(Very) Short Takes: "MIB 3", "Madagascar 3", "21 Jump Street", "The Intouchables".

Sometimes adaptations of TV shows work better than they should, which happens to be the case with 21 Jump Street. Recurring to the modern fad of bromances, this one has former high school enemies Morton Schmidt (Hill) and Greg Jenko (Tatum) become best friends during their training at Police Academy. The geek learns from the jock (no need to point out who plays what, right?) and soon the roles are once again inverted when they're sent back to high school on an undercover assignment. The film doesn't really make an effort to be much more than it should be, although it has to be said that when compared to recent comedies, this one -gasp-is surprisingly funny throughout. Hill and Tatum don't stretch their acting muscles beyond what we know them for, but the screenplay and the high-spirited direction of dynamic duo Lord and Miller make it pleasant, sometimes hilarious(despite moments of massive eye-rolling) and actually rather sweet.

Those who take so much pride in belittling Hollywood for its mundane, lowbrow sensibilities, and brag about the wonders of European cinema should be eating their words while watching The Intouchables. The movie isn't just proof that even the French can do crappy cinema, it's also proof that they have seen something they want to emulate in the lowbrow Hollywood movies they criticize so much. This "feel good" flick, was "inspired by true events" and shows us how Driss, a poor man from the Parisian projects (Omar Sy) injects new life to lonesome, millionaire tetraplegic Philippe (Francois Cluzet). The movie feels like a montage of everything that's wrong with how movies choose to treat their audiences - there is nary a moment that doesn't feel calculated and overstudied - and while its magical negro center might be excused by France's lack of racist self-awareness, there is much to be said about the way in which it reduces its characters to silly archetypes, nothing but shadows of real humans.

If you enjoyed Madagascar and Madagascar 2, this unnecessary sequel is just what you were looking for. There isn't much to add to this series which by now has become a purely money-making enterprise. This time around, the escaped zoo animals join a circus and travel across Europe as they try to avoid being caught by a psychotic Animal Control officer. The movie is aimed at children who will undoubtedly be enthralled by the simple humor, visual gags and colorful situations. Thinking adults however might be offended by the film's complete lack of subtlety, especially because there aren't any cheap jokes it shies away from (including countless punches at how Europeans are "weird"). From its use of Katy Perry, to the way in which it avoids taking any real risks, this is one of those movies you know were better than the previous chapter but still won't remember the day after you've seen it.

Men in Black 3 seems to be rooted on a strange thirst for 90s nostalgia, that has invaded movie screens recently. While the first installment was groundbreaking and helped establish Will Smith as the king of summer movies, the ten years that have gone by after the sequel have proved that time isn't always forgiving. Tommy Lee Jones practically disappears for the entire movie and is replaced by Josh Brolin (never a bad thing to be honest) who plays a younger version of his character. The film's time-travel premise gives path to many plot holes, confusion and all the issues brought on by bending time, but despite its shortcomings (Will Smith isn't half as charismatic onscreen as he used to be) the film results rather enjoyable.

Grades
21 Jump Street **½
The Intouchables *
Madgascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted **
Men in Black 3 **

While I Was Gone...

...I did not get engaged to an average looking, stock actor, but hey anytime's a good time to see some Anne right?
What I did however was realize how lost I am without internet at home.
After waiting for an entire week for the people to come fix my connection (does that happen everywhere or am I victim of Third World-ism?) today I'm posting or what has seemed like an eternity.
So to make up for the lost time let's see what happened while I was gone...
I saw "Nothing But the Truth" which turned out to be a great movie, not the silly, Ashley Judd-esque thriller I was expecting.
It seems "Slumdog Millionaire" got Danny Boyle the DGA award. This one was a shoe-in, they all love the direction, now it pretty much has a clean path towards the big one at the Kodak.
I also saw the simply awful "Seven Pounds", most of the time I like to make up my own opinion about movies and see everything even when the critical reception has been awful, but this time I wish I'd been paying attention.
Well I went on discount day so I can't be that stingy about it.
I also re-wacthed "Revolutionary Road" (how did they snub Thomas Newman's score is a head scracther), attended a screening of "Bride Wars" which wasn't half as terrible as I thought it'd be. Best thing to do for movies like this is go with your closest friends when you're all in need for some light, make that very light, fun. I fell the minute I saw Anne Hathaway in short shorts, dancing with a male stripper and doing the sexiest version of "the robot" ever (I always fall for dance-offs).
Don't watch this movie with feminists, lesbians or straight men; they will either kill you or try to exert a great revenge on you after watching this.
Oh and I was shocked, shocked to learn that "Kung-Fu Panda" swept the Annies leaving "WALL-E" empty-handed. What the hell went wrong there?
Anyone care to answer do so, I've missed the "blog talk".

Hancock *1/2

Director: Peter Berg

Cast: Will Smith, Charlize Theron, Jason Bateman

Apparently it's Will Smith's world and we're just living in it.

Or so seems to be the fuel behind "Hancock"; a summer movie that should've been hamrless, explosive fun, but becomes so condescending to the audience that at one point you start wondering why did you even buy the ticket to see it.

With the idea that everyone on Earth loves Smith (G-d forbid if you don't), the story has him playing John Hancock, an immortal, invincible man who has the physical traits of a superhero, but acts like a junkie.

He spends his days sleeping and drinking. Whenever a crime occurs he comes to save the day, but detroys trains, cars and infrastructure in the process.

Villains and victims hate him and people calling him an "asshole" becomes a sort of motif in the movie.

This gets to the point where the city of Los Angeles demands he is incarcerated for damages.

Enter Ray Embrey (Bateman) an idealistic publicist who sees in Hancock what nobody else does: a chance for redemption.

In the best Hollywood way he reforms the, not so heroic, hero and turns him into what comic books tell us he should be like, all to the dismay of his wife Mary (Theron) who thinks Hancock can only bring danger to her family.

But there is a dark past to Hancock, one that holds the key to the past he doesn't remember and that sinks the film into dramatic territory it can't pull off.

"Hancock" begins with promise as it explores the side effects of being a superhero. Who hasn't wondered how the cities recover so fast after final battles?

But as you watch the film you also begin to realize that the whole hero thing becomes a lazy metaphor for what it's like to be a celebrity nowadays.

Hancock isn't liked and he often does more wrong than good, but the media pays so much attention to him that he becomes an easy target for martyrdom.

Watching him struggle with issues that "normal" people deal with in private, you will remember all those starlets who plague the press every day with their scandals.

Like them, Hancock wallows in the mysery that comes with being "different", as if that is justification for his irreverence.

Shot with what can be described as reality show aesthetics, the cinematographer loves doing awkward reaction shots, particularly with Theron that announce plot twists ages before they come (and don't really help the actors look good, except for Bateman who owns the film).

The sad part is that the film as a whole could've exploited this and become a parody of sorts, it only works when it's being silly fun, but it takes itself too importantly and deals with the sort of double morality that is inherent from its very casting.

You know when it starts that while you may dislike Smith at the beginning, there's no way the feeling will remain the same by film's end.

But director Berg couldn't care less about the audience and knowing that the film would make a profit regardless of how incoherent it turns, he inserts subplots that drag and feel like lazy backup plans.

The themes "Hancock" deals with have been explored in much better films (like "The Incredibles" for one) and while its attempts at emotional depth come off as good intentions, sometimes all we really want from our heroes is that they save us.