Blu-ray Review: Life Of A King (2013)

Now Available to Own   



Photo Slideshow   

In his sophomore feature Life of a King, writer/director Jake Goldberger proves he’s as committed to bringing stories of custodians to the big screen as he is working with an Oscar caliber cast once again in this period movie biopic follow-up to Don McKay.

And while thankfully he doesn’t need his janitor main characters to clean up the overall film as this is vastly superior to the mess that was the Noir inspired Don McKay, unfortunately Goldberger still can’t manage to break out of the safety net of film formula familiarity.

Much like the feeling derived in his first “mix-tape” like movie that we’d seen done many times before, this is a competently made, average biopic feature that just can’t seem to shake the overbearing weight of so many inspirational underdog stories that have come before it from the Terrence Howard starrer Pride to Hilary Swank in Freedom Writers (just to name two thematically similar vehicles).

Nonetheless, in addition to yet another dynamic portrayal by the criminally underutilized actor Cuba Gooding Jr. is the film’s intriguing origin story.

Life of a King centers not on an idealistic teacher but an ex-con who leaves prison following a lengthy armed robbery sentence who goes on to form the Big Chair Chess Club, inspiring inner-city and/or at-risk youths to use the lessons from the game in their everyday life where there are no do-overs and everyone must obey the rules.

Unfortunately the personal life of its charismatic lead – Eugene Brown (Gooding Jr.) including his estranged relationship with his children gets shortchanged in what ultimately takes a formulaic Afterschool Special approach to the plotline.

But despite the fact that the film invests too much screen time on a generic subplot involving a few of his student chess players that would’ve been better left on the cutting room floor to get to know Brown on a deeper level instead, ultimately you can’t fault King too much.

Even though it’s predictable from start to finish, it achieves exactly what it sets out to which is to celebrate a man who turned his life around in yet another inspiring, positive tale of community activism that should particularly play well to viewers who have enjoyed thematically similar works.

While it doesn’t have the finesse or big budget presentation of a Glory Road or Great Debaters, King gets bonus points for (much like the aforementioned Writers and Debaters) focusing on an intellectual pursuit via a mental sport as opposed to the traditional cinematic slam dunk tales of underdog champions who score touchdowns, homeruns or goals despite the odds.

And even though checkmates may be less visceral or visually thrilling than an athletic display, they’re no less rewarding when it comes to character building as epitomized by Brown, as we learn how much he’s accomplished onscreen and off in making a difference in student lives.

While there’s not much in the film we haven’t seen before – at least in some form or another – it’s still a well-made, worthwhile picture that plays particularly well as a conversational double feature alongside Lee Daniels’ The Butler, which was another recent African-American biopic that featured Gooding Jr.

Destined to raise all sorts of questions about the pros and cons of budget size as well as staying true to the source material or embellishing facts for the sake of entertainment, whether you start with a presidential Butler or go with Goldberger’s janitor King first, you have the makings of a lively movie night discussion that will undoubtedly elevate your enjoyment of both pictures that much more. 

Text ©2014, Film Intuition, LLC; All Rights Reserved. http://www.filmintuition.com Unauthorized Reproduction or Publication Elsewhere is Strictly Prohibited and in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.  FTC Disclosure: Per standard professional practice, I may have received a review copy of this title in order to evaluate it for my readers, which had no impact whatsoever on whether or not it received a favorable or unfavorable critique.

Blu-ray Review: Lee Daniels' The Butler (2013)

Now Available to Own   


      

Photo Slideshow 

 

Before it was ever put into words, from his youngest days working under a sadistic boss on a cotton farm to his thirty-plus years spent serving eight U.S. presidents as a White House butler, Cecil Gaines understood precisely what was meant when he was advised to possess two faces – his own and the one he would show to white folks.

 

While that sentiment alone has slavery era literary roots, in director Lee Daniels’ The Butler, which was written by Emmy award-winning historical screenwriter Danny Strong, it serves as something beyond mere advice to become an actual way of life for the eponymous lead portrayed by Forest Whitaker in a role that was inspired by – (read: very loosely based upon) – fact.

Gorgeously crafted and undeniably well-intentioned with all departments from cinematography and production design to hair and makeup firing on all cylinders, one of The Butler’s biggest problems in fact is its picture-perfect, museum-like approach to its subject matter.

From its convenient plot points that hit the desired emotional beats at precisely the right time to some awkward transitions between presidential administrations, everything feels so extremely choreographed that most of what occurs onscreen ends up feeling melodramatically manipulative rather than natural. The end result is a film that holds us at arm’s length rather than one that successfully transports us into the film to fully buy into the story the filmmaker is trying to tell.

And while their names and faces looks great on a poster, the Cameo Carousel approach of offering viewers a Where’s Waldo like game of “Spot the Movie Star” – wherein a new A-lister enters and exists every ten minutes as if part of a Hollywood parade –  pulls us out of the plot with each new walk-on and detracts from the work as a whole.

From a storytelling standpoint, this gimmick makes the episodic nature of Strong’s script that much more apparent. But more troublingly it calls far too much attention to itself as one by one we identify the movie star currently onscreen and just as frequently find ourselves disappointed by the casting choice of selecting someone for the sake of name recognition rather than addressing the question of whether or not they’re actually right for the role or look anything like the people they’re supposed to play.

While the actors try their best with Liev Schreiber’s fiery Lyndon Johnson a film highlight, when most feel so grossly miscast, what it ultimately boils down to is stunt casting and it’s condescending to its audience – making the whole picture less effective all-around.

And at the same time, the commanding lead turns by not only Whitaker but in a surprisingly powerful supporting role by Oprah Winfrey (that reminds us just how effective she was in Spielberg’s The Color Purple), help anchor the film and prove just how beneficial it can be to cast the right actors in the right parts. Winfrey is so good in fact that it makes us wish she’d spend more time acting and less time focusing on conquering the small screen as a media mogul.

While she’s a bit shortchanged in her performance due to peculiar editing choices that force us to guess far more than we’d like about particular indiscretions or behavioral motivations of the character based on a look here or a throwaway line there, her scenes with Whitaker are the strongest in the picture.

In fact, the two are so good together that it makes you wish the film was far more emotionally riveting than it actually turned out to be, not only to be worthier of the audience but to its stars as well.

While nowhere near as naturalistic and impactful as another 2013 film that Whitaker was involved with behind the scenes while serving as the producer on another biographical effort Fruitvale Station, (which incidentally shares today's release date with The Butler), the stunning production values and stellar turns at the heart of the film make it worthy of at least one spin.

And while every fiber of my being wanted to like the picture and indeed, Lee Daniels’ The Butler appears to be as eager to please as Gaines was in his White House role, nearly stamping “For Your Awards Consideration” onto each gorgeously composed frame of this Forrest Gump-like ode to old-fashioned storytelling, it just doesn’t live up to its enormous ambition or potential.

 

Instead of merely presenting both of Gaines’s faces to the audience, this Butler tries to be all things to all people. From the gross manipulation of the facts that were either heightened or completely changed for maximum soap-opera effect to not having enough faith in Gaines’s plotline so that they had to invent a fictional militant son to serve as a political counterpoint for the era, this Butler is a mess of a missed opportunity.

For one of the greatest problems is that we’ve seen the alternate histories of the ‘60s done so many times before that the fictionalized Freedom Rider turned Black Panther son should’ve been left on the cutting room floor altogether.

As instead of Vietnam War unrest and civil disobedience struggles we’ve faced onscreen before, the thing we’d never encountered is the story of Cecil Gaines and unfortunately, it’s his story that Daniels and Strong seemed least interested in telling (aside from a chosen anecdote here or there).

And while I can only yearn for what was missed and indeed can’t critique a film I wasn’t shown, you can’t tell me that serving eight presidents didn’t generate enough valid material for a great movie. Unfortunately the one we’re left with is beautifully executed enough but far too bland for us to remember anything about The Butler we were so looking forward to getting to know.

Using the same manipulative tricks he employed in Precious, Daniels knows how to play his audience like a fiddle, while also inspiring some staggeringly raw, honest performances. But unfortunately this time around he doesn’t achieve the impact we’d been braced for by all the pomp and circumstance established by the film’s first act build-up or the promise of its award season campaign.

While worth a look for history buffs as well as Whitaker fans – with the caveat that it’s also a good idea to seek out the original source material to separate the small amount of fact from a massive amount of fiction – ultimately history will be the best judge of the film’s longevity long after award season passes and those easily influenced by it will be able to watch with more perspective.

Of course, it could become a cult classic in future years but something tells me that producer Whitaker’s masterfully made Fruitvale Station will far surpass Lee Daniels’ The Butler not only with regard to Forest Whitaker but in terms of the cinematic year of 2013 in general, inspiring future generations to come with its celebration of life on a small scale vs. this star-studded, sprawling soap.    

Text ©2014, Film Intuition, LLC; All Rights Reserved. http://www.filmintuition.com Unauthorized Reproduction or Publication Elsewhere is Strictly Prohibited and in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.  FTC Disclosure: Per standard professional practice, I may have received a review copy of this title in order to evaluate it for my readers, which had no impact whatsoever on whether or not it received a favorable or unfavorable critique.

What Love Is

Director: Mars Callahan

In The Tao of Steve we learned that guys don’t do opera, in Swingers we learned that every guy needs a wingman and in the movies of Kevin Smith, we learned that guys gossip more than a sorority. Yet, having worked in the theatre, I can confidently tell you that unless they’re desperately trying to woo a date or are over the age of 55, straight guys seldom do theatre.

With undoubtedly this in mind and in an effort to blend theatre together with Swingers and Chasing Amy, writer/director Mars Callahan got in touch with his inner screwball and served up What Love Is, a film so foul it would make Kevin Smith blush and one where dialogue whips by so quickly that the Gilmore Girls heroines would tell them to slow down for fear of a speeding ticket. A raunchy hybrid of sitcoms and confessional theatre and set during a particularly raucous Valentine’s Day night, nothing about this wicked talk-a-thon feels authentic as audiences find themselves half expecting applause or canned laughs after certain punchlines and characters actually enter the room on cue like Norm on Cheers or Kramer on Seinfeld.

When he discovers empty closets and suitcases by the front door, Tom (Cuba Gooding Jr.) reads the obligatory Dear John letter left for him by his girlfriend who’s decided to walk out on him after three years of cohabitation and realizes that in addition to his heartbreak, he must contend for an impromptu party he’d obliviously decided to throw to celebrate what he’d hoped would be his engagement.

Before the other guests arrive, his four boyhood friends trickle in one-by-one (and always on cue) and, with their varied outlooks and attitudes offer Tom advice and speeches for the film’s opening forty minutes that seem so loud, chaotic, and lewd, one wonders if Callahan, perhaps budget strapped, offered a bonus to whichever actor can deliver his monologues the fastest, thereby saving precious film stock and shortening the running time to roughly ninety minutes.

Matthew Lillard sets the film’s tone early on as the self-described misogynistic and homophobic Sal who, saddled with the film’s most shocking yet memorable lines, attacks his character with a ferocity I didn’t realize the actor had in him and it’s easy to imagine that his agent will be mailing his entire opening segment to David Mamet in the hopes of scoring a role as one of the prize-winner’s legendary boors.

In fact, Lillard is so repugnant yet compulsively fascinating that the other actors are nearly helpless in his wake, although the fault seems to lie largely in the script which finds Andrew Daly faced with portraying a one-note, ridiculously penned gay stereotype, Sean Astin relegated to portraying a Birkenstock wearing, granola eating New Age hippie tired of always being labeled as the friend to beautiful women and the writer/director, who turns in a nice performance in an uninteresting role as the happily married Ken.

How and why these characters still remain friends is a mystery as San Francisco Chronicle’s Peter Harlaub memorably described his view of the group by asking viewers to “imagine if the pack from 'The Breakfast Club' were still stuck in detention twenty years later.” While they repeatedly explain that they’ve known each other since grade school, the men in What Love Is prove just as often that they haven’t evolved much since then and it’s all the more apparent when, almost halfway through the film women begin arriving at the party (played by Gina Gershon, Anne Heche and others) and as they walk through the door, must endure starring in a stripper fantasy.

Of course, women and men are as different as Mars and Venus as the media will constantly remind so with little in the way of explanation, Callahan gives the women an abridged opportunity to delineate their own pet peeves and attitudes about dating, love and sex by placing them in the bathroom (of course) where they prove that women can be just as crude as the guys. Again as Hartlaub explained, “If you’re in your late thirties and still trolling for hookups in trendy bars, these characters will probably speak to you. If not, you’re almost certain to find them annoying.”

In other words, consider this reviewer annoyed and while I held out hope that once the two sexes would coexist in the same scene, sparks and words would begin flying, the film’s final act proves to be its most lifeless when cliché induced unsatisfactory conclusions are reached. As rude and clipped as the opening forty minutes were of the film were, had Callahan kept up the pace and managed to write the rest of the supporting players with as much force as he did for Lillard’s Sal, it may have been a successful melding of theatre and film, yet as released and given a bland title destined to blend into the video store shelves, there’s not much to love about What Love Is.