Sunday, April 10, 2016

Movie Review: "Eye in the Sky" (Gavin Hood, 2016)

WAR IS (DIGITAL) HELL by Bennett Campbell Ferguson

Above: the late Alan Rickman in a scene from Mr. Hood’s new movie.  Photo ©Bleecker Street.

“Eye in the Sky,” the latest movie from Oscar-winning director Gavin Hood (“Tsotsi,” “Ender’s Game”) is a film about drone warfare.  In fact, the story is so steeped in the icky intricacies of technologically-enhanced combat that you could be forgiven for mistaking its superb English cast for an army of mechanized creatures with exceptional actorly finesse. 

The leader of the charge is Colonel Katherine Powell (Helen Mirren), a terrorist hunter whose single-minded ferocity makes Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Terminator look like a Teletubby.  Her superior, Frank Benson (Alan Rickman), is equally icy; he seamlessly segues from shopping for a toy baby doll to suavely explaining to a tableful of politicians why they should authorize Powell to fire a missile at a terrorist stronghold in Kenya—even though a young girl is selling loaves of bread just outside the targeted building.

With so many sharp fragments of plot grinding against each other, “Eye in the Sky” could have easily impaled itself upon its vast scope.  Yet that doesn’t happen, mainly because the whole operation is masterminded by Mr. Hood.  Powered by sleek Hollywood suspense, thorny ethics, and a sorrowful, knowing attitude towards violence, “Eye in the Sky” reflects not only Mr. Hood’s maturation as a filmmaker, but his stint in law school and his time in the South African military.  It’s the work of a man who’s seen it all.

What the soldiers of “Eye in the Sky” see, they glimpse only through pixilated surveillance footage; it’s Steve Watts (Aaron Paul), a Vegas drone pilot serving under Colonel Powell, who first spots Alia (Aisha Tokow), the bread seller.  Over the phone, Powell insists that Watts take the shot; he doesn’t want to, though neither do Powell’s military and political superiors.  Like children playing a murderous round of Duck, Duck, Goose, they keep crying, “Not it!” and begging anyone else to choose between the life of Alia and the lives of the people who may (or may not) be killed in a potentially imminent terrorist attack. 

These seething boardroom debates mark a moment of scaling down for Mr. Hood, who spent roughly half a decade milking his operatic science-fiction epics, “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” and “Ender’s Game,” for apocalyptic pathos.  By comparison, “Eye in the Sky” unfolds on a more diminutive canvas, though it gushes with the qualities that defined Mr. Hood’s tenure as a sci-fi auteur—his vicious contempt for militaristic violence and his nakedly heartfelt passion for honorability, truthfulness, and kindness.

“Eye in the Sky” hurls a wrench into that vibrant dichotomy by insinuating that there’s something inhumane about a soldier unwilling to kill one child to save the lives of countless other children.  Still, the film is pure Hood, not least because of its panting eagerness to both terrify and entertain.  After all, there’s no denying the shameful thrill of watching Watts wait for the right moment to pull the trigger, as the clock ticks closer and closer to block-wide Armageddon.

Better yet are the scenes on the dusty streets of Kenya, where a tough, wily agent named Jama Farah (Barkhad Abdi, as razor-thin as he was in “Captain Phillips”) spies on the terrorists per Powell’s orders.  While it’s stirring and chilling to watch Powell and Benson rage about the ethics of preemptive strikes, the sight of Farah flailing over ramshackle fences and racing through cramped alleys is more compelling because he’s not just raging.

He’s fighting for his life.

Thursday, April 7, 2016

"Batman: Bad Blood" (Jay Oliva, 2016)

A BETTER BATMAN by Mo Shaunette

Above: a scene from “Batman: Bad Blood.” Photo ©Warner Home Video.

It's an unfortunate fact that at some point, every comic book fan faces some moment of disillusionment as they age and grow.  For me, one arrived when I realized just how boring Batman actually is. 

Don’t get me wrong; there are Batman stories that I love.  But those stories are made memorable by situations, strong supporting characters, and iconic villains.  Batman himself is so arch and straightforward that he borders on being one-dimensional—a premier “human” character in DC Comics with relatively little humanity.

“Batman: Bad Blood,” the latest of the DC animated features, wisely responds to its hero’s limitations by shifting its focus away from the Caped Crusader and onto various sidekicks and supporting players.  That’s part of why the film is one of the stronger outputs from Warner Home Media’s recent uneven streak.

“Bad Blood” begins as a new gang takes hold in Gotham City: a crew of lesser-known villains led by the mysterious Heretic (Travis Willingham).  When it appears that the Heretic has succeeded in killing Batman (Jason O’Mara), Dick Grayson, a.k.a. Nightwing (Sean Maher), takes up the Bat-mantle, donning his former mentor’s cape and cowl to fight the Heretic, with Bruce Wayne’s son Damian (Stuart Allen) tagging along to make sure he does it right.

Along the way, the new Dynamic Duo get help from Kate Kane, a.k.a. Batwoman (Yvonne Strahovski)—a distant cousin of Bruce Wayne—and Luke Fox, a.k.a. Batwing (Gaius Charles), who is the son of Batman’s gadget supplier Lucius Fox (my favorite Ghostbuster, Ernie Hudson).  These compelling characters help set “Bad Blood” apart from the DC animation pack.  

The film also succeeds because of thematic concentration.  As the title implies, the idea of family and familial bonds is central to the story.  Dick remarks that it was Bruce’s ability to empathize with him and Damian as sons, not soldiers, that inspired them to a higher calling. 

Similarly, both Kate and Luke are kept at a distance by Bruce because they aren’t part of his “family”—but they are welcomed by Dick, who sees them not only as capable fighters, but as kindred spirits, scarred by trauma and spurned forward by duty to make their city a better place.

“Bad Blood” also stands apart because of the fact that Dick Grayson is at the center of the story.  His personal arc brings much-needed humanity to the movie (as does his sense of humor) and both Kate and Luke have similarly compelling hero’s journeys, especially since they are former soldiers looking for new purpose (Luke is mentioned as having returned from a tour in Afghanistan; Kate was at West Point Academy before being expelled for violating Don’t Ask Don’t Tell).

If there’s any element of the film that falters, it’s the script, which is clunky and uneven at times.  The film’s action scenes and character beats don’t always connect and the climax runs through events in such rapid succession that there’s little time to breathe, especially when the Heretic’s gang members start dropping like flies. 

I get that in a story with more characters than normal, you have to budget your screen time strategically, but I still think that DC missed an opportunity to enrich their film by at least making it longer than eighty minutes.

Still, “Bad Blood” ultimately works.  The cast brings it (especially Sean Maher, who shines in the lead role, and Travis Willingham, who effectively sells the Heretic’s madness and internal turmoil); many of the action sequences are fluid, well-choreographed, brutal and highlight each character’s particular style; and Phil Bourassa’s character designs still look fantastic, with his villain redesigns being especially distinct (although I can’t decide if the Heretic’s sleeveless trench coat looks cool or just silly).

In the end, it all comes together to make one of the better Batman movies I’ve seen in some time.  If you’re interested in exploring the world of the Dark Knight from outside his head, give it a watch.