A Look Back at 2007: The Breakout Stars

I wanted to give out an award for the actor who had the best year in 2007, but in trying to narrow it down to one I realized it was nigh impossible. Too many people had too great of a year. So I decided instead to focus on the five actors who had the biggest breakout this year. These are people who were either largely unknown or generally disregarded before 2007 rolled around. Thanks to their work this year, each is now a household name, and we can certainly expect a lot from each in the coming years. In alphabetical order:

Casey Affleck

The films: Ocean's Thirteen, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Gone Baby Gone

The less famous Affleck finally became the bigger of the two in 2007. Casey has largely been on the fringes of film, most notable for his supporting role in the Ocean's trilogy. He started his year off as the best part of Ocean's Thirteen before heading into serious fare with Assassination and Gone Baby Gone. These films demonstrated that he could hold a film on his own. No longer hidden in his brother Ben's shadow, he seems to be on his way to getting an Oscar nomination this year for his portrayal of Robert Ford.

Coming Next: Not yet announced.


Josh Brolin

The films: Grindhouse, In the Valley of Elah, American Gangster, No Country for Old Men

The former Goonie has been languishing for years in middling fare like Hollow Man and Into the Blue. But somehow he completely reinvented his image in 2007 with four major films. He has excelled this year at playing the creepy guy, be it as a villain (Grindhouse, American Gangster), or as the hero (No Country for Old Men). I can see his career taking on a similar trajectory to that of another former child star, Christian Bale. Bale seemed to be gravitating to these sorts of roles a few years back before he hit it big with Batman Begins. So long as he doesn't waste all this new found attention, he could be huge.

Coming Next: Milk, the true story of the murder of San Fran politician Harvey Milk. He plays the murderer.


Michael Cera

The films: Superbad, Juno

No actor's breakout this year makes me happier than Michael Cera. To those who knew him from Arrested Development, it felt like we had this little secret we wanted to share with the world. Well now the secret is out, and Cera seems poised to be the next big comedic actor. Impressive for a 19 year old. I realized just how much of a chord he'd struck with audiences after Superbad hit when I saw the Juno trailer for the first time. When asked who fathered her child, Juno says "Paulie Bleeker" and the trailer cuts to Cera's mug. The whole audience burst into laughter. To elicit that kind of laughter in a trailer by simply being on the screen for a split second is huge, especially for someone still so new to film. If he does prove to be a bankable comedic star, perhaps they'll finally be able to convince Fox that an Arrested Development film is viable.

Coming Next: Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

Emile Hirsch

The Films: Alpha Dog, Into the Wild

Hirsch is a guy I just never expected much from, career-wise. I figured he'd languish in teen exploitation films like The Girl Next Door or Alpha Dog before disappearing. But with Into the Wild he popped in a big way. Suddenly he is gaining respect as one of the best new actors of his generation. Oscar glory seems to be in the cards as well if all goes well next January. How did this happen? Well, Sean Penn certainly deserves some credit, as he was the one who discovered that Hirsch could do something big given the chance. The best comparison I can think of is Leonardo DiCaprio, who also didn't seem to get much respect as a young actor and had to work that much harder at gaining the respect he deserved. I honestly hope people continue to doubt Hirch in the future, because that kind of doubt will only push him to try more and more challenging work, something that has proved to elevate DiCaprio above the peers he was once seen as inferior to.

Coming Next: The ultra trippy looking Speed Racer.


Shia LaBeouf

The Films: Disturbia, Surf's Up, Transformers

Every decade seems to have one or two big stars. There was Jack Nicholson in the 70's, Harrison Ford in the 80's, Tom Cruise and Hanks in the 90's, and Johnny Depp and Will Smith now. Come next decade, we will be talking about Shia LaBeouf in that same manner - assuming he doesn't achieve that status in the next two years, which is entirely possible. Before you accuse me of being some Shia fanboy, a little history: I had almost no idea who he was before this year, and I wouldn't consider any of his movies this year to be among the year's best. But there is no denying that he has that star quality that so few seem to have. He was able to make the otherwise mediocre Disturbia fun, and his work in Transformers made me believe in giant transforming robots more than any special effects ever could. He has such charm and charisma that I get sucked into his films inspite of whatever misgivings I might otherwise have. It also helps that he has Spielberg in his corner. So long as his life doesn't fall apart like so many other former child actors' do, he's already on his way to superstardom.

Coming Next: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Seriously, do you really want to bet against this kid?

A Look Back at 2007: The Unappreciated

With less than a month left in the year, it's time to start making sense of the year that was 2007. Over the next few weeks I'll be writing a few articles looking back at the films of 2007, leading up to my Top 10 for the year. To kick things off, we'll start with the five films that deserved more love than they got. For whatever reason, these five films went under the radar, didn't get the reviews they deserved, or simply failed to catch on. None are necessarily classics, but they certainly deserved better than they got.

5. Smokin' Aces

With all due respect to Javier Bardem, the psychopath of the year award goes to the Tremor brothers from Smokin' Aces. Their all too brief screen time in this film was by far the best part of the movie. And the scene in which (spoilers) they kill Ben Affleck's character and then pretend his corpse is forgiving them for his murder (end spoilers) is both hilarious and unsettling. The rest of the movie is pretty fun as well, with an amazing cast. And this is the film that finally proves that Clint Masell is the best new composer of the decade. He delivers yet another amazing score for a movie that probably didn't even deserve such a memorable score.


4. Hot Rod

In a year of Knocked Up, Superbad, Hot Fuzz, and The Simpsons Movie, I am almost embarrassed to admit I laughed hardest at Hot Rod. Watching this film, I couldn't help but be reminded of the early films of Adam Sandler (and yes, that's a good thing). The laughs are unexpected and not as idiotic as you might have expected. Take, for example, the scene in which Rod and his buddies are purposefully walking down the street and a crowd begins to follow them. This inspiring moment goes haywire when it suddenly turns into a riot. It's out of left field, yet it's a great spoof of similar ridiculously inspiring scenes in movie musicals. I don't know if this film is a sign that Andy Samberg will be the next big comedy star, but it's certainly the first time I've had any interest in a SNL alum since Will Ferrell.


3. Severance

I saw Severance way back in 2006 at an early screening and the fact that I still think about how fun that experience was at the end of 2007 is a sign of how wonderful Severance is. If you like horror movies mixed with dark humor, this is one of the very best - I'd easily rank it up there with Shaun of the Dead. The cast of characters aren't just there to be killed, and the villain is surprisingly realistic and frightening. The film got almost no press and a small early summer release before finding its way to DVD. Next Halloween season, if you want to impress your friends with a horror movie, watch this one. You'll never look at bear traps the same way again.


2. Grindhouse

Any film on this list I would suggest you go out and watch. Except Grindhouse. Grindhouse was an experiment from directors Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez to try and recreate the experience of going to see a double bill of cheesy exploitation films. A big part of the experience is seeing it in the theater with other people. Grindhouse came complete with fake trailers, advertisements for neighboring restaurants, missing reels, scratched prints, and more. Unfortunately most people didn't get the point when it was released in theaters, and after bombing it has been chopped up and kind of ruined on DVD. Gone is that experience of watching an event, replaced with two stand alone movies minus all the goodies. I highly suspect that this experience (a word I keep using, but it's the only one that accurately describes Grindhouse) will become a midnight movie staple. If it does, do yourself a favor and check it out there. Don't bother with these botched DVDs, they don't do Grindhouse justice.


1. Sunshine

Of all the movies on this list, Sunshine probably came closest to being a genuinely great film. Were it not for the fact that it turns into a slasher film in the final act, it would easily be among the best sci-fi movies of recent years. It is thoughtful, humbling, exciting, tragic, and funny. While watching it, one gets the sense that director Danny Boyle wanted it to be Children of Men in space. Fox Searchlight, who have had a banner year, somehow completely botched the release of this film, never putting it in more than a handful of theaters and getting a gross of only a few million. This should have been one of the blockbusters of the summer, instead it became an afterthought. Whether you like movies to thrill you or to make you think, Sunshine offers both in ample portions.

Atonement

Thank the Movie Gods for Atonement, the only "Oscar movie" this season that actually delivers. The fall has been rife with misfires, both big (Michael Clayton, Juno) and small (No Country for Old Men, American Gangster). The final three months of the year usually result in many of my favorite movies of the year, but that has not been the case for 2007. Which makes the blissfully absorbing Atonement all the more satisfying.

Based on the novel by Ian McEwan, Atonement is not the film you might expect based on the trailers. Young Briony (Saoirse Ronan) is a child with a strong imagination, and she often puts that imagination to good use by writing stories. When she catches a glimpse of her older sister Cecilia (Keira Knightley) and the son of the family housekeeper, Robbie (James McAvoy), engaged in something beyond her understanding, it sets off a chain of events that ultimately destroy all three lives. The film, which begins in 1935, follows Briony, Cecilia, and Robbie through WWII, showing us how the repercussions of a single act have shattering and everlasting effects.

Part of what makes Atonement such a resonating piece of art is that it really works to examine and develop certain themes throughout the narrative. On the surface, one could easily enjoy this as a tragic love story. The fact that Keira Knightley and James McAvoy are billed as the leads make it appear as though it is their story. Yet it is young (and not so young) Briony that drives the themes, and it is her character above all others that is central to this film. Briony comes to realize that the mistake she made as a child has had horrible repercussions, and the way in which she struggles to come to grips with that fact makes us wonder if she has truly atoned for her misdeed. I really loved the question the film raises of whether or not art can serve as that atonement, or if it is simply a way of making yourself feel better about what you've done. It's surprisingly deep stuff.

But if you aren't interested in examining the film on that level, the tragic love story is very gripping. Most films ask us to believe that two people can fall in love in a short time. Atonement wisely sidesteps that by opening on the day that Robbie and Cecilia finally consummate their attraction after years of longing for one another. When Robbie is taken away to prison and then war, we can believe that these two people would go to such great lengths to find each other. The development of their love story was so well done that I was greatly affected by the final minutes of the film when we discover how they are reunited and under what circumstances. I'd also be remiss if I didn't mention the masterful score done by Dario Marianelli. The way in which he uses the sound of a typewriter to underscore the theme of the movie is brilliant, and it gives the film a sense of power and urgency that would simply not be there without the score.

I was so completely won over by Atonement that I am a bit ashamed to admit I was very cynical about it before I saw it. It looked like Oscar bait more than anything else, and I generally hate movies made just to win Oscars. They always feel so hollow and soulless. That is not Atonement at all. Atonement is about something. It demands to be considered as more than just an awards film, but as a film honestly trying to examine the idea of atoning for ones sins, and whether or not it is ever even possible. It's simply brilliant.

Juno

Juno is a victim of its own hype. It's a film that has garnered lavish praise and awards chatter, yet ultimately it's nothing more than a quirky teen comedy with a pretty impressive central performance. Had it been released in March, no one would be talking about it in the same breath as No Country for Old Men, Atonement, or There Will Be Blood. If you can get past all the hyperbole surrounding this film, you might find a moderately sweet diversion. If not, prepare to sit through an occasionally agonizing 90 minutes of overly quirky dialogue and familiar plot points.

Juno (Ellen Page) is a loud mouthed, wise beyond her years 16 year old who has just learned she is pregnant. The father is her geeky friend and one time fling Paulie Bleeker (Michael Cera). She decides to keep the baby and give it to a family who can't have children of their own. The couple, Vanessa and Mark (Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman), don't seem totally ready for kids, with Mark being an overgrown kid and Vanessa being a bit too stuffy and self-centered. The film follows Juno over the 9 months of her pregnancy, her relationship with Paulie, and the struggles of Vanessa and Mark as they come to grips with parenthood. A lot of people have been calling the screenplay from newcomer Diablo Cody a revelation, but clearly they weren't talking about the plot.

I fear they were talking about the dialogue. If so, I have a little bit less respect for the film critic community. The dialogue is often gratingly unrealistic and "clever" in the worst sense of the word. Cody seems to have spent more time trying to think of things that made her say "wouldn't it be funny to hear someone say that?" and less time thinking about what would actually be true to her story and characters. The worst offenders were the characters of Juno herself, as well as her friend Leah. People don't talk like that, and to hear a person say things like "honest to blog?" or "this is one doodle that can't be undid, home skillet" just takes you out of the reality of the film. I honestly stopped caring about some of the characters because they were clearly not meant to be anything more than simple cartoons there to make us laugh.

The actors all try their best to rise above the jarring dialogue. Ellen Page really is pretty good as Juno, and there are times where I think she really tried to elevate her character above the bad one liners and quirky vibe Cody infused upon her. I almost cared about Juno towards the end, and that was 100% thanks to Page. Cera is, as expected, understated, and he actually feels like a real human being for the most part. Garner and Bateman may be the best part of the film, however. Not saddled with the same idiotic lines their costars have, they are able to create two fully former characters that actually have depth. Both are likable and unlikable at the same time, and I honestly was warmed by the final two scenes with Garner. Bateman could have come across as a villain with his role, but thankfully he is smarter than that. We might not agree with what he does in the film, but we can easily see why he feels the need to do it.

Director Jason Reitman made one of my favorite films of 2006 with Thank You for Smoking. He was lucky to have an intelligent, funny script to work off of with that film. Here he does the best that he can with Cody's inane quips, and I suspect that he still has some growing to do as a filmmaker. He may be one to keep an eye on, however, as he is clearly a major talent in the comedy genre. I wish I could have loved this film as much as everyone else seems to love it, but I simply hated every word that came out of certain characters' mouths. No one talks like this, and the strong performances and solid directing are all weighed down by that one simple fact. As it stands, Knocked Up from last June is a far more funny and intelligent look at unexpected pregnancy, and it's a shame that film won't be the one garnering all the awards attention come next February.

Charlie Wilson's War

It's interesting how a person can know that something happened without knowing exactly how it happened. Such is the case with my knowledge of the Soviet-Afghan War. I knew of the fact that America helped train and arm Afghans to fight off the invading Soviets in the late 80's, and I knew that this incident played a major part in the fall of the USSR. Yet I never knew how the ball got rolling on our involvement. Charlie Wilson's War is the story of that ball, and, to steal the film's own metaphor, how it has been bouncing along ever since. That may sound like the potential for a long, stuffy, dull film - but you'd be wrong. Actors Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, and especially Philip Seymour Hoffman turn this brisk film into a rousing crowd pleaser. It's not one of the year's best, and its Oscar possibilities aren't as strong as might have been expected, but it's the kind of movie that a lot of people will enjoy over the holiday season. I certainly had a fun time.

Charlie Wilson is a boozing, fun-loving congressman, played by Hanks. He gets wind of the troubles in Afghanistan and decides to get involved. He has no idea what exactly getting involved entails, however, until he travels to the wartorn nation and sees firsthand the atrocities that have been happening. From that point there is no looking back, as he begins to work on the largest covert operation in American history. The role fits Hanks like an old glove, and he is charming and fun as Wilson. Yet anyone expecting anything groundbreaking or layered will be slightly disappointed. Hanks never really digs into the role like he has in past roles, occasionally appearing to be on autopilot. I think the same argument people have against Jack Nicholson playing Jack repeatedly can apply here to Hanks. It's fun to watch, but not a revelation.

Speaking of Nicholson, it seems like Philip Seymour Hoffman is channeling a young Jack in his role. I don't think I've ever seen Hoffman light up the screen with charisma before, but here he is really chewing on the scenery, delivering the single best performance in the film. He's a hotheaded, sarcastic, very funny CIA operative named Gust Avrakotos who joins Wilson in the Afghan plight. When Hoffman isn't on screen, this is a good movie; when he is on screen, it's a great one. If this film does turn out to have any awards cache, expect him to be the first to benefit from it. The audience was howling at many of his scenes, yet he never sacrificed the character's fierce intelligence to get a laugh. Hands down, the best scene in the film is the introduction of Wilson to Gust. Spoiling it would be criminal, but it is both hilarious and a great insight into Gust's character.

Switching gears a bit, of this film's weak points, none are more glaring than the miscast Julia Roberts. Even if you feel Hanks isn't doing a whole lot with his role, you at least feel as though he is doing his job effortlessly. Roberts, on the other hand, never sinks into her character, and it brings you out of nearly every scene she is in. And the problem goes far deeper than simply her poor imitation of a Texan accent. Roberts hasn't been on screen since Ocean's Twelve back in 2004, and one gets the feeling that she has forgotten how to dig into a role. Her performance in Charlie feels a lot like that of an actress trying to refamiliarize herself with the craft. Her confidence just isn't there, and it's a shame. Her role was clearly meant to be a fun one, and she never appears to be having any.

The runtime, about 100 minutes, also feels short. That may sound good, and in some ways it is, but I never quite shook the fact that it felt like something was missing. Rumor has it the film has been heavily edited down, and I think that may have been a mistake. A two hour movie is not a chore to sit through if it's as entertaining as this one is, and I suspect another twenty minutes might have made it all flow better. For example, we never understand why Wilson wants to get involved with the Afghan plight. As far as we can tell, his first introduction to the conflict is when he briefly catches a new report on TV during a party. Surely a congressman has enough on his mind that a snippet of new footage isn't enough to so drastically change his life (even a congressman as fun-loving as Charlie is). Also, there is a whole subplot dealing with Wilson being investigated for his partying ways that feels like it never fully develops. We never get the sense that it has any real bearing on the rest of the film or Charlie's work in Afghanistan. Things like these could easily have benefited from a bit more development.

So many political and war related films of late have failed miserably with both critics and audiences, and it's for the same reason in every case: they just seem too dreary and depressing considering what is going on in the world right now. That's not to say a depressing film about recent history can't work (United 93), just that it takes a skilled filmmaker to walk that line between depressing and insightful. Charlie Wilson's War deftly avoids this problem altogether by trying to be a fun film first and foremost, and I suspect audiences will flock to it more than other recent political films. It hits us every once in awhile with a powerful moment (Charlie's trip to a ravaged Afghan town, where he meets two children left disfigured after playing with a mine hits you in the gut, and one really hopes that those kids' appearance was digitally altered and not reality), but those moments are rarely the focus. Charlie, Gust, and to a lesser extent, Roberts' Joanne are all fun people you want to spend time with. They aren't there to lecture you, and as a result you can let the facts of the story sink in without feeling lectured to. It may surprise some, however, to find the film ends on a slightly melancholy and ambiguous note. Yes, Charlie got the ball rolling in Afghanistan, but he has no control over how that ball will bounce after the war is over. The final line of the film, delivered in text, is both decidedly amusing and strikingly sobering.

Catching Up: Mini Reviews

As Oscar season quickly approaches, my movie intake is increasing. I simply don't have the time to give all the movies the reviews they deserve, but I still felt I should sum up my feelings towards each.

Gone Baby Gone



Following in the footsteps of Clint Eastwood with Mystic River, actor Ben Affleck has crafted a masterpiece of moral ambiguity. Based on a Denis Lehane novel, Baby follows two private detectives (Casey Affleck and Michelle Monaghan) in search of a missing four year old girl. The plot unfolds in a surprising way, and it's a testament to Ben Affleck's directing abilities that he is able to keep it from feeling exploitative or familiar. At one point I honestly had no idea where the film was going to go next, a quality I wish more films had. All the performances are excellent, with Casey Affleck once again proving he is ready for the big time. Ed Harris as a morally ambiguous cop and relative newcomer Amy Ryan as the mother of the missing child give the best performances, however, and it would be truly surprising to not see at least one of them (probably Ryan) get an Oscar nomination. It all builds to one of the most thought provoking finales of the year, with a final shot that is a bit devastating. If this is the career Ben Affleck has in his future, I welcome it with open arms.




Bee Movie


There really is only one reason to see Bee Movie: Jerry Seinfeld. It's been almost a decade since his hit sitcom went off the air, and he has finally made the leap to the big screen (Comedian notwithstanding). If you were to remove Seinfeld's humor, though, this would be just another Dreamworks animated comedy, which is to say, not a very good movie. Yet Jerry brings enough wit and charm to raise this above the Shreks and Shark Tales and deliver an occasionally very funny film. The supporting cast is unfortunately largely wasted, especially Chris Rock, whose presence here amounts to maybe three scenes. Seinfeld definitely still knows how to make you laugh, though, and that's really all I expected from this to begin with.




American Gangster


With American Gangster Ridley Scott appears to have watched every major gangster film of the past 40 years, and then proceeded to copy them all. The result is one of the least original films of the fall season. Which isn't to say it's a bad movie. You've seen literally everything in this film before, but it's done with such precision here that it barely receives a pass. Denzel Washington is up to his usual tricks as Frank Lucas, a gangster on the rise, while Russel Crowe is satisfying as the cop out to catch Lucas. The best scene in the film is when these two men finally sit down to talk with each other (shades of Heat), which unfortunately doesn't come until over two hours into this epic. Don't go into this expecting anything new and you will be satisfied. Those who prefer to see a new take on an old genre best look elsewhere.




No Country for Old Men


I wanted to try and write a full review of this film, but I just don't feel like I've been able to digest it the way I should have. Clearly this is a very ambitious film, and the Coen brothers have rarely stumbled in their long career. Yet for some reason I felt distanced from this film throughout. What frustrates me is that I can't pinpoint what it is I found so alienating about this film. Tommy Lee Jones as a weary cop is stoic and melancholy, a man who has seen the horrors of the world and walked away dumbfounded. Javier Bardem as the psychopath Chigurh is chilling, one of the best villainous performances in recent years. And capping off his comeback year, Josh Brolin centers the film with his portrayal of a conflicted man on the run. It's interesting that no character here is meant to really be liked or sympathized with, perhaps aiding my conflicted feelings towards this film. Everything is shot with bravado, the sound is beautiful, the lack of any real score adds tension. In fact, the only thing that I can immediately point out as being a misstep is a jumpcut towards the end of the film that essentially skips one of the most important parts of the story. We spend so much time with Brolin's character that it feels like an outright cheat to not see how he gets to where he is at the ending, even if we can piece it together on our own. I wanted to love this movie, and I see no reason why I didn't, which makes this such a maddening experience. This isn't your typical quirky, offbeat Coen brothers movie, instead feeling cold and calculated - and perhaps that is what threw me off. In a way it surprisingly feels more like a Stanley Kubrick film than a Coen brothers film. Kubrick is a man who rarely made a movie I outright loved upon initial viewing, and yet I now consider most of his films to be among the best cinema has every produced. No Country for Old Men is not a film that I can fully dissect right now, but given time it might become a classic - or its coldness might just put me off to it for good. It's simply too soon to tell.

Southland Tales

A few incarnations ago, way back in the early days of 2005, I started a movie review site. My first post was a preview of the movies I was looking forward to in the upcoming year, and number one by far was Southland Tales, from writer/director Richard Kelly. His first film, Donnie Darko, was one of my favorite movies at that time, and I couldn't wait to see how he would follow it up. The year came and went, but no Southland. 2006 started, and again this was my most anticipated movie, as I was now certain it would be released by year's end. Sure enough, it was submitted to Cannes in May, seemingly guaranteeing its impending release. But the reception at Cannes was a disaster, and suddenly no one knew what would become of Kelly's second film. Another year passed with no release in sight. Even the most steadfast Kelly fan would be dubious at this point, and I was certainly getting frustrated. Good or bad, I didn't want to wait any longer to see this film. But finally, after nearly four years of patiently waiting, I was able to see Richard Kelly's Southland Tales. No movie has provided me with such a rollercoaster of anticipation and dread, and reviewing it in light of all that has happened over the years proves no easy feat.

Southland is essentially about a group of people in Los Angeles all interacting in the final three days before the end of the world. At the center of it all there is amnesiac actor Boxer Santaros (Dwayne Johnson), porn star turned media mogul Krysta Now (Sarah Michelle Gellar), and mysterious twin brothers Roland and Ronald Taverner (Seann William Scott). Going any further than that would be both difficult and useless: so much happens to so many people that describing it would both spoil it and color it with my own interpretations. Suffice it to say, it is something along the lines of Brazil mixed with Donnie Darko and Starship Troopers.

So I guess the big question is "Is it a disaster like we've been told?" In short: no. It is a very, very flawed movie, but not one without its charms. It's a case of Richard Kelly's ambition getting too far out of control, resulting in a project he was not able to fully have a handle on. I suspect the biggest problem most will have is that it is nigh impossible to fully get it without reading the companion graphic novel, which sets up the first half of the story. Unlike Star Wars, which can start on Episode IV and make sense, this one is fully dependent on the viewer's knowledge of how everything got to where it is at the film's start. The quick introduction at the beginning is simply not enough. Thankfully I was familiar with the prequel story, so I was able to fully grasp what was going on. But most people won't ever read the prequels, and thus, will not appreciate much of what happens.

Kelly has said he wanted to cast people in roles you wouldn't associate them with, and that tactic surprisingly works for the most part. Dwayne Johnson (no longer "The Rock") is good as the befuddled, loopy action star. I always have found him to be a charming actor, and I hope this film proves to be a leap in a new direction for him. Sarah Michelle Gellar brings a quirky ferocity to her porn star character, and I would argue she gives the best performance of the film. It could have been just a ditsy idiot, yet it never is. There is depth to Krysta that is always shining through. Seann William Scott was extremely subdued and contemplative as the Taverner twins, and not once did I think of him as a comedic actor. In fact, for a film that is meant to be a satire, he is possibly the only character that isn't meant to be funny at all. The supporting cast is all very eclectic, with Jon Lovitz shining as a truly scary racist cop and Wallace Shawn enjoying himself as the bizarre creator of a new source of energy known as Fluid Karma. Some might not like the fact that everyone is playing against type, but for the most part they all succeed (Mandy Moore, however, plays her spoiled senator's daughter character way too over the top, and is the weakest part of the cast).

Unlike Darko, where every element seemed to fuse together into one great product, here things don't flow so naturally. For example, Kelly's seemingly preternatural ability to use sound and music in his last film is wasted here. The often beautiful score from musician Moby seems like an afterthought, always used in unnatural scenes. And with the exception of a scene featuring a Pixies song, none of the song choices stand out either. Kelly's interspersal of cutaways, news footage, maps, and other visual elements to tell his story are often relied on too heavily in place of simple storytelling. While they help to create the sense of a real, lived-in world, they become too much of a crutch for his overly ambitious story. And perhaps most disappointing is his lack of strong characters. In Darko there was a sense that each character has something important to add to the story, yet here so many characters are expository or superfluous. You get the sense that Kelly had a film so big in his mind, that no single element of the film got the full attention it deserved, resulting in a film full of deficiencies.

The tone of the film is something that I had some serious contentions with: this thing has mood swings worse than a newborn child. It's a satire, yet it wants us to take it seriously, especially at the end. It's OK to have some funny, lighthearted moments (even end of the world movies need some humor), but entire characters are meant to be over the top and goofy. So when the end hits, and we are supposed to take some sort of special meaning from the final scene, it falls flat. Either make an end of the world satire like Dr. Strangelove, or make a serious-minded look at how me might bring about our own downfall; you can't have it both ways.

Yet in spite of all these flaws, I liked it. I think. I appreciate Kelly's ambition, his steadfast determination to create something different. I wasn't bored, and there were some truly shining moments (Justin Timberlake's musical number set to a Killers song was a lot of fun). I wish it could have all worked out, and I am very curious to see the half hour of footage left out of this final version. It probably won't make the film better, but it sure would be interesting to see if Kelly was able to reign in his film in the final months. I don't think it's the disaster many have claimed it to be, but it's not especially great, either. I am pretty sure I've never anticipated a movie as much as I have with this one - which wasn't helped by years of delays - so it is hard to gauge my true feelings for it. It could soar in my mind over the coming months, like Darko did after I first saw it. Or it could completely collapse as I get more and more removed from the insane buildup in my mind. But right now, at this moment, I see Southland Tales as a gloriously flawed cornucopia of ideas, and one that I am glad to have finally put behind me after all these years of waiting.