Role Models

I wasn't expecting a whole lot out of Role Models besides a few laughs, but it ended up about as solid as any comedy these days that dips into the same pool of actors. Paul Rudd and Seann William Scott make an unlikely leading duo, and in a way they were both just carrying their own half movies that crossed over a number of times, but I bought their friendly if undesired (on Rudd's part) rapport. Rudd co-wrote the screenplay with some of his longtime comedy buddies, and it was a nice mix of some smaller faces with more currently popular names. Rudd's as wryly funny as ever, and Scott continues to somehow be likable despite his general personality being something that would usually make me want to shove a fist in his face. After an unfortunate incident they're forced to enlist in a Big Brothers Big Sisters-type program run by the hilarious as usual Jane Lynch in lieu of jail time. Scott gets a problematic kid, Rudd is assigned McLovin cast as a LARP-obsessed dork, and hilarity ensues.

I had some issues with the story, as things run just a little conveniently parallel between the two characters and the ending is perhaps overly tidy and happy for everyone. I'm not quite sure it earns everything it tries to do. It's not a big issue though, as I liked most of the characters and it was funnier than I expected. Everyone I already mentioned does a fine job, Elizabeth Banks continues to be underutilized for how good she is at this stuff, and Ken Jeong provides his usual unique brand of bizarre comedy as the "king" of the LARP community. It's not always his words that sell the jokes, it might be just the way he touches someone's face or just a look he does. And despite the general vulgar tone of the film, it actually does a few things to change perceptions of the unusual topics it covers. Again, the clean ending undermines a bit of the realism in the story, but overall it was a solid, funny movie.

Invincible

Another Wahlberg movie? Just looking at his list of credits, I've seen a lot of his work (seven movies). Not that I mind. He's a solid actor and seems likable enough. His performance here is nothing special, you root for his character but he never really stretches out. It's a Disney sports movie, so maybe we shouldn't expect that many dramatics from it. Kinnear has a nice little career comeback going, and does a decent job as the coach who believes in underdogs. Banks seems to be good in everything she does, and this is the biggest part I've seen her in. Although again, there wasn't much there for her to do. The rest of the cast is rounded out by a bunch of bit actors playing believable Philadelphians, even if their dialogue is unrealistic. Am I supposed to believe sports fans from a city this famous for its vitriol can boo for over a minute without swearing once?

The movie itself is decent, for what it is. It's the true story of Vince Papale, who broke into the NFL at age 30. Details are changed to make it more inspirational and exciting, with plenty of little subplots mixed in to add a bit of a depth. It's generally filmed well, with some nice football scenes, although the cinematography is a bit odd at times. A little too yellow. It does seem a little hokey at times, like it's trying too hard to be uplifting. The story's good enough that they don't have to try to exaggerate it as much as they do. You know the kind of movie it is; it's really not very good, but it's difficult to hate. I'll admit I had a smile on my face in the climactic moments. I wouldn't really recommend you pay money to see it. But sometimes it's nice just to feel happy.

Spider-Man 3

Hmm. Spider-Man is my favorite super hero. I used to read some of his comics as a kid. I didn't know what was really going on, since the big story lines were spread over four books every month and I only read one. I still really liked the character though. Spider-Man is easily related to by a lot of people, because he isn't perfect. He starts out as a nerdy kid in high school. He has to deal with normal problems while fighting super villains who want to kill him. His entire career as a crime-fighter started when he made a mistake that led to his uncle's death. He's interesting because of his flaws as much as his ability to do good.

I loved both of the first two movies. I thought they were an excellent combination of story, character, humor, creative action scenes, and awesome special effects. My expectations were high for the third movie, but some things about the previews tempered them a bit. Three villains? The first two movies both did very well with just one. They were interesting because they weren't just pure evil, they had connections with Peter Parker and sympathetic in some ways. I'm fine with Harry succumbing and turning into the second coming of the Green Goblin, even if it seemed a bit soon with so many villains unexplored of yet. Sandman is pretty cool I guess, though I never saw him in a comic. But making him Uncle Ben's killer? What the hell? Part of what made Ben's death interesting and so important to Peter was that it was just a normal criminal that killed him who Peter could have stopped. That shame is what causes Peter to be who he is. The movie handles this situation somewhat satisfactorily, but it's still irritating. Seeing the black suit in the trailer, my thoughts immediately went to Venom. Obviously, you can't bring the symbiote to earth without Venom appearing eventually. My question was whether he would figure prominently in the story, or, as I hoped, merely be all set up for a sequel. It became clear though, eventually, that he would be fully featured as a third enemy. Why bring him into it, when Venom is so popular among fans that he could easily hold an entire movie, and you've already made preparations for Lizard to appear eventually?

It seemed overloaded, and maybe it was. Sam Raimi still does a pretty admirable job of handling all the threads, even if the plot ends up being a bit convoluted because of it. What irked me more than the excess of bad guys was the continued romantic problems Peter faces with Mary Jane. I thought the situation was pretty much set. They were together, she knew who he was, and it seemed all right. Whenever I read the comics, she was always there as a strong character supporting Peter when he struggled. She had her own things to do, but they had a strong relationship and lived happily. After I stopped reading they split up for a while, but since had made up and are happy again. Why over-complicate things when you already have this much stuff to juggle? It's fine for her to have something to do, but more friction is not what the movie needed.

Peter with the black suit was interesting. He gradually becomes more and more of a dick during the movie, but it was played more for laughs than actual story tension. It corrected itself when it needed too, but I thought that pretty much the entire thing could have been better if it was treated more seriously. It's funny to see Tobey Maguire dance like an idiot who thinks he's cool, but is it actually good for the film? No. That aspect of the movie just didn't work for me. Fortunately, the ship is righted in time for the final act. I won't say what happens, but in addition to being pretty damn fun to watch, the final conflict brings together all of the separate elements and concludes almost all of them in a way that eased most of my misgivings and made me appreciate the movie a lot more than I might have otherwise. I guess all's well that ends well. I liked Spider-Man 3, not as much as the first two films, but enough to recommend it to anyone who has any interest. We know there will be more Spider-Man movies, but we don't know who will be directing and starring in them. If Sam, Tobey, and Kirstin come back for the fourth, I'd be happy, as long as they reign it back in a bit. If they don't, then I'll come away from the first trilogy satisfied with what took place and how they handled it.