A Walk in the Woods

"Intimidate the bears? They're f*cking bears!"

Following on the heels of the astoundingly good All is Lost from a couple years back, the latest 'Robert Redford in nature' film A Walk in the Woods - directed by Ken Kwapis - acts as a biopic for travel author Bill Bryson. In essence, it's a roadtrip movie, just without the road...or the car.

Bill Bryson (Robert Redford) is a travel author whose recently moved back to the States. After a television host asks him why he hasn't written about his home country America, Bryson decides to hike the Appalachian trail, a 2,200 mile stretch of wilderness that not many people manage to complete. His wife Catherine (Emma Thompson) thinks it's a terrible idea and insists that he doesn't go alone. After calling just about everybody he can think of, he gets a call from an old yet distant friend, Stephen Katz (Nick Nolte) who wants to hike the trail with him. After Stephen arrives, it's clear that he's in no shape to hike the trail, but they go anyway. Bryson is determined to finish the trail, even if that means dragging Stephen along behind him.  

To be honest, comparing this to All is Lost is unnecessary and unfair. Where the aforementioned ponders subtle philosophical questions about existence as its timid character struggles to survive, A Walk in the Woods presents a lighthearted story about rekindling friendship and enjoying the scenery. 'Robert Redford in nature' is as far as the comparison stretches. If you approach this in the right mindset, Kwapis has created a sometimes cheesy but regularly funny film that sheds light on the mind of a travel writer and offers a solid plot arc for the relationship between Bryson and Katz, a basic story that's been told countless times before, especially in the road-trip format, but still works well. Unfortunately, A Walk in the Woods often feels rushed and lacks nuance. I rarely argue for adding to a running time but at 105 mins, there's not much room for the characters to indulge in the experience of walking the Appalachian trail and as such, much of the film becomes a montage of bite-sized moments.

The story is driven by the relationship between Bryson and Katz, which is fairly well portrayed by the two leads. Redford is not at his strongest here but still brings life to what is essentially the straight-man in the comedy duo. Nolte portrays Katz as an enthusiastic but easily whiny out-of-shape alcoholic with the trademark raspy voice, and does so convincingly. Whilst character development is limited, that's more to do with material than the performances.

Kristen Schaal succeeds at creating another funny yet annoying character with the clingy hiker Mary Ellen, and Emma Thompson's small role is still decently well rounded. Overall though A Walk in the Woods has a very small cast, which is dominated by Redford and Nolte. However I did find the interactions between Bryson and motel owner Jeannie awkwardly timed. Mary Steenburgen is an undoubtedly talented actress and I think the scene was designed to be awkward in this way but it still felt surprisingly jarring. Not much to complain about though. John Bailey adds to his fine filmography with some stunning cinematography. The sweeping landscape shots are beautifully composed, and the natural environment encapsulated well. I think Bailey could have stretched his creativity more and mixed it up a bit but it's still a joy to watch.

A Walk in the Woods is at times rushed and is not going to take you on a roller-coaster ride of emotions, however those looking for a lighthearted, funny film that takes you into nature need look no further.

War Movie Month: The Thin Red Line (1998)

"Malick's Guadalcanal would be a Paradise Lost, an Eden, raped by the green poison, as Terry would call it, of war. Much of the violence was to be portrayed indirectly. A soldier is shot, but rather than show a Spielbergian bloody face we see a tree explode, the shredded vegetation, and a beautiful bird with a broken wing flying out of a tree"

-Producer Robert Geisler on Malick's vision for the film

This movie marks the return of Terrence Malick, whose last film Days of Heaven, was released twenty years earlier. This movie is a great example of filmmaking. It has a gripping storyline, stunning visuals and stellar performances from a cast with more stars that has ever been seen.

The movie recounts a fictionalised version of one of the battles in the Guadalcanal Campaign during the Pacific War in WWII. Private Witt (Jim Caviezel) has been found after going AWOL and is reassigned to Charlie Company under the leadership of First Sergeant Welsh (Sean Penn). Led by Lieutenant Colonel Tall (Nick Nolte), the men in the battalion are charged with capturing and controlling an island currently held by the Japanese.

The story is accompanied by narration from various soldiers who all ponder the point of war. This narration is usually voiced over stunning landscapes of Queensland (where the film was shot). The narration does not extend as far as the battle scenes, which have Hans Zimmer's beautiful score drowning out the sounds of war. One scene where this is especially prevalent is when the battalion finally takes the Japanese camp. The soldiers run through the camp and kill all who aren't surrendering, but if you were to close your eyes and listen, this is not the image that you get.

There are four main characters that most of the action focuses on. Caviezel, Nolte, Penn and Elias Koteas all carry most of the plot. But it's the cameos that take you off guard. Stars like Adrien Brody, George Clooney, Jared Leto, John Travolta and Woody Harrelson all have tiny parts in the film. I can only imagine that this was due to their excitement at hearing that Terrence Malick was making a film after twenty years and jumped at the opportunity to work with the acclaimed director.

Verdict: This movie searches for the emotional core of war and does a pretty good job and finding it through a sea of heavy themes. Much better than Saving Private Ryan, the other big WWII film that came out in 1998.

Gangster Squad

Gangster movies have long been a staple of my movie diet. Since a young age I have enjoyed movies such as Goodfellas, Scarface, Reservoir Dogs and countless other crime flicks. I have always been drawn in by the glamour of the lives that these men lead, but I have also taken away the message of these movies, that although you may have a great life it never ends well. And boy, doesn't it end badly for Mickey Cohen, the main bad guy in Gangster Squad. It seems to me that whenever a something is set in 1940s LA, the go to bad guy is Mickey Cohen. He has been featured in everything from film, books and even video games.

Gangster Squad is the story behind the crusade to bring down real life LA kingpin Cohen, played perfectly and ruthlessly by a stellar Sean Penn. Josh Brolin's John O'Mara is charged to put together an outfit to bring down Cohen, who's been running LA for years. The team is quickly assembled and they have to work outside the law to bring down Cohen, because he has most of LA's cops in his pocket. They destroy racket after racket to flush out Cohen, which eventuates in a classic hotel shootout, but it is one we have seen a million times.

Josh Brolin is excellent as the crusading cop and this is the first movie that I've seen with him since the Coen Brother's True Grit, but the stars that everyone has come to see in this are Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone. It's no secret that I am in love with Emma Stone, every guy who has seen her feels the same way, but her casting in this feels like nothing more than a marketing ploy. Everyone loved her and  Gosling in Crazy, Stupid, Love, but she didn't get enough screen time for me to make a meaningful connection to the character and although she's no ditzy blonde, she seemed like she was only there as motivation for Gosling's character. Although I am a huge fan of Ryan Gosling (he should have won some award for Drive and I am immensely looking forward to The Place Beyond The Pines), he seems like he should stick to being the indie hero that he is. When he stars in these big budget movies I feel as though he doesn't get to be the actor that he can be when you see him in indie films.

Sean Penn's Cohen reminded me a lot of the character he played in Colors and although he played a rookie cop in gangland LA in that one, I couldn't help getting the feeling that he was channeling the motivations he had as that character all those years ago. Of course the real life Cohen didn't share the same fate as Sean Penn did in this movie. Like many of those gangsters all that time ago, he was put away for tax evasion.

For me the real star of this movie was the city of LA. Ruben Fleischer (the director) put together a stunning recreation of the city in the 40s. Now I have to say I am a huge fan of this time period. It was the golden age of Hollywood, jazz music was on the rise, art deco was what everyone wanted. This movie really does do that justice.

Ruben Fleischer, however, maybe wasn't the best choice of director. His previous two films were Zombieland and 30 Minutes or Less, two comedies that both featured Jessie Eisenberg. They are both hilarious movies and this film is by no means a comedy. There was a few jokes early on that were played highly upon, but I felt that they weren't all that necessary.

The action in this movie is stylised and you could read how most of the gunfights were going to play out on their predetermined course. The car chase in the old Cadillacs was a highlight though.

Verdict: This movie is full of the same old cliches and archetypes of the 40s LA gangster film. There were some good performances and the city looked amazing, but in the end it was a film that I won't stick with me too long.