"ANGELS AND DEMONS" (2009) ReviewAfter the success of the 2006 adaptation of Dan Brown’s novel, ”The DaVinci Code”, director Ron Howard and actor Tom Hanks returned to adapt another Brown novel that featured the character of symbologist Robert Langdon – namely, ”Angels and Demons”. Although the latter novel had been published first; it became the second of Brown’s works to be adapted by Hollywood, making ”ANGELS AND DEMONS” a cinematic sequel to ”THE DaVINCI CODE”. ”ANGELS AND DEMONS” revolves around the quest of fictional Harvard University symbologist Robert Langdon (Hanks) to uncover the mysteries of a secret society called the Illuminati and to unravel a plot to annihilate Vatican City using destructive antimatter. Like the novel, the movie uses the idea of a historical conflict between science and religion, particularly that between the Illuminati and the Roman Catholic Church.Following the death of the Pope, a destructive antimatter is stolen from CERN (the world's largest particle physics laboratory located in Geneva, Switzerland) and one of the scientists murdered. The Vatican then receives a threat from a group calling itself the Illuminati (a former secret society that consisted of European freethinkers that supported new scientific discoveries, despite the Catholic Church’s opposition), which claims it will destroy the Vatican using the stolen antimatter. The Church summons both Robert Langdon and CERN scientist Vittoria Vetra (Ayelet Zurer) to prevent the Illuminati from carrying out its threat in less than 24 hours. During their time at the Vatican, both Langdon and Vittoria encounter some degree of hostility – mainly from Commander Richter, head of the Swiss Guard (Stellan Skarsgård).”ANGELS AND DEMONS” can boast solid performances from a first-rate cast. There were no bad performances that I could spot. On the other hand, not one member of the cast gave what I would consider an exceptional performance – not even top-notch talents like Hanks, Skarsgård or Ewan McGregor, who portrayed the Vatican’s the Camerlengo, Patrick McKenna. The more I try to think of an exceptional performance in this film, the more difficult it was for me to achieve this goal. However, I must admit that I found Rance Howard’s appearance as one of the Cardinals voting for a new Pope rather out of place. Other than his appearance, everyone seemed . . . solid.And if I must be frank, I might as well say the same about the movie. Some have claimed that the screenplay had failed to follow the novel very closely. I say . . . who cares? I am not a fan of Dan Brown’s novel. It bored me so much that I did not even bother to finish it. The only reason I had bothered to go see the movie was due to my hope that like ”THE DaVINCI CODE”, it would be an improvement over the novel. Thankfully, Ron Howard’s direction, along with the screenplay written by David Koepp and Akiva Goldsman improved the story immensely. Well, the parts I had read. Like the novel’s beginning. I can see that it would be futile to compare the entire novel to the entire film. Especially since I never bothered to finish the novel. But . . . I must admit that I did enjoy the film. Langdon and Vittoria’s efforts to stop the group from killing four Vatican cardinals and destroying the Vatican managed to maintain my interest. I was especially impressed by Howard’s direction of the sequences that featured Langdon and the Swiss Guard’s Lieutenant Chartrand (Thure Lindhardt) being trapped in the Vatican’s increasingly airless archives; Langdon and Inspector Ernesto Olivetti’s (Pierfrancesco Favino) attempts to save one of the kidnapped cardinals suspended above a roaring fire inside the Santa Maria della Vittoria Basilica; and the efforts of Langdon, Vittoria, Chartrand and Father McKenna to find the antimatter and prevent it from blowing up.If a moviegoer is looking for an exceptional movie, ”ANGELS AND DEMONS” is not the right flick. But I rather enjoyed ”ANGELS AND DEMONS” a lot. It was a solid and entertaining thriller filled with good performances, first-rate action, great location photography of Rome and a pretty good solid story. If you simply want to be entertained, I highly recommend this movie.
"CINDERELLA MAN" (2005) Review
When I had first learned about Ron Howard’s biopic about boxing champion James J. Braddock, I was very reluctant to see the film. In fact, I did not even bother to go see it. Instead, I merely dismissed "CINDERELLA MAN" as a ‘"SEABISCUIT" in the boxing ring’. After I finally saw the movie, I must admit that my original assessment stood.
”CINDERELLA MAN” and the 2003 Oscar nominated film, ”SEABISCUIT” seemed to have a lot in common. Both were released by Universal Pictures. Both films possessed a running time that lasted over two hours, both were sentimental stories that centered around a famous sports figure and both were set during the Great Depression. Unlike ”SEABISCUIT”, ”CINDERELLA MAN” told the story about a man – namely one James J. Braddock, an Irish-American boxer from New York and Bergen, New Jersey. The movie started out with Braddock (portrayed by Russell Crowe) as a boxing heavyweight contender in 1928, who had just won an important bout against another boxer named Tuffy Griffiths. But within five years, Braddock found himself as a has-been struggling to keep his family alive during the depths of the Depression, while working as longshoreman. Thanks to a last minute cancellation by another boxer, Braddock gets a second chance to fight but is put up against the number two contender in the world, Corn Griffin, by the promoters who see Braddock as nothing more than a punching bag. Braddock stuns the boxing experts and fans with a third round knockout of the formidable Griffin. After winning a few more bouts, Braddock ends facing boxing champ, Max Baer (Craig Bierko), for the heavyweight title in 1935.
Despite the similarities between ”CINDERELLA MAN” and ”SEABISCUIT”, I must admit that I regret not seeing this film in the theaters. It turned out to be a lot better than I had expected. Director Ron Howard, along with screenwriters Cliff Hollingsworth and Akiva Goldsman, did an excellent job of chronicling Braddock’s boxing career at a time when he had been labeled a has-been by the sports media. The movie also featured some excellent fight sequences that came alive due to Howard’s direction, Crowe, Bierko, and the other actors who portrayed Braddock’s opponents. Although the movie’s main event was the championship fight between Braddock and Baer during the last thirty minutes, I was especially impressed by the sequence that featured Braddock’s fight against Art Lansky (Mark Simmons). In my opinion, most of the praise for these fight sequences belonged to cinematographer Salvatore Totino, and editors Daniel P. Hanley and Mike Hill (who both received Academy Award nominations for their work) for injecting the boxing sequences with rich atmosphere and effective editing.
Ironically, the movie’s centerpiece – at least in my opinion – was its deception of the Depression. I understand that Howard had used the city of Toronto to serve as 1930s Manhattan and New Jersey. And judging from the results on the screen, he did an excellent job of utilizing not only the cast led by Crowe, but also the talents of production designer Wynn Thomas, Gordon Sim’s set decorations, Peter Grundy and Dan Yarhi’s art direction and Totino’s photography to send moviegoers back in time. There are certain scenes that really seemed to recapture the desperation and poverty of the Depression’s early years:
*Braddock begs for money from the sports promoters and boxing managers at Madison Square Garden
*Mae Braddock’s discovery of the gas man turning off the family’s heat
*The Braddocks witness the desertion of a man from his wife and family
*Braddock’s search for his friend, Mike Wilson (Paddy Considine), at a Hooverville in Central Park
Howard and casting agents, Janet Hirshenson and Jane Jenkins, managed to gather an impressive group of cast members for the movie. The ironic thing is that despite the impressive display of talent on screen, hardly anyone gave what I would consider to be a memorable performance – save for one actor. Russell Crowe naturally gave an impressive, yet surprisingly likeable performance as James Braddock. Although I found his performance more than competent, I must say that I would not consider it to be one of his best roles. There was nothing really fascinating or complex about his Braddock. I suspect that screenwriters Hollingsworth and Goldsman could have made Braddock a more interesting character . . . and simply failed to rise to the occasion. I have to say the same about their portrayal of the boxer’s wife, Mae Braddock. Portrayed by Renee Zellweger, her Mae was a loving and supporting spouse, whose only kink in her personality revolved around her dislike of Braddock’s boxing. In fact, Zellweger’s Mae threatened to become a cliché of the countless number of women who end up as wives of men in dangerous professions. Thankfully, Zellweger managed to give an excellent performance and with Crowe, create a strong screen chemistry.
Paul Giamatti received an Academy Award nomination for his portrayal of Braddock’s manager, Joe Gould. Many had assumed that Giamatti had received his nomination as a consolation prize for being passed over for his superb performance in ”SIDEWAYS”. After seeing his performance as Gould, I suspect they might be right. I am not saying that Giamatti gave a bad performance. He was excellent as Braddock’s enthusiastic and supportive manager. But there was nothing remarkable about it . . . or worthy of an Oscar nomination. If there is one performance that I found impressive, it was Paddy Considine’s portrayal of Mike Wilson, Braddock’s friend and co-worker at the New York docks. Considine’s Wilson was a former stockbroker ruined by the 1929 Crash, who was forced to become a menial laborer in order to survive. Although his plight seemed bad enough to generate sympathy, Considine did an excellent job of portraying the character’s bitterness and cynicism toward his situation, President Roosevelt’s ability to lead the country out of the Depression and the world itself. I hate to say this, but I feel that the wrong actor had received the Oscar nomination. God knows I am a big fan of Giamatti. But if it had been left up to me, Considine would have received that nomination.
We finally come to Craig Bierko’s performance as Max Baer, champion boxer and Braddock’s final opponent in the movie. Baer’s character first makes his appearance in a championship fight against Primo Carnera, following Braddock’s surprising upset over Corn Griffin. From the start, he is portrayed as a brash and aggressive fighter who does not know when to quit. And it gets worse. Before I continue, I want to say that I have nothing against the actor who portrayed Baer. Like Crowe, Zellweger and Giamatti, Bierko had to do the best he could with the material given to him. And he did the best he could. Bierko, being an above-average actor, infused a great deal of energy and charisma into his portrayal of Baer. It seemed a shame that Howard’s direction, along with Hollingsworth and Goldman’s script forced Bierko to portray Baer as some kind of callous thug who felt no remorse for killing two other fighters in the ring and was not above needling Braddock at a Manhattan nightclub by making suggestive remarks about Mae.
Baer’s son, Max Baer Jr. (”THE BEVERLY HILLIBILLIES”) had been naturally outraged by what he deemed was the movie’s false portrayal of the boxer. What the movie failed to convey was that Baer had only killed one man in the ring – Frankie Campbell – and had been so shaken up by the other man’s death that it affected his boxing career for several years. Nor did Baer ever make any suggestive remarks toward Mae Braddock. He also hugged and congratulated Braddock following the latter’s June 1935 victory. I really do not know why Howard thought it was necessary to turn Baer into a one-note villain. Someone claimed that the movie needed a nemesis for Braddock that seemed more solid than the vague notion of the Depression. If that is true, I believe that Howard and the movie’s screenwriters turned Baer into a villain for nothing. As far as I am concerned, the Great Depression made an effective and frightening nemesis for Braddock. This was brilliantly conveyed in Braddock’s bout with Art Lasky. At one point in this sequence, the New Jersey boxer seemed to be on the verge of defeat . . . until his memories of his family and how the Depression had affected them . . . urged him to a hard-won victory. Sequences like the Braddock-Lasky fight and Braddock’s search for Mike Wilson in the Central Park Hooverville made the Great Depression a more effective nemesis than the one-dimensional and crude behavior of a falsely portrayed Max Baer ever could.
Despite the movie’s badly written portrayal of Baer, and slightly uninteresting major characters like James and Mae Braddock, and Joe Gould; ”CINDERELLA MAN” is still an excellent biopic that featured exciting boxing sequences. More importantly, it is one of the few Hollywood films that revealed an in-depth look into one of the country’s most traumatic periods – namely the Great Depression. Flawed or not, I believe that it is still worth watching.
Below is my current list of favorite movies set in the 1920s: FAVORITE MOVIES SET IN THE 1970s
1. American Gangster (2007) - Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe starred in this biopic about former Harlem drug kingpin, Frank Lucas and Richie Roberts, the Newark police detective who finally caught him. Ridley Scott directed this energetic tale.
2. Munich (2005) - Steven Spielberg directed this tense drama about Israel's retaliation against the men who committed the Munich massacre at the 1972 Summer Olympics. Eric Bana, Daniel Craig and Ciarán Hinds starred.
3. Rush (2013) - Ron Howard directed this account of the sports rivalry between James Hunt and Niki Lauda during the 1976 Formula One auto racing season. Chris Hemsworth and Daniel Brühl starred.
4. Casino (1995) - Martin Scorsese directed this crime drama about rise and downfall of a gambler and enforcer sent West to run a Mob-owned Las Vegas casino. Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci and Sharon Stone starred.
5. Super 8 (2011) - J.J. Abrams directed this science-fiction thriller about a group of young teens who stumble across a dangerous presence in their town, after witnessing a train accident, while shooting their own 8mm film. Joel Courtney, Elle Fanning and Kyle Chandler starred.
6. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (2011) - Gary Oldman starred as George Smiley in this recent adaptation of John le Carré's 1974 novel about the hunt for a Soviet mole in MI-6. Tomas Alfredson directed.
7. Apollo 13(1995) - Ron Howard directed this dramatic account about the failed Apollo 13 mission in April 1970. Tom Hanks, Bill Paxton and Kevin Bacon starred.
8. Nixon (1995) - Oliver Stone directed this biopic about President Richard M. Nixon. The movie starred Anthony Hopkins and Joan Allen.
9. Starsky and Hutch (2004) - Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson starred in this comedic movie adaptation of the 70s television series about two street cops hunting down a drug kingpin. Directed by Todd Phillips, the movie also starred Vince Vaughn, Jason Bateman and Snoop Dogg.
10. Frost/Nixon (2008) - Ron Howard directed this adaptation of the stage play about David Frost's interviews with former President Richard Nixon in 1977. Frank Langella and Michael Sheen starred.
