Tag Archives: Harold Perrineau

Zero Dark Thirty-2012

Zero Dark Thirty-2012

Director Kathryn Bigelow

Starring Jessica Chastain

Scott’s Review #1,133

Reviewed April 14, 2021

Grade: A-

Director Kathryn Bigelow, not far removed from her Oscar win for The Hurt Locker (2008), returns with a similar style of film centering around war and more specifically about the emotional tolls and psychological effects from not just the battlefields but from dangerous missions.

The main character suffers from many conflicts and inevitably the viewer will as well.

Zero Dark Thirty (2012) is unique for the genre by having a female in the lead role and star Jessica Chastain is front and center and terrific.

She is calm, restrained, and in control. She is tough to rattle and a powerful and inspirational character to be admired.

Chastain exudes cool in the face of danger.

Chastain does have a brilliant emotional scene at the end of the film. Her character, Maya, boards a military transport back to the U.S., as the sole passenger. She is asked where she wants to go and begins to cry. The emotion finally gets the better of her as it would to anyone.

The film is not all Chastain’s to brag about and there is little wrong with the film.

Beautifully directed, Bigelow layers her film with enough tension and magnificence to enshroud the moral questions viewers will ask, specifically about torture.

It’s somewhat fictionalized, and in fact, Chastain’s character is made up, but Zero Dark Thirty is a gem nonetheless.

But we also know the events happened.

The film starts incredibly well and immediately grabs the viewer’s attention with a brilliant first scene. Amidst a dark screen and soundtrack of actual calls made to the 911 operator from inside the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11, the scene is about as powerful an opening as a film can have and bravely sets the stage for what follows.

These include many scenes of Arab detainees being interrogated (that is, tortured) for information about Al Qaeda. Is this justified or unnecessary abuse?

The viewer is immediately saddened and in tears and conflicted about whether the torture is justified having just heard the 911 calls.

I know I was.

From there, the viewer also is told a summary story putting the pieces of the first scene together.

After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Osama bin Laden becomes one of the most wanted men on the planet. The worldwide manhunt for the terrorist leader occupies the resources and attention of two U.S. presidential administrations.

This is the crux of the film and the story told.

Ultimately, it is the work of a dedicated female operative  (Chastain) that proves instrumental in finally locating bin Laden. In May 2011, Navy SEALs launched a nighttime strike, killing bin Laden in his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

We all know this but troubling is the use of torture. I keep coming back to this point.

I think what I like most about the film besides the riveting pacing, action sequences, and psychological appeal is the controversy that surrounds it.

The fact that it ruffled feathers at the CIA and in Congress about whether the info was leaked to the filmmakers makes me think that at least some of it is based on facts, despite what other reviewers (likely with a strong political bias) might claim to the contrary.

But as a political junkie that’s just my belief.

The film’s reproduction of enhanced interrogation techniques is brutal. Some critics, in light of the interrogations being depicted as gaining reliable, useful, and accurate information, considered the scenes pro-torture propaganda.

Acting CIA director Michael Morell felt the film created the false impression that torture was key to finding bin, Laden. Others described it as an anti-torture exposure of interrogation practices.

I guess we may never know the truth. But the film compels and provokes feeling.

Bigelow is at the top of her game with Zero Dark Thirty (2012) crafting a genre film (the war one) way too often told from only a masculine “us versus them” mentality and leaving behind the fascinating nuances that can make the genre a more interesting and less one-note one.

The masterful director does just that and makes us think, ponder, and squirm uneasily.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Actress-Jessica Chastain, Best Original Screenplay, Best Sound Editing (won), Best Film Editing

28 Weeks Later-2007

28 Weeks Later-2007

Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo

Starring Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner

Scott’s Review #513

70058018

Reviewed November 6, 2016

Grade: B-

At the time of its release, I remember 28 Weeks Later (2007) to be a successful follow-up to the original 28 Days Later (2002), a clever play on the title and picking up events some seven months after the original.

Watching the film now, however, I see flaws, mostly in the lack of a character-driven story and the resulting traditional action-type film.

Still, the film is far from all bad.

The action begins as the audience meets a “family”, barricaded in a homey residence, attempting to resume normalcy in life by preparing and serving a delicious family dinner- almost reminiscent of Thanksgiving.

The scene is tranquil and rich in familiarity.

When a little boy pounds on the door to be let in, the terror begins and the Rage virus is proven to still be alive and well.

The story was written for 28 Weeks Later has nothing to do with the original and contains none of the original characters. Rather, a father, mother, and young boy and girl are the family that we follow throughout the film.

Rose Byrne stars as a doctor- laughingly named Scarlet- and Jeremy Renner as a U.S. military presence, NATO having been sent in to keep order as best they can.

The opening sequence is fantastic as peacefulness turns deadly rather quickly and the characters are in immediate peril. In another scene, when the father and mother are alone in a laboratory and events go awry, the sequence is gory, shocking, and quite heartfelt.

These are merely moments, however, and are not quite enough to carry the film into a successful sequel.

Another positive to note, even more, prevalent than in the original, are the wonderful location shots of London. From the London Eye to Big Ben to street shots of downtown London and the surrounding streets, are capably done and I loved seeing the ariel views of said city.

The conclusion at Wembley Stadium was also great. This was a treat for any fan of London and gave the film a clear sense of location.

Conversely, I was not a fan of the characters in 28 Weeks Later.

Whereas, in 28 Days Later, the characters were well-drawn and compelling, rich with beauty and emotion, the same cannot be said for the sequel. I am unclear what the purpose of Renner’s tough, no-nonsense military type was for, or Byrne’s sympathetic, but pointless turn as a scientist/doctor.

Both held little appeal and gave snore-worthy performances. Or perhaps the roles were just not written well. Regardless, neither worked.

The dynamic between the father and mother did work, but the kids were not the best actors and I found their additions pointless as well.

The last scene, a frenetic trip through a tunnel by the infected and arriving in gorgeous Paris- a shot of the Eifel tower as proof, is a nice touch.

With a few nice touches, cool location shots, and intense peril in a few sequences, but with limited compelling characters, 28 Weeks Later (2007) is okay, but hardly an upgrade to the original or even close to the character-driven film.

No follow-up film, while initially planned, was ever completed.

Go for Sisters-2013

Go for Sisters-2013

Director John Sayles

Starring Edward James Olmos

Scott’s Review #177

70272916

Reviewed September 27, 2014

Grade: B-

Go for Sisters is a 2013 independent feature film about a female parole officer (Lisa Gay Hamilton) with a troubled, missing son named Rodney, feared to be mixed up with the murder of a drug dealer.

The film takes place in California and Mexico.

Hamilton plays Bernice, a middle-aged black woman, who has always done the right thing. Widowed and recently dumped by a new boyfriend, she runs into ex-convict Fontayne, played by Yolonda Ross, at her parole office.

Initially wanting nothing to do with her former high school friend, Bernice decides to use Fontayne’s criminal connections to locate Rodney.

From this point, they hire retired Mexican police officer Freddy Suarez, played by Edward James Olmos, and the trio embarks on an adventure across the border of Mexico.

I love the story involving the two female leads (Hamilton and Ross) who share a Thelma and Louise-type bond.

The characters reconnect with each other and develop independently. Straight-laced Bernice toughens up and breaks a few rules while Fontayne, determined to go straight, struggles to keep her head above water, resisting drugs and attempting to hold down a job.

The two forge a bond based on trust, respect, and loyalty, and their friendship grows throughout the film.

One gripe about Fontayne’s character- she admits to being a lesbian but then mentions she is not sure if she is or if she is not. This sexual identity crisis seems strange- why couldn’t the film make her a lesbian? Why the hedging?

The remaining aspects of the film are mediocre to weak.

Adding the character of Freddy to the mix is unnecessary. He adds little to the plot except helping the women get into Mexico and being male comic relief.

Either way, I didn’t find the character very interesting or care about him and the film would have been better off without Freddy.

What was the reasoning behind making him have poor eyesight? What was the point of Freddy taking a young woman and her daughter to breakfast and realizing they were crossing the border to find her estranged husband? Who cares?

It had nothing to do with the plot.

All the audience knows about Freddy is that he is retired due to a misunderstanding, accepts money to help Bernice and Fontayne, and tags along with them for the rest of the film.

The stereotypes should have been eliminated. The Chinese dragon lady and the corrupt Mexican police officers have been played to death in films and are rather insulting to smart and serious movie-goers.

I found the plot a bit tough to follow and I still don’t understand how or why Rodney was involved with the Chinese mob in the first place other than to help Chinese immigrants cross the border.

Was he involved in the money or wanted to help the immigrants cross to the United States?

The film mentions countless times how Rodney is a decent person so what’s his motivation? The film never wholly explains why he is kidnapped and a suspect in a murder case.

Also, countless characters are introduced to help the women on their journey with some connection to the kidnap victim but are written haphazardly with no character development.

The ending of Go for Sisters (2013) is too predictable and leaves the audience not caring about the outcome.

Despite numerous negatives, the heart of the film belongs to the talents of Hamilton and Ross and their characters’ interesting and warm friendship that develops throughout the film.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Female-Yolonda Ross