Movie Reviews

Jason Green
Web Master

Basic
Directed by: John McTiernan
Starring: John Travolta, Connie Nielsen, Samuel L. Jackson
Playing at: Chase Park Plaza, Esquire

“Basic” is anything but that

by John Hamel

Given the vast number of low-brow teen comedies, mechanical action flicks, and sentimental romance stories Hollywood has recently flung at us, every once in a great while we disregard our escapist (or uncultured) tendencies and rally around movies that force us to think. “Basic” does not provoke any self-examination (nor does it intend to), but one must be readily attentive to follow a plot that undergoes more changes than Michael Jackson’s nose.
Sgt. Nathan West (Samuel L. Jackson) is the commanding officer of a group of six U.S. Army Rangers on a training exercise in the jungles of Panama. When only two of the Rangers return, not including the abhorred Sgt. West, it is discovered that an internal conflict had provoked the team members to take sides and turn against each other. The survivors each offer different accounts for Lt. Julia Osborne (Connie Nielsen), who is heading the investigation.
When Lt. Osborne can’t crack the case, an expert interrogator and former Ranger, DEA Agent Tom Hardy (John Travolta) is brought in to assist her. With the limited evidence offered by the surviving Rangers and character statements of the dead gathered from numerous sources, the two slowly begin to piece the case together.
The result is a complex web with conflicting accounts of betrayal, murder, and even drug-dealing. Every time Hardy and Osborne stumble across a new piece of seemingly-conclusive evidence as to what happened, a different account arises to suggest otherwise. As soon as it appears safe to place trust in a character or story, the thread is immediately yanked away. Thus, it becomes impossible to maintain any rational expectations of what’s going to happen next, and the element of surprise, crucial for such a film, makes an unwelcome, yet anticipated departure after the first hour.
By this point, the plot has become so exceedingly elaborate that the film’s writers probably had to watch the movie in its entirety several times just to understand it themselves. Simply confusing the viewer, however, certainly doesn’t render the story to be any more entertaining than it really is.
Now, I don’t want to be completely critical. Along with the heartily-welcomed Travolta-Jackson reunion, there really isn’t a weak acting job to be found. Giovanni Ribisi (“Gone in Sixty Seconds”, “Boiler Room”) is particularly stellar in his role as one of the two surviving Rangers. Although bed-ridden, groggy, and subject to pressing interrogation from Hardy and Osborne, Ribisi evokes memories of Gollum from Lord of the Rings (“my precious”) with a sarcastic, yet innocent demeanor.
Unfortunately, the endless plot twists and token betrayals leave you wondering when something normal and logical is going to happen. Perhaps an unnecessary love story could have made its way into the film to balance things out. I certainly wouldn’t have objected if the film’s writers had used Roselyn Sanchez a bit more creatively. At least some blatant sexuality would have been straightforward. The storyline changes so often, it’s incomprehensible as to why the writers could make a movie with such good acting so unnecessarily frustrating and complicated.
I’ll conclude with a metaphor. My mom is an excellent cook. You could probably figure that out if you’ve ever seen me in person (well, I’m kind of lazy too, but stay with me). Anyway, she’s got this great culinary mantra: serving food too hot-whether in terms of temperature or spices-is really just the guise for an average dish. But hey, you’re going to be too busy trying to swallow that steaming mouthful of casserole before you realize it’s not that good. After all, you wouldn’t want to burn your tongue or insult the cook, would you? “Basic” follows the same strategy. There is a limit as to the number of times you can intentionally mislead the viewer, and “Basic” blatantly disregards it. After seeing it, you don’t leave the theater wondering “it’s amazing how unpredictable that story was while maintaining a cohesive plot,” but rather “what the just happened?” After the witty banter and plot twists wear off (which they do quickly), “Basic” is a good film unnecessarily ruined by incessant changes in the storyline.

Bottom Line:
“The endless plot twists and token betrayals leave you wondering when something normal and logical is going to happen. ”

Grade: C-

Gerry
Directed by: Gus Van Sant
Starring: Matt Damon, Casey Affleck
Playing at: The Tivoli

Gus Van Sant’s mesmerising minimalism

by Robbie Gross

Gus Van Sant’s transformation from an independent filmmaker to a more or less Hollywood director has been undoubtedly successful. Indeed, his last five movies alone tell the tale of a man for whom conformity is a good thing. Just as wonderful (and wonderfully received) as “Good Will Hunting” and “Finding Forrester” were, it is important to remember Van Sant’s unconventional, shot-by-shot remake of “Psycho,” which, for all the hype, was decidedly unnecessary and unsuccessful. With his newest movie, “Gerry,” Van Sant has again made a film that defies Hollywood conventions. Without a doubt, however, this time the director/screenwriter got it right. “Gerry” is a movie of unparalleled and paralyzing physical beauty, outdone only by its grandiose purpose of minimalism, which through its restraint is more meaningful than any other movie to come out this year.
It is important to understand that “Gerry” is not so much a movie as it is an experience. With minutes-long (it will feel like hours) shots of driving, walking, and staring-and nothing else-chances are that audience-members will talk, squirm, yell, or as a few did (even at the prestigious “Tivoli”), leave. The film opens with a long shot of the cast (in its entirety: Matt Damon and Casey Affleck) driving down an open road in the middle of, perhaps literally, nowhere. We don’t know where the two laconic though clearly close friends are going, nor do we know where they are. They park the car, and with two beers, matches, and a pack of cigarettes, begin to walk on a wilderness trail. Their intention is to return, but after getting off-course for a bit, it is clear they are lost. The remainder of the movie is their attempt to get back to civilization: to find their car, or a highway, or water, or animals.
A former student at the distinguished Rhode Island School of Design, Van Sant’s greatest attribute is his eye and knowledge of what is aesthetically beautiful. Filmed at first in Argentina, but ultimately in the mountains and deserts of California and Utah, “Gerry” is a visually mesmerizing film. Aside from the plot and the pretty (though not as usually pretty) faces of Affleck and Damon, the cinematography can almost stand on its own as a nearly two-hour extended piece of photography. All of the hauntingly beautiful aspects of Death Valley are there: the silky though somewhat ominous clouds spewing over and through the peaks of towering mountains; the never-ending empty space of sky and desert; the hot and burning sun of daytime; and the empty darkness of night.
And then there are the characters. Played surprisingly well by Damon and Affleck (the dialogue was partly written, partly improvised by them), the two stars who thrived together in fast-paced “Ocean’s Eleven,” now exhibit the type of restraint necessary in a movie where nature plays an equally important role as they do. When there is dialogue the two actors prove they are capable, skillfully playing off one another’s ultra-realistic discourse. Usually, though, the two are without words, and without clear human and individual traits-both their names are simply, Gerry-they appear almost as symbols of the young and simple, disillusioned and disoriented characters so frequently discussed in writing and film.
Even with so little action, and only one really ostensible, though ambiguous “plot twist” at the movie’s conclusion, “Gerry” remains to be every bit as affecting, every bit as moving. Slow-paced but never sullen, its breathtaking images are meant to seep-to permeate and paralyze. Gus Van Sant’s movie just does that. It is a film that can be appreciated in both an artistic and philosophical context, and it deserves to be seen.

Bottom Line:
“A movie of unparalleled and paralyzing physical beauty, outdone only by its grandiose purpose of minimalism.”

Grade: A-

Leave a Reply