Nightwatch

I stumbled across Nightwatch as soon as it came out on DVD, back in '97 or '98.  I had never seen a preview for it, was completely unaware of its box-office performance, and knew nothing of its plot.  I did, however, recognize Ewan McGregor from Trainspotting, and that was good enough to warrant a rental.  It was the first real “thriller” I had ever seen --- I had still not experienced a true horror movie yet, either --- and the novelty of discovering a film on my own, free of the mass media and the recommendations of others made this a personal favorite for a few years.  Now, I hadn't watched Nightwatch in years, but I never forgot the positive impression it left on me.  As the years have passed, I have occasionally wondered why nobody else seems to fondly remember this pic.  Was I just a stupid kid with terrible taste in movies when I first watched Nightwatch, or is this an under-appreciated gem?  Only one way to find out, I suppose.

Martin (Ewan McGregor) is a student in law school, who enjoys typical law school things, like going out drinking with friends and laughing loudly.  He shares a gigantic loft apartment with his busty girlfriend (Patricia Arquette) and hangs out with his asshole best friend, James (Josh Brolin), and his smart-mouthed girlfriend (Lauren Graham).   The big difference between Martin and the others is that he doesn’t have any money.  And, apparently, “no money” is a relative term, because he still goes out to bars with his friends and has that badass apartment.  To fix that problem, Martin decides to take a job as a night watchman at a morgue.  

This was after a failed attempt to open a casino

 Because he is a normal college kid, and that is what normal college kids do, right?  Anyways, the job pays well and will give him ample time to study.  The morgue is, predictably, a creepy place, and everyone who works there is bizarre and horrible.  No surprises there.  It is weird, though, that the watchmen have to go into every room in the morgue every hour and essentially get a time punch to prove they were there.  There seems to only be one entrance to the building, which means that the only time anyone could get in without being noticed is when the security guard is doing his hourly rounds; I suppose that policy is in place only to mess with the minds of the employees. 

The labels on the bottles read "amorphous blob in formaldehyde"

A body is brought into the morgue one night, an apparent victim of a serial killer.  Martin meets Detective Cole (Nick Nolte), who lets him in on some of the grisly details; the victims have been hookers, and the killer is sadistic and has some knowledge of surgery.  Around this time, James starts acting bizarre; his actions appear to be those of a bored rich kid looking for adrenaline kicks.  He gets a particular rush from bar fights and hiring prostitutes to degrade themselves.  Sounds suspicious, doesn’t it?  This naturally leads the police to assume that James Martin is the serial killer.  That would suck on its own, but it is pretty obvious that the killer also has his/her eye on Martin, too...

McGregor's homage to "Scream"

The acting in Nightwatch definitely has its highs and its lows. Unfortunately, the highs fall in the realm of acceptability, while the lows are just incomprehensibly odd.  I liked Ewan McGregor’s natural charm and thought he was pretty likable, although a little dumb.  His character’s logic isn’t very impressive, but McGregor did a good job playing up some of the more childish aspects of his character.  Patricia Arquette was her typical self; she’s fairly blank for most of the film and when she has to act distressed, she sounds a little moronic. 

This would have been a great opportunity for her to say "These aren't my clothes"

Still, she has a very background role, so that never becomes problematic.  Lauren Graham had an even smaller part, which left even less of an impression.   That’s too bad, because I usually like her.  I liked Brad Dourif as the least sympathetic doctor ever, even if the character was hilariously unrealistic. Oh, and John C. Reilly had a very small role as Nolte’s partner/underling. Remember when he was an outstanding dramatic actor?  Man, those were the days.  Nick Nolte, though, was just bizarre.  

This film was made right around when he stopped playing romantic leads and began to embrace his creepy aging face.  And he definitely brought the creepy with this role.  It’s one thing to play a bad cop, or even a disturbed cop, but his Detective Cole immediately strikes you as the type of person who makes neckties out of human flesh.  Who would trust this guy?  That would be a more pressing question if it wasn’t for Josh Brolin’s character.  Here is a character that is all things to all people, depending on the needs of the script.  Do you need someone to be brash and fun?  How about unsettling and abrasive?  Maybe a murderer?  Or a voice of reason?  No problem --- JB will fill that role!  Honestly, I don’t think it is possible for Brolin to look remotely competent playing such a poorly written character, but I think he did as good a job as he could with what he was working with.

"Your motivation here is to want to punch Ewan in his damn face...for some reason"

I was shocked to find that Steven Soderbergh was responsible for co-writing this film.  I don’t know if there is some sordid behind-the-scenes story about the making of this film, but this is truly awful writing.  The characters are immune to logic, the police do not follow even the most basic of investigative steps, and the serial killer menacingly sings “This Old Man.”

Well, I suppose it's a bit creepier if you interpret "played knick-knack" as "made molesting motions with his hands."  Actually, the story isn't really Soderbergh's fault; Nightwatch is an American remake of the Danish film Nattevagten, so it's pretty obvious that Soderbergh was hired primarily to translate the script into Americanese.  The original story (and the Danish script) was written by Ole Bornedal, who also directed both the Danish film and the American remake.  As frustrated as I was watching the characters act so damnably odd, I have to give Bornedal some credit --- he does a nice job building the suspense in this film.  He doesn't do it artfully, so it isn't subliminal like clever camera shots can be.  Instead, he slowly builds the tension and makes even the smallest and stupidest plot point seem threatening.  

"Actually, I am interested in changing my long distance.  Very interested..."

Thankfully, he focused almost entirely on Ewan McGregor's character --- the only one in the movie that is even remotely believable --- so you might not notice just how ridiculously over the top the entire supporting cast is.  I'll give Bornedal an "A" for effort and execution, but a "D" for his actual script and characters.

I don't know...it almost feels like I am being a little too harsh on Nightwatch, like I'm overcompensating for having such a high opinion of it as a youngster.  But then I glance at my notes and feel a whole lot better.  Sure, I can look the other way on some of the dumb stuff in this movie --- like the fact that the police apparently do not check alibis because it builds suspense, or the acreage of the allegedly college apartments --- but there are some things I just can't ignore.  For example, I can sympathize with Martin when he is audibly confused when a prostitute starts to give him a surprise handjob in a fancy restaurant --- that would be a little weird and socially awkward --- but I don't think yelping repeatedly like she was wearing a joy buzzer was a natural reaction. 

Although it does explain his attraction to that alarm...

I also doubt that a tough, muscle-bound guy at a bar who apparently likes to fight would be wearing a Jennifer Beal's torn sweatshirt from Flashdance.  And then there’s the final confrontation between Martin and the killer.  It works perfectly well as a sadistic killer preying on an innocent, but when you remember that the killer is trying to frame Martin, the weapons being employed make a whole lot less sense; you can make it look like Martin is a killer who committed suicide if you use, say, a gun, but not if you're attacking him with a bone saw, moron.

Man, what a letdown.  I remembered this movie being so cool.  Now, I see it as just an exercise in how to do the best you can with a crappy script.  The suspense is genuinely well done.  The script is genuinely wretched.  If it wasn't for McGregor's energy, this movie would be nigh-unwatchable.  And it's really too bad, because this movie comes very close to being genuinely creepy.  Sadly the lack of believable characters makes this a promising movie that just isn't very good.

Jonah Hex

I never had high expectations for Jonah Hex.  While I usually enjoy comic book movies, this one looked really, really bad.   When it absolutely failed with critics and viewers alike, I was not surprised at all.  I was, however, shocked when the star of the film, Josh Brolin, repeatedly trashed (but also defended) Hex while promoting his next movie.

Tags: Movie Trailers, Movies Blog

That kind of honesty and optimism did two things for me.  First, it made me wish I liked Josh Brolin more.  He's okay, I guess, but his presence in a movie is never what makes me want to watch it.  Second, it made me curious as to how entertaining Jonah Hex could be if I approached it like Brolin suggested, with similar expectations as I had for Piranha.  Hell, it couldn't be worse than I expected, even with Megan Fox acting in it.  Right...?

Hey, uh...you got something on your face.  No, the other side.

In the Civil War, Jonah Hex (Josh Brolin) fought for the Confederacy, but he was not a zealot.  When his commanding officer, Quentin Turnbull (John Malkovich), ordered for a Union hospital to be burned down, Hex refused.  This led to a confrontation  with the other men in his unit, which eventually led to Hex gunning down Turnbull's adult son (and Hex's best friend), Jeb (an uncredited Jeffrey Dean Morgan).  After the war, Quentin tracked down Hex, tied him up and forced him to watch as his men murdered Hex's wife and child.  Before he left, Turnbull branded Hex on the face and left him to die of exposure.  Hex was found, mostly dead, by an Indian tribe, who nursed him back to health.  However, his brush with death left him with an ability to speak to the dead.  So...that's something.  Turnbull was allegedly killed in a house fire a short while later, so Hex became a bounty hunter and took out his rage on some of the worst men in the Wild West.

Oh, and he had a horse-mounted Gatling gun.

One day, Hex is approached by representatives from the U.S. Government to come and meet President Ulysses S. Grant (Aidan Quinn) about a job.  Hex, being an ornery type, isn't impressed by Mr. President until he states that Quentin Turnbull is not only alive, but actively planning to destroy the country within the next few days.  I wonder if the revenge-fueled antihero will seek out his most hated enemy?

After typing that summary, I realized that this movie doesn't really sound so bad on paper.  No, it doesn't sound great, but not as bad as people made it out to be during its theatrical release (13% Rotten Tomatoes rating and a Metacritic score of 33). Sure, the whole talking-to-the-dead thing is weird, but it's not a deal breaker by any means.

Maybe the acting is what sinks this ship?  Well, Josh Brolin is surprisingly good as Jonah Hex.  He would have been even better if his facial makeup didn't cause him to slur some of his lines.  John Malkovich was surprisingly mediocre as the hate-filled Turnbull; Malkovich usually has fun with evil characters, but he didn't really come across as very interested in this movie.  Michael Fassbender played the main henchman to Turnbull and did what I presume is his best impression of Jim Carrey's Riddler.  He was certainly goofy, but even the ridiculous goatee-tattoos never made him scary.

This is why you don't pass out at tattoo parties.

That leaves us with Megan Fox.  Yeah...she's not a very good actress and she takes lines that are supposed to be sassy or cool and she sucks the personality out of them.  On the bright side, she plays a shockingly clean and fit Wild West prostitute (who, of course, loves the disfigured hero), so at least she's flaunting what has made her career thus far.

The rest of the supporting cast is a collection of bit parts, played by recognizable actors.  Will Arnett plays a soldier, and his presence implies that the filmmakers were aware of the funny-bad possibilities in the script.  Michael Shannon, the third Oscar nominee in this cast, had a tiny role, as did Jeffrey Dean Morgan, and they were both fine.  Wes Bentley, who I thought (after seeing American Beauty) had a bright career ahead of him, gives one of the least impressive performances in the movie.  No wonder I haven't seen him in anything in over a decade.  I wasn't impressed by Aidan Quinn's President Grant, but that might have been because I wanted him to be drunk and make really poor decisions.  I was happy to see television actor Lance Reddick playing something other than a lawyer or police officer for a change.  He wasn't great, but I appreciated the atypical casting.

I'm not going to blame this movie on the director, Jimmy Hayward, even though this is his first live-action feature film --- he's worked as an animator on a few Pixar movies and directed Horton Hears a Who, which naturally makes him the best director for a comic book-based Western.  He didn't do a good job directing, mind you.  The acting was limited and the cinematography was mediocre, and that's if I'm being generous to both.  His editing was awful and there is some sort of recurring waking dream sequence that was pretty incomprehensible, but I will give him credit where it's due: the movie is short.  It's 81 minutes with credits.  Not just anyone would choose to put most of a character's back story into an animated form, but it cut out an awful lot of acting time from the movie, and for that, I thank him.

Nothing clever is said in this scene.

 The biggest problem with Jonah Hex is the ridiculous story.  That shouldn't come as a surprise, since this movie was written by Neveldine/Taylor, the writing team that brought us such think pieces as Gamer and the Crank movies.  Man, this is a dumb script.  Fox and Brolin have at least half of their lines devoted to quips, and they're all pretty bad.  Brolin gets away with some because he's devoted to his character's intended bad-assness, but Fox...she couldn't deliver a smart line if it came with paid postage.  Aww, snap!  Mail carrier humor!  **ahem**  Even without the dialogue problems, this is a bizarrely written movie.  Why does any Western bad-ass need gadgets?  The horse-mounted Gatling gun was ridiculous, the automatic dynamite crossbows were just silly, and the villainous "nation killer" weapon was simply bizarre.  And what was with all the explosions?  This is the 1870s --- I can buy gunfire starting a fire, but huge explosions every time?  That's just dumb.  Oh, and that weird Jonah-Hex-talks-to-the-dead thing?  And the weird crow spirit stuff?  Yeah, not in the comics at all.  Hex could have just been a smart bad-ass, but instead, he was given supernatural crow/death powers by the writers.  That may not have been the best choice.

And while this movie is very bad, it is stupid enough to enjoy.  That's not terribly shocking, given the writing team.  If you're looking for a good action movie, a fun comic book adaptation, or a cool Western, this is not the movie for you.

 If, on the other hand, you feel like laughing at something ridiculous and ridiculing a movie, this is a decent choice --- but by no means a great one.  If nothing else, this is the stupidest Western I have seen in ages, but at least it's short.  I give it a Lefty Gold rating of

True Grit (2010)

When I heard that some of my favorite filmmakers, the Coen Brothers, were remaking the John Wayne classic True Grit, I was conflicted.  The Coens usually don't disappoint, but a remake just seemed like it would paint them into a corner; I usually like the Coens best when they are free to be weird or dark or whatever they happen to feel like at the time.  The first previews I saw didn't encourage me much, either; while I don't know exactly how Jeff Bridges managed to speak that incoherently, my first guess is that he had somebody else's tongue in his mouth whenever he needed to deliver dialogue.  Nevertheless, I really liked the original film, I love the Coen Brothers, and I'm a fan of Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon, so I ignored my reservations and visited my local cinema house.

For those that are unfamiliar with the plot, young Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld), aged fourteen, goes to the town where her recently deceased father's corpse waits for her.  Quite the little businesswoman, she sends the body back to her hometown, buys and sells some horses, and goes to the sheriff, expecting to hear news about the search for her father's killer.  The news is that the cowardly killer, Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), has left the state and entered Indian Territory, where the law is unlikely to pursue him.  Mattie wants to see Chaney die for his crimes, and she learns that she can hire a US Marshall to act as a bounty hunter for her.  There are competent trackers, and all-around good men that are well-suited for the job, but Mattie opts for the meanest Marshall around: the surly, one-eyed drunk, Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges).

It takes quite a bit of convincing, but Mattie manages to hire Cogburn for the job.  However, no amount of convincing talk will make him follow her wishes to the letter, which include taking her with him on the manhunt and making sure that Chaney dies for killing her father and not any other crime.  After all, a Texas Ranger named La Boef (Matt Damon) wants to bring Chaney to justice in Texas, where a sizable reward would be split between him and Cogburn.  And, as for the idea of Mattie joining the manhunt in person, that's just ridiculous.  But, as many older men find out as this film progresses, Mattie Ross is not a ridiculous young woman, but someone with the will to get exactly what she wants.

This film is certainly centered around the story of Mattie Ross, but the star of the film is definitely Rooster Cogburn. Jeff Bridges does not disappoint in his role, and he manages to not echo John Wayne's Oscar-winning performance.  Bridges' take on the character can be summed up as simply "dirty."  He looks fat and greasy, he fights dirty, and he is generally a rough, unlovable person.  And that all works out great; he's believably tough, socially awkward, and genuinely funny, depending on the situation.  And Bridges' physical acting was superb; he walked the walk of an aged roughneck very well and this might be the most believable "guy with an eyepatch" role I have ever seen.  The only thing I didn't like was his bizarre mumbling, but more on that later.  Hailee Steinfeld does a great job as the calm, collected, and damn stubborn Mattie.  She manages to be stubborn, persistent, and pushy, but still likable.  This is a great role with depth for a young actress, and Steinfeld (in her feature film debut) does a fantastic job.  Matt Damon made his character less charming than Glen Campbell did in the original, and I liked his character far better because of it.  I like Damon best when he is not trying to be funny, and he comes across as earnest and occasionally exasperated here, which I thought fit this film well.  The rest of the supporting actors have limited screen time, but benefit from the Coen's tendency to make their bit role colorful.  Barry Pepper looked every part the Wild West nomad as the villainous (Ned) Pepper.  Josh Brolin played his character as fairly dim-witted and brutish, which I thought was a good choice.  Domhall Gleeson (Brendan's son and Bill Weasley in the latest Harry Potter) is stuck with a fairly whiny role as the doomed Moon, but I thought he handled the part well and didn't overact, which is high praise, considering what they do to his character.

Joel and Ethan Coen did a great job writing and directing the film.  Every single character in the film is memorable, many are funny, but the viewer is never distracted from the main story.  Why does Rooster Cogburn go out of his way to kick those Indian children?  It doesn't matter, it's just something he does; on with the plot!  They got a very good performance from a very inexperienced actress, and they let Bridges have fun as a crotchety old man.  More importantly, though, is the overall tone of the film.  The word "quirky" is often (justly) applied to Coen Brothers projects because they enjoy going off on tangents and having a cast of extremely colorful characters.  Here, they are able to keep their cast of goofy characters, but they all serve the plot, so they don't feel like diversions.  The cinematography, done by frequent Coen collaborator Roger Deakins, is noticeably impressive; this movie looks and feels as filthy and smelly as the Old West must have truly been, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't full of harsh, broad, and beautiful landscapes.  This might be the best looking Coen film since O Brother, Where Art Thou? (also shot by Deakins), and it is perhaps their best balance of gritty stories and funny characters to date.

Now, let's discuss the mumbling.  When I saw the trailer for this movie, I assumed that Bridges just had his cheeks full of chewing tobacco, because the Old West was a disgusting place and chaw is nauseatingly fitting for that time and place.  Sadly, it was simply a choice by the actor and the directors.  I guess it could be the side effect of being a rough-and-tumble character in an age where medical attention was both lacking and deficient; theoretically, they could have invented a back story for Rooster than involved a few broken jaws that healed crooked.  Whatever the reason, it was kind of obnoxious, especially when it obscured a witty quip from Bridges.  Later in the film, Damon also joins the mushmouth parade, but at least his character is given an excuse.  These atypical verbal deliveries may have been realistic for the times, but I found them generally irritating and actually kept me from understanding some key moments of dialogue.

How does this stand up to the original?  Quite well, actually.  The performances (mumbles aside) are all very good, and Bridges does a good job with an interesting character.  Honestly, I think the primary actors are all worthy upgrades over the original film; the supporting cast is far better this time around (although Robert Duvall is still better than Barry Pepper), since the original film had many unmemorable bit players.  The one thing that the 1969 film did better was show the developing relationship between Cogburn and Mattie; when John Wayne starts calling her "sister" in the film, you can feel a loving bond in his words.  That closeness is not shown in this version, although some affection is clear.  I also prefer the ending of the original better (not the climax, but the falling action) because it summed up the story of Mattie and Rooster so well.  The Coens made a very grim and gritty Western, but they did so at the cost of the sweet sibling-ish relationship between the two lead characters.

That said, this is a very good movie, and it is a Western that will appeal to those that are not already fans of the genre (read: women).  It is funny in many parts, with sharp dialogue and three characters that mesh well together.  It is painfully raw and brutal in other parts, with uncompromising violence and some truly nightmarish dental prosthetics.  And, despite all of that, it is a story of accomplishment, above all else.  Does this eclipse the original movie?  No, but it certainly makes a case as a deserving peer.