"The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" - Never Meet (and Shoot) Your Heroes

*I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie, so...SPOILERS. Though one could argue the title, and history, has already spoiled the main event of the film.

With a lot of people seemingly just now realizing Brad Pitt can act with Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood and Ad Astra, I decided to go with The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford for this month’s western. I have liked Pitt’s work for years, and 12 Monkeys was the first time I saw him more as an actor than a face. He has plenty of great roles under his belt, but I consider his work in this film some of his best. The Jesse James of this film is a mean, brutal, reflective, paranoid, charismatic, and generally complex character, and Pitt handles every element with ease. Perhaps it’s the meta-quality of the film that makes it stand out for me, as Jesse James was a celebrity of the time, Pitt could easily find common ground in that area. How often must Pitt deal with people in his life that come to him with a certain expectation of who he is based on performances and tabloid stories rather than his actual self. Jesse James, at least in the film (and probably in real life), also had to deal with perceptions of him compared to the real, very human, man he really was. Watching Pitt navigate that character is just one of the many pleasures of this underseen, understated western. 

Myth Vs. Reality

It should be clear by my previous choices for westerns in recent months that I prefer non-traditional, or modern westerns. I enjoy traditional westerns, but the westerns I want to own and revisit from time to time usually need to be a bit different, and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford certainly qualifies. In fact, the story of Jesse James is the perfect subject for a modern western, because, just like Jesse James, the myth of the Old West time period compared to historical reality is often very different.

In the film, Robert Ford starts off idolizing Jesse James and his gang because he believed the stories he read as a child, which made James out to be a Robin Hood type hero. A big part of the reason Ford eventually betrays James is because he is disillusioned with James after meeting him; don’t meet your heroes, and all that. This allows the film to be a statement about celebrity, as well, and not just in regards to James. Ford becomes a celebrity after killing James, and he gets a taste of the downfall of having your reputation arrive before you. The film is a bit of a condemnation of celebrity culture and the dangers of chasing stardom at the expense of your soul. That element alone resonates with me for days after each viewing because the ending is so depressing and perfect, with Robert Ford dying as a result of his quest for celebrity, with nothing about his life turning out the way he had hoped. 

Much like Robert Ford’s disillusionment, researching the Old West also leads to a bit of disappointment when compared to the Hollywood version we’ve seen for years. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is one of many westerns that highlights the reality of the era rather than glorifying it. 

The most obvious example that this is not a traditional western is the gunfight between Dick Liddil, Wood Hite, and Robert Ford. Dick and Wood shoot at each other at nearly point blank range, unloading their guns without either of them inflicting a mortal wound. Just like Unforgiven (which I will also write about in the future), the shootout is meant to show that when it comes to actually pulling a trigger a lot of factors come into play and the result is more sloppy than cinematic. I love a good Old West shootout as much as anyone, but I also appreciate realism. We all like to think we could be Clint Eastwood when the chips are down, but more likely most of us would be like Dick Liddil, missing shot after shot as we fall out of bed.

Aside from the shootouts, I love it when historical films highlight the mundane day-to-day life of the time period. Travel time and communication plays a big factor in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. People are often gone because a trip from place to place takes weeks. Word travels slowly, so scheming is a bit easier as is hiding from people. Robert Ford is only forced to play his hand when Jesse reads a newspaper article. It’s a slow time, and the film replicates it poetically rather than in a boring manner.

I hate to refer to a film as a “tone poem” at this point, mainly because I’ve overused it over the years, especially in reference to films like those of Terence Malick (whose later films make for an easy comparison to The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford). It’s not that it doesn’t fit, because it certainly does, but I just feel like it has become my go-to descriptor for a movie others might consider boring. I guess I just need to start being blunt about: a lot of people find this film boring, and I can understand why. But I find each frame beautiful and compelling, even when nothing is going on. 

Anyone who might find this film boring is probably just dealing with incorrect expectations. Many people still want their westerns to be old-fashioned, filled with stand-offs and shoot-outs. I still like that stuff, too, but I knew going in that this movie wasn’t promising anything like that. Perhaps it’s the title. Speaking of which...

TAOJJBTCRF, and Other Reasons Why This Movie May Have Failed Financially.

You may have noticed I have made no effort to shorten the title of this film. First off, the facetious shortening in the title of this section looks pretty stupid. Secondly, a title this long should just be embraced at this point. It is the title of the book the film is based on, and, according to IMDb trivia, Brad Pitt insisted that the title remain. 

I like the title, but for years after this movie came out I would always get a weird look when I recommended it. I had similar issues with The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (another movie I love and will write about soon). I would get into a conversation with someone about westerns and recommend these two films and just get a weird look after spitting out these mouthfuls of titles. If just calling this film The Assassination of Jesse James would have made it more popular, I wish they would have altered it a bit.

Title aside, this film was never going to be a huge success. The aforementioned tone poem aspect is usually an indicator that not many people are going to bother with the movie. Plus, it’s on the long side, and it’s just not a traditional film. All the things I like about this movie are also the things that most likely kept it from being a success. I could accept that if this film had a bunch of nobodies in it, but how did this happen with Brad Pitt as Jesse James?

I remember when this movie (kind of) came out in theaters. I had seen the previews and was very excited to see it, even reading the book beforehand. I thought it looked amazing. The release date came and went and no theaters near me picked it up. It eventually left theaters entirely never getting close to me. (I didn’t check Louisville [an hour and a half away] at the time, but Evansville [an hour away and my go-to for smaller films] never got it.) I couldn’t believe it. Brad Pitt’s new movie did not get a wide release. This was the first time I recognized the death of star power. Years ago, just having someone like Pitt in a movie would warrant at least a small wide release. But now, it doesn’t matter. If a studio doesn’t think the film can make a definite profit, then it doesn’t matter who’s in the cast; that movie is not getting a wide release. It’s always annoyed me so much, especially living in the Midwest. I just want studios to let the audience decide. Give the film a week in wide release, especially since everything is digital now and doesn’t require expensive film reels dispersed nationwide. But it won’t happen thanks to streaming and whatnot. I just wish so much that I had the chance to see this on the big screen.

Roger Deakins didn't win for this?

Until he won for Blade Runner 2049, Roger Deakins’s losing streak at the Oscars for Best Cinematography was a cruel joke. This man has made some of the most beautiful films ever made, and he somehow got passed over each year, including the year The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford came out. Deakins lost to Robert Elswit for There Will Be Blood, so it’s hard to be too mad about that, especially when you realize Deakins was double nominated for this and No Country for Old Men, and he most likely split votes because of it. This film is special, though, because he created such a unique western look for the film.

The narrated moments that show parts of Jesse’s daily life look like moving daguerreotypes of the time, and it’s a magical effect. Not to mention the train sequence early in the film, which Deakins claims is one of his finest achievements. His work in this film is why I want to see the longer cut of the film that was released at festivals. 

Deakins claimed in an interview that Criterion isn’t interested in releasing it (pretty much the only way it could happen). Why the people who chose to give Armageddon a special edition won’t touch this is beyond me. Of course, I want just want to see more of this movie overall, but I also want to see all the work Deakins did that didn’t make it. Apparently there was a four-hour cut originally, but writer/director Andrew Dominik claims he’s happy with the theatrical cut. With all due respect, let us be the judge of that.

I suppose that sums up how I feel about this movie. It’s a nearly three hour, slow moving treatise on celebrity and myths, and I want at least another hour of it.

Random Thoughts 

"The president of the Confederacy discerned his wife's needs and satisfied them, with the utmost skill and the utmost courtesy."

Bob sitting down just as chow is called and everyone else gets up is such a perfect introduction to his awkward, out of place character.

God, Garrett Dillahunt is so good at looking stupid.

Sam Shepard sees through Bob's bullshit immediately. 

"Well, what am I supposed to say to that?"

"Sidekick?!"

"So you can examine my grit and intelligence."

"I don't know what it is about you, but the more you talk, the more you give me the willies."

I don't know why, but it makes me laugh when Frank calls Jesse "dingus."

The approach of the train has so many beautiful moments: the train hitting the camera and continuing forward, the flashing lights revealing the robbers, Jesse's silhouette as the train approaches, etc. Not to mention the score.

"I about heard all I want to about sidekicks."

I wish Shepard was in this longer. I could watch him talk shit to Casey Affleck and Sam Rockwell all day.

What happened to Paul Schneider? After he left Parks and Rec, he has worked sparingly. He gave an interview about being more selective in his work, but it just seems strange to drop off as much as he has.

Brad Pitt's fake laugh when he visits the Fords after Renner's death is amazing. 

This movie could also be called The Many Tense Conversations of Jesse James with Ed Miller, Dick Liddil, Charley Ford, Robert Ford, and Others.

Ted Levine!

I don't mind the casting of James Carville as the governor, but it is a but distracting.

The noise Pitt makes when he says he could see the "gears grinding" after he almost cut Bob's throat might be my favorite moment from his career.

So much of this film is shot through that old timey glass that obscures the view a bit. It's like the era itself: everything we know about it is a bit blurry, the full vision forever elusive. Sorry for the poetic analysis; this movie brings that out in me.

The actual death feels staged like a play, which is, of course, fitting since the Fords would go on to put on the play.

Sam Rockwell is so good during the play sequences, first acting terribly, and finally becoming incredibly dark.

Everything after Jesse is killed is my favorite part of the film. The transition of Bob from annoying murderous fanboy to tragic man of regret is perfect.

"Charley was only expected not to slouch, or mutter. And to transport his sicknesses to the alley before letting them go."

I love Nick Cave's score, and his cameo singing a folk song about Jesse James.

I can't think of another film that truly made me end up liking, or at least sympathizing with, a character I initially hated. A lot of that is because of Affleck’s performance, which I still consider the best of his career.

Because of that, the last moment of the film now gives me chills and nearly made me cry this time.

..

Weird '90s Comedy Trilogy #2: "Glory Daze"

*I write every article under the assumption that the reader has seen the movie, so...SPOILERS.

For part two of my weird comedy trilogy of the ‘90s, I’m revisiting Glory Daze, which was written and directed by Rich Wilkes, the co-writer of The Stöned Age. This film about coming to terms with the end of college could easily have come and gone without notice, but the cast made it stand out, especially as many of them became increasingly famous afterwards. For me, this movie stands out because of a few random moments that my brother and I still quote. Revisiting it, however, made me realize how much I’ve aged since I last watched it.

This movie made me feel old.

I first watched this movie back in the ‘90s, when I was not even in high school, so I just found it to be a weird little college comedy. Now that I’ve gone through college and am now a parent in my mid-30s, I see it a bit differently. It’s still a weird movie, and I like it for that (more on that later), but what struck me the most was how much I hated Ben Affleck’s character this time around. I can’t remember if I found the lovesick, whiny, pretentious, and flat out dick Affleck this annoying originally. I’m afraid I may have found him interesting at best and relatable at worst. This time around, I related more with his father, who is presented here as a soulless art-hating asshole.

It might be the art major stuff that bothered me the most. What was Affleck’s goal? Had anyone ever told him he had talent? He didn’t seem to be passionate about art, since his final project was only mentioned in a couple scenes. He certainly wasn’t presented as an artist in his downtime. He was more interested in just fucking off all day and wanting to do that for the rest of his life. So when his dad yells, “Go out there and see how many people are going to pay you to arrange garbage in neat little piles!” I wanted to go through the screen and high-five him, but I’m supposed to want to punch him.

I think a lot of it has to do with Affleck’s narration, both the content and the delivery. Affleck seems to be really phoning it in, but can you blame him with lines like “I’m Jack, happy-go-fucking-lucky as the day I was born” and “he changed majors more than he changed his underwear”?

Affleck does get called out for his shit multiple times throughout the movie, so perhaps we’re meant to hate him, but I don’t think we’re supposed to hate him this much. I think he’s meant to be a bit annoying but overall a protagonist we relate to and want to see succeed. But I just wanted to see him fail and finally realize what a bitch he’s been. He does sort of realize it by the end, but not enough to my liking.

Affleck aside, I hated most of the rest of the “crew,” as well. Mickey, who inexplicably dresses like Charlie Brown at one point, is just as whiny and annoying. Sam Rockwell’s character is a complete dick to his fiancée. French Stewart is actually more tolerable than I remember, so he gets a pass. The only one who is living an honest life is Slosh, who is presented as the fuck-up of the group. Once again, this is most likely intentional (the fuck-up is actually the guy who has it figured out!), but it seems tossed in like an afterthought near the end rather than getting fully explored.

I’m still young enough to relate to the fears all of these characters, especially Affleck, are going through, but I’m also old enough to want to tell them all to grow the fuck up. Who doesn’t want to just keep partying aimlessly and hanging out with their friends every day? But like Affleck’s movie dad says, “You’ve had four years to be happy and do what you want.” It’s meant to be some old man not understanding the young line, but I agree with it. Also, everyone looks back on those college (or any other carefree moment in life) with rose-colored glasses. Yeah, when you get a job, get married, have kids, etc. life becomes a bit more tame. But there’s something to be said for building a life for yourself and others compared to scrounging up beer money for the weekend and getting fucked up every day. Plus, your body eventually can’t handle that type of drinking all the time, anyway. I’m not saying it’s bad to want to that time of your life to last longer or to revisit it, but it’s not all it’s cracked up to be, either.

I still like this movie for all the little odd moments.

Most of my favorite weird moments will be mentioned in the Random Thoughts section, but I wanted to comment about them a bit in general. I read somewhere (not sure where and how many people are reading this anyway and how many of them are wanting to fact check me?) that this was semi-autobiographical. I’m sure that means Wilkes went through a similar experience, wanting his college days to last forever and perhaps feuding with his parents about going to college for filmmaking or writing. But something tells me that all the random moments in this film are from his experiences in college, too.

There must have been a truck rental dude like McConaughey. He must have seen a man slapping a fish. He probably almost pissed on a dude in the bushes who then asked about a band of orcs and claimed that he, in fact, had not been in the bushes. There must have been some dickhead jokester handing out caps and gowns.

It doesn’t matter whether these moments really happened or not, but their inclusion makes this movie stand out. It’s nothing new to make a film about wanting to cling to your youth; it is something new to devote an entire scene to a miserable truck rental salesman; it’s something new to cut to a man slapping a fish in the middle of a “my parents don’t understand me” scene. That’s the kind of stuff that will bring me back to this movie, even if I do cringe when I see Affleck’s stupid face and hear his pathetic thoughts.

Random Thoughts

Oscar winners in this movie: Affleck, Damon, Rockwell, McConaughey. Crazy.

One of the worst DVD covers ever. And it makes no sense because the poster is okay. I guess they really wanted us to know Affleck was in it, and that he had a stupid face.

McConaughey’s cameo is my favorite part of this movie. “Me and the missus, couple weeks ago come out here in this particular machine. Her mother rode along with us. We got here. Ten minutes later, hell, they hit the road. I ain't seen her since. I don't know. God damn. It's what it’s all about…”

It's hard to be sympathetic for Affleck. The narration is one thing, but we're supposed to care about this guy just because he misses his ex and doesn't want to grow up? There just doesn't seem to be much reason for him to be pissed. Rhys-Davies does call him out on it, but it doesn't make it any easier to like him. He should have gotten over being pissed about being from the suburbs his freshman year, if not sooner.

Subtle touch with Affleck literally stopping the clock during the scene in which he convinces everyone to stay at college another year.

What is with Mickey's wardrobe? Charlie Brown one scene, half buttoned overalls the next? Why would Milano want to get with that?

“I wasn't in the bushes, man.”

Affleck's fucking dog tags…Stolen valor, fucker!

It's all very ‘90s, which I like.

Affleck sort of quoting The Catcher in the Rye. Come on! Although that’s another narrator I dislike more and more with age.

“We're not so happy you got a degree in art.”

“I want to do what I want my whole life.”

What restaurant serves a whole...duck?...to be carved by the diners? Is this some fancy thing I've never experienced?

Brendan Fraser and Leah Remini on the bus are great. “You’re lucky I don’t know karate!”

Also, the bus driver taking Affleck’s shirt is pretty great.

Because of this movie, there is a punk song with Sam Rockwell singing. That alone justifies its existence.

Remember when trailers were considered special features? What an odd trio of previews.

"Iron Man 2"

Iron Man 2 - Directed by Jon Favreau, written by Justin Theroux, starring Robert Downey, Jr., Mickey Rourke, Sam Rockwell, Don Cheadle, and Gwyneth Paltrow - Rated PG-13

The Kurgan and Ivan Vanko might be distant relatives (although The Kurgan is a bit more awesome).

Iron Man was a bit of a surprise for me when it came out in 2008. I’ve always been more of an X-Men and Batman fan, so I went to check it out with fairly low expectations. When I walked out of the theatre I had become a fan of Tony Stark. The first movie had plenty of action, wit, and fun. Most importantly, Iron Man was a film that featured a near perfect performance from Robert Downey, Jr. and it was a film that didn’t take itself too seriously. I’m happy to say that all of the above applies to Iron Man 2.

The word “busy” would also apply to Iron Man 2. As with most superhero sequels, the kitchen sink approach is taken. This can hurt some films, but director (and co-star) Jon Favreau handles the multiple plot points well. Tony Stark is dealing with a lot of issues this time around. His homemade chest reactor contains an element that is killing him, he’s being hassled by the government to turn over his Iron Man suit, the Russian son of his dad’s former business partner is trying to kill him, Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) is hanging around talking about the Avengers, a weapons rival (Sam Rockwell) is making trouble, and he still has the same issues from the last film with Rhodey (Don Cheadle) and Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow). Sounds like a bit of a mess, doesn’t it?

It is actually very easy to follow, though. Things move quickly at first, with Tony constantly on the move and acting as reckless as ever. This is standard sequel stuff. The audience already knows the main characters, so no introductions are needed. What is needed is constant movement. That’s fine. I enjoy a quick paced film. But it’s nice when a movie slows down a bit, as well. The strange thing about Iron Man 2 is that it seems to be going 100 mph during the first half, then it drops down to a leisurely 30 mph, only to crank it back up by the end. I’m sure some people will claim that this film has “pacing issues,” but I actually enjoyed the speed of the film.

But who cares about pacing, right? This film is all about the characters and there are a lot of them. I won’t waste too much time talking about the returning cast, if you liked Downey, Jr. the first time, then you’ll like him again. Same goes for Paltrow. And Don Cheadle is a suitable replacement for Terrence Howard.

The newcomers really get to shine in this one. Mickey Rourke plays villain Ivan Vanko with a great understated menace, plus he looks cool. I know the whole walking away from an explosion and not looking at it has become a cliché, but I forgive the filmmakers for it because it just seems fitting for Mickey Rourke to walk towards the camera with flames erupting behind him. As for the understated menace, you can see it in every scene of dialogue with Vanko. You truly get the impression that he is capable of extreme violence at any moment

Sam Rockwell is also a great addition to the cast as weapons manufacturer Justin Hammer. His interactions with Downey, Jr. are amusing and his general showmanship throughout the movie is quite funny. Rockwell has been consistently impressive lately in films like The Assassination of Jesse James… and Moon. It’s good to see him in a high profile release like this because he deserves a larger audience.

Scarlett Johansson is another high profile addition to the cast as Tony’s suspicious new assistant. Let’s be realistic here, there’s no secret to her character. If you’ve seen any marketing, then you know that she is not just a helper; she’s actually a secret agent working with S.H.I.E.L.D. She gets an entertaining action sequence in the film but for the most part she seemed like an unnecessary addition to the cast, but it didn’t bother me all that much.

A much more interesting casting choice is John Slattery as Tony’s father, Howard, in archive footage. He basically gets to act like his character from “Mad Men.” It’s just something that fans of that show will find amusing. Another amusing choice is Garry Shandling as a senator trying to get Tony’s suit.

The abundance of characters doesn’t mean the film is lacking in action or comedy, there’s more of both this time around. Tony’s birthday party was quite funny and there’s an excellent in-joke for people aware of the other Marvel characters…I’ll give you a hint, it involves a shield. (Stick around after the credits for another crossover tease.) So expect to laugh quite a few times.

The action is even better this time around, as well. Ivan Vanko’s attack at the Monaco car race was flat out awesome and of course there are some great action scenes during the climax of the film.

When it comes to movies I feel that more, more, more usually means less quality. I’m glad to say that’s not the case with Iron Man 2. Yes, there is certainly a lot more to this film than the original, but it’s handled well and it makes for a good time at the movies. What else could you ask for?

"Gentlemen Broncos" / "Universal Soldier: Regeneration"

Gentlemen Broncos - Directed and co-written by Jared Hess, starring Michael Angarano, Sam Rockwell, and Jemaine Clement - Rated PG-13

The Evil Kurgan likes his comedy as weird as possible.

Gentlemen Broncos is the latest film from Jared Hess (Napoleon Dynamite, Nacho Libre) and if you haven't heard of it that's because the studio barely gave it a theatrical release. But it's finally on DVD and I thought it was well worth the wait. But if you didn't like Hess' previous films, then I can almost guarantee that you won't like this one.

Gentlemen Broncos is about Benjamin, a home schooled teenager who loves to write fantasy fiction. The story revolves around Benjamin's fantasy novel, "Yeast Lords: The Bronco Years." His new friends try to make a film version of it and his favorite author, Ronald Chevalier (Clement), steals the story and publishes it as his own. This premise allows for the film's strongest point: the fantasy story sequences.

In these sequences, a hilarious Sam Rockwell plays both Bronco (Benjamin's bearded, redneck hero) and Brutus (Clement's altered, "tranny" hero). Each version is hilarious and Rockwell is impressive in his second multiple part role of 2009. I don't want to spoil any of his lines, but I found nearly everything he said to be funny.

But it's all a different kind of funny. This is not broad comedy (even though it does feature a decent amount of gross out humor - more on that later). I hate to use the word quirky since it is how every Hess movie is described, but it is perfectly fitting. This is a quirky movie. It's very weird at times and sometimes the jokes need a few minutes (or even a second viewing) to sink in. Once you accept that it is goofy and some of it makes absolutely no sense, then you should free yourself up to laugh quite a bit.

The gross out humor might turn some people away. In fact, everything I've come across that is negative for the film (of which there is plenty) has mentioned that Hess has relied on gross out humor to salvage any comedy for this movie. I would completely disagree. Sure, the movie is gross at times (the snake defecation, the puke-kiss, etc.) but it certainly doesn't rely on it. In fact, I found some of it a bit funny.

The gross out humor doesn't make the movie or anything, though. Gentlemen Broncos is all about the fantasy sequences and it's other comedic weapon: Jemaine Clement. The "Flight of the Conchords" star is absolutely hilarious in this. I read that Hess asked him to read his lines like Michael York and that is obviously going on and Clement nails it. His voice makes mediocre lines funny. But it helps that he has some of the best lines of the film as well. If nothing else, I suggest that everyone watch Clement's scenes in this film (which is something that even the negative reviews suggest). He even gets the funniest prop: an ever present bluetooth headset that he never uses. I just wish this film would have gained a larger audience so Clement could get some bigger roles.

Gentlemen Broncos isn't for everyone, but it's certainly for more people than the studio gave it credit for. This is not that different from Hess' earlier work. I think it stands right up there with Napoleon and Nacho. Maybe you won't like it as much as me, but I definitely think you'll find yourself laughing if you give it a chance.

Universal Soldier: Regeneration - Directed by John Hyams, starring Andrei Arlovski, Dolph Lundgren, and Jean-Claude Van Damme - Rated R

As utterly pointless and annoying as Bruce Banner's dad.

It's no secret that I am an unapologetic Jean-Claude Van Damme fan, so it shouldn't be a surprise that I decided to review this direct to video (DTV) release since I didn't catch anything new at the theatre this past weekend. How could I not review the return of Lundgren and Van Damme to the Universal Soldier franchise?

Unfortunately, I don't have much to say about this one. I was honestly expecting this to be Lundgren vs. Van Damme for an hour and a half with Andre Arlovski (a former UFC fighter) peppered in here and there. What I got was a starring vehicle for Arlovski, in which Van Damme doesn't factor in until the second half and Lundgren only features in for about fifteen minutes. Am I wrong in thinking the only appeal for this movie was Van Damme and Lundgren? If I am, and you're just looking for a mediocre action film, then by all means, rent this one.

If you're like me, though, I think you should save your time and money because this one was honestly disappointing. It has it's moments, sure, (the showdown between Van Damme and Lundgren was great but oh so short) but when I see Van Damme on the cover of a movie, I expect him to be the star. On top of that, the plot is some ridiculous Cold War-esque crap about a bomb blowing up Chernobyl. I wish they had had the budget to take this one out of Eastern Europe because it seems like that is the only place Van Damme films a movie these days.

I need to write a bit about Arlovski. It befuddles me as to why he would get more screen time than Van Damme or Lundgren, because he doesn't have half the screen presence of either of them. It would have been much better if his role didn't exist at all and Lundgren played the enemy unisol that Van Damme was brought in to take down. On top of the lack of screen presence, the choreographer obviously got pretty lazy with Arlovski's scenes because ninety percent of his fight scenes end with him on top of the guy punching his opponent's head repeatedly into the ground. Which would be fine if it was really brutal and only happened once or twice. But it's borderline comedic and it happens every five minutes it seems. At one point a guy jumps out a window and a few characters run over to look down at him. While they're watching, Arlovski trots onscreen and does his punch deal to the obviously unconscious body. It's just pointless and annoying, which kind of describes the entire film now that I think of it.

I was hoping that Van Damme would make a legitimate comeback after the praise he received for JCVD, but he went right back to his old ways with this one. What is really infuriating is that he turned down a role in The Expendables to make another video release that is most likely as mediocre as this film.

Universal Soldier: Regeneration is a failed attempt to rejuvenate a dead franchise and I'm afraid it also re-solidifies Van Damme as a strictly DTV star. Skip this unless you're a die hard like me and if that's the case, you've probably already seen it anyway.

"Moon"

Moon - Directed (and story) by Duncan Jones, starring Sam Rockwell - Rated R

Sci-fi films don't need action to be great.

I thought 2009 was a great year for sci-fi, well, action sci-fi, that is. As you can tell from my reviews of last year, I was completely okay with the action packed offerings of Avatar, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Terminator: Salvation, and especially District 9. (I know I’m in the minority in my enjoyment of a couple of these films, but I found the action to be quite suitable in Terminator and Transformers.) The more thought-provoking sci-fi took a backseat this year. Films like Knowing and Surrogates had a few ideas going for them, but they both have their problems. And the most interesting sci-fi film, The Box, fell flat at the box office (I imagine I’ll be defending that film for years to come). Out of all of this comes Duncan Jones’ Moon and it’s among my favorite films of 2009.

Moon is the story of Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), an astronaut who is near the end of a three year solo stint on the moon, harvesting Helium-3, a new energy source that keeps earth running. Well, Sam isn’t completely on his own, he’s accompanied by his faithful robot, GERTY (amusingly voiced by Kevin Spacey). Things start off smoothly enough until Sam finds someone else on the moon: himself, literally. I don’t want to go any further than that with the plot; suffice it to say that your mind will start running through all the possible answers to the situation.

This leads me to one of the film’s strong points. Moon is blatantly inspired by other, classic sci-fi films. You’ll see shots reminiscent of 2001: A Space Odyssey. You’ll hear music and see plot points that mirror Steven Soderbergh’s remake of Solaris. These are the two influences that stuck out to me, but there are plenty more. Those influences struck me because they serve a purpose regarding the story. Is GERTY evil like HAL? Is the second Sam Bell a creation of the first Sam’s mind or some kind of alien force? These were the thoughts running through my head as I watched and it added to my enjoyment of the film. I think the film is still enjoyable even without knowledge of other films, but knowing about them might help.

This is not to say that Moon doesn’t have a style all its own. The film looks great, especially since it was made for $5 million (an insanely small budget for a sci-fi film). If I would have guessed the amount it cost to make this, I would have said at least $30 million. But Duncan Jones went back to the old ways for this one. Each scene showing the harvesters and trucks on the moon was shot with miniatures, something I did not know until I watched the special features on the DVD. I’m not going to get all preachy and point fingers at CG gurus like George Lucas and James Cameron(I still enjoy all the glory CG can offer), but Jones does show that a sci-fi film can look great without breaking the bank.

The look of the film is one thing, but the atmosphere created by this film is hypnotic. Maybe it’s the way Jones captures the isolation of the moon base or maybe it’s the presence of GERTY, always lurking near Sam. Whatever it is, it worked on me. Duncan Jones created a believable world that I wanted to return to almost as soon as I finished my first viewing.

All of these elements hinge on one thing, however: Sam Rockwell. He gives one of the best performances of the year, or I should say he gives two of the best performances of the year. Rockwell truly makes it feel like there are two different people interacting with each other onscreen. What makes it a great performance is that the interactions between the two Sam’s are at times tense, hilarious, and even touching. The humor is the most important aspect, though. Movies like this can become deadly serious and borderline boring if the filmmakers are not careful, but that is not the case in Moon. The film puts a lot of weight on Rockwell’s shoulders and he carries it well. It’s unfortunate that he is not being mentioned more during awards season. Rockwell proves yet again that he deserves more starring roles.

Rockwell being ignored is one thing, but the film in general deserves much more attention. It was given a weak theatrical release (it wasn’t released anywhere near this area) and since it didn’t create a buzz along the lines of Paranormal Activity, it was pulled from theaters after grossing only $5 million (but hey, it made its budget back, and then some when you add the foreign market). But now it’s on DVD and if you like sci-fi at all, you should at the very least rent this great film.