Gangster Squad (2013)

I've never been a huge mark for gangster movies. Their plots tend to be a bit overly complicated for me, what with the phone book of names they require us to know, almost all of them ending in "o" or "ni," and the connections between all of them, which when charted out with lines connecting all the dots resembles something akin to a Spirograph drawing. Oddly I find the same stuff in "Lord of The Rings" easy to follow. For some reason I know that it's Gimli, son of Gloin, son of Groin, descendant of Durin, but for some reason I could not tell you why Tony Soprano wants "Big Pussy" Bonpensiero dead. I have no explanation for this.

Movies like "LA Confidential" and "The Departed" just made my head hurt trying to keep up with the plot, to the point I couldn't enjoy them. I guess I'm just a simple man when it comes to gangster movies. Stuff like "Dick Tracy" or "Scarface." Cops are good, gangsters are bad. They shoot at each other. There you go. I'm all for shades of grey and crooked cops and men on the inside and informants and whatnot, but not at the expense of knowing what's going on. I even found "The Godfather" to be slightly frustrating, as good as it was. But that's just me. I don't like olives in my martinis, and I don't like convolution in my mobster plots.

But it seems an accepted fact now that gangster movies need that ridiculous web of connections and plots within plots within schemes within rats in order to even get made. It's just something those movies are supposed to have, but I've always found that to really be annoying because when it's all said and done, the only thing we want is to see the big shoot out at the end, because that's how they all always end. That is the part everyone is there to see in the first place. To have the road to that shoot out be so twisting and turning and doubling back on itself seems pointless, plodding and bordering on pretentious.

*sigh* It's just not exciting unless I've seen 3 hours of impossible-to-follow lead-in...

"Gangster Squad" doesn't have any of that. It was fast paced with a clear and easily digestible plot, and I found it to be something of a breath of fresh air. It was streamlined to the point where there wasn't anything left of the usual annoyances I have with the genre. What's left my not be anything that someone coming into it expecting a film like "LA Confidential" would want, but that's not to say it's bad. In fact, as "dumbed down" as that person may see "Gangster Squad," I greatly preferred it to something more "cerebral," and the reason for that is because it's free of that previously mentioned pretension.

I suppose it's for that same reason that "Gangster Squad" has been thrown under the bus in terms of critical reaction. Not that any of that really matters in the long run, but the 33% that Rotten Tomatoes has this film at is nowhere near the rating it deserves. I guess it's quite telling how deeply those elements of obfuscation have been engrained into the mob movie when a fun, well acted, action packed entry is shunned simply because it lacked those elements. It's a shame.

Listen up, you critics who gave this movie crap for not being "LA Confidential." It's not "LA Confidential." They never meant it to be. Accept this and move on. Stop crying into your notepad filled to the brim with scribbles bemoaning how this movie DARED to be a fun time, stick the pencil in your eye and leave the rest of us who got the point of this movie in peace. Just go pleasure yourself over "Road to Perdition" again or something.

What? Walking away from an explosion? Zero stars.

"Gangster Squad" plays out like a slightly more serious remake of "The Untouchables." Calling it "more serious" may be something of a misnomer, since there is certainly a good amount of humor to be found within, but anyone who saw "The Untouchables" remembers how comic-booky it got. "Gangster Squad" has a similar premise, what with a seasoned cop forming an elite team to take down a powerful mob boss, but this time it's in LA instead of Chicago. And we have better actors than Kevin Costner.

While I wasn't blown away by Josh Brolin's Sgt. O'Mara, the main character, I suppose he did a passable job of squinting and looking like a jaw had grown to gigantic proportions and sprouted legs. I'm not going to complain about his performance. He did what he was supposed to do. He was a hard-ass cop who didn't play by the rules, but damn it, he got the job done! I'm surprised they didn't give him a .44 magnum.

His jawline is actually a detective. It hides its badge under O'Mara's tongue.

I found Ryan Gosling to be more entertaining to watch, even though I'm still not 100% on board with him as an actor. We'll call it 70%. He has been climbing the ladder, but he still reminds me way too much of Casey Affleck, who's rocking a 25%. At least Gosling has the ability to not mumble. He's the reluctant member of the eponymous squad who's also playing the most dangerous game out of anyone, as he's having an affair with Grace (Emma Stone), who just happens to be the "companion" of the villain, Mickey Cohen.

Speaking of him, if there was one reason to see this film, it's Sean Penn as Mickey Cohen. He's another actor I'm usually not overly fond of, but I've got to say this was a really fun performance that he gave. If you were to channel De Niro's Al Capone and Pacino's "Big Boy" Caprice, you'd be in the right ballpark in terms of how fun he is to watch. Because he's a former boxing champion, Cohen is a bit more intimidating on a physical level than most mob boss villains are, and it's rather tense seeing him bare-knuckle throw down with Josh Brolin at the end, because there's a really strong possibility that Brolin is going to get his ass handled to him in a fancy cocktail glass.

I'd like to see Gandolfini do this...

In addition to Sean Penn, two other reasons to see "Gangster Squad" are immediately brought to mind. The first is Robert Patrick as a six-shooter toting cowboy cop who seems like he wandered onto the set from another movie being filmed across the street, but they liked him so much they just rolled with it. He may be out of place, but he's still a badass and possesses the best facial hair of the film. It's glorious. Plus it's Robert Patrick. And that's awesome.

The other reason was Emma Stone. Well, Emma Stone and her legs. There are certain things that I just can't lie about. One of those things is the fact that when it comes to particular people, I am a disgusting pig. I can't lie. So here it is: Emma Stone seems to be on a mission to be the most offensively attractive person I've ever seen in my life, particularly when she's sporting the red hair. And that seductive, Becall-esque, cigarette soaked voice of hers that sounds straight out of a movie from the 40's...good lord. I have a list of body parts I would be willing to saw off myself (or anyone else for that matter) with an allen wrench if it meant that I could merely be in her presence. I don't care how creepy that sounds, I stand by it.

She's also a really good actress. There is that, too.

Seriously, that's not fair, Emma. You're killing me by being so gorgeous.

With all that said, the cast really can't do too much if the rest of what's going on around them isn't entertaining as well, but "Gangster Squad" manages to be exciting throughout, with a good amount of action beats to keep the tempo brisk and engaging, and enough surprisingly brutal violence to satiate the bloodlust of anyone watching for the carnage. And for the kind of movie this is, which is a big budget B-movie harkening back to something that Lee Marvin would be in, that doesn't seem out of place at all.

And what do you know? It's also pretty funny. Some might not like that. Of course when you have lines like "You know the drill, boys" before a guy gets killed via a drill to the face, followed by brains splattering on the wall, followed by Josh Brolin throwing hamburger meat on a grill, it should be obvious what kind of movie this is. And expectations should be adjusted properly. I'm just glad I had fun at a mobster movie for a change.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Gangster Squad" was a lot of fun. It's exciting, it's well acted, the action is brutal, and it doesn't take itself very seriously, which adds to the humor and overall enjoyment. This is not a movie made by a people desperately trying to get an Oscar like most modern gangster films. This is a movie that remembers that those movies used to be a really fun time. Which "Gangster Squad" was. Check it out.

Men In Black 3 (2012)

Back in 1997, I was at the movies a lot. And while there were a fair share of awesome movies released that year, there was just as much garbage piled in the corner under a blanket in the hopes that nobody would notice it, but the fetid odor of death and decay was far too powerful and overwhelming to forget or ignore. One remembers fondly movies such as "Air Force One," "Liar Liar," the only good "Austin Powers" movies, "The Devil's Advocate" and "The Fifth Element" as among some of the best movies of 1997. But there is no forgetting or forgiving that 1997 also gave us "Speed 2: Cruise Control," "Volcano," "Dante's Peak," "Spawn," "Anaconda," "Tomorrow Never Dies" and "Alien: Resurrection."

Then of course, there's that other film that we do not speak of. That little chunk of pure, unadulterated molten evil that must have been chipped from the slimy, scaly hide of Cthulhu himself: "Batman & Robin." Yeah, that was 1997 too.

Someone needs to suffer for this...

And I went to the movies to see that piece of crap. After all, how could my 15 year old self have known what kind of horrors awaited him? I was an innocent child undeserving of such torture. Looking back, I should have called Child Protective Services on Joel Schumacher.

There was something special that happened during the screening of that film, however. About an hour into the film, I think right when Poison Ivy met Mr. Freeze for the first time, the film broke. You know when you see that effect replicated and it looks like the screen is melting? Yeah, that's totally what happened. And I have never been more relieved. Those technical issues possibly saved my life, because I was seriously contemplating eating my own tongue until the film mercifully put itself out of our misery. And as a bonus, the manager came into the theater to apologize, thank us for choosing wherever it was that we were, and gave us a free pass for another film.

Anyways, the point I'm trying to make is that "Batman & Robin" sucked so hard that it destroyed the film stock it was printed on, which allowed me to see the first "Men In Black" for free.

It was a good trade.

"Men In Black" was one of those special "out of nowhere" movies that was pretty impossible not to love. Nobody really saw this thing coming, and it's difficult to compare it to anything that came before. I think the closest thing to compare it to is "Ghostbusters," but even as funny as it was, "Ghostbusters" never approached the zaniness that "Men In Black" did. It's almost to the point where "Men In Black" is difficult to categorize. Is it a comedy or an action flick? Few films can walk the line between the two the way that "Men In Black" did.

Now, the sequel, "Men In Black II" is pretty widely regarded as a massive disappointment. I can't really comment on that because I honestly have little to no memory of it. All I remember is Patrick Warburton was in the beginning, K comes out of retirement, Linda Fiorentino is suspiciously absent, and the really cheesy line "You're not sad because it rains, baby. It rains because you're sad." That's really all I remember.

Now we come to "Men In Black III," and I have to say that while I was very excited to see it, I was not really sure of what to expect. The general impression that I got from the trailers was that A) Josh Brolin does a SCARY good Tommy Lee Jones impression, B) It's good to see Will Smith being funny again, and C) This could either be really, really good or stupendously bad. But the affection I have for the first movie raised my hopes to the point that I was anticipating something at the very least fairly decent.

I love having my expectations exceeded. "Men In Black III" was awesome.

You know, not many people can pull this look off...

It's difficult to explain exactly why this movie works, but what it really boils down to in the end is entertainment. It's just a lot of fun. It's not too overly silly, it's not too overly serious, it has dramatic moments while maintaining a light tone, and it's a great example of how to make a movie that's fun. So often a movie will fail when trying to find a balance between drama and comedy, and go too far one way, or they equate humor with being stupid, prime examples of both can be found in the "Transformers" franchise.

The characters in "Men In Black" are not stupid. They're not clowns doing pratfalls or annoying jackasses. You actually like these characters, which is something that is shockingly sparse in a lot of comedies. I mean, put Will Smith's Agent J against Shia LaBeouf in "Transformers." You can not tell me that Shia even approaches the same hemisphere in terms of likability. True, some of that may be because Will Smith actually possess talent, but looking at it from a character perspective, who would you rather follow through a series of films?

::Insert "South Park" joke here::

I don't mean to rip on "Transformers" (Ok, that's a lie. I tear apart that piece of trash at every opportunity) but I simply use it as an example of why a movie can work based on characters alone. "Men In Black III" could stand on the likability of the characters, even if it didn't have a fun, exciting story to go along with it.

I mentioned missing funny Will Smith earlier, and I was very entertained by his return to the "not serious." I think we forget sometimes how incredibly funny this guy can be to watch, and I soaked up this performance he gave like a sponge. He is so damn funny without really trying that hard, which is a big difference between him and some other comedians. With Will Ferrell, you can tell he's trying. Seth Rogan is trying and failing hard. Vince Vaughn is trying OH SO HARD but he's still just that jackass next door who won't shut the hell up.

Will Smith is so smooth that the comedy almost seems like an accident. I think that's what they call "naturalistic" in the biz.

"Ya'll are laughing. Did I say something funny? I'm like this all the time, see, so I can't really even tell anymore."

The story was the big thing that I was a little iffy on. Whenever "time travel" is brought up in a plot synopses I get a little worried, and understandably so. I mean, for every "Back To The Future" or "Star Trek: First Contact" there's a "Time Cop" and "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home." I know, I know, "The Voyage Home" is considered one of the good Trek movies, but I could never get behind William Shatner breaking into Sea World.

The time travel aspect in "Men In Black III" is handled more in the tradition of "Back To The Future" than it is "The Terminator," although there are elements of both "styles" of time travel - those being of the thought that the future is either changeable or a self-fulfilling prophecy, depending on the movie. J certainly can and does change events in the past, however, on some occasions it drifts towards the "you've done this because you did it already" head-splitting conundrums of time travel more in keeping with a rigid timeline. But these are fairly rare, and it generally stays more lenient with rules.

From an acting standpoint, Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones are effectively the same characters they were before, and the actors grasp of the characters has not diminished in quality. The biggest difference is that Tommy Lee Jones' Agent K is given a bit more depth, so to speak. That's difficult to quantify, however, given the fact that his personality is still an impenetrable shell. What was interesting though was to see what Josh Brolin did with Agent K.

Josh Brolin, as I mentioned before, does a fantastic Tommy Lee Jones impression, catching his voice, nuances and mannerisms to the point where it's almost creepy. But this is a younger version of K, and while you can see the man he will become, he's not quite there yet. And if anything, this is a more open and reasonably accessible version of K, although that isn't saying much at all since K still answers most questions in under 5 words and small talk is an utterly foreign concept worthy only of a stern, almost irritated look. But he's not as cold as the older K is, and the reason for that is a driving force of the movie.

The entire climax of the movie has to do with the question that Agent J asks the older K several times - "What happened to make you like this, man?"

This brings us to the ending. The ending of "Men In Black III" caught me completely off guard. Not going into spoilers here, but suffice to say that there is a twist at the end of this movie that was really unexpected. It was cool, shocking, and offers a whole new way to look at the entire series up to this point.

And I still don't know if I like it or not.

When we find out what actually happened to K, while it does shed new light on character motivations and personalities, I'm not sure if it works when viewed with the other two films. Granted, I haven't seen the other two films in a very long time, but looking back, I'm not sure how well the twist ties in with everything. In fact, I would not be surprised to find more than a few occasions where it would make no sense whatsoever, especially in the first film.

Also, it seems to me that while the event that happens to K would indeed be a life changing event, I'm not really buying it as the reason he becomes very cold and prickly. If anything, I would think that it would make him more gentle, all things considered. But that's just me.

And if there were one other thing I would have changed, I would have liked to know a little bit more about the bad guy, Boris The Animal since he's basically just an anonymous killer alien and nothing much more than that. Especially since he's played by Germaine Clement! Now, he's basically unrecognizable under the costume, but still, that's pretty cool. Makes me wonder if he has any hip-hop alter-egos. Maybe Girapffe.

"You're the most beautiful alien (in the room)"

Oh, and also...don't give Will Arnett just 30 seconds of screen time. That's not cool.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Men In Black III" is a great big ball of fun. While it may not be as good as the first, it is miles ahead of the second. Filled with great performances and a lot of laugh out loud moments. If only all summer blockbusters could be this entertaining. Highly Recommended.