FILM REVIEW OF ''MARSHALL" (2017)

Before he played the lead in Marvel Studios’ superhero sage “Black Panther,” actor Chadwick Boseman played a genuine African-American hero in “Boomerang” director Reginald Hudlin’s “Marshall,” a sterling biographical courtroom yarn about civil rights attorney Thurgood Marshall.  As it turns out, this is the same individual who argued 32 cases before the Supreme Court and then later donned the robes as the first African-American to sit on the highest federal court of the United States.  It doesn’t hurt matters that seasoned civil rights advocate Michael Koskoff and his son Jacob penned the screenplay.  Interestingly, the elder Koskoff still serves as an attorney in Connecticut, where the trial took place in 1941, so he would know something about the hurdles that Marshall had to negotiate. At this point in his life, Marshall worked as the sole legal counsel for the NAACP, and his NAACP superior Walter White (Roger Guenveur Smith of “Eve’s Bayou”) dispatches him to all parts of the country to defend poor African-Americans who cannot afford an attorney.  

“Marshall” (***1/2 OUT OF ****) depicts the eponymous character as a sharp, savvy, sartorially elegant attorney who refuses to be intimidated by anybody.  Boseman has a field day incarnating this historical personage.  Neither Hudlin nor the Koskoffs reveal a great deal about Thurgood Marshall beyond his dedication to the rights of African-Americans in a legal system skewered heavily against them.  Indeed, we do learn about the problems that Marshall and his wife Vivien "Buster" Burey (Keesha Sharp of “Malibu's Most Wanted”) encountered in their repeated but futile efforts to get pregnant.  Eventually, she does have a baby.  Nevertheless, Hudlin and the Koskoffs don’t let Marshall’s own life history interfere with the trial at hand.  Mind you, “Marshall” clocks in two minutes short of two hours, but Hudlin doesn’t malinger.  The trial in question takes place in Bridgeport, Connecticut. The authorities have arrested a middle-aged, African-American chauffeur, Joseph Spell (Sterling K. Brown of “Brown Sugar”), for allegedly raping an affluent Greenwich socialite, Mrs. Eleanor Strubing (Kate Hudson of “Deepwater Horizon”), and then throwing her into a reservoir late one evening.  According to Koskoff, when the press broke the story, one newspaper touted it as “the sex trial of the century.” When Marshall visits Spell in his jail cell, the attorney explains that the NAACP represents only innocent blacks. Spell assures Marshall that he did not rape Strubing.  Furthermore, he has an alibi for his whereabouts when the crime occurred, and the witness in question turns out to be a white policeman. 

As the case unfolds, Marshall realizes that he lacks the appropriate credentials to practice law in Connecticut, so he finds a gullible but willing Jewish insurance attorney, Sam Friedman (Josh Gad of “Pixels”), to help him represent Spell.  Friedman constantly has second thoughts about the trial and the dire publicity that may irreparably damage his budding civil practice.  Nevertheless, he agrees to serve as Spell’s mouthpiece.  Meantime, the abrasive Judge Foster (James Cromwell of “L.A. Confidential”) refuses to let Marshall utter a syllable during the trial and threatens to hold him in contempt if he does.  

Throughout the trial, Marshall must coach Friedman because the latter hasn’t argued a criminal case.  If these two strikes against our sympathetic, but snappy hero aren’t enough, Marshall discovers about half-way through the case that Spell has been lying to them.  Indeed, Spell didn’t rape Strubing!  Instead, he had intimate consensual relations with her, because her abusive, bad-tempered husband, John Strubing (Jeremy Bobb of “Boy Wonder”), often left her alone at night.  Naturally, Friedman struggles to improvise, but he falls into too many traps laid by prosecuting attorney Loren Willis (Dan Stevens of “The Guest”), who is supremely confident that he will triumph in the end with a conviction. Of course, the racist citizens of Bridgeport aren’t happy with both Marshall and Friedman, and they go after them with fists.  Friedman suffers the worst, getting beaten to his knees, and walking away with minor facial scars.  Marshall grins at him and points out that the local press lumped him with Marshall as a crusading NAACP lawyer.

“Marshall” qualifies as a well-made but routine courtroom drama bolstered by terrific performances and historical accuracy.

FILM REVIEW OF ''THE RETURN OF JOSEY WALES" (1986)

The people who produced "The Return of Josey Wales" should have changed the hero's name. "Return" went straight to video in 1986 without significant theatrical release, while "The Outlaw Josey Wales" was released in 1976. Ten years is a long time to delay a sequel, though "Star Trek" fans weathered decades before their cult NBC-TV show finally reached the big-screen. Reportedly, Clint Eastwood had considered making Forrest Carter's second Josey Wales novel "The Vengeance Trail of Josey Wales" as a sequel. Nothing came of the project. Anyway, only the fictional characters from the original show up in "The Return of Josey Wales." None of the original cast members reprised their roles, and Clint Eastwood had nothing to do with the low-budget oater. Forrest Carter, author of both "Josey Wales" western novels received screen credit for both story and screenplay.  The producers changed the ending.  Several characters from the original novel reappeared in the second novel in an early chapter.  Nevertheless, “The Return of Josey Wales” is at best generic from fade-in to fade out compared not only with the previous movie as well as Carter’s novel. 

Producer/Second Unit Director R.O. Taylor received credit as "writer: special scenes."

"The Outlaw Josey Wales" qualified as an indisputable magnum opus. Meanwhile, "The Return of Josey Wales" (* OUT OF ****)npales by comparison, more of a drab, saddle-sore, horse opera with little to distinguish it. According to IMDb.COM, the produced lensed on location at the Alamo Village, in Brackettville, Texas, where John Wayne filmed his own magnum opus "The Alamo" in 1960. A large percentage of the cinematography is master shots. Master shots are typically long shots with actors shown from head to toe in their environment.  Star/director Michael Parks, who graces himself with an adequate number of close-ups, should have known he was setting himself up for a fiasco. The original "Josey Wales" overshadows this threadbare sagebrusher. Had the protagonist's name been altered, "The Return" wouldn't have found itself at such a tremendous disadvantage compared to its lofty predecessor. The Internet Movie Database lists no release date, but I remember a trailer at a drive-in movie theater advertising it. Like another reviewer, I bought a VHS copy through Amazon so I could say that I have seen it.  The picture quality is mediocre, and the film may have been cropped to accommodate the standard 1:33.1 screen ratio.

Despite the somewhat brutal events in the prologue, you're going to feel like you're watching a conventional television western. Tame, lame, with little of the same from the original, "The Return of Josey Wales" ranks as an uninspired sequel. Repeated viewings of the Eastwood original allow you to appreciate its perfection. Eastwood did a marvelous job when he condensed the entire Civil War in the prologue after Union sympathizers slaughtered Josey’s wife and son, and later he joined Bloody Bill Anderson. "Return" doesn't raise the stakes, boasts few surprises, breaks no new ground, and doesn't leave you wanting more. Character actor Michael Parks—an outstanding thespian in his own right—replaced Clint Eastwood. Indeed, some resemblance appears between the two, and Parks looks persuasively authentic in his black sombrero, white shirt, and dark britches. Aside from preserving Josey's tobacco spitting routine, Park's Josey Wales isn't as interesting as Eastwood's character. He has no love interest in this film, and he doesn’t have any memorable showdown scenes. Parks packs one revolver in a standard, low-slung, right-sided holster, like a prime-time, TV cowboy, and wields an occasional Winchester. Eastwood's Josey Wales armed himself to the teeth with as many as four revolvers. Eastwood knew how to make an entrance, whereas Parks ambles into and out of scenes as if by accident without a trace of charisma. He mumbles in his dialogue scenes like Marlon Brando. Occasionally, he says something insightful.

As director, Parks stages the western shenanigans without fanfare.  Watching it once is probably more than enough. I've seen it several times for this review. You'll have to wait patiently about 20 minutes for the first gunfight. The gunfight is minor like something out of a Randolph Scott western. Rafael Campos is the only other recognizable cast member.  Campos gives the best performance as a liquor-loving vaquero.  Everybody else, even in speaking parts, looks and sounds like amateurs. Some of the male extras wear atrocious hats that resemble party favors instead of Stetsons. Basically, like Clint Eastwood's "The Outlaw Josey Wales, "The Return of Josey Wales" has a savage prologue involving a heinous atrocity. The hero's extended family of friends suffers at the hands of the slimy villains. "The Return of Josey Wales" doesn't deliver an eye for an eye western with an icy-cool looking hero. Parks can be heroic.  Happily, he does handle himself acceptably in the first shoot-out both on foot as well as horseback. Appropriately enough, the villains—Mexican Rurales who scalp Indians for the bounty--are unrepentant devils.

The Rurales rape a defiant saloon girl, Rose (Suzie Humphreys of "Deep in the Heart") and beat a poor bartender to a pulp, while a one-armed Mexican peon, Pablo (Paco Vela of “The Job”), witnesses these horrific acts. Later, Paco relays his information to Josey Wales. Predictably, Wales saddles up and hits the trail, but with considerably less gusto compared to its predecessor. Furthermore, one of Josey's friends, a tin-horn gambler named Ten-Spot (Robert Magruder of “Five Days from Home”) has been taken. Mexican Rurales commander, Jesus Escabedo (Everett Sifuentes of "Selena"), plans to hang Ten-Spot, and Josey tracks them down with his Mexican vaquero, Chato (Rafael Campos of "The Appaloosa"), but Chato gets himself shot-up.  Sadly, Ten-Spot catches a bullet in the finale. Josey leaves Escabedo buried up to his neck in the ground as he rides off with his friends.  In Carter’s novel, Wales repeatedly shot and killed Escabedo during a face-to-face confrontation in a canyon.  Furthermore, in Carter’s novel, real-life Apache chieftain Geronimo played a peripheral role.

Josey Wales desired better than this grubby little western delivered.

FILM REVIEW OF ''SECRET IN THEIR EYES'' (2015)

“Pretty Woman” superstar Julia Roberts shatters her glamorous image in the grim but surprising police procedural thriller “Secret in Their Eyes” (*** OUT OF ****), co-starring Academy Award winning actress Nicole Kidman, Oscar nominated actor Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Emmy-nominated actor Alfred Molina.  This occasionally gripping but often conventional film is a remake of the superb 2009 Argentinean opus “The Secret in Their Eyes.”  Scripted originally with a man in mind, Roberts’ steps into the rewritten supporting role as a grieving single-mom who happens to be a veteran detective determined not only to take the law into her own hands but also exact vengeance on the suspected murderer of her daughter.  Furthermore, the man in the Argentinean movie was not a pistol-packing policeman, but a statistics-minded bank clerk!  Reportedly, “Shattered Glass” writer & director Billy Ray rewrote the role specifically for Julia Roberts.  Incidentally, Ray is best known for scripting movies such as “Flightplan,” “Captain Phillips,” and “The Hunger Games.”  Of course, it remains to be seen whether Julia Roberts’ loyal fans will accept the “Erin Brockovich” actress as a plain-Jane, tomboy with a sadistic streak.  In contrast, murder mystery aficionados who thrive on grisly melodramas may have a tough time imagining Roberts as such a demented soul.  Mind you, entertaining as this formulaic American crime saga is, it isn’t as imaginative as its distinguished predecessor that took home the Best Foreign Film Oscar in 2010.  Appropriately enough, the director who helmed the inspired original film, Juan José Campanella, served as the executive director for “Secret in Their Eyes.”  Presumably, Campanella must have conferred his blessing on the Hollywood adaptation by supervising it as an executive director.  

FBI agent Ray Kasten (Chiwetel Ejiofor of “American Gangster”) has been reassigned to Los Angeles.  He has been dispatched to assist a special anti-terrorist task force in the aftermath of New York City’s 9/11 catastrophe.  Ray has grown chummy with two investigators, Jess Cobb (Julia Roberts) and Bumpy Willis (Dean Norris of “Lethal Weapon 2”), but District Attorney Martin Morales (Alfred Molina of “Spider-Man 2”) and gimlet-eyed Detective Reg Siefert (Michael Kelly of “Man of Steel”) infuriate him.  Morales has just recruited a new deputy D.A., Claire Sloan (Nicole Kidman of “Australia”), who is an statuesque blonde.  Everybody, particularly Jess, soon realizes Ray is infatuated with Claire.  Claire remains as cool as a glacier as she moves around Ray.  Nevertheless, she is doesn’t entirely ignore him.  Meantime, Ray has been conducting surveillance on a mosque when a report reaches him about a Jane Doe corpse in a nearby dumpster.  Everybody assembles at the mosque where the police have set-up a crime scene.  Ray is the first detective to gaze into the dumpster.  Horror overwhelms him when he recognizes the corpse; the dead girl, Carolyn Cobb (Zoe Graham of “Boyhood”), is none other than Jess’s daughter.  Distraught beyond description, Jess climbs into the dumpster and cradles her dead daughter in her arms.  

Eventually, Ray ferrets out an enigmatic suspect, Marzin (Joe Cole of “Offender”), on the basis of a company picnic photo.  The villain is shown staring at Carolyn in the picture.  Later, Ray discovers that Marzin had been hanging around the mosque.  Inevitably, Ray clashes with an abrasive Morales about his conduct.  Ray is an defiant FBI agent who ignores boundaries when they interfere with his objectives.  Launching his own investigation, Ray refuses to share either evidence or leads with the detectives assigned to the case.  Ray provokes Morales’ wrath because the loose cannon FBI agent has been neglecting his prime directive. He is supposed to monitor potential terrorist threats to Los Angeles.  Morales threatens to notify the FBI about Ray’s insubordination and have him recalled.  Nothing Morales does, however, derails Ray’s obstinate search for Carolyn’s murderer.  At one point, Claire finds herself drawn into his investigation.  Together, they expose Marzin as the killer, but events beyond their control prevent them from prosecuting this dastard.

“Secret in Their Eyes” inherited its flashback-riddled narrative structure from the original.  The remake unfolds 13 years after Carolyn’s unsolved murder as Ray shows up Los Angeles to convince Claire—now the District Attorney— that she must reopen the case because he has new evidence about the identity of the suspect.  Comparatively, in the original, the hero revisited his old stomping ground 25 years afterward because he is using Carolyn’s homicide as the subject for a novel.  The two films switch back and forth between past and present with nimble abandon.  This hopscotch technique could confuse audiences accustomed to straightforward chronological yarns. In this respect, the American version takes advantage of these incessant shifts in time to accentuate the suspense and the surprises.  Whereas the Argentinean cop was not personally acquainted with the murder victim, the FBI agent worked closely with the daughter’s mother as a colleague. 

The American remake suffers primarily from the changes that Billy Ray has made with certain characters.  First, the incendiary FBI agent explodes like a powder keg and emerges as his own worst enemy.  The investigator in the original rarely lost his temper.  Second, the hero’s partner in the Spanish film mustered greater charisma than the hero’s crippled counterpart in the remake.  Third, the hero’s antagonist boss is neither as eloquent nor as profane as the hero’s superior in the original.  Fourth, the motive for the hero to return in the remake is more contrived than the hero’s reappearance in the first film. Fifth, a “Gone in 60 Seconds” stolen car chop-shop scene qualifies as hopelessly gratuitous with its standard-issue shootout.  Despite the flawed characters and the uneven scenes, the remake successfully duplicates more scenes from the original than it wrecks.  The best example occurs when Kidman and Ejiofor collaborate to dupe the villain into confessing his crime.  Unfortunately, Kidman and Ejiofor generate little chemistry as a couple supposedly attracted to each other. Altogether, “Secret in Their Eyes” doesn’t surpass its infinitely superior predecessor “The Secret in Their Eyes.” Nevertheless, Julia Roberts manages to broaden her acting repertoire.