London Boulevard

Let's see what we have here.  London Boulevard is the directorial debut of William Monahan, Academy Award-winning screenwriter of The Departed.  That sounds good.  Of course, he also wrote Edge of Darkness, which included radioactive children, which is less good.  On the other hand, Colin Farrell is in it, and I've really enjoyed him in the last few things I've seen him in (Fright Night and In Bruges), which almost completely makes up for how awful he was at the beginning of his career.  The supporting cast includes the always reliable Ray Winstone, the considerably less consistent David Thewlis, and the adorable Anna Friel.  Keira Knightley plays Farrell's romantic interest, too; while I'm not a big fan, Knightley isn't a bad actress --- she just seems to act in movies I don't want to watch.  When you add all that up, London Boulevard sounds like a pretty solid movie, if not a good one.  And yet, it took a year after its European release for the film to have a limited theatrical run in America.  Is this a misunderstood diamond in the rough, or is this (in the parlance of the UK) just some shite that should have gone direct to DVD? 

After being released from prison, Mitchell (Colin Farrell) is immediately picked up and reintroduced to the shady criminals that got him in trouble in the first place.  Mitchell didn't rat anybody out --- in fact, he's a bit of a legend for being a bad-ass --- so he's not going to get snuffed, but he's tired of that life and wants to move on.  Somehow, Mitchell manages to get a job as a bodyguard for reclusive actress/British tabloid fodder, Charlotte (Keira Knightley).  Charlotte has developed a bit of an anxiety disorder thanks to the constant badgering she has received from the paparazzi; I would say she is paranoid, but they really are out to get her, since the worse she gets, the better their headlines.

She doesn't seem overexposed at all

Taking care of Charlotte is surprisingly rewarding for Mitchell.  Aside from developing friendships that don't revolve around secrecy and being paid --- hold on...okay, his new gig isn't that different from his days as a thug.  Whatever.  Mitchell and Charlotte fall in love, the end.  Or not.  You see, ever since Mitchell got spung from the pokey, local crime boss Rob Gant (Ray Winstone) has been pestering Mitchell to flex some of that infamous bad-assery on his behalf.  Mitchell has refused politely and less politely, but Gant isn't the sort who takes "no" for an answer.  So who will come out on top in the end, gangster Mitchell or reformed Mitchell?

None of the acting in London Boulevard was too bad, but the leads weren't especially impressive.  Colin Farrell did about as much with the role as the script would allow, but the story relies heavily on him being totally bad-ass, and we don't see a whole lot of that.  Keira Knightley was fine as the strung-out celebrity, but her role was surprisingly small, given the initial movie trailer.

Rumor is Keira gained 1.5 lbs to play this role; that rumor may be exaggerated

While I didn't care for the individual performances by Farrell or Knightley, they did show some chemistry together, mostly due to Farrell being understated.  Luckily, the lack of overwhelming charm and charisma from the two headlining stars is more than made up by two stellar supporting performances.  David Thewlis played a habitually stoned manager/hanger-on of Charlotte, and he was great.  What I liked about him was how well he played up the nonchalance of a habitual drug user, without being over-the-top at all. 

This is easily the best work I've seen from Thewlis, although considering his non-Harry Potter career, that's not saying much.  Ray Winstone is great at playing tough guys, and this role was right in his wheelhouse (sorry, I've been playing a lot of MLB12: The Show).  Loud, violent, and scary: that's all you need to know about his performance here.  There are a lot of recognizable faces in the rest of the cast, but the only one who stood out was Ben Chaplin as a sniveling and stupid crook; it wasn't a great part, but Chaplin was suitably unsympathetic.  Stephen Graham and Eddie Marsan were both underutilized in small parts.  Anna Friel was almost completely unnecessary in what could have been a fun bit part, but just felt out of place in London Boulevard.

As William Monahan's first directorial feature, London Boulevard does a decent amount of things right.  The best scenes in the movie --- basically any time Farrell shares the screen with Thewlis or Winstone --- are snappy, well-edited and pretty awesome.  The violence is also fairly raw and abrasive (in a good way).

"I'm an artist at my chosen craft"

And yet, London Boulevard is a huge mess.  The first thing you'll notice is the variety and thickness of the British accents in the film; I enjoy the Brits, but even I had a hard time figuring out what was being said at times.  Worse, Monahan's adapted screenplay is all over the place.  The trailer makes this movie look pretty promising.  A tough guy trying to get out of the criminal life and protect his new life with the woman he loves.  Nothing wrong with that, at the very least, and it has the potential for greatness.  But here's the thing: this movie really isn't about that.  It's more of an odyssey for Mitchell as he adjusts to non-criminal life.  The subplot featuring his sister was absolutely useless.  The extended subplot featuring Mitchell's homeless buddy would have been useless, if not for the cheap shot it provides at the end of the film.  But what is worse, a useless subplot, or a seemingly unimportant part of the movie coming back at the very, very end and suddenly being improbably important?  And then there is the bit about the crooked parole officer, and the technical owner of a certain house...there's just a lot going on, but not in a fast-paced crime caper kind of way.  Chunks of this movie work, but they don't actually connect to each other in a narrative or thematic fashion.

That disconnect is really at the core of what keeps London Boulevard from working.  There are some good bits (the familiar overarching plot, the snappy banter in key scenes), but the pacing of the film as a whole is awful.  The story gets sidetracked by subplots with little to no payoff, Mitchell is attached to certain characters for reasons the viewer never really understands, and the core of the story --- Mitchell and Charlotte falling in love --- is rushed and left mostly unexplored and unexplained.

That's enough of that!

How do you screw up a British gangster movie with so much talent in the film?  By not focusing on the "gangster" part and not letting the talent interact with each other, I suppose.  I was already sorely disappointed in the film when it suddenly sealed the deal and earned my ire. 

I'd be pissed, too, if I starred in this

SPOILER ALERT: Mitch has just gone out of his way to keep himself and Charlotte safe, and he's leaving her house to get on a plane and meet up with her.  And then he gets the shit stabbed out of him.  Not by any of the famous actors in the cast, or even someone with a speaking part up to this point, but by a kid.  You see, Mitch gave his homeless buddy a knife to protect himself, the homeless guy gets beaten to death, and word on the street is that a kid did the deed; Mitch tracked the kid down and was seconds away from murdering him, but he stopped, presumably because he made a choice to change.  And then that stupid kid stabs him to death with his own knife, out of nowhere.  That...that is just awful.  It may not be the worst ending I've seen, but it is, at the very least, complete bullshit.  If the movie had been good up to that point, I would have been seriously upset, so at least London Boulevard made sure you had lost interest before doing something so stupid. 

For the record, that is one star each for David Thewlis and Ray Winstone.  The rest of this movie can curl up and die, for all I care.

Limitless

Finally!  Two years after The Hangover surprised the movie industry by being a ridiculous hit, someone from the cast has moved on to starring roles!  Yes, Bradly Cooper has apparently come of age in Hollywood; he has made a successful sequel, co-starred in The A-Team, and is now People magazine's "Sexiest Man Alive," which I assume he received after slaying Ryan Reynolds.  This is his first time carrying a major motion picture --- how did the new "it" man do?

Limitless is one of those movies that doesn't trust the audience to stick around for a slow-building plot.  Most of the film is told in a flashback, with some narration from Cooper in the lead role.  Apparently, he made a "miscalculation," which has led to his neighbor being murdered, with Cooper's character up next.  Did that hook you?  Probably not.  It's a pretty generic opening for a thriller.  Did it make sense?  I sure hope so, because that's about as much detail as the teaser bookends of this movie offer.  But I'll clear things up.  Eddie (Bradley Cooper) is a loser who fancies himself a writer.  He has a book deal, but he hasn't written a word in months.  Aside from his writing, Eddie spends his time mooching off his girlfriend, Lindy (Abbie Cornish), whose parents were aviation nuts.  That's just a logical guess on my part; these characters aren't terribly well-developed, so I just wanted to flesh her out a bit.  Anyway, Lindy dumps Eddie because he's a self-centered mooch who makes excuses and looks like he is a member of Blind Melon.

Sexiest Man Alive

Obviously, Eddie is having a bad day.  Immediately after the break-up talk, Eddie randomly bumps into his ex-brother-in-law, Vernon (Johnny Whitworth) who used to be a sleazy drug dealer.  Now, replace "used to" with "still is," and you have his character's history.  Vernon gives Eddie a single pill to cheer him up; Eddie takes it because his life is pretty awful and because he's an idiot who ingests mystery chemicals without asking what they are or what they do.  The next thing Eddie knows, he has seduced a married woman, cleaned his apartment, and written 40 excellent pages of his novel. 

Apparently, some people are productive when tripping balls

Of course, the effects wear off, so Eddie needs a fix from Vernon, who decides to be a jerk and make Eddie his errand boy to pay for the privilege of buying more of the drug, which he calls NZT-48.  This drug supposedly allows people to access 100% of their brain's capabilities, which explains the writing and the philandering, I guess.  After all, brains love sex and words.  Vernon is murdered by an unknown party who were also apparently looking for this rare drug.  They didn't find it.  Eddie did.  Now Eddie can get his life on track with a haircut, a new job, millions of dollars, and all the fancy stuff he could ever want because he is suddenly a genius at everything.  All thanks to drugs!  But living the high life doesn't come cheap, and Eddie finds himself faced with unruly Russian mobsters, a demanding boss, mystery people trying to steal his fix, and a permanently smug expression.

Okay, it's a clever ad campaign.  I still want to slap him.

Thank goodness drugs never have any negative repercussions, especially mystery drugs that are designed to influence they way your brain functions.

I wasn't terribly impressed with Bradley Cooper in this, his first big starring role.  He was okay, given the story, but being a mediocre actor with a stupid story is nothing special.  I will say that his character's long hair was the least believable handsome-actor-obviously-wearing-an-ugly-wig I've seen since John Cusack in Being John Malkovich.  Aside from that, Cooper alternates smugness with wimpy panicky moments.  Abbie Cornish is decent as Eddie's responsible, sane, and pretty love interest. 

She is essentially designed to be Eddie's moral sounding board, letting him know that doing drugs and lying isn't cool, which is as thankless a task as it sounds.  Robert DeNiro is okay as a super-duper international businessman, but the threat that his character promises is never followed through with.  Anna Friel has a bit part as Eddie's ex-wife, and she is far less attractive when make-up artists don't want her to be pretty.  Andrew Howard plays the Russian thug with more joy than anybody else in this cast, but it's a pretty standard role that has little new to offer.  Rounding out the cast, Tomas Arana is once again "that guy you don't trust to do the right thing."

Director Neil Burger handled Limitless with some spurts of imagination that seemed inspired by the title; the rest of the time, he was fairly awful.  First, the good: Burger used some pretty cool visuals to show how Eddie was using his brain more (the ceiling tiles turning into stock quotes, letters falling in his room, etc.), and I liked the recurring use of having a character literally step outside themselves to see their situation with new, drug-fueled, eyes.  Now, the bad: this was a predictable, cliche-ridden plot with shallow characters and no one to root for. 

Hero: lying, manipulative druggie.  Villain: hard-working immigrant

Oh, and the "zoom forward" effect that is used throughout the movie looks like the work of an uninspired music video director, circa-1995.  The plot is certainly to blame for a lot of the problems with Limitless, but it is ultimately up to the director to make a script into a good film.  Burger doesn't quite do that.

Immediately after finishing Limitless, I thought to myself that it wasn't great, but wasn't bad, either.  Hardly a recommendation, but not a head on a pike to warn others, either.  Then I started to think about it.  This is a movie that advocates ingesting mind-altering chemicals, despite horrible and fatal repercussions.  This is a film where the hero has a true love, but still bangs every other woman he encounters in the movie.  This is a story where a huge problem for Eddie is his limited supply of Limitless pills and he shows a remarkable ability to master any craft he pays any attention to.  Even more remarkably, Eddie apparently chooses not to learn anything about science and instead hires a random science dude to make more; even stranger, Eddie doesn't feed science guy any drugs to make him suddenly brilliant.  That is a pretty stupid plot hole for a movie that is supposed to be about being smart.  I think DeNiro was used poorly, and I would have really liked to see him (or anyone, really) out-think Eddie.

DeNiro, reacting to someone saying how much they loved Showtime

Aside from the gaping plot hole, Limitless isn't a bad thriller.  No, I never liked Eddie or any of the other characters, but I thought the premise was an interesting one.  There is a moral dilemma that arises when people significantly alter themselves, and I liked that notion, even if this film clearly wasn't going to delve into the subject.  Hell, this story does its best to avoid morality or guilt whenever possible; Eddie shows no emotion for anyone that has suffered because of him, even his innocent (and murdered) neighbor in the beginning of the film.  I also found it interesting to see drugs shown in such a positive light, even a fictional one with lethal side effects.  Sadly, taking a questionable stance on pharmaceuticals isn't enough to overcome the plot holes or the soulless characters.  The idea has some legs, but on the whole, this is a little underwhelming.