Reviews

When I first read about Evolution, the latest sci-fi scheme to come from DreamWorks, I was interested. A story about aliens with humor, not bad. Then when I read that Ivan Reitman, the BEST comedic director of the 80's and one of the best of all time was at the helm, I was thrilled. I mean, come on, after he was given duds like `Father's Day' and `Six Days, Seven Nights' to work with, isn't it about time that Hollywood gave him a project worth while (I won't even mention the bombastic disaster of `Junior'…oh, I just did)?

It begins with the introduction of Scott's character, Wayne Green, a wannabe fireman practicing for his fireman final (questionable at first, hilarious in the end). Then he gets an unexpected visitor - a meteor, carrying alien organisms hits the heart of the Arizona desert. After a community college science professor, Ira Kane Duchovny, working with one screwed up screen name)and his eccentric geologist buddy, Harry Block (Jones) discover the meteor, they find that the `bleeding' rock starts to create these weird alien creatures and soon they begin to multiply. Kane's nemeses, Gen. Woodman (Levine) and the military get involved, things get too out-of-control, so it's up to the teaming of Kane, Block, Green and government scientist Allison Reed (Moore) to stop the evolution.

If you're a Reitman fan, the plot of this could make you go in expecting some kind of tribute to both `Ghostbusters'. In a way it is, and is that a bad thing? Hell no! If you liked, or even loved (like me) `Ghostbusters', I can bet my clean pair of boxers that you'll get a hoot out of `Evolution'. But of course any film must maintain some distance from the films its being compared too, and `Evolution' does that. The characters and situations are different, atmospherically. Duchovny turns in a `cool' performance, by that meaning he wasn't Mr. Badass or Mr. Laugh-a-Minute, he was just, well, Duchovny and that itself is always pleasing to watch. Jones is his usual funny self, delivering some funny lines. Moore's ability to do just about anything comes in handy here, playing the hottie-yet-clumsy love interest. Scott's acting resembles the other roles he's done in the past, and I've come to appreciate that (that thing he does w/ his eyebrow is getting funnier every time). Can't say the same for Levine; his cliché performance as the bad-guy-who-doesn't-listen character gets annoying fast.

A lot of the film makes me question what it is, and really what it could have been. The script, penned by three writers, was originally written as a sci-fi THRILLER, not a sci-fi comedy. There were a lot of laughs, but because of the script's origin, there could have been more. But considering the script was originally a sci-fi thriller, the filmmakers, including Reitman, did a great job. Can't say much for the ending, though: the ending looks and feels like a meshed-up result of what-could-have-been, and from that mushiness, the filmmakers poked at and took at least some of the good elements. Thank god the film is a comedy; if it was its original idea, the ending would have been disastrous.

`Evolution' is a overall crowd-pleaser with nice special effects and makeup (those dead aliens looked great). It's a few laughs and comedic situations short of comedic greatness, but look on the bright side-Reitman is back in his lovable kick-ass form. He's tapped into the present and how most comedies are made, but he didn't dare forget his roots: there is a sequence in the film where Duchovny, Jones and Scott chase down a flying creature in a mall. The three, equipped with shotguns, dispose of it in true Ghostbusters style. And with me being a big Ghostbusters fan, I fell in love with the it, plus its the best scene in the film. (The trio singing after their battle; nice touch).

GRADE: B+

I bet that if you read some book adaptation or the script itself of Swordfish, you would probably think it's another predictable action/thriller story. And you'd be right. However, it has a special feel to it. There's something in this canny story that prevents it from going down the drain…the question is, can it be brought up from, what I like to call, its `crap quota'? Thanks to ever-improving director Dominic Sena and his band of very merry actors…YES it can.

Written by Texas-born Skip Woods, a washed out computer hacker named Stanley Jobson (Jackman) gets a rather friendly visit from a mysterious woman, Ginger (Berry), and makes him an offer he actually can't refuse, even though he tries: if he meets this girl's employer and does a job for him, he will get a chance to regain custody of his daughter. Accepting her offer, not to mention $100,000 on the spot, he meets this employer…who ends up being the ever-so-evil Gabriel Shear (Travolta), a terrorist calling himself a `patriot' who needs to steal over $9 billion in unused government funds from an abandoned operation called `Swordfish'.

With a plot this simple, things so do get complicated, and fast. There are even times when Wood's script loses focus on its importance. The script has flaws, but it also has some sharp dialogue. The four main players take this good deed and use it to make notable performances. Travolta, Jackman, Berry, and Don Cheadle as agent A.D. Roberts, take to this film as a kid would to candy; they bring energy to their characters, and the end result is dynamic.

Director Sena first brought attention to such producers as Jerry Bruckheimer (`Armageddon', `Pearl Harbor') and Joel Silver (`Matrix', who also produced here) last year with `Gone in 60 Seconds'. Though it wasn't a disaster as most critics made it out to be, Sena didn't show true directing chops, but he did show promise. He's like a high school teen: his `freshman' try was under the gun, but his `sophomore' try is better, because frankly he's a little wiser. He's not only interested in creating stylish and elaborate action sequences, but now he's interested in human characteristics and conflict. He did a great job with Jackman's humanistic struggle to be with his daughter again. Sena improved here, and I have a feeling he's only going to get better.

Before ending this review, there is something I REALLY have to mention. In the beginning, Sena decided to make this horrific explosion and turn it into a sequence that goes a little like this: During the whole explosion, the camera actually makes a 360 pan through everything: the streets, in between cars, in coffee shops. After it was all over, all I said was `damn!' and started to applaud.

GRADE: B+

I'll admit that I've never seen "Waiting for Guffman", 1997's critically acclaimed comedy mockumentary about a small town thats that stages a pageant. When the advertising for Best in Show had the tagline "From the Team That Brought You Waiting for Guffman", a fair number of critics out there implied in their reviews that only people that are familiar with the film or its filmmakers and cast would have a good time seeing this film. For shame, critics, for shame times two! Any critic that implies something like that with any film probably doesn't want to share the film's wealth with the rest of the world, but this is one film that I hope people will experience, now that its video/dvd. "Best in Show" is, without a doubt, the best comedy of 2000.

The film begins with a mockumentary style, introducing the main competitors (not to mention screwballs) of the annual Mayflower "Best In Show" competition, where dogs of all breeds come to compete to see who is the top dog. We have the loveable and gullable Harry Pepper (Guest) with his bloodhound, the simple Gerry & Cookie Fleck (Levy & O'Hara) with their terriors, nut-case yuppies Hamilton & Meg Swan (Hitchcock & Posey), the gay dog groomers Scott Dolan & Stefan Vanderhoof (Higgins & McKean), and the airheaded millionare Sheri Ann Ward Cabot (Coolidge) along with her trainer Christy Cummings (Lynch). They all have their minds on one simple object: The Blue Ribbon, which will be awarded to the best dog. And...do I have to tell you the rest?

Director/writer/star Guest's idea of humor is one that assures me that there are comedies out there that are worth laughing at, and that the idiocy of films like "American Pie" or other pointless "teenage" flicks won't take over the world after all. His idea is simple: make your comedy not just funny, but SMART funny. But instead of following in the brilliant footsteps of films like "Zero Effect" and "High Fidelity", he used a rather unusual approach (and as I understand, he also used this approach for "Guffman"). Whether you notice or not, a very large part of the film is improvisation. In other words, what the actors say and do were probably not written in the script, maybe even not even dreamed of by Guest and co-writer/star Levy. But with a gentle hand from Guest, he and the actors pulled off a hilarious theatrical feat that probably would have flopped if handled by other, less adept actors. Now that's smart!

The cast is, of course, what makes improv work the most. All of them are a (comedic) marvel to behold, especially Guest as Pepper. But the real standout has to be Fred Williard as Buck Laughlin, the clueless announcer at the competition who can spin out the most outrageously funny stories and comments that no announcer would even dream of...that is, if the announcer was trying to be funny. Williard can go from talking about the dog to suddenly going on and on about how much he can bench press. There's even a part were he gives out an idea for a new marketing strategy: have sexy women pose in tight shirts and shorts with the dogs and imply something like "have a doggie-style of a time". Its priceless, as is his performance.

I hope that people engage in this 90-minute "dogumentary". The film deserves so much recognition. It did get nominated for Best Picture-Comedy at the Golden Globes, but didn't win. I can't see why. I mean, in the comedy department, it is best in show.

GRADE: A

I saw this film a week after it came out, and I walked in with the knowledge of critics and people both loving and hating this film, so my expectations weren't that high (even though that one scene where Paris shoots flame from his mouth to reveal the aliens is pretty creative and cool). My...my...my. The film was very entertaining, and though I thought it wasn't as good as David Twohy's last film (The Arrival), it still shows that he has a good sense of direction. I recommend this film for sci-fi lovers everywhere. This is Fincher-3 signing off, so keep it real.