The MattyBoy Codex

Before getting into the meat of this review, let me say first off that you must see this movie. Not because it’s a great movie. It’s not. Certainly not because Angelina Jolie directed it. She’s got a sure steady hand as a director, but isn’t extraordinarily talented in that department. Nor should you see the movie solely for the fine acting by Jack O’Connell or Takamasa Ishihara, though they both give awesomely good performances.

No. You should simply see this movie for Louis Zamperini. Do it for him, posthumously, as he died a few months back. See it as a tribute to one of the best men you will ever know.

Unbroken is Zamperini’s story, adapted from Laura Hillenbrand’s great book of the same name. It tells the harrowingly true story of Zamperini, a troubled youth who learned to channel his anger into competitive running, going to the Berlin Olympics and then enlisting in the air force as a bombardier during World War II. While on a mission, his plane goes down. He is lost at sea for 47 days. 47 DAYS!!

He’s rescued, but by the Japanese who take him to a POW camp where he is singled out by the sadistic camp commander Watanabe, or The Bird, as the POW’s call him. The Bird takes a strange shine to Zamperini, beating him senseless nearly every day, simply to prove that he is the better man. Eventually Zamperini and the rest of the POW’s are rescued, and that’s basically where the movie ends.

Now, the scenes in the raft are amazingly well done. O’Connell portrays Zam as the calm, reserved, strong voice of reason, and it’s a really, really good performance. The POW camp scenes also are harrowing, especially when the bird commands each of the prisoners to punch Zam in the face. There are over 100 men there, and it was either obey or get shot. They obey, reluctantly, and Zamperini is beaten to a pulp.

Here’s the problem. We’ve seen a LOT of POW movies. STALAG 17 was fun. THE HANOI HILTON wasn’t. Forget about the DEER HUNTER! I mean, after THAT, there’s not much more you can do to portray the brutality of these camps. So what we have here is a somewhat obvious story of the tough POW and the Sadistic guard who makes his life miserable. And that’s a shame, because Louis deserves much more. He deserves to have us gasp, clutch our hearts, or cover our mouths with our hands. But, we’ve seen this all before in other, better movies! Don’t misunderstand. Jolie delivers the goods, and the empathy level is high. It’s just that it’s hard to get worked up over these things again. The recent report on the CIA torture techniques doesn’t help (no matter which side of that argument you end up on, the CIA was REALLY good at torturing enemy combatants!).

For me, the real omission here is what Jolie leaves out. At the risk of making a 4-5 hour movie, she leaves out Zams post war alcoholism, his marital woes, his money issues, all chalked up to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and all conquered by Zamperini. Sure, she gives us written end credits barely touching on these things, but the real story of Zam is how he overcame years of abuse, only to turn his life around and embrace his captors and forgive them (literally. He travelled back to Japan and met and forgave all his tormentors, except for the Bird, who wouldn’t meet with him). Again, I get the need to edit, but some of the POW stuff could have been shortened, as well as the days at sea, and this final triumph given the story it deserves.

Peter Jackson’s last and final (supposedly) foray into Middle Earth, The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, wraps up his second trilogy of the adapted works of J.R.R. Tolkien. The first trilogy comprised the 3 books that make up the Lord of the Rings, and was a monumental undertaking that succeeded on damn near every level. The books themselves, basically a long 3 part war story involving wizards, elves, dwarves, trolls, etc. is a literary classic and rightfully so.

Thing is, while the written Lord of the Rings (LOTR) was big, long, complex and requiring 3 big, long, complex movies to fully do it justice, The Hobbit is roughly 300 pages of story and does not require 3 long, complex movies. Delightful as the original story was, The Hobbit, as adapted by Jackson, is a bit dreary, overlong, overwrought, and padded with enough made up characters and long panoramic shots of the gorgeous New Zealand countryside to all but put you to sleep. And that’s a shame. The story itself is engaging. 13 Dwarves show up at the house of Hobbit Bilbo Baggins, and coerce him into joining them to take back their fortune from a dragon who took it years earlier. Sound silly? It is. But Tolkien imbued the story with enough Celtic myth, allegory and excitement that it didn’t “read” silly at all.

I confess to being a big geek about this stuff. I loved the books and re-read them many times. The 3 movies comprising the Lord of the Rings was brilliant, and I’ve seen them many times too. But the Hobbit, as a movie, has left me somewhat exhausted, suffering from Hobbit fatigue. It’s not that these are bad movies. They certainly are not. But there’s a sameness to them, a been there-done that feeling to it. Frankly, as good as the CGI is, how realistic the dragons and trolls look, we’ve seen them already in LOTR. I don’t feel that the 3 movies of the Hobbit are as good as the LOTR.

But…they are still really, really good. Especially this last one. Lots of big battles and bloodshed, but it’s in the individual battles that Jackson really excels at presenting here. The Dwarf King Thorin finally confronting his scary as hell protagonist Azog the Defiler upon a frozen lake is brilliantly shot and a fitting climax (more on the climaxes later). The cinematography is gorgeous, and the acting is top notch. Martin Freeman as Bilbo the Hobbit is perfect, as is the rest of the cast.

What’s good:

Evangeline Lily as Tauriel the elf. The character isn’t in Tolkien’s book, but there weren’t a lot of female characters at all in the book, and if Jackson had to cram in a bit of sex appeal, well, Ms. Lilly certainly fits the bill, pointy ears and all.

Orlando Bloom as Legolas. He’s been in both trilogies and he’s welcome.

Special effects and music. Both top notch.

What’s not so good:

Uhhhhh…about 7 hours to tell a 300 page story?

The ending(s). Jackson doesn’t know when to end the tale. Just when you think you can leave your seat…some character is saying goodbye again.

The look of the movie is dark, spooky and perfect. That said, it all looks that way. Watching 7 hours of it lends a sense of sameness to the proceedings. It gets a bit tedious.

Damien Chazelle’s “Whiplash” may be the most intense, moving, jaw-droppingly good movie I have seen this year. I loved every second of this movie and was sorry to see it end.

It’s a fairly simple plot. Gifted young jazz drummer Andrew (a fantastic Miles Teller) enrolls in a prestigious music school, where he meets Terrence Fletcher, the head of the Studio Band department. Studio Band is the crème de la crème of the students, hand-picked by Fletcher, who runs it with military like precision.

Remember the drill instructor in Full Metal Jacket? Remember how scary he was? Fletcher eats him for breakfast. He is sadistic, rude, crude, violent, and pushes his students to the point of suicide.

Or to the point of perfection. His whole approach is to break his students down, totally destroy them, and then if they come back for more, he knows they are serious.

What transpires is some of the most grueling, gut-wrenchingly hard to watch verbal (and in some cases, physical) beat downs in movie history. Fletcher is an absolute maniac, and his students, so eager to be the best and win his approval, grovel and cower before him. He makes grown men cry, and thinks nothing of pitting his musicians against each other.

Andrew goes through the practices, endures the abuse, and finally breaks. What happens after that I won’t say. It’s everything you would expect, and yet completely different. Suffice to say, that what transpires over the last 15 minutes of this movie will move, shock, and make you gasp all at the same time.

I can go on and on about this movie. As a drummer, I appreciate the subject matter, and had been anxious to see it. I’d heard it was good, but was expecting more of a “Fame” kind of movie. This is not “Fame”. Nothing like it. This is big boy, badass, serious movie making, and something everyone must see.

J.K. Simmons is a revelation. He is completely, astoundingly convincing, and the scariest protagonist since Heath Ledger’s Joker in The Dark Knight. I can’t stress it enough. The guy will reduce you to tears, he is so scary good in this roll. Forget those Farmers Insurance commercials. This guy should be given an Oscar for this one. Teller is a young actor to watch, and in odd, but perfect casting, Paul Reiser is Andrew’s milquetoast dad. Quiet, somewhat sad, and truly believable, Reiser redeems all those years of Mad About You with a real, passionate acting job.

The physicality required to play the drums is an integral part of the story, and frankly makes for very compelling storytelling. Many times, I’ve had people sit down at my drum kit, bang around for a bit and exclaim “OH! This is hard!” It is. And the physical toll it takes is realistically, bloodily depicted here. You don’t need to be a drummer to appreciate the blood, sweat and tears that mastering this instrument requires. You didn’t need to be a boxer to understand the pain that Rocky Balboa was going through! Don’t let the subject matter scare you away. This is no niche movie. It’s for everyone, and is something even younger kids would benefit from watching. Im talking 12 year olds and up. The language is rough, but the inspiring lessons are worth it.

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is one of those movies that I really don’t know how to feel about. It’s innocuous, for sure. It’s a little weird, and it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but it’s a pleasant enough way to spend 90 odd minutes, and if you’re a fan of Ben Stiller, who also directed, it’s…ok.

The plot is simple, until it gets preposterous. Walter Mitty is a daydreaming geek who works for LIFE magazine sorting or receiving or doing something with the film negatives that their photographers send in. One of the superstar photographers has sent in a picture that he promises will be the “quintessence of LIFE” and that will be perfect for the mags final print issue. The picture is lost, and Ben Stiller’s Walter Mitty has to track it down by following the photog around the world.

The angle here is that Mitty is a daydreamer, someone who has done nothing and been nowhere. A schlub, otherwise known as the typical Ben Stiller character. Mitty zones in and out of reality, imagining himself in all kinds of adventures, until he actually goes on one to retrieve the picture.

OK, so this is a remake of an older, better movie, based on a James Thurber story. This movie, however, is disjointed and hard to take remotely seriously. One minute Mitty is in Greenland, then Iceland, then the Himalayas, where he miraculously stumbles upon the photographer he’s looking for (a slumming Sean Penn). I mean, the Himalayas, for crying out loud! How do you “stumble” on anything there, unless you’re stumbling off a cliff? And how long does this globe hopping take? A day? Week? MONTHS?!! No sense of time is given, nor a sense of how Mitty is surviving, what he’s doing for cash, food, clothes, etc. He just kind of shows up, and gets into these wild situations.

Now, not to be too harsh. It’s pleasant. Diversionary. Ok for the family, too. It’s just, I don’t know, a bit “light” in that there’s really no weight given to anything. I’m not looking for Citizen Kane from Ben Stiller, but a bit more attention to detail would be welcome. There ARE some nice set pieces, like a scene where Penn and Stiller join in a tribal soccer game, and another where Stiller goes careening down a long open road on a skateboard. Nicely done. The soundtrack is good too, as is Kristin Wigg as the love interest for Stiller.

U2 have sprung their latest “Songs of Innocence” on us via a free download to all I-Tunes user’s which is about 500,000,000 people, so…thanks guys. I guess.

Actually, let me say “Thanks” with this caveat: It’s one more U2 album (yes I still call them albums) of completely unmemorable tunes that sound exactly like the ones on the previous album (No Line on the Horizon) that in fact sounded just like the previous one to that.

So…yeah, thanks a lot U2.

It’s not that I don’t like this band…I love them! I have since I saw them live back in 1984, and many times afterwards. They are a GREAT rock n roll band. I will buy just about anything that they put out. And I will listen to it once and never bother with it again. Which is why I’m thankful that I didn’t have to buy this one.

It’s not that I think this is a collection of completely shitty songs.  Compared to the crap that’s out there passing for serious music, U2 is hitting it out of the park on “Songs of Innocence”. But for THIS band, who hit such magnificent heights over the last 30-40 years, who were ever-searching, ever-striving, for that “next, new, sound”, that this set of songs sound like simply a rehash of the last few albums is borderline criminal. You know, I can almost live with bands who sound like other bands…those groups who sound like Zep, or the Who, or the Stones, or what have you. That shows an attention to influence, and is something that I don’t necessarily think is a bad thing, to a degree. What I really can’t stand is a band who always sounds the same, who always seems to regurgitate the same sounds, phrasings, motifs, etc. That is U2, whose biggest influence appears to be U2.

Now, yes, Zeppelin always sounded like Zeppelin. Stones like the Stones, The Who like the Who. And so on. But there is one thing to remember; U2, while a great band, is NOT a Zeppelin, Stones or The Who. They are no BEATLES, for damn sure. What U2 lacked in musicianship and song writing ability they always made up for with heart and earnestness. They were doing the best they could with what they had, and did wonderfully for years with that. But Jesus, I’ve been listening to this thing all morning now, and I can’t really distinguish one song from another. “The Miracle (of Joey Ramone) starts off with a jaunty hum-along and then launches into a fuzzed out riff that sounds like its gonna go somewhere! And then…it just kinds of fades into Bono’s usual falsetto - tinged drag of a voice. What happened to that guitar? Where did that urgency go? Man, that riff was ok for the few seconds it lasted… “Volcano” is actually not the worst, though it sounds like it could have been off their “Pop” album, which was an exploration of disco beats and loops. I didn’t like it, but you know what, it didn’t sound like every other album before it! “Raised by Wolves” is more of the same. Starts out interestingly, and then…it just kind of puddles out to nothing much.

Most of the other stuff here is a drag. Bono keeps singing about his moms death, which I’m sure was traumatic but it was, what 50 years ago? Come on…please. No more songs like “Iris”.

I get that not every album can be transformative. U2’s sound had been established on the post-punk of “Boy” and “October” and then hit its full apex with “War”.  Those albums gave us a hungry, earnest, striving band, working hard on their instruments and grappling to play something meaningful and different. Later, albums like “The Unforgettable Fire” and “The Joshua Tree” completely re-jiggered U2’s sound, alternating between ethereal soundscapes, Americana-colored anthems, and then on “Achtung Baby”, grinding, electronic, dirty, cold rockers.

Now…I’m bored by everything that they’ve put out over the last 15 years or so. Never thought I’d say that, but it’s true. I’m not looking for them to be the next Metallica, or Tool, or Taylor Swift, or Foo Fighters but I don’t want them to sound like the same old’ same old’

This is going to be a short one. I watched The Amazing Spiderman 2 last night and didn’t like it. There.

Not good enough? Need more? Well…there’s not much to talk about. Mark Webb is the director, and he seems to be channeling Joel Schumacher circa Batman Forever and (God help us) Batman and Robin. I mean, what the hell happened here? The previous Spidey movie was fun. Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker/Spiderman, and Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy brought some real (albeit slight) gravitas and chemistry to their roles, especially Garfield. He’s a good actor, and was a good Parker. Add Martin Sheen and Sally Field as Uncle Ben and Aunt May and its pretty heavy duty! That movie had weight, seriousness, humor and some outstanding FX.

This one….not. Jaime Foxx as Electro, a super nerd who falls into some super eels in a tank and then can control electricity. And Fly. And Disappear, and…whatever.

Then Dan Dehaan as the Green Goblin, who when he finally shows up looks like a reject from a Tim Burton outtake from Edward Scissorhands…silly and not menacing.

The special effects are distinctly video game-ish, and not remotely realistic. How realistic can a guy swinging around Manhattan look? Well, check out the first movie! Or even the Sam Raimi trilogy with Tobey Maguire from a few years back. Much better.  

Anyway, the whole thing was…slight. Twee. Boring, silly and had a tone that didn’t at all mesh with the previous flicks slightly serious, gritty setting.

Yeah, I know. Gritty superhero’s are passé but dammit so are garish, overwrought, neon looking productions! Enough with that already! I didn’t necessarily find Man of Steel to be dark, only violent. Neither was the Avengers. They were, dare I say it, well done and semi-adult treatments of childish conceits. Not to mention Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, wherein Batman is treated not so much as the dark avenger of evil as he is a militarized ninja badass with serious authority issues. Sure, that may have been the total opposite of the spectrum but it worked!

Chaos Theory at Tropix on the Nautical Mile in Freeport!

Saturday August 9th 2-6pm!

Still smarting from my recent so-called meal at the Salsa Shack at Tobay Beach on Long Island, my family and I ventured into New Hope Pennsylvania for two days of rest, relaxation, and mostly…eating. My wife and I are both on fairly strict diets, have each lost a ton of weight, and frankly, just wanted to cheat a bit.

Sure, we started at the Salsa Shack, but as you might have noted from my previous review, that didn’t go exactly as planned. Check out my review on this page, and stay tuned as I send a copy of it to the management of that horror show.

Nevertheless, and undaunted, we ventured into unknown territory Thursday night simply on the recommendation of our hotel’s desk clerk, and headed out to the Redstone Grill for a meal that we hoped would be fun, different, and above all, GOOD.

We were seated quickly in a very spacious booth, and admired the décor. Wine bottles on racks form the walls surrounding a huge bar, dimly lit, and just crowded enough. In fact the whole place was crowded. A good sign.

Then….the waiter comes. Introduces himself as Larry, and proceeds to tell us about the food, the menu, the location….my eye rolls were in full bloom. It’s a peeve of mine. I don’t NEED to be told how to read a menu, especially by some hipster who apparently is taking himself and his job way too seriously!

But wait…this is different! I ask Larry about a certain craft beer, and he says he is embarrassed to say he doesn’t know the answer but will ask the bartender. And he DOES! Comes back with the bottle too, to show me. I appreciated that, and tried the beer which I enjoyed (some ginger infused thing that seemed good at the time). Then he proceeds to take our order in the most professional, pleasant way possible. Answering questions. Giving tips, but not in any type of overbearing way at all. I like this guy!!

So the food comes. Oh Wow. It’s really good! The boy has a big steak cooked perfectly. Sue and I both have baby back ribs that completely fall off the bone, and that are accompanied by a savory Cole Slaw that might be one of the top 20 things I’ve ever eaten. COLE SLAW, for Chrissakes!!!! Delicious! Julia had her typical pasta with grilled chicken, but even that was different. Seriously, this was a dynamite meal. Now, about that steak. You can get it with a sauce. Any real meat eater will tell you not to bother, that a good piece of meat needs no adornment. However, my son Matt is a wildly adventurous eater and wanted to try the Béarnaise sauce. However he hadn’t ordered it when he placed the order for his steak.

Larry to the rescue! I called him over, asked for the Béarnaise sauce on the side, he said “sure” and disappeared for about two minutes. Then the manager, not Larry, comes over with the sauce. Now, that’s impressive enough, but the manager said that he knew it was our first time at their establishment and how was everything and could he do anything more for us…no thanks, he did enough. HE RESTORED MY FAITH IN HUMANITY!! Ok, hyperbole for sure, but dammit that was the right goddam thing to say at that time to my family and I.

Desserts. Larry tells us they are big enough to share, so we order two. Some peanut butter / chocolate cake thing, which was huge but truly didn’t work for me, and then the Apple Cobbler/Crisp with a Cinnamon ice cream scoop on top. Huge and delicious!!! REALLY good!

Now here’s the thing…this feast (and I didn’t even mention the flatbread pizza appetizer which was wonderful with tomato, basil and fresh mozzarella) cost a bit less than the mess we had at Salsa Shack. Delicious food, good, reasonable portions, and service that was beyond professional and accommodating. What an absolute joy! I was sure to tell the manager on my way out what a great meal it was, and how appreciative we were of Larry the server, who took such apparent pride in his job, and his place of employment, that I am embarrassed that I initially thought of him as a hipster doofus. He likely won’t see this, but Larry…you are a damn good waiter, and it was our honor to sit at your table!!

Standards. We all have them. Some higher, some lower. Some of us care more than we should, and some of us don’t care enough. I consider myself the former. I care. I want to enjoy a good meal, with good service and good value. I don’t necessarily care what it costs, I just want to be able to say “that was worth every dime” or “that was good” or even “that didn’t suck”. Unfortunately I can’t say any of the above about the Salsa Shack at Tobay. What I CAN say is “Man! Did THAT suck”!

Walk into the Salsa Shack (let’s call it SS for brevity’s sake) and your confronted by a wonderful view of Tobay Beach. Just gorgeous. The restaurant itself is pretty, with outdoor or indoor seating. We sat outside, just in time for a nice sunset and a cool breeze. Nice. Waiter comes, we place an appetizer order of Nachos and Quesados which is a quesadilla. I ask for some chips and salsa as every other table has some, and some sodas and ice teas.

Chips don’t come. I ask again. And again. And one more time. By this time, the drinks are gone, we are hungry and thirsty. Where’s the food? It’s a Wednesday night at 6pm, not Saturday night at 8pm. We should get served!

Apps come. I ask again for some chips. At this point, it’s a principle thing. I want the damn chips and salsa! The apps come, and they are atrocious. The nachos are soggy, flavorless, and floating in a soup of what can only be a can of Progresso tomato sauce. The Quesados, are ungrilled, cardboard-like tortilla with some gloppy white cheese, and the same tomato sauce drizzled over it. Ugghhh…just….Ugghh. Horrid.

Well, the waiter who at this point has brought the chips and salsa, and refilled our drinks, has brought out another bowl of the crappy chips. No salt on them, as flavorless as can be. But HEY! They were GRATIS! Thanks man, for not charging us the $2 for an additional bowl of your crap chips. To be fair, he was a nice waiter, and apologized for the chips confusion. Meh. What are you gonna do, right?

So the entrees come. I ordered a combination plate of Taco, Enchilada, and Burrito. Horrid. Flavorless. Just…not good. That same runny, crummy tomato sauce is poured on top of the enchilada and burrito. The tortillas that they were wrapped in felt and tasted like they had just come out of the Old El Paso wrapper without the benefit of being warmed up. And the Taco…man. The Taco. Soggy. No cheese! No onion. Again no flavor. Ye Gods if you can’t figure out how to make a taco, if TACO BELL has you beat HANDS DOWN in the Taco-Making department, if you can’t even swing what about a billion American moms slap together a few times a month with some chop meat and store bought taco shells...well, you better pack it in. Horrible. Offensive. And $22.

Next up, my son Matthews Crab filled enchiladas. Oh wow. That was bad. Fishy, runny (again, that description fits) and tasting vaguely rancid. My 16 year old son, who never met a plate he didn’t clear, and a meal he wasn’t really into, didn’t even finish it. I tasted it, and couldn’t find a napkin to spit it into (alas, no extra napkins. I guess having to ask for silverware twice didn’t guarantee a fresh napkin). My Sue and Julia both ordered fajitas. They kind of liked the steak, though to my mind, it was tough and surprisingly over-salted. I guess they were searching for SOMETHING to like!

And then, the bill. Just about $140 with tax. Really? For that??!!! It’s insulting to a very high degree. Again, standards. This place apparently has none. Thank God we didn’t get margaritas. Can you imagine, if they couldn’t get a taco right, how they would butcher the booze?

And that’s the thing, really. At what point did the owners of this dump actually sit down and eat a meal here? What led them to believe that a meal so lacking in taste, professionalism, and value was ok? I mean, again, Taco Bell beats this place. BADLY! On the Border, in Hicksville, makes their OWN GODDAM TORTILLAS! Seriously! They have some poor bastard standing back there pouring mixture onto a press, and are knocking out some awesome fresh tortillas and chips. AND ON THE BORDER IS A CHAIN!! AND CRAPPY!! But it beats hell out of this place.

Don’t go here. Seriously. It’s not good, it’s overly expensive, and there is such a lack of attention, and lack of accountability that you will regret it. Sure, I suppose someone will refute this, and tell me “OH NO! WE went there and it was AWESOME!!” Great. I’m glad your experience was 100 times better than mine. But unfortunately I’m not giving this place another shot. My standards are too damn high, and apparently theirs are too low.

I love a good biblical epic. The Ten Commandments, Ben-Hur, King of Kings, all those old classics, many starring Charlton Heston, are some of my favorite films. They’re a comfort to me, in a way, bringing back memories of childhood nights, staying up late with the family to watch these enormously epic movies. They were part of the holiday TV schedule, right up there with A Charlie Brown Christmas/Halloween/Thanksgiving, or any of the Rankin-Bass classics, with their stop motion puppetry and classic stories. It was a simpler time then. No cable, no dvr’s, Netflix or Redbox…just a few channels and the network belief that showing holiday movies that mentioned the word GOD was appropriate, and nothing to fear.

Alas…those days are over.

I really was anxious to check our Darren Aronofsky’s Noah. The director is a visionary, an off-beat auteur whose movies are bizarre fever-dreams, like Requiem for a Dream, or Pi, or Black Swan. I love his stuff, usually. He managed to coax a really fine, sensitive performance out of Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler, and nowadays, that can’t be too easy!

Russell Crowe is as close to our generations Olivier as you’re going to get. I can watch him read the phone book. His Lucky Jack Aubrey in Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World is, I maintain, one of the finest acting jobs ever. He’s a wonderful actor, though a bit of an asshole in the real world…no matter. He gets it done.

Anyhoo, Noah. Yeah….I was really curious to see it, and true to form, Aronofsky delivered, kind of. The story is well known. GOD is disgusted with mankind’s evil ways, and decides to wash the planet clean with a great flood. He tells Noah, a good decent, vegan family man, to build a great ark, and take his family and two of every creature on earth on to it so they can survive the flood and start over. Simple enough. But Aronofsky gives us great big stone creatures called Watchers (basically fallen angels) who assist Noah with the building of the ark and also in defending it against the hordes of bad guys who want to take it for themselves. The Watchers are interesting, and odd, and just…well, they aren’t really part of the bible, as far as I know. And OH YEAH, GOD is never mentioned. The term CREATOR is used.  I don’t know, but a biblical epic that doesn’t mention GOD is political correctness gone awry. Is it a big deal? Well, I don’t know…it’s a glaring point, though, and I found it distracting. As minor as it is, the very deliberate effort not to say GOD rendered this movie somehow less in my eyes. I don’t know if it’s a political statement that Aronofsky (who also wrote the film) was trying to make, but it’s a silly, pandering thing to do. That’s great, big time director, you really showed all us Christians! You made a movie about GOD without once mentioning his name. You’re so cool…

Other than that, it’s a fine movie. Great special effects. Jennifer Connelly as Noah’s wife, and Emma Watson, all grown up and still not a great actress, but a sincere presence. She’s always gonna be Harry Potter’s pal Hermione. Noah’s sons are played by some modeling agency’s idea of what biblical male models looked like (chiseled features, Fabio hair, etc.) but they’re ok too.

Chaos Theory at Tropix on the Nautical Mile in Freeport.

The original 1968 Planet of the Apes, starring Charlton Heston, was a milestone in many ways. On the surface, it displayed the staggering advancements in cinematic makeup that had taken place since the golden days of Karloff’s Frankenstein and Lon Chaney‘s The Wolfman. It also worked as social commentary, as a metaphor for race relations. And how can you top the ending?  Charlton Heston, on his hands and knees, staring up in disbelief at the ruins of the Statue of Liberty as it dawns on him that mankind had finally pulled the trigger on itself.  That is one of the best reveals ever in movie history, and begged the question “what the hell happened? How did mankind fall prey to itself, and how the hell did Apes take over?’ The ensuing sequels varied in quality, but never really got to the heart of the matter. What happened, and why?

Well, 2011’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes started to provide the answers in a surprisingly coherent, plausible way. James Franco is a scientist who discovers an Alzheimer’s cure. Testing on Apes gives them intelligence, but also creates a virus that begins to wipe out mankind. It was a good movie, in the way that all movies should be. It made sense (kind of) had an engrossing story, good actors (not least of which was the astounding Andy Serkis, in full motion-capture glory, as the ape Caesar, who is adopted by Franco and displays incredible intelligence due to the Alzheimer’s serum. Director Rupert Wyatt took that story and ran with it, turning the flick into one of that summers true cinematic delights.

And here now we have the sequel, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Rise’s Wyatt is gone, but is ably replaced by Matt Reeves, who doesn’t necessarily improve things, but rather takes them to some logical conclusions. Serkis is back and just as awesome. No Academy Awards category for this type of thing? Fuck it. Make one! The guy breathes life into every character he plays, be it Gollum, or King Kong. He’s brilliant.

The story, ten years past the ending of Rise, has the apes having taken to the woods of California, while mankind has dwindled to almost nothing. Jason Clarke plays an architect trying, with Gary Oldman, to get the dam working so the human survivors can have energy. While doing so, they run into the Apes, and the culture clash begins. Surprisingly, the Apes simply want to be left alone, but eventually agree to help the humans. Of course, it goes bad, and war ensues. I couldn’t help but think of the apes as American Indians, who of course were done a grave injustice by the White Devil, and who were considered savages.  

It’s a fun story, thought provoking, full of action, and at times ham handed in its sentimentality.  I never like watching animals behaving like humans, as it always struck me as somewhat silly looking. Nothing here changes my mind, but it DOES help to bring out the “humanity” of the apes, if you will. It works, and isn’t TOO bad. The visuals are, to say the least, outstanding. Reeves is a visionary, and his work on this cements his rep as someone to watch. Parts of this were simply gorgeous looking. The motion capture, rendering actors, via computer, into apes, is astounding for the most part, though sometimes there is a bit of a video game look to it. Nevertheless, the scope of this movie is huge, and the cast, especially Jason Clarke and Kerri Russell, doing their best to stay relevant as Serkis gives a master class in acting.