Robogeek reviews ROYAL TENENBAUMS, MAJESTIC and A BEAUTIFUL MIND!!!

Hey folks, Harry here. While Robo and I see eye to eye on TENEBAUMS, his rather automaton-like views upon THE MAJESTIC are not shared by me, as you'll soon see via the miracle of electronic communication on this here site of mine. I've seen a ton of stuff recently, and am in the midst of writing a thousand and two reviews. Till then, here's Robo with the big breakdown....

Robogeek reviews THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS, THE MAJESTIC and A BEAUTIFUL MIND

Greetings, citizens! ROBOGEEK here with a fistful of reviews before I go see THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING for the fifth time (what, didn't you read my review?) and continue my quest for the One Ring replica (in the cool light-up resin box!) that Applause stupidly made too few of.

However, before I forget, I want to echo the esteemed Hercules' sentiments in Coaxial News that you owe it to yourself to watch THE TICK tonight on Fox. As much as I hated the pilot and second episode, I've loved the last three. Spoon!

Now, then, here are my thoughts on a few films I've caught recently. I'm assuming you already know what these movies are about, so I'm not going to give you book reports, but rather impressions. Enjoy my robo-insights while you can, because it may be awhile before I have a chance to review anything else. (I missed out on seeing ALI and BLACKHAWK DOWN early, and passed on seeing I AM SAM yesterday because, well, I feel like I've already seen that episode of "The Practice," thank you very much.)

Oh, and while I will do my best to avoid spoilers, let's just assume that I will fail, so consider yourself warned. (No whiners in Talk Back!)

A BEAUTIFUL MIND

If I had to review A BEAUTIFUL MIND (aka "Akiva's Redemption") in two dozen words, it would be...

"Sort of like GOOD WILL HUNTING meets THE OTHERS, with a dash of HEARTS IN ATLANTIS - only not quite as good as any of them."

Now let me just tell you that while this may seem like a negative review, it isn't meant as one. MIND is actually a very good film - at times near great - but it's essentially a showcase for one exceptional lead performance by Russell Crowe (on par with Anthony Hopkins' in ATLANTIS, Nicole Kidman's in OTHERS, and Robin Williams' in HUNTING), and little else. Besides Jennifer Connelly's sharp supporting work, the rest of the film just didn't quite measure up to Crowe's excellence. And, well, it has some problems.

Don't get me wrong, I'm recommending this film, because it's absolutely worth seeing just for Crowe and Connelly, who are both at or near career bests here.

While his accent sometimes wavers slightly, Crowe becomes almost invisible within the character of the brilliant but mentally ill John Nash - so much so that he actually comes across as a fairly diminutive guy, which is quite a feat for Maximus himself. Crowe is utterly convincing as the idiosyncratic, antisocial Nash, and avoids the trap of overacting what is inherently a showy role. His performance is textured with nuance and subtlety, and demonstrates why he is one of the finest actors on screen today.

Connelly's Alicia Larde, who doesn't appear until the second act, is also absolutely wonderful, and provides a perfect balance to Crowe. Her first sparks with Crowe's Nash are magic, and their courtship is played so lightly and naturally that it's a real pleasure to watch. And as Nash's mind unravels, she develops convincingly into the steadfast wife, played with graceful strength and noble devotion. In fact, I hope it's not redundant for her to play Betty Ross in THE HULK, as it's another devoted-love-of-an-afflicted-genius role.

(And I should also mention - for the benefit of the geek contingent - that this is the first time I've looked at Connelly and finally agreed with Harry that yes, she and no one else should play Wonder Woman.)

One of my problems with the film is that besides Crowe's and Connelly's, there just aren't any other developed characters to be found in this particular narrative landscape. At all.

And that, to me, seems like an utter waste - especially when you have at your disposal the talents of Ed Harris, Anthony Rapp, Christopher Plummer, Josh Lucas, Adam Goldberg, Judd Hirsch, etc. - all of whom are good, but each seems to perform just one simple, narrow function within the machinery of the story.

Visually, MIND is certainly a handsome, well-crafted piece of filmmaking (with lovely lensing by Roger Deakins, and some inspired effects work by Digital Domain), but I found myself yearning for more artistry. (I must admit I found myself thinking, "I wish Scott Hicks had directed this.") There are a few times when the film veers a bit too much into melodrama, but overall there is a satisfying consistency of tone - which is very important in a film that goes the places this one does (something I don't want to spoil).

Akiva Goldsman's adaptation of Sylvia Nasar's biography of John Nash does some really wonderful things. One is exploring Nash's very human conflict of yearning for achievement while also yearning for recognition of that achievement. Which one takes precedence? Nash says early on that he's on a quest for a "truly original idea," but how much of his motivation is the discovery of that idea itself versus the praise and renown it would bring him? Ah, now that's interesting.

Another territory the film explores is the often fine line between genius and madness, and how the two can sometimes not just be interrelated, but interdependent. This is also very interesting stuff, and I appreciated seeing a mainstream Hollywood film actually challenging an audience to ponder such things (though I'm not sure how many actually will). Similarly, the film offers a glimpse of how obsessive behavior - i.e. seeing patterns everywhere - can in one context be constructive (say, code-breaking), it can also be highly destructive when unfocused and unchecked.

However, the flipside of all this interesting exploration is that none of these issues are sufficiently resolved, and we are led to the proverbial biopic Hollywood happy ending. In fact, in the case of the mental illness issues raised, the message of the film seems to be completely at odds with all informed and responsible mental health doctrine; Nash just decides to "will" his schizophrenia into submission - a prescription that I find startlingly irresponsible for a film to advocate.

Of course, the film also conveniently ignores many important pieces of the true story it is based on - like Nash's sexual relationships with men (including an arrest for solicitation), his attempt to renounce his U.S. citizenship, his divorce from Alicia, etc.

I suppose the filmmakers thought including these would make MIND less beautiful. I just hope Mr. Howard doesn't treat THE ALAMO with the same selective historical memory.

THE MAJESTIC

There's nothing I wanted more than to love this movie. I very nearly worship Frank Darabont (THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION should have won Best Picture), and had been eagerly anticipating this film.

But if someone asked me to review THE MAJESTIC in three words... as much as it would pain me, I would have to say...

"A profound disappointment."

There are moments in MAJESTIC that are absolute magic and perfection, and that in fact moved me to tears. But they are tossed in a rough sea of a film that just doesn't work, no matter hard it tries. (And it tries really, really hard - way too hard.)

Problem number one is that no one in their right mind has any business trying to make a Frank Capra movie except Frank Capra - and he's dead. Few filmmakers are genres unto themselves, and among those who are, Capra's sitting on a comfy sofa at the top of the list with Hitchcock. (FYI, MR. DEEDS GOES TO TOWN is one of my top ten films of all time, and is my favorite Capra film.)

Okay, now if you're going to abandon reason and try and make a Capra film anyway, there's really only one actor walking the earth you could possibly cast if you have any hope of pulling it off, and that's Tom Hanks. But we don't get Tom Hanks. We get Jim Carrey. And not TRUMAN SHOW Jim Carrey, but a mannered, affected, even cloying Jim Carrey. (Can you say every scene with the monkey?)

Then, on top of that, as if we haven't already ventured deep enough into the bowels of bad ideas, MAJESTIC also decides it's going to try to be a remake of LE RETOUR DE MARTIN GUERRE - which was already tried as SOMMERSBY, and we all know how well that turned out.

Someday, assuming the esteemed Mr. Darabont will ever speak to me after reading this review (which, much to my horror, I know he will), years from now I would love to sit down with Frank after basking in the glow of a string of his yet-to-be-produced future masterpieces (like DOC SAVAGE!), and simply ask - in all good humor and warmth - "What the hell were you thinking?"

Granted, I should make an important disclaimer. I can't possibly be wholly objective when it comes to this film, because I spent three years of my life working at Austin's version of the Majestic, the Paramount Theatre. On top of that, the Majestic's projectionist (played well by Gerry Black) bears more than a passing resemblance to the Paramount's beloved Walter, who I called a friend - and whose death is uncannily mirrored in THE MAJESTIC. This isn't to say that I I think Mr. Darabont appropriated a person and an event I wrote about on AICN last May for his film, only that parts of his film held uniquely unsettling resonance for me.

And in many ways, the film is designed to push buttons of resonance for the audience, relying on their context of film history - and love of the movies. However, it does so to such an extent that it evokes feelings it doesn't genuinely earn. Some might call this cleverly efficient, while some might call it cheating. And it's probably a little bit of both.

When the camera pans up lovingly to find THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, what gives me chills is the idea of a theater full of people discovering for the first time what's arguably the greatest science-fiction film ever. That gets me, but it's due to Robert Wise.

The film is at its best in the middle act, though even that is less a film and more a picture postcard telling us how great the Golden Age of Hollywood and the great Movie Palaces was, saying "Wish you were here." Only we aren't there. We are in an overly nostalgic, two-dimensional rendering of it, almost an SNL-skit of a Capra movie, only They're All So Serious. It's just a lot of glossy set-dressing (shot beautifully by David Tattersall, btw).

One diamond among all this costume jewelry is Martin Landau, who gives a memorable, touching performance. When he talks about his love of the movies, and what the Majestic theater means to him and his community, it's moving and resonant (well, to me; again, here I'm biased). And his joy, fueled by unwavering hope, that his son has actually returned alive is both palpable and bittersweet. Landau is so, so very good, it makes the rest of the film's shortcomings that much more apparent - and painful to watch.

For instance, there's just the basic faulty logic behind this whole town mistaking Jim Carrey's amnesiac Peter Appleton for a soldier they lost in World War II a decade prior. This is made all the more far-fetched when, in flashback, we discover that the real soldier was none other than Private Ryan himself, Matt Damon (or at least spoke with his voice). And no, I'm not kidding.

And then there's the utter wrongness of a scene at the soldier's grave where Carrey's Peter was earnestly tries to convince Laurie Holden (playing the girl the soldier left behind) that he lives in the "real world," where things aren't as simple as they are in this small town. Except he doesn't live in the real world, but a cartoonish version of Hollywood during the blacklist that's so egregiously simplistic in its depiction as to be offensive, and so woefully "unreal" as to undermine Carrey's dialogue in this particular scene; there is no stark, dramatic contrast between blacklist-period Hollywood and the small Northern California town of MAJESTIC - both are sentimental exercises in nostalgic artifice.

However, the film's worst crime is its big finish, where Carrey's struggling screenwriter Appleton is summoned to appear before the House Un-American Activities Committee on charges of being a communist, and of course he delivers his Big Speech, his big MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON moment. Only Jim Carrey isn't Jimmy Stewart (or Tom Hanks). And the speech is bad. Really, really bad.

And adding insult to injury, Carrey's character pulls out the dead soldier's Medal of Honor and waves it in front of the committee, crassly trading on the soldier's sacrifice and heroism to get his own weenie ass out of a jam. It is the single most amoral and unconscionable thing he does in the whole movie, but how do the people of the small town react, who of course had turned on him when he was revealed not to be the lost soldier? They decide to embrace him. Unbelievable. It makes absolutely no sense.

Periodically during MAJESTIC, we are treated to tantalizing glimpses of the fictional B-movie adventure SAND PIRATES OF THE SAHARA (with Bruce Campbell playing the leading man), which is Appleton's first produced credit. And all I could think of during MAJESTIC was how much I'd rather be watching SAND PIRATES OF THE SAHARA. In fact, I dearly wish that MAJESTIC had simply been a two-part short that bookended a complete SAND PIRATES film.

That would have been majestic indeed.

THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS

So if I had to review THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS in a dozen words...

"It's like a Bizarro World adaptation of a J.D. Salinger short story."

And I mean that in the best possible way.

I absolutely adored this movie. It is a thing of wonder and delight, richly detailed and utterly satisfying. It may not have as strong a story or be as overtly funny as RUSHMORE, but guess what? This is a different movie. And I appreciated that.

This is going to be a short review because, well, I don't really have any problems with this movie. It's impeccably cast, sharply written, deftly directed, and deliciously dark and complex. Sure, a film that delves into such things incest (kind of) and suicide (well, attempted) may not be fun for everyone, but it was incredibly refreshing to see Gene Hackman and Owen Wilson in something this clever after the unbelievably stupid BEHIND ENEMY LINES.

In fact, having grown up reading about Salinger's fictional Glass family (thanks to Winona Ryder, actually, to whom I remain in debt), I was pretty much in surreal heaven for the duration of the film. Each and every character seems genuine, and the film's exquisite (and elaborate) attention to detail is just a world of geeky fun.

The threads of each of these characters' lives are sketched with minimalist efficiency, and woven cleverly amongst each other in consistently interesting ways. There's a real whimsical delight in seeing these dynamics at play, and the stories unfold, like you're in "the zone" while playing the coolest, weirdest pinball machine you've ever seen. I know that probably doesn't make sense. Just go with it. Try this - it's sort of like MAGNOLIA meets THE BIG LEBOWSKI. Okay, maybe that doesn't make any more sense. But it doesn't matter.

Because at the heart of the film is, well, a heart - and real humanity. Not overly baked or melodramatic or sentimental, but simple, honest, and true. For instance, near the end of the film, when Ben Stiller's Chas tells Gene Hackman's Royal Tenenbaum "I had a really hard year," it sums up his character - and encapsulates their relationship - in one perfect, Zen-like moment. And it all just sort of fits, and feels right.

And Kumar Pallana just rocks so very hard as Pagoda.

This is not a normal movie. But it is witty, heartfelt, and one of the best films of the year (certainly the best American comedy).

GO SEE IT.

- Robogeek

P.S.: If you haven't seen them already, I also highly recommend VANILLA SKY, which kicked my ass. (Anyone who tells you it's too convoluted just wasn't paying close enough attention.)