Crime 101 + Hoppers

 

Crime 101

Score: B/B+

Directed by Bart Layton

Starring Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Halle Berry, Barry Keoghan

Running time: 140 minutes

Rated R

Crime 101 is a solid, well-made L.A. crime thriller but some key failings prevent it from inclusion among the top movies of the genre.  There are few surprises in the structure and many familiar markers appear, but considering the dearth of this genre in theaters in recent years, it's nice to see it back again.  Newcomer Layton provides nice direction with good pacing: he is generous with screen time for the main cast (Hemsworth, Ruffalo, and Berry) and alternates character development with the action scenes effectively.  There are some really nicely written and acted scenes, such as Mike (Hemsworth), the main criminal, meeting a romantic flame during an awkward rear-ending accident; insurance agent Sharon (Berry) keeping a straight face while her rich clients act (realistically) obnoxiously; and detective Lou's (Ruffalo) scenes with his exasperated partner.  Unfortunately, Hemsworth is just not very well suited for his role as the brooding, cunning Mike.  He's fun, sure, but a more appropriate actor could really have boosted the film considerably higher (Berry and Ruffalo are great fits for the movie, however).  The final heist and conclusion also disappointed me.  It's impossible to believe that Mike couldn't see through Lou's impersonation attempt, and the inevitable confrontation also falls a little flat.  The ending is too tidy, particularly for this genre.  Still, there are some exciting chase scenes, and much of the character work is pretty intriguing.  This makes for a perfectly enjoyable time at the theater, or streaming at home (when you can).

-----

Hoppers

Score:  C

Directed by Daniel Chong

Starring (voices): Piper Curda, Bobby Moynihan, Jon Hamm

Running time: 104 minutes

Rated PG

Hoppers is a watchable but highly derivative and bland animated movie, a shocking disappointment coming from the legendary Pixar studios.  The premise of the movie, in which a young woman's mind inhabits a mechanical beaver so she can communicate with real animals, is fine and offers some amusing moments and possibilities, many of which are suggested in the trailer.  The central problem, however, is that the writer and director choose the most straightforward, obvious paths from start to finish, with some classic Pixar flourishes thrown in but with little effect (such as the elderly relative who inspires the heroine).  A corollary problem is that the plot - saving a patch of wilderness from destruction for development (seen anything like this before?) - is the overriding focus.  The heroine isn't particularly interesting, largely because she's treated as a generic stand-in.  The villain is a bore, the human helpers are typical eccentrics, and even the animals, despite moments here and there of humor, are mostly clones of those from similar talking-animal movies.  It's difficult to find much of anything positive of note, other than it is a good bet to entertain the little ones for close to two hours.  But Pixar has been the studio above all others in making animated movies that appeal equally to children and adults, and this one totally fails the older audience.  At least they also made the masterpiece Wall-E, a superior work illustrating the imperative of taking care of our world - watch that one instead (even if for the gajillionth time).

***

As we get to the spring movie season, it's been refreshing to see more variety in the theaters so far this year, even if the results have been mixed.  Crime 101 is better than expected, boldly bringing a familiar (but aging) genre into the present.  Certainly it's no Heat, but there's still plenty in its favor.  Meanwhile, Send Help and Hoppers were both surprising - but in opposite directions.  Send Help was the pleasant surprise, a nice genre blend made by a top filmmaker with engaged, well-chosen actors.  Hoppers is a perfect illustration, on the other hand, of the dangers of resting on your laurels, which is what Pixar appears to be doing now.  From 1995 (Toy Story) through 2017 (Coco), Pixar made some of the best movies, period, animated or not; since then, it's made plenty of fine movies but rarely glimpses its old form (the underrated Elemental being an exception).  It needs to return to its creative roots - wonderful animation, sure, but also simply delving into these unique, impossible-for-live-action worlds with rich characters and letting the stories flow naturally from them.  Because right now, it has become just another animated studio, shooting for the lowest common denominator.

* By source, Amazon MGM Studios - https://x.com/AmazonMGMStudio/status/1981346124167286904, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=81410977

** By source, Disney Enterprises, Inc./Pixar - https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/app/uploads/2025/11/HPR_Payoff_Life_1s_v5.0_Mech5.jpg, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=80455682