Hardball (2001) - 3 stars out of 10

Hardball (2001) - 3 stars out of 10
1350th Review

“Hardball” is everything that you expect from a “Bad News Bears”/”Mighty Ducks” story.  A reprehensible human is tasked with organizing a group of misfits into a sports team, and the coach is the one who is transformed in the end.  The story is formulaic but satisfying.  The acting of Keanu Reeves, however, is not satisfying.  His emotional moments feel overacted and the other 95% of him performance is completely emotionless.  The script gave him little more than a single monologue to prove his acting chops and the result is lackluster.  The whole gambling aspect of the story is rather overdramatic.  The ballplayers in the film are cute in a “kids say the darndest things” sort of way.  DeWayne Warren puts on a nice performance (though much of it is due to the “cuteness” of such a small child using profanity) and it offers a chance to see Michael B. Jordan 15 years before “Creed.”  There is a nice message in there about seeing the potential in a group of kids from the projects but it has been done better in other films.  “Hardball” provides a moderate amount of entertainment and a few heartwarming moments, but I’d recommend any great movie about teachers (“Mr. Holland’s Opus,” “Dead Poets Society”) before this one.

[Pictured: Gotta love Dewayne Warren!  He has most of the best lines in the film]

The Look of Silence - 7 stars out of 10

The Look of Silence - 7 stars out of 10

"The Look of Silence" is the second documentary by Joshua Oppenheimer with regard to the Indonesian Killings of 1965-66.  It's a tough sell because it presents the same information as "The Act of Killing" but in a less thorough way.  It's interesting to tackle this chapter in history through a personal narrative since the main character is emotionally invested due to the direct effect of these killings on his family.  He is an ophthalmologist and uses his profession to question each of his brother's killers under the guise of giving the individuals an eye exam.  It is an extraordinary circumstance, for this man to interview the killers without them realizing their hand in his brother's death.  Each killer demonstrates the remorselessness seen in “The Act of Killing” as, even once they realize that they were responsible for killing his brother, they continue to defend their actions and heartlessly justify the mass killings.  It is similar in tone and content to its predecessor but is less poignant because there is no moment of regret experienced by the killers.  All of the emotion comes from the victim.  Those emotions create a lot of empathy but it would be more powerful to see a transformation in the wrongdoers as they accept what they have done.  The film is not as captivating as “Amy” but manages to keep pace with the bold risks taken by “Winter on Fire” and “Cartel Land.”  Its crew stands in the face of danger as the anonymous main character and videographer confront some less than savory ex-soldiers.  “The Look of Silence” works as a nice supplement to “The Act of Killing” by relating the action of several murderers to a specific victim but it isn’t a strong enough standalone documentary to take down “Amy” for the Oscar.

[Pictured; The lack of remorse in the interviewees is disturbing]

Cartel Land - 7 stars out of 10

Cartel Land - 7 stars out of 10

"Cartel Land" is a gritty look into the Mexican drug trade and the resulting vigilante self-defense group, the "Autodefensas."  The creators of this documentary are fearless.  Following around meth-cooking members of drug cartels and soldiers in vigilante groups in Mexico is a pretty tall order.  Throughout the documentary, they are witnesses to shootouts, house raids, and the torturing of potentially innocent people.  The story is fascinating as the heroes become the demons that they fight against.  The attitude shifts from protecting their towns to killing anybody who might pose a threat in the future.  The documentary is incredibly relevant as the spilling over of this gang violence into the United States is a daily threat.  There are only a few instances of disturbing imagery but the language should definitely be a deterrent for younger audiences, even though this material would be of interest to the high school age group.  I had no idea that these threats were occurring in Mexico but this documentary does an excellent job of painting a vivid image.  I don't believe that "Cartel Land" deserves to win an Oscar but it is certainly worthy of its nomination.

[Pictured: That awkward moment when the bad guys are given government uniforms]

Pan - 2 stars out of 10

Pan - 2 stars out of 10

I approached "Pan" with the lowest of expectations.  After seeing the critics rip it to shreds, I was positive that just about anything would exceed those low expectations.  And then they started singing singing Smells Like Teen Spirit.  Not just a subtle reference.  Like, ten thousand people belting it out hardcore for a solid minute.  You may ask, what does Nirvana have to do with a family-focused Peter Pan origin story?  I would tell you, but the film never explained it.  That seems to be the case with a lot of the content in this film.  Typically, the purpose of an origin film is to explain the origins of well-known characters and places so that sequels can be produced based on this reinvigorated popularity.  "Pan" just creates a lot of questions without explanation and fails to create the connection to characters that might justify a sequel.  It would be really interesting to know how nuns in World War II London were able to summon pirates from a magical realm to kidnap their orphans as punishment.  Yes, that actually happens in this story.  So how can a film with great special effects and a talented cast be so disappointing?  "Pan" is just another reminder that even Oscar-nominated actors can't save a poorly written story.  Hugh Jackman offers his most Johnny Depp-ish impersonation of a pirate, not because he lacks the originality and talent to create an interesting character with depth, but because the script requires the role to be played this way.  Likewise, Rooney Mara just received her second Oscar nomination but her performance as Tiger Lilly is static because of her limited dialogue.  This is the sort of screenwriting that gives family-friendly movies a bad name.  We don't need an anachronistic telling of a classic fairy tale or a heroic interpretation of a classic villain ("Maleficent," anyone?) to draw in audiences; instead reimagine a classic in a way that enhances our favorite stories without changing them.  That's why "Cinderella" has an 84% on Rotten Tomatoes and "Pan" has a 26%.  Family films can be worthy of Oscars when done the right way.  If last-name-titled movies based on Peter Pan are going to be a thing, I'm sticking with "Hook."  The latest iteration of the Peter Pan story had potential with a great cast and a huge budget but the final result is another cheapening of a classic story.

[Pictured: Even Hugh Jackman can't save this poorly-written character]