Score: *** out of ***** (C)
Long Story Short: The increasingly popular Fast and Furious franchise just keeps getting bigger, and this seventh installment continues that trend. While it still highlights cool cars and the merits of driving really fast, Furious 7 is primarily a full-fledged action film (including the presence of Johnson and Statham, whose presence is one of the few good things here). Maybe I'm missing something, but this is just not a good film, action or not. If you need more detail, then keep reading!
As the weather outside gets warmer, my excitement for the summer movie season grows. In two weeks it will kick off with a bang: the sequel to The Avengers. Starting with that movie, I think I'm going to make a few changes to my reviews; we'll how it goes. Meanwhile, you might think that the summer movie season has already begun, with the release of this blockbuster which made nearly $150 million in its first weekend and already has over $1 billion worldwide. I'd only seen one other Fast and Furious movie before (that I remember), but I figured I'd see what all the fuss was about - and it even has an 82% score on Rotten Tomatoes. Furious 7 was directed by James Wan and stars Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, Jason Statham, et. al.
At the end of the last film, Dom (Diesel) and his crew took down bad guy Owen Shaw; now his brother, Deckard (Statham), wants revenge. While the team has tried to rebuild normal lives, particularly Brian (Walker) and Mia (who are married and have a son), Deckard soon goes after them, forcing them to regroup. Fortunately, they have allies: a covert government team saves Dom, and then offers assistance in bringing down Deckard in return for help recapturing a young hacker and her powerful surveillance program. The battle takes the team all around the world, but it seems the bad guys are always one step ahead. A return to their home turf of Los Angeles may be the only chance Dom and co. have to prevail - and survive.
The acting in Furious 7 is not terrible but also unimpressive, even by the standards of this genre. No one expects to see Daniel Day-Lewis in these movies, but charismatic, fun characters are quite important. Unfortunately, Vin Diesel - the lead - is a terrible actor. Mumbling through most scenes and trying (and failing) to balance tough guy aloofness with heroic strength, he also earnestly delivers the film's "key" awful lines. Dwayne Johnson is a superior actor, if that tells you anything, but he only gets 10-15 minutes of screen time. Paul Walker, who died during filming, is much closer to the charismatic star the film needed, but his role was necessarily reduced. Most of the minor characters are nothing to write home about, though I did enjoy Tyrese Gibson's funny character. Finally, the two non-group characters are quite opposite. Kurt Russell as the government ops team leader practically spends the whole time winking and it gets annoying. But Jason Statham's bad guy Deckard is actually pretty good, a menacing and ruthless presence (despite his usually playing the hero).
After its incredible start at the box office, it's safe to say that the Fast and Furious franchise is the current king of action movies. Admittedly going based on what I've read rather than the movies themselves, this is a shift from a primarily car/racing culture. And Furious 7 does still have plenty of cars - sometimes in cool ways, more often ridiculous. But back to the action; despite the series' addition of stalwarts Johnson and Statham and blockbuster effects and sets, Furious 7 is just not a good action film. A fight between Johnson and Statham at the beginning is very impressive, and a car chase in the middle of the film (if you cut out the utterly ridiculous beginning and end to the extended sequence) are quite entertaining. Beyond that, the action is actually just not very interesting - from either lack of imagination, lack of realism (even relatively speaking), or sheer repetition. Furious 7 also makes awkward and completely failed attempts to show its characters' feelings and value of family (though admittedly the tribute to Walker at the end is emotional, knowing that the actor himself was also the father of a young child). Finally, all this crammed together adds up to a two hour, fifteen minute runtime which is far too long, especially the brutally extended final action set.
***
Frankly, I'm a bit flabbergasted by the popular and (especially) critical success of this film (and probably franchise; though I've only seen the fifth one, it too was not good). If you've read my blog you know that I love action movies - from superheroes to James Bond and so on. But this is just low quality, and I'm shocked that the critics - who unfairly malign countless superior action films - don't call this series out for it for some reason. The film lacks star-worthy heroes or even much in the way of talented, charismatic acting. The plot and writing is so ridiculous and pointless it isn't even worth pointing out specific flaws. And the action - including what are supposed to be the showcase stunts - are mostly poorly conceived, executed, or both. Now, I've certainly seen worse, and Furious 7 does have some good things about it as I've mentioned. Statham-Johnson fight (and Statham himself), the mountain-top car chase, Tyrese Gibson. But it is bewildering to me that this is both a box office smash and a critical success. If you're a 10-16 year old boy, OK, go out and see this. Otherwise, skip.
"Furious 7 Film Poster" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furious_7#/media/File:Furious_7_poster.jpg
Score: ***1/2 out of ***** (B)
Long Story Short: Ferrell's latest comedy teams him with fellow star Kevin Hart in a premise mixing financial crime and race. Get Hard is certainly in the same class as Ferrell's other films, love them or loathe them, and while the overall quality of laughs is not tremendous, the two stars' presence and chemistry is entertaining. It's also a well-made film in general, worthy of better than the critical reviews; worth a theater viewing, certainly if you're a Ferrell/Hart fan.
Another delay, I'm afraid, has put me another week behind on writing my movie reviews. It has been slower at the movies this year than I had expected, but now summer is just around the corner. And next week, I'll have my review for the biggest box office hit of the year so far, Furious 7. Those who read this blog likely know that I'm a huge Will Ferrell fan, so when I got news that this was to be his next film it was almost certain that I'd see it. Throw in Kevin Hart, who has become one of my favorite comedians, too, and an interesting premise, and I was sold. Bad score on Rotten Tomatoes be damned, I was going! Get Hard was directed by Etan Cohen and stars Ferrell and Hart.
James (Ferrell) is a hedge fund manager living the dream. He is enormously wealthy and revered by his peers, has an adoring and gorgeous fiancee, lives in an enormous mansion, and on and on. James has become quite convinced that things are only getting better - until cops unexpectedly crash an engagement party and lead him away in cuffs for financial crimes. James is sure that he is innocent, but before he knows it all his assets are frozen, his fiancee leaves him, and he has been sentenced to ten years in a maximum security prison.
Darnell (Hart), a car wash manager, finds James hiding in the trunk of his car back at work. In a burst of inspiration, James grasps onto the idea that Darnell, a black man, can surely prepare him for the roughest of prison experiences. Darnell, a law-abiding, model citizen, is briefly inflamed by James' assumption - but agrees to help him anyway in exchange for money needed for his daughter's school. Thus the "training" begins - while more guilty eyes watch closely.
Get Hard has a good cast, led, of course, by the duo of mega-popular comedians. Ferrell's James is the main character, and indeed this is a Ferrell-style film. As usual, Will has created a character both hilarious and interesting. While a hedge fund-type arrested for fraud would usually be positioned as the villain or, at best, anti-hero, James is instead a naive innocent - he understands numbers, not the system, and any outrage stems from his acclimation to privilege. In Ferrell terms, he's a cross between Ron Burgundy and Buddy (from Elf). Kevin Hart is great, too; perhaps more impressive, as he is great in this supporting role despite being the lead in most films. Partly the set up of the film allows for a good convergence of their comedic styles, but Ferrell and Hart also have good chemistry and complement each other well. Everyone else is a minor player; the only one of note is Alison Brie who nearly steals a few scenes with an impressively flamboyant performance.
Get Hard is not the biggest success when judged strictly by the size of its laughs, but it at least partially makes up for this in other areas. Ferrell and/or his team consistently find really excellent set ups, in both story and character, even if they don't fully realize the potential. Get Hard is no different, with the contemporary theme of outrage over financial crooks, hints of race (but skirting much controversy), and the rising star of Kevin Hart. One could argue that had the filmmakers been less PC, a more hilarious film could have been made - but it is what it is, and therefore the humor is of a different kind. Of course, this centers around prison stereotypes, though race is a considerable (and well done) aspect as well as some gay "humor" (not well done). Beyond the humor, the film is quite well crafted for a comedy. The story is of course simplistic and silly, but it is sound and flows well, helped by good pacing. It hits some cliches, but avoids most annoying ones. The movie knows which scenes to highlight and mixes conventional and stylistic approaches well, depending on the needs of the story/humor.
***
Get Hard is not a great comedy by any means - but nor is it a bad one as many critics have labeled it, and it's also made me realize and/or accept a few things about comedies. While Will Ferrell is possibly my favorite comedian, on strictly the strength of jokes his films have been disappointing for the last half or so of his film career. Still, he consistently comes up with interesting characters (some among the best in all of comedy, IMO) that are always entertaining - and, as I mentioned, the premise of his films is almost always creative or interesting. So while the quality of the humor may have declined and/or turned more toward lower-common-denominator areas, there are still joys to be had in his films that I find in few if any other places. Another thing I'm coming to appreciate more is simple quality of filmmaking. I have not studied film in any academic sense, but just having seen a lot over the last few years, I think I'm getting better at spotting the underlying differences among similar films. Character, story, writing - humor, in comedies - and other direct qualities are hugely important, but so are less obvious things like pacing and tone/style (both consistency and quality). So while Ferrell may be impressing me less with the most obvious of elements - the humor - I am appreciating more the quality of the supporting elements. As a final recommendation, of course consider whether Ferrell's brand of humor is for you first because this has the usual (including language, sexual references, etc.). If you do like it, this is a perfectly fine choice for a trip to the theater, but also not a must see, if you'd prefer to wait for Netflix.
"Get Hard (2015) Poster" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_Hard#/media/File:Get_Hard_film_poster.png
