Rebel With a Cause

Robin Hood

**1/2 out of ****

Directed by: Ridley Scott

Starring: Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett, Mark Strong, Oscar Isaac and Max Von Sydow

Running time: 140 minutes

With financial woes plaguing the European Union and a slowly adjusting global economy, will audiences choose to escape into a time where “taxation” was still the word on everyone’s lips?

From the medieval look to the gritty battle sequences to the collaboration with Russell Crowe, Ridley Scott’s latest retelling of the legendary Sherwood Forest archer was marketed as “Gladiator: The Return of Maximus.”

Instead, Robin Hood is "Gladiator Lite," with less rousing action, fewer compelling characters, and an alarming lack of personality. Nevertheless, it is still an enthralling and magnificently filmed origin story.

Moviegoers may be expecting a rehashing of story elements that they are familiar with. But beware: this is a prequel to the Hood's title as Prince of Thieves.

Long before he was labelled an outlaw and robbed the rich to give the poor their coin, Robin Longstride (Crowe) and his gang of marauders served England in the Third Crusade.

When their leader, Richard the Lionhearted (Danny Huston) dies in battle, Robin and his troupe of soldiers decide to return home. On their journey, they come across a pillaged band of knights, one of whom is breaths away from his end. That man is one Sir Robert Loxley of Nottingham, and he wants Robin to return his sword to his father.

Longstride vows to do so. Upon meeting the penniless population of Nottingham, he finds Loxley’s widow, Lady Marion (Cate Blanchett), and father, Sir Walter (Max Von Sydow), to whom he returns the weapon.

He further vows to defend the poor community from the harsh taxes summoned by the newly crowned King John (Oscar Isaac) and his errand boy sent to collect the bill, Sir Godfrey (Mark Strong), who’s also secretly an agent of France.

Gone is the dreamy Technicolor of the Errol Flynn classic. These new adventures are nearly drained of colour, but Scott’s signature epic sweep makes up for the lack of green-cloaked merriness.

The attention to detail – from the grand medieval locations to the costumes – is rich. Moreover, the battle sequences are thrilling, including a triumphant storm-the-beaches finale that plays out like D-Day in reverse. Robin Hood looks medieval and feels like a brawny summer blockbuster.

Unfortunately, the characters could have used some polishing. The film is overstuffed with three villains (too many), a cluster of Merry Men (ditto) and several helpful aides, including Mark Addy as Friar Tuck and William Hurt as a loyal servant to the King.

The attempts to introduce each supporting character makes the film lag, and their lack of development ensures that they quickly become dispensable within the story.

Furthermore, Russell Crowe’s take on the Hood is not quite a bullseye. For an actor known for intense, fiery, strong-willed performances, you hope for Robin to show some charisma while jump-starting a drive to justice:

Unfortunately, dull characterization from the often-reliable screenwriter Brian Helgeland (L.A. Confidential, A Knight's Tale) ensures that even Crowe seems too bland to bring the character a strapping action-hero status.

Blanchett fares better, as Marion (notably without the “Maid” preceding her name). She is a woman of substance and fierce intelligence. She is everything that Crowe's portrayal should have allowed him to be - it’s no wonder she turns up as a warrior alongside him in the final minutes of the film.

Most fascinating, though, is the currency of the subject matter. Depending on your political leanings, Robin Hood is either the Barack Obama of 13th century England (with his libertarian ideals) or the ultimate Tea Party representative (one who demands “no taxation without representation.”)

The battle scenes have might, the political conflict has intrigue, and the costume and production design is layered with detail. It’s too bad that many of the characters in Robin Hood lack these preceding traits.

These adventures of Robin Hood and Co. are solid but ultimately flavorless. Where’s Errol Flynn when you need him?

This "Dragon" is Never Draggin'

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

***1/2 out of ****

Directed by: Niels Arden Oplev

Starring: Michael Nyqvist, Noomi Rapace, Sven-Bertil Taube, Peter Haber and Lena Endre

Running time: 148 minutes

Fervent readers across the world – those who have outgrown tales featuring hormonal wizards and Abercrombie & Fitch models posing as werewolves – have been firing through the “Millennium Trilogy,” from Swedish author/journalist Stieg Larsson.

Larsson’s trilogy was finished but unpublished when he suddenly died in November 2004. Since then, his books (released posthumously) have sold over 30 million copies worldwide. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is the first installment in the trilogy.

And even though an American remake of the bestseller is in the works – likely to be helmed from Fight Club director David Fincher – it would be unwise for anyone, bookworm or not, to miss this gripping adaptation. Even one that’s entirely in Swedish.

That girl with the dragon tattoo scaling her back has a name, and it’s Lisbeth Salander (she's portrayed by Noomi Rapace).

She wears coarse, black clothing, is covered with piercings, swears profusely, and earns a living as an undercover investigator, craftily obtaining private documents and hacking her way through hard drives. She’s a compelling hybrid of shock rocker Marilyn Manson and the snooty (and fictional) Chloe O’Brian, from Fox’s hit series 24.

Her last name may be Salander, but in Dragon Tattoo, she delves into the life of an alleged slanderer, a disgraced journalist named Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist).

Blomkvist, a publisher for a thriving financial magazine, has been sentenced to a six-month prison term for losing a libel case against a powerful Swedish industrialist. After being defamed for his actions, he hastily agrees to assist an aging billionaire, Henrik Vanger (Sven-Bertil Taube).

Forty years prior, Vanger's niece, Harriet, disappeared from the island that houses the lofty family estate and was never seen again.

Haunted by the cold case, Vanger believes that his niece was killed and that her perpetrator is still out there. He wants Blomkvist to crack the unsolved mystery by bringing a fresh, journalistic perspective to the investigation.

Before long, our new detective gets a major break in the case, courtesy of someone who’s keeping close tabs on Blomkvist: a young woman with a dragon tattoo. Together, Blomkvist and Salander form an unlikely detective duo to get to the root of the decades-old mystery.

Blomkvist and Salander are an unlikely combination, but Nyquist and Rapace, respectively, give their coupling a scalding hot chemistry amidst a chilly, barren atmosphere.

Both characters are lost and vulnerable. Salander has been depraved by a sadistic guardian (warning: there are some graphic scenes of rape and mutilation here). Also, Blomkvist can’t walk very far without being reminded of his journalistic collapse.

Nyquist and Rapace offer these beloved literary characters a sardonically bitter edge in the first third. But, as we uncover more about these lonely souls and get caught up with their shattered lives, we begin to buy their inevitable romantic pairing.

Major props go to Rapace, who looks the ferocious part while offering glimmers of tenderness underneath. Good luck to the casting director of the upcoming US remake for finding someone of equal worth.

Furthermore, there aren’t many times when an adaptation – especially one for such a sprawling, intricate novel like "Dragon Tattoo" – can remain in-sync with the characters without missing the elemental aspects of Larsson's dense plotting.

The film is taut, and never feels the need to swerve into the subplots involving secondary characters that were wisely left on the page.

Director Niels Arden Oplev ensures both excellent pacing and breathless suspense. When one can be so engrossed with the mystery at hand that they no longer feel as if they’re reading the subtitles but breathing in the intricate details of the story, it's fair to say that this is a worthy tribute to Larsson's page turner

Even so, it’s odd that the novel’s potent MacGuffin is absent. In the novel, Blomkvist agrees to investigate for Vanger in exchange for information that would prove that the man who initially sued him for libel is indeed corrupt. Blomkvist’s immediate involvement with Vanger in the film version - without the exchange - is hard to buy, as a result.

Regardless, this is intelligent, riveting entertainment. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo brings out the vivid characters, unsettling portrayals of violence and malice (that are key to the story at hand), and the encapsulating whodunit that has already left millions of readers licking their lips for more.

It’s as if the zeniths of Larsson’s opus had been tattooed onto the reels of the film. Take note, Hollywood: this is how a beloved novel's adaptation is done right.

Man With The Iron Suit

Iron Man 2

**1/2 out of ****

Directed by: Jon Favreau

Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Mickey Rourke, Scarlett Johansson, Don Cheadle and Sam Rockwell

Running time: 124 minutes

Everything that went brilliantly right with the first Iron Man film – the spot-on performances, the irresistible charm of narcissistic playboy protagonist Tony Stark, a flurry of amusing laugh-out-loud moments uncommon of the superhero genre – is also present in its sequel.

So why does Iron Man 2, the first mega-blockbuster of the summer, feel so unsatisfying?

This model may be flashier and features a broader array of gadgets than its predecessor, but when put together, the parts don’t complement each other to serve an efficient, focused, well-balanced whole. It's grandly entertaining, but also overloads itself with underwritten subplots.

In this installment, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is enjoying his enlarged celebrity status by keeping the world safe and secure with his Iron Man technology. While fame goes to his head, the palladium chemical in his armor suit slowly kills everything else inside him.

Uncertain of whether he can be saved by a substitute element, Stark gives his former assistant, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), his company's CEO position. He starts drinking, too.

While Tony’s death begins to seem imminent, it becomes the least of his concerns.

A Russian physicist named Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) is keen on revenge. Vanko's father, who collaborated with Stark’s daddy before banishment to Russia by Stark Industries and a miserable life in poverty, dies.

Vanko has created an arc reactor to thrash (or more appropriately, give “Whiplash” to) our steel-cloaked protagonist, to honour his father's accomplishments and demonize Stark Industries.

Furthermore, a rival weapons manufacturer, Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell), is poised to shame the billionaire playboy in front of the US Congress – where Tony is summoned to give up his technology – while upping the ante with new warfare of his own.

Finally, Pepper's replacement arrives in the form of a very sultry and mysterious young woman named Natalie Rushman (Scarlett Johansson), who Tony is eager to seduce.

A sequel needs to deliver more, but not in the ways Iron Man 2 delivers “more.” The storylines of characters we’ve grown to adore – Tony, Pepper, Rhodey (Don Cheadle, replacing Terrence Howard after a contrast dispute) – are stilted in their development to make way for plenty of subplots involving new characters.

Screenwriter Justin Theroux (Tropic Thunder) has followed in the footsteps of other inferior superhero sequels (X2: X-Men United, Batman Returns, Spider-Man 3) by adding a new group of characters without adding to the complexities to the characters that were already there.

The film shrugs off the engaging personal drama of one of comic lore’s most charismatic figures, the insatiable Tony Stark. Theroux introduces the idea of Tony being Iron Man’s biggest adversary, but does little with it.

When your protagonist is throwing his life away on liquor, (especially when he’s portrayed by a post-rehab Downey Jr.), the drama aches to become candid and entirely compelling. Instead, it resolves itself quickly with a clanky battle between Iron Man and his metal sidekick, War Machine, set to the beats of Queen and Daft Punk.

Furthermore, it doesn’t help matters when your villains aren’t, well, all that bad. Rockwell's Justin Hammer is a plucky rival for Stark, but even though his deliciously obnoxious portrayal recalls a PG-13 hybrid of Ari Gold and Gordon Gekko, he’s a one-dimensional creation.

Ditto to Vanko, who is ready to thwart Tony as a way to expose the darker undercurrents of Stark Industries. But there is little development within his tale, as well.

This intriguing means to explore the question of good and evil of our protagonist, his father, and the morality of their weapons manufacturing is shoved aside entirely. Didn’t these questions of moral ambiguity help make The Dark Knight such riveting, thought-provoking entertainment?

Regardless, even when the characters and their storylines aren’t developed to their potential, the performers are excellent.

Downey Jr. continues his dry, sarcastic quirkiness as our cocksure hero, while Paltrow is wonderful as his intelligent but cautious aide, playing both companion and character foil to our snarky hero. Their scenes together are the highlights of the film.

Director Jon Favreau, who helmed the original, has also become more confident with filming action sequences. Iron Man 2's big-budget FX setpieces are dazzling, nimble and (refreshingly) shot and edited in a clear and cohesive manner. We can see the battles between Iron Man and Whiplash without suffering from whiplash ourselves.

But when all is said and done, Iron Man 2 is merely serviceable. While some parts - mainly the action sequences - are Marvel-ous, other sections - mainly the character driven ones - feel stagnant and disposable.

That’s what happens when more time is focused on the machines than to the people inside of them.

Law and Order in Buenos Aires

The Secret in Their Eyes

***1/2 out of ****

Directed by: Juan Jose Campanella

Starring: Ricardo Darin, Soledad Villamil, Guillermo Francella and Pablo Rago

Running time: 127 minutes

There’s a sequence halfway through The Secret in Their Eyes, an Argentine feature that recently won the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar, that’s so mesmerizing even people only halfway-serious about film will be talking about it for years.

It’s an enthralling pursuit through a jam-packed soccer stadium to catch a suspected criminal. The inspectors chase the man from the overflowing stands through a maze of hollow corridors and then onto the field itself.

Filmed to look like one prolonged shot - interviews with the director have revealed that the sequence was composed of a few shots seamlessly edited together - the set-piece is astounding.

It’s the stylized highlight of a very orderly and very good crime thriller from Juan Jose Campanella, a celebrated director whose work ranges from compelling foreign fare to several Law and Order: SVU episodes.

Campanella’s background with the latter crime procedural proved to be good practice, as his newest film plays like an extended episode of Law and Order plus better cinematography, meatier characterization and a snappier script.

The Oscar-winning film tells the story of Benjamin Esposito (Ricardo Darin), a retired criminal court investigator who’s trying to pen an original novel. The content of his to-be masterwork revolves around a macabre murder case from 25 years earlier – one that still haunts him.

He tells Irene (Soledad Villamil), a beautiful former colleague who worked with him on the case, that he’s not entirely convinced with the results of that investigation.

The central crime revolved around a young Buenos Aires woman named Morales who was raped and murdered by an unknown assailant.

Campanella uses his protagonist’s work-in-progress novel as a framing device to flash back to 1970s Argentina, to follow Esposito as he tracks down the criminal and falls for Irene, and then to return to the present day as he cleans up some loose ends.

The Secret in Their Eyes isn’t just an absorbing crime thriller, but a film that adheres as much to its protagonist’s personal desires as it does to the central mystery. As intrigued as we are with the case at hand, we are just as interested in the path of Benjamin’s relationship with Irene.

The film also evokes Roman Polanski’s Chinatown with its complex characters, compelling mystery and conflicts involving a corrupt political bureaucracy.

As Benjamin, Ricardo Darin brings a wry, gentle approach that is as far from a machismo detective portrayal as one could expect. This style ensures that we can believe the love story elements – he does share much spicy chemistry with co-star Soledad Villamil, who is also excellent.

Strong performances also come from Guillermo Francella as Benjamin’s charming if over-intoxicated right-hand man and Pablo Rago in a haunting turn as the disturbed husband of the murder victim.

The film is sensual, alluring and rich with characterization, a rarity that manages to balance the romantic disposition with the dense plot exposition that usually comes with detective stories.

With its thrilling procedural elements alongside a satisfying love story, it’s no secret as to why the Academy was charmed by The Secret in Their Eyes.