The Nines

Do you like Ryan Reynolds?  If you are watching The Nines, I hope the answer is "yes," because you get a lot of him.  Specifically, you get three characters played by Reynolds and a plot (or three) that centers around him.  This isn't just three short stories that showcase Reynolds' acting skills, though; there is an overarching story that ties the three plots together.  So...the same actors (it's not just Reynolds) play multiple roles in multiple stories in a movie with a big picture plot at its heart.  That doesn't sound pretentious at all, does it?  Well, sarcastic question, you haven't learned what that big picture plot is, yet.

Hint: the secret does not involve the power of beards

There are three short stories in The Nines, and they are helpfully separated by title screens indicating what each subsection is named: The Prisoner, Reality Television, and Knowing.  Each chapter features Ryan Reynolds as a guy with a G-name (Gary, Gavin, and Gabriel) with a different problem.  In The Prisoner, Gary is a goofy and not terribly bright television actor from a CSI-type show that winds up under house arrest after some accidental arson and a crack-cocaine binge.  In Reality Television, Gavin is a high-end writer that has to choose between standing by his best friend (and the star of his new pilot) and screwing her over to get his show on the air.  In Knowing, Gabriel is the creator of a World of Warcraft-type game that has to find help for his family when their car battery dies in the woods.  In each chapter, Melissa McCarthy (whose characters include Margaret, Melissa, and Mary) acts as someone who cares about G-name, whether as a friend, lover, or simply a concerned third party.  Similarly, Hope Davis plays characters (named Sarah, Susan, and Sierra) that are trying to get G-name alone, away from...something.  But what?  And what does the number nine have to do with any of this?

...and yes, rating Reynolds on a 1-10 scale is mentioned.

Right off the bat, the second the phrase "Part One: The Prisoner" popped on the screen, I knew I was in for something ostentatious.  Any time a filmmaker decides to separate a movie into chapters for the viewer, you know there is something pompous in the works.  The funny thing about The Prisoner is that it is actually kind of silly.  You don't get any sense of self-importance in this first bit, and that was a pleasant surprise.  Ryan Reynolds is fun to watch when he's being goofy, and his crack bender and its consequences were entertaining.  Of course, Part One ends with something strange and Part Two starts to get metatheatrical, with the camera assuming the part of a reality TV camera.  Part Two also shows some overlap between Gabriel's story and Gary's; it seems like they are spending at least some time in the same house, at the same time, but without seeing each other.  Weird.  Part Three turns the meta up a few notches, with the characters becoming aware of their counterparts in the other stories and their memories/abilities.  If that doesn't sound pretentious enough for you, there is also a writer/creator/god theme throughout.  I'm not saying that this film is annoying, or that the heavier themes are handled poorly, or anything like that; it's just fair warning, because you sometimes need to be in the right mindset to take in a film like The Nines.

Example of a bad day to watch The Nines

The acting in this film is fine, but I was hoping for more, since the actors all get to play multiple parts.  While Reynolds clearly has fun with his parts, his performances of Gary and Gavin bordered on being caricatures.  Yes, you can argue that is part of the "big picture" story, but I'll touch on that later.  Still, Gary and Gavin were entertaining enough, with Gabriel standing out as the most grounded role in the movie.  Reynolds has no problem with comic timing, but I felt that he could have done more with his conflicted emotions.  I enjoyed Melissa McCarthy for the most part, even if her Margaret character was initially grating.  I've always preferred McCarthy in realistic roles, so it was nice to see her in a movie that gave her some dramatic moments.  It's worth noting that she plays herself during Part Two: Reality Television, and that is her real-life husband making a brief appearance.  I would also like to point out that her character in Part Three is married to Ryan Reynolds.  I'm not saying that it couldn't or shouldn't happen, but it is a damned odd romantic pairing for a film featuring Hollywood actors.

No offense, Melissa, but you're no Scarlett Johansson

I didn't particularly care for Hope Davis, though.  Maybe it was because her characters were all slightly bitchy, or maybe because she seemed to be the key master to the film's secrets.  I'm not entirely certain why I didn't like her much, I just didn't.  Elle Fanning did a fine job as the resident slightly creepy child.  Really, I wasn't surprised by her work here, but it was the first time I've seen her in a movie since my viewing of Super 8, so I thought I'd call her out.  You might also recognize television actors David Denman, Dahlia Salem and Octavia Spencer in small parts, but they don't really do a whole lot.

...and featuring Hope Davis as the Keymaster!

This is John August's directorial debut, although he has some noteworthy writing credits (including this movie).  Aside from co-screenwriting several Tim Burton films, August is the writer of Go and the Charlie's Angels movies.  That should give you a pretty good idea of his talent for subtlety.  I don't know...this film isn't poorly written, or filled with one-liners --- although claiming that koalas are telepathic and control weather was funny --- but it never felt clever enough to pull off August's ambition.  For example, there is a definite reason why all of Ryan Reynolds' characters had names beginning with G, and the same for Melissa McCarthy's M-characters; these are just heavy-handed hints, though, without much payoff when and if you figure them out.  I don't think this story required the bizarre awesomeness of Charlie Kaufman, necessarily, but this is definitely a script that wants to say something clever about writing/creating, and I don't think August completely succeeded.  His direction was fine, although the script makes the direction more of an afterthought than anything else.

Pictured above: Melissa and Elle viewing an early cut of the film.  Not pictured: Elle crying.

The Nines is a movie that reaches for the stars, but falls short.  I didn't love the movie, but it was an interesting change of pace for me, and I appreciate that.  The acting in the film was a little unbelievable at times, but you could argue that it played into the theme of someone assuming a fictional role.  You would be talking out of your ass if you argued that, but it is certainly an option.  Any time a filmmaker chooses to go the meta- route, they risk coming off like a hack; not everyone has something clever to say about the filmmaking process.  Yes, there are some clever moments (the "no bellybutton" bit was cute), but I didn't think they added up to a proper whole.  With this kind of movie, I want to be blown away when it ends, with my concept of reality and creativity completely unhinged.  I think The Nines fails in this aspect.  It's not a bad movie, though.  It's just a little shallower than you might expect.

Super 8

Do you remember the original television advertisements for The Matrix?

Now, if you've seen the movie, that trailer more or less makes sense.  In 1999, though, that was just a string of random images and a sorry-ass excuse for not telling anyone what the story for the damn movie was.  I ended up seeing The Matrix on its first night in theaters, but only because my friend and I couldn't think of anything else to do with our time; I recall arguing that we had to have something better to do, when watching movies is all we did.  That's right, I argued against watching a movie to a friend who loves movies more than I do.  That's how much the trailer pissed me off.  Of course, the first Matrix was all kinds of awesome, so the story had a happy ending and I felt dumb for objecting, but I find myself reacting similarly when movie trailers purposefully frustrate potential viewers.


...and this was my first glimpse at what would become Super 8, the latest film from the producer of The Blair Witch Monster Cloverfield.  I was predictably unimpressed.  In the intervening year or so between seeing that trailer and watching the film, the only additional knowledge I had was that the movie featured child actors.  Awesome; kids and a trainsplosion.  But summer is upon us, and my lovely wife loves her summer blockbusters (and J.J. Abrams), so I ended up watching this movie, too, on its opening weekend.  I'm so weak.

Here's the good news: the story requires a certain amount of suspense, so I won't be giving away too much of the plot.  Well, it's good news for me, because it involves less typing.  Super 8 begins by focusing on Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney), a middle school-aged kid whose mother tragically died recently, and whose father, Jackson Lamb (Kyle Chandler), buried himself in his deputy sheriff work instead of consoling his only child.  Like most kids, Joe is surprisingly resilient and he intends to spend his summer vacation helping his loud-mouthed best friend, Charles (Riley Griffiths), film a short movie to be entered into a statewide competition for teenage filmmakers.  Charles is the director, Joe handles the makeup, Cary (Ryan Lee) is every single zombie in their movie (as well as their expert in firecrackers), and the other two friends are there to round out the cast.  After reading up on screenwriting, Charles decides that he needs a romantic interest in his zombie film, so he somehow convinces the very pretty Alice (Elle Fanning) to join the team.  The other thing that Charles realized was important to filmmaking was production value, so he decided to fake his; to get realistic background action, he gets the whole crew to sneak out at night and act at the local train station, so they can capture the train passing by in their shots.

Great idea, fatty.

As the trailer suggests, though, their evening at the train station was fairly eventful.  While the kids did their best to not die in train wreckage, their super 8 camera keeps filming, capturing something on film that they were never meant to see.

Super man, girl, monkey, dog, cat, horse, and that looks like mom and dad on the right: Super Eight.

That's all I care to say about the story of Super 8, but I would like to point out how silly the title is.  Yes, I understand that the kids were making a crappy short film on super 8 film, but does anyone really think that film is the focus of this story?  Of course not.  It's kind of like when a band writes a song with an obviously memorable chorus, like "I bathe in vanilla pudding," and end up naming the song something pretentious or obtuse, like "Onyx."  This is, in many ways, a monster movie.  It's deeper than that, I'll admit, but this title sucks.  Thank goodness producer Steven Spielberg didn't follow this model when naming his movies; I don't know how excited I would have been to see Raiders of the Lost Ark if it was called "Whip."

Whatever the title, I was pleasantly surprised with the acting in this movie.  Having child actors as the primary characters is always a risky choice, but these kids were pretty good.  Joel Courtney was very appealing in the lead role, projecting a natural awkward charisma that reminded me of Patrick Fugit.  Elle Fanning was flat-out awesome as his leading lady; I usually will give a grudging acknowledgement of good performances from child actors --- let's be honest, most of the time they get attention for just acting a little older than they are --- but she was very impressive.  This wasn't a powerhouse performance, but she showed a lot of natural talent and good instincts in the dramatic moments.  Keep in mind that this is basically a creature feature, so the fact that any actor had effective dramatic moments at all is impressive, much less one young actress having several.  And she's only thirteen!

The other kids were okay, but those two clearly carried the film.  Riley Griffiths was pretty good as the kind of obnoxious friend and Ryan Lee was occasionally funny as the group's resident pyromaniac, but that's about it.  Kyle Chandler was pretty decent as Joe's father, but I found his more heroic moments a little far-fetched.  Ron Eldard played Alice's drunken father and was serviceable, I guess.  Noah Emmerich was similarly okay, once again playing an untrustworthy character; maybe it's the pock marks, but I can never trust that guy to not be evil in movies.  Or in real life, probably.  Former 7th Heaven kid David Gallagher had a bit part as a creepy stoner, and that was good for a few chuckles.  Another child star, AJ of the jail-bait pop group Aly & AJ, played the fat kid's sexy sister.  Aside from the two child leading roles, the acting was fine, but not spectacular.

J.J. Abrams is better known as a producer and creative force than he actually is as a director.  Despite having twenty years of producer credits, this is only his third feature film directorial effort, after Mission: Impossible III and the Star Trek reboot.  Personally, I don't usually have strong feelings about Abrams as a director, but I thought he did a pretty good job with Super 8.  Working with kids is always difficult, but he got some very solid performances out of this group and he balanced drama, humor, and the occasional fright pretty well.  I'm sure more than a few people will notice a clear stylistic homage to co-producer Steven Spielberg in the way the film is shot and how the mysterious creature is revealed; it is quite possible that you might have flashbacks to E.T. or Close Encounters while watching this movie.  That's an okay choice, I suppose --- if you're going to make a movie that relies on the wonder of children, borrow from the best --- but I wish Abrams had put more of his own spin on things.  Instead, he did a very good job as a Spielbergian imitator.  Abrams' inexperience as a director shows up from time to time, as many of his dramatic shots are nearly identical.

I hope you like people looking anxiously at something off-camera, because it happens a lot.

No, seriously, a lot.  As in over...

...and over...

...and over...

...and over again.  Will this bother most people?  Probably not, at least in their initial viewing.  Besides, that's more of a stylistic shortcoming than an inability to direct.

I don't want to give the impression that I did not enjoy Super 8.  I did.  It was the most adorable alien/creature/monster movie I have ever seen.  It has been a long time since anyone made a movie in the vein of The Goonies --- an occasionally scary adventure for kids that adults can enjoy --- so it was nice to see that style revisited.  The action was well-directed, the special effects looked good, none of the child actors were terrible and most were actually effective, and the pace was reasonable.  The film's greatest asset is in how well the attitude and wonder of teenagers was captured.  It's hard to accurately depict teenagers in a positive light --- they are, after all, inhuman trolls, one and all --- but Abrams was able to make these kids likeable and believable.  As far as PG-13 movies aimed at kids go, this one was a lot of fun.

Aww...the one with the hat thinks he's a person!

My biggest gripe with Super 8 is with the writing.  It's not bad, but I wish it was a little less simple.  The bad guys are really obviously bad.  The good guys pull off some truly unlikely heroics.  And that whole trainsplosion...?  Really?  There has to be a better way to stop a train.  None of that makes a huge impact on the story at large, but for a movie that tries so hard to be rooted in the reality of 1979, moments like that (and the Walkman joke) receive a raised eyebrow from me.  I still like the movie, but I don't know if the writing will keep it from being the classic that it is obviously striving to be.

Another limitation of this movie is the setting.  For a movie presumably aimed at kids and filled with childlike wonder, it sure is pressing all the nostalgia buttons for people born in the seventies and early eighties.  Is a thirteen year-old in 2011 going to return to this movie, set almost twenty years before he/she was born, often enough to make this a classic?  I don't think so.  I think this film is a love letter to Spielberg in his prime, and that's okay.  It might not be as epic or as memorable as it wants to be, but Super 8 does a great job as an homage.