutherland, on the other hand, is wasted in a one-note role, largely due to the film's lazy script. Sutherland's character is limited to only two emotions, "less angry" and "more angry", and calling his character "stock" would be implying too much depth.
Eva Longoria is given little to do and is essentially eye-candy for males in the audience. At 5'2" and likely no more than 100 pounds, Longoria is barred from conveying the presence as well as the ability of an actual field agent. Regardless, she is still able to upstage Kim Basinger, whose performance as the First Lady serves as yet another reminder that her Oscar for "L.A. Confidential" may have been a fluke. Behind the camera, the only person who emerges relatively unscathed is composer Christophe Beck, whose percussive-intensive score, while completely predictable, is rarely inappropriate. Everyone else should be embarrassed.
The film's "wouldn't this be cool?" sense of production design suffocates any realism one expects in a "political-thriller". Kiefer Sutherland's office features more technology than a "Best Buy" store and yet in reality, our own FBI is struggling to equip agents with their own email accounts. This is but one example of where the film trades honesty for flamboyance. Much like the director Clark Johnson's previous effort, "SWAT", "Sentinel" refuses to give the audience insight into how a real law-enforcement organization operates. Countless opportunities in the film to illuminate how the Service operates are discarded in favor of pointless plot developments and made-for-TV action scenes.
Despite borrowing liberally from films like "The Fugitive", "The Negotiator" and "In the Line of Fire", George Nolfi's script can best be described as "insulting". There is an overriding feeling throughout that the filmmakers have no respect for their audience. Most plot developments are riddled with holes and every character including Douglas' is paper thin. A laughably artificial romantic scenario is introduced early on that exists only because the hack-job of a screenplay lacked a love interest. The villains are given literally no descriptions beyond being from Kyrgyzstan. And despite the build-up, the mole in the agency is dropped in at the last minute as part of a half-baked Cold War plot with a single line of dialogue serving as the "motive".
Equal blame, however, must go to director Clark Johnson. With the dubious aid of cinematographer Gabriel Baristain, Johnson has created one of the most visually unattractive and poorly shot films in recent memory. Absolutely nothing works, as Johnson bombards the audience with an embarrassing mix of quick close-up zooms, awful CGI, contrast-boosted outdoor scenes, and faux security camera footage. The last of these is especially frustrating in hindsight, as themes of voyeurism are planted then inexplicably dropped when they can't be tied to the plot. In fact, the only frame that stuck with this reviewer from the entire 105 minutes was the close-up of Eva Longoria's butt.
Furthermore, Johnson is apparently unaware that his film cannot fit into the genre of "political thriller" if it lacks thrills as well as politics. Most scenes feature various individuals chasing or being chased by the 61 year-old Douglas. The problem is that Johnson's complete misunderstanding of how to generate excitement or tension makes these scenes about as engaging as playing hide and seek with Helen Keller. Even the finale's promise of a an action-packed assassination attempt goes completely unfulfilled, and there is a pervading sense that the filmmakers either just ran out of money or gave up and shot what they could.
Could "The Sentinel" have been any better? Absolutely. If the filmmakers had simply set out to create a buddy-cop film with Douglas and Sutherland as agents trying to prevent an assassination, the results might have at least been entertaining. It also would have cut down the large number of "24" fans who will flock to this film and leave disappointed. As it stands, "The Sentinel" is one hell of a mess, evidence that a lack of talent will inevitably produce a terrible movie.
The New World (2005)
A film of true depth and emotion
"The New World" marks the triumphant return of director Terrence Malick, who after a seven year absence, has delivered one of the most impressive films of the past year. Though perhaps too long for his fans, Malick's hiatus was shorter than the 20 years that passed between 1978's "Days of Heaven" and 1998's "The Thin Red Line". Stylistically, his newest work is more of a continuation of the latter than of his seminal debut, "Badlands", and will likely arouse debate among followers of Malick's career. Although it is not very accessible to the average movie-goer, "The New World" carries tremendous rewards for viewers in the mood for something artistic.
In terms of plot, "The New World" is a retelling of the tale of Pocahontas (Q'Orianka Kilcher) and John Smith (Colin Farrell). The film begins with the founding of Jamestown and continues through the Smith-Pocahontas relationship, the conflict between the settlers and the Powhatans, and Pocahontas' eventual marriage to John Rolfe (Christian Bale). However, this only scratches the surface of the film's focus.
A deeper connection with nature is the unmistakable, driving force of the work. When John Smith first travels to the natives' camp, Malick depicts the Powhatans as a race that exists in harmony with their surroundings. After spending an extensive amount of time with the natives, Smith's return to the English settlement is visually jarring as the palette moves from lush greens to shades of brown. The English outpost is a fort sinking into the mud, confined by looming log walls. Its settlers are contrasted as a group that seeks to shut itself off from nature rather than embrace it. As such, they are unable to thrive in the new world.
Pocahontas' eventual journey to England enhances this disparity. One of the film's most effective moments has a Powhatan, Opechancanough (Wes Studi), wandering through London's royal gardens. For him, the topiary designs are an artificial and alien "forest", illustrating how man has endeavored to recreate nature despite denying us an authentic experience.
However, the film is not just a meditation on the natural world. Malick uses the love story of Pocahontas and Smith to explore the meeting of two very different civilizations. The fact that the title is "The New World" is but one indication that Malick has structured his film assuming viewers will automatically begin by identifying with the English. Nevertheless, Malick invests effort to convey the experiences of native life. The sequences he films are effective enough that viewers should find the experiences of the settlers to ultimately be the more foreign of the two.
The meetings between the cultures evoke a range of emotions from wonder to fear. Also clear is the immense range of possible outcomes that existed during these first meetings. As the relations between the groups continue to break down, the results are tragic. The relationship between the characters of Smith and Pocahontas represent the idyllic middle ground between the civilizations. Their relationship is a demonstration of understanding that, unfortunately, seems lost on those around them.
The film is also successful in its more tangible qualities. The editing is economical, skipping from moment to moment without a traditional set-up and conclusion for each scene. This is not jarring in the MTV sense, but thoughtful, and it allows Malick to include an impressive number of images and emotional moments into the running time. The film's music, scored by James Horner with contributions from Wagner, Mozart, and others, is evocative and complements the on-screen action. It is gratifying in particular that Horner clearly understands Malick's intentions and his serene touches are welcomed.
The acting, cinematography, and production design is strong all around. However, newcomer Q'Orianka Kilcher deserves special mention in her impressive performance as Pocahontas. Kilcher communicates a maturity well beyond her age (14 at the time of filming) with a youthful energy that brings her character alive. Kilcher eventually becomes the heart of the film and holds the screen well on her own. It is hard to say at this point what future Kilcher may have in other roles, but her performance in this film certainly is notable for its merits.
The film has two minor flaws. First, Colin Farrell, in spite of delivering a strong performance, falls victim to "Last Samurai-itis" in that he is too recognizable a personality to truly disappear into the character of Smith. Secondly, the voice-overs used throughout the film are at times more pedestrian than insightful and may strike some viewers as pretentious. The strength of the voice-overs is that despite their weakness in content, they fit extremely well into the mood of the film. Combined with the lyrical pacing and editing, the voice overs prove that Malick is a director who can successfully realize poetry in a visual medium. As a result, these flaws do not diminish the emotional impact one feels by the time the end credits roll and to make too much of them would be a disservice to the recommendation that this film carries.
Even among the handful of strong releases currently in theaters, "The New World" is a must-see. At its core, it is what cinema should be, a visual work of art that succeeds in arousing a strong emotional reaction. Viewers can rejoice over the fact that this film is seeing wide-release and one won't have to search far and wide for an obscure theater in order to experience Malick's vision. Want to see a truly great film in theaters? Go see this.
RATING: 4.5 stars out of 5
First Descent (2005)
Should be a treat for snowboarding fans, but not for the rest of us
The best thing about "First Descent" is that it lives up to its promise from the trailer of "no wires", "no special effects", and "no stunt doubles". Unfortunately, although this snowboarding documentary is occasionally thrilling, it only skims the surface of its subject matter and manages to wear out its welcome by the time the end credits roll.
The primary fault of "First Descent" is that it is two movies in one, and neither is given enough time. The first is a history of the sport since its conception. Intercut with this is the story of five snowboarders (Shawn Farmer, Terje Haakonsen, Nick Perata, Hannah Teter, and Shaun White) on a trip to Alaska to board down untouched powder in the Alaskan mountains (these rides are called "first descents"). Thankfully, despite the fact that the movie is produced by MD Films, none of the boarders ever crack open a Mountain Dew for the camera.
The historical section of "First Descent" is a straightforward primer on the sport. Archival footage is mixed with interviews from dozens of authorities in the community. Several interesting topics are touched upon including snowboarding's growth from the X-Games to the Olympics, the effects corporate sponsorship, and the influence of filmmakers and photography on the spread of snowboarding's popularity.
Unfortunately, each of these topics is only allotted several minutes and is paid lip-service rather than explored to any satisfactory depth. Certain topics such as the ties between the snowboarding, surfing, and skateboarding beg for their own segment, but are only mentioned in passing. Furthermore, these issues represent only a fraction of the running time from the historical section. Much of the history of the sport, as presented, turns out to be less than compelling and is suffocated by a constant barrage of snowboarding stunt clips. Although some of the footage is impressive, it soon becomes repetitive and tiresome.
The Alaskan sequences, although flawed, are the more interesting segments and feature new material produced for the film. This material is exquisitely well-shot and is often awe-inspiring. The sheer size of the peaks and their near vertical drops are captured well enough to convey a tangible sense of danger. The boarders are seen performing death-defying stunts, some of which are mind-boggling in execution. One boarder even unwittingly starts an avalanche, only to narrowly escape courtesy of some impressive boarding.
These images make one wonder why production companies decide to spend inordinate amounts of money on visual effects (see the avalanche scene from 2002's "xXx") when there are daredevils out there who will give you the real deal and have a great time doing it. It is likely that skill in capturing these stunts is the reason "First Descent" is seeing a release on the big-screen, especially since the historical sections would be more at home on television rather than in large format.
Each of the Alaskan boarders is given a background as to their history in the sport. However, these introductions are only around five minutes each, and for the most part these athletes are thrust into their "runs" down the Alaskan mountains before the viewer gets to know them. Again, intriguing issues such as how one of the boarders, Hannah, is a woman in a man's sport are given only cursory attention. The weakness of this is that although the boarders are exposed to dangerous situations in the mountains, the viewer has trouble caring about their plights beyond them being "man versus nature". Additionally, since just about all of the Alaskan sequences take place on the mountains with boarders on solo-runs, neither the personalities of the boarders nor the bonds between them can be developed. When the boarders gush about how they have "grown" or "bonded" with each other over the trip, their comments lack resonance.
Fundamentally, "First Descent" tries too hard to be the snowboarding documentary to end all others, and the result is a lack of focus. The film's length is not enough to illustrate snowboarding's entire history and the story of five boarders in Alaska. In trying to cover all the bases, "First Descent" ends up covering none of them well enough. However, a longer running time would have proved equally fatal as the film sometimes drags along at its current length.
The better approach would have been to focus in on only one of the two main story lines. Of the two, the human element is most compelling. A more in-depth look at the five boarders would not only be more emotionally satisfying, but the best snowboarding footage (of their runs) could be retained. Interestingly, 2001's skateboarding doc "Dogtown and Z-Boys", although stylistically inferior to "First Descent", featured a commitment to character that ultimately proved to be more effective.
If you are a snowboarding nut, see "First Descent" in theaters to truly appreciate the stunts captured for the film. Otherwise, you should consider skipping this one. As pure eye candy, "First Descent" is an 8/10. As a documentary however, it's closer to 4/10. Taken as a whole, its rating falls somewhere in between.