Thursday, March 10, 2011

Movie Review - The Adjustment Bureau (2011)

The Adjustment Bureau, 2011.



Directed by George Nolfi.

Starring Matt Damon, Emily Blunt, Anthony Mackie, John Slattery, Michael Kelly and Terence Stamp.



The Adjustment Bureau

SYNOPSIS:



An ambitious politician falls in love with an enchanting ballerina but mysterious forces are determined to keep them apart and the agents of fate - the Adjustment Bureau - forbid him to see her.



The Adjustment Bureau

Chance and fate are like twin sisters; biologically related but far from identical. They are concepts we all know and experience day after day. Yet their effects fluctuate so wildly that no human being can define, prove or explain what exactly they are, or indeed confirm their existence with any certainty. The best, most brilliant minds throughout history have focused their attention on these beguiling, fascinating, unknowable sisters at some point. Everybody, from genius to crack addict, ponders the cruelties of chance, the favours of fate.



Was it chance that brought the girl of your dreams out onto the street in front of you? Was it just bad luck that you were spitting out your gum at the time, so that she walked head on into a potent projectile of sugared saliva and masticated goo? Or were you doomed to failure? Manipulative Miss Fate may have singled you out as her joke of the day. Then again, perhaps she was just redressing the balance after she took out the lights in the bar that time. Your powers of attraction increased tenfold in near darkness, allowing you to raise your standards considerably. That girl, let’s say Linda, barely noticed the peculiar crook of your nose, for instance, or the irrepressible leering tint to your eyes. But then again maybe there’s no balance at all, no order. Maybe it’s just Miss Chance, a bored, daydreaming secretary at her desk, absentmindedly jabbing at her keyboard.



Often the only way we can begin to explore or talk about these sisters is through storytelling. And George Nolfi’s first feature film as a director, The Adjustment Bureau, is fairly explicitly about the human relationship between our free will, each and every choice that we make, and our fate, the possible destiny that may be already determined for us, laid out beyond our control. The Adjustment Bureau is also a film that can claim to be a “sci-fi romantic thriller”; a distinctive and intriguing description of any story.



Indeed ever since I saw the trailer for The Adjustment Bureau I have been anticipating a thoroughly different blockbuster. Several of Phillip K. Dick’s stories have been taken on and adapted by Hollywood, and several more such as The Man in the High Castle (an alternative history of the Cold War), would make excellent movies. Dick had a knack for capturing fascinating science based or philosophical questions, within a captivating narrative framework that really made you think about the issue. Apparently Nolfi has expanded considerably on Dick’s short story, Adjustment Team, for this project, and that may account for some of its failings.



Numerous reviews have pointed out the plot holes in The Adjustment Bureau and lamented its implausibility. For a film marketing itself as exciting, the lack of engaging thrills has also been highlighted. It’s certainly something that requires a greater than usual suspension of disbelief to really enjoy it. However, critics have also been quick and correct to heap praise upon the performances of the two leads.



In interviews Emily Blunt and Matt Damon have talked of how they “dicked around” on set and tried to transfer some of this interaction, this genuine banter, to the screen. It’s a technique that worked tremendously well. Much of Nolfi’s dialogue in this film is good, but inevitably when trying to encompass such grand themes and deal with an issue like love at first sight, the odd passage is clunky, cliché and cheesy. These bad moments have the potential to seriously deflate the quality of a film. But Damon and Blunt’s brilliance ensures that these dances with disaster become strengths. Whenever an emotional speech is about to over step the mark, one of the characters, usually Blunt’s, makes a jokey remark to both lighten the tone and preserve the intensity of what went before. With such sensational plot components Blunt and Damon’s incredible, immense believability and appeal makes the romantic element of the story feel constantly real and affecting.



Damon in particular is excellent as the focus of the tale and adds another impressive notch to his CV. He appears to have truly arrived as a top Hollywood leading man. Here he plays up and coming senator David Norris, who concedes a mammoth lead in the polls thanks to some revelations about his wild shenanigans in the past. It was a step too far for voters, who had been willing to back the fresh faced, young and local candidate. Damon is completely convincing as a politician passionate for change but disillusioned with the system he must embrace to achieve it.



Underneath it all, Norris just wants company and affection, and this Damon portrays well too. In the Gents after his election defeat, he bumps into Elise, a contemporary ballet dancer. After an odd (but believable!) first meeting, Norris is as infected with the chemistry between them as the audience is. He abandons his conservative losing speech in favour of a frank, electrifying exposure of behind the scenes campaigning and the nature of politics as a whole. His popularity sky rockets (one of the film’s multitude of interesting ideas and points is how the public wants honesty in politics but good men are continually stifled from being themselves).



However when Norris tries to pursue his instant infatuation with Elise, he’s warned off by mysterious looking types in 1950s style period suits, wearing silly hats. This is The Adjustment Bureau; the people that make things happen according to plan. They are not all powerful, as they appear to be governed by their own set of rules and frequently require greater levels of “authorisation”, but they can flit about New York City by teleporting through doors and predict the choices you make. John Slattery, Anthony Mackie and Terence Stamp, all give decent performances as agents of this supernatural organisation.



The dated look of the agents has come in for considerable criticism; but I rather liked it. Whilst the film could be more thrilling, it’s refreshing to watch a blockbuster that’s still exciting and engaging without being stunt heavy. The focus is not on the action but on the plot and the romance between Elise and David. As for the plot holes, especially increasingly silly ones towards the end, these are probably due to the fact that The Adjustment Bureau is ideas heavy. Sure some of these musings on such debated subjects as the limitations of free will, determinism, God, chance and love are far from subtle. But to me that doesn’t matter, especially given the convincing chemistry at the heart of the film driving it forward as the narrative focus. It’s extremely admirable, valid and bold to make a mainstream film about any of these ideas at all. The Adjustment Bureau will get you thinking and talking about them, and hopefully exploring these fascinating areas further.



Besides, in my opinion, not all of the film’s ideas are as flat and basic as some reviews would have you think. The corporation like structure of The Adjustment Bureau for example (with God referred to as The Chairman), made an extremely relevant point about the limitations of our free will today, in supposedly completely liberated western societies. We no longer realistically worry ourselves with tyrants and dictators, but money, class and big business can substantially shape our paths through life and the hold the powerful keys to turning points in our destiny.



I applaud the abundance of ideas in The Adjustment Bureau then, even if it could have been a better film. Because of all the talking points and its compelling romance, it is still a good and worthwhile watch. Perhaps the most resonant, but also cliché, point that it makes though, and chooses to conclude with, is that love is worth fighting for. Whatever uncontrollable obstacles life throws in the way, be it distance/geography, illness/injury or rivals/opponents, love can be enough and worth holding on to. No matter what.



Oh god. Did I actually just type that? Shoot me now. Yes their performances really are that good.





Liam Trim (follow me on Twitter)



Movie Review Archive

Video: Aaron Eckhart, Michelle Rodriguez and Jonathan Liebesman on Battle: Los Angeles

Battle: Los AngelesSci-fi actioner Battle: Los Angeles arrives in UK and North American cinemas today, with the $100m blockbuster telling the story of mankind's last stand against an alien invasion as Marine Sergeant Michael Nantz (Aaron Eckhart) and his gung-ho platoon take on an enemy unlike any they've encountered before. Inspired by films such as Black Hawk Down and United 93, South African director Jonathan Liebesman (Darkness Falls, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning) intended to depict a 'realistic' response to an alien invasion, assembling a cast that includes Michelle Rodriguez (Avatar), Will Rothhaar (Hearts in Atlantis), Bridget Moynahan (Ramona and Beezus), Michael Peña (World Trade Center), Lucas Till (X-Men: First Class) and Ne-Yo (Stomp the Yard).



So far the critical response to Battle: Los Angeles has been pretty negative, but if you're yet to make your mind up about whether to catch the film this weekend why not check out the following behind-the-scenes clip and see if Liebesman, writer Christopher Bertolini and stars Aaron Eckhardt and Michelle Rodriguez can persuade you otherwise...



The Neighborhood Bully, DOW, SP 500, NASDAQ

NEW YORK - The United States has been reluctant to invade Libya despite civil unrest. President Obama, is content to let other leaders lead the way to end the Libyan conflict. While, pundits around the world condemn the U.S. for their inaction. What the U.S. is saying is, that the other world leaders can have their cake and eat it too.

The U.S. has been widely criticized for invading Afghanistan and Iraq, by just about every country in the world. Many world leaders have campaigned for election by saying they were against these wars. People criticize the U.S. for having selfish motives such as oil, or that the U.S. simply does not belong in a foreign land. It is criticized for invading Afghanistan a country that is responsible for the death of thousands of their people. Or, Iraq which had a ruthless dictator who mercilessly killed people. But the world does not see the U.S. as the "shining city upon the hill" for invading these countries, instead they see greed and corruption.

Obama is telling the world that they cannot criticize the U.S. on both sides of the argument. If the U.S. invades Libya, they will eventually be condemned by the world who will stare down at them, sitting on their pillar of judgement which is supported by false integrity. Yet what have these other countries done? The U.S. has a 14 trillion dollar deficit, much of which has come from military spending (approximately $700 billion in spending a year including wars) as they protect the world, while the world continues to decrease their military spending. The U.S. spends nearly 3 times as much on military as Europe despite having economies of approximately the same size. The Europeans and the world enjoy budget surpluses as the U.S. provides a free of charge global army.

The people rallying for the U.S. to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq and wondering why the U.S. has not invaded Libya should note the striking irony in their arguments. Where they see human rights abuse they cry for action and when there is action they condemn the one who takes it.

Should the U.S. take action in Libya perhaps. But it won't, because international condemnation for the last 10 years has put their world power and global might in a straightjacket.

Will other world powers step up, and help out the Libyan people? Probably not, they would rather criticize and do nothing.

On Star Trek, Sully Baseball, and Gratuitous Red-Sox Bashing

Squawker Jon, you are way out of date. Josh Beckett is just a blip on the radar as being one of my most-hated Red Sox these days, especially since the Yankees seem to pummel him every time they face him now. I am not sure if he would even make my Top 5 least favorite Red Sox this year, not with annoying teammates like Jonathan Papelbon, Kevin Youkilis, and Dustin Pedroia.

Speaking of which, Sully Baseball and I had a discussion on his radio show the other night about how this is the worst era ever for baseball nicknames, with so-called nicknames really being shortening of names, like "Tek" and "Youk." How boring. Not that the Yankees are much better in the nicknames department these days, though. We also discussed about how every scandal has a "gate" attached to it. How annoying!

Anyhow, Squawker Jon, you are correct about my hatred of "Star Trek." The only things I liked about the show was the cat episode, and that you refer to "The Wrath of Swan" whenever I have a hissy fit! I did read our friend Sully's entire article comparing Beckett and "Star Trek", though!

Speaking of pop culture, I think I finally figured out why "Sheen's Korner" is spelled with a K. It's Charlie's tribute to "Kiner's Korner"! Ralph oughta sue.

What do you think? Tell us about it!

Beam Me Up, Beckett

Squawker Lisa, I realize that two of your least favorite things are Josh Beckett and "Star Trek," but I think even you will be amused at a clever piece comparing the two written by friend of the Squawkers Sully Baseball:

How Josh Beckett and the Star Trek films mirror each other

After I read Sully's piece, I realized that Oliver Perez mirrors "V." Both were clearly dead in the water by the end of last season, yet both somehow continue to avoid richly deserved pink slips.

Life Sciences Greenhouse Gets New Home

The Southside is now home to the Pittsburgh Life Sciences Greenhouse. The 10-year old organization left it’s building on Second Avenue for a new “campus” at the River Park Commons Business Center. Greenhouse CEO John Manzetti says right now they are providing space for about a dozen incubator companies.

Manzetti says the lease in the old build was coming up for renewal and they looked at all areas of the region before landing on the south side. He says he wanted to be near the universities, near the companies working in the life sciences field and still have reasonable rental rates.

The new building will not only hold the greenhouse’s administrative offices and its clients, it will also be home to two venture capital firms and a pair of bio science companies. “To allow them to see what is going on in our greenhouse portfolio and actually see some companies up close and personal for the purposes of partnering with them, investing money in the case of a venture capital firm, or maybe investing in technology they think is important for their growth,” says Manzetti.

Manzetti says another advantage of the new location is the ability to expand. He says they have more space in the buildings that they are currently occupying and have access to other buildings in the area.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, University of Pittsburgh, Carnegie Mellon University, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and Pittsburgh’s regional foundation community, founded PLSG as a public/private partnership in 2001. It provides startup capital, building space, and access to qualified personnel and connections to other companies to emerging technologies.

Allegheny County Health Department Meeting

On Thursday, the Allegheny County Health Department Board members approved an air quality plan for bringing the Liberty-Clairton area into compliance for national standards in terms of the federal clean air act.

The vote was unanimous. The area has been one of the region's worst offenders for poor air quality - because of the Clairton Coke Works factory owned by US Steel. It emits ultra-microscopic particles that are harmful to human health because they can be inhaled deep into the lungs. There isn't an air quality standard for that pollutant.


The plan will go into agreement in 2013. By then the company will have made a number of improvements to the plant, mostly replacing old coke oven batteries with new ones.