22 Jump Street (2014) – Review

Review: 22 Jump Street is somewhat amusing and does have a good time poking fun at itself, but ultimately feels like a waste of everyone’s time (creatively speaking, as of course this mostly just exists to make money).

22 Jump Street picks up where 21 Jump Street left off with Schmidt and Jenko heading to college as undercover cops investigating a new drug that has popped up on campus. There are a few differences plot wise, but the film is mostly the same as its predecessor. This begs the question: “Why was this movie even made then?” Well, simply, it was made to make easy money.

Directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller, who generally make very funny films, decide to use 22 Jump Street as a platform to make fun of Hollywood sequels and the system that churns them out. This works well at first, but the issue is that they take the joke a bit too far, which leads to a film that is not very entertaining or interesting. They want the film to fit the joke to such an extent that they leave its narrative lacking completely. Even the character development, which was the first film’s best attribute, is undermined this time. In 21 Jump Street Schmidt fit in very well in with the cool kids while Jenko was a bit of an outcast (flipping on their expectations of what would happen when they returned to high school). This time, the same thing happens again but with Jenko fitting into the fraternity scene leaving Schmidt to hang out with the ‘art kids’. And, like last time, this narrative is about the conflict between Schmidt and Jenko being different and having to work to keep their friendship together. Thus, 22 Jump Street is retreading the exact same character moments on top of making the same jokes and featuring similar action set pieces. All this leaves the film feeling boring and unsatisfying because we already saw this film the first time. Yet, this seems like the intention of Lord and Miller, because that is the joke they are making with the film.

In an attempt to make fun of the Hollywood sequel machine, Lord and Miller have made a terrible and disappointing sequel to an enjoyable film, self-fulfilling their own joke. It all feels like a missed opportunity to make something funny with the good cast they have in place and entertaining characters they created with the first film. Satire works best when it is both biting and still creates a full narrative. This does neither. There is not really much more to say. It is essentially a less funny, less creative, less imaginative, not as well written version of the first film with no ambitions other than to just collect paychecks for all involved while making a mockery of the very thing they are doing (making a sequel to a surprisingly successful action/comedy based on a somewhat forgotten 1980s TV series).

If there is any good in the film, it comes from a few jokes that work and a few strong comedic performances (particularly Channing Tatum and Jillian Bell). I am sure that many will enjoy it, as it is just mindless noise that is content with going for the easy jokes while rehashing the first film. The film is in many ways an indictment of modern American filmgoers (in general) and the marketplace they create. It is terrible because it can be terrible – people will still go see it and apparently love it, regardless of actual quality. Moviegoers enjoyed the first film and seemed to want something that was exactly the same (but worse) for the sequel, so why even bother wasting creative energy on something more? The Transformers films are perpetually mindless, noisy, and artistically/emotionally vapid and yet they are more and more successful with each sequel. Michael Bay does not even try to make anything good. Why should he? It clearly does not matter. It just has to be bigger and louder. If audiences are happy with drivel then why should Hollywood takes creative risks when so much money is on the line? They can happily just continue to make the same things over and over again and take the cash and run.

Maybe I am being overly harsh on 22 Jump Street. It is pretty much what I expected it to be. I think that I am just disappointed with the overall lack of quality both from this film and Hollywood in general. Lord and Miller have made a film that is offensively lazy basically because they could. I do not like that mentality. This is a poor film and it is not really worth anyone’s time. Not because it is worse than any other bad film, as that is not true, rather it is because Lord and Miller are very capable of making another fun and entertaining action/comedy with 22 Jump Street and instead decided to just phone in a pointless sequel (seemingly gleefully pointing out just how pointless the film is along the way). This again leads me to ask a question I already know the answer to – why even make this film?

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Phil Lord and Christopher Miller have a good track record with fun action films and comedies like Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, 21 Jump Street, and The Lego Movie, which only makes their seeming lack of ambition on 22 Jump Street all the more disappointing. It is their worst film by a large margin.

Mark Mothersbaugh creates a simple and fun score for the film, but its seems as though much of dramatic emphasis is put on the soundtrack, as the soundtrack gets most of the good music cues while the score is relegated to filling in dead spaces. Barry Peterson’s cinematography is very good and is probably the highlight of the film. He does a great job with color, allowing the bright palette to pop. Steve Saklad’s production design works well enough with the film, but it too feels a bit lazy.

The cast of 21 Jump Street was very good and funny across the board. In 22 Jump Street, the cast is not quite as good overall. Peter Stormare, Wyatt Russell, Amber Stevens, The Lucas Brothers, and Nick Offerman have some okay stuff in supporting roles, but none of their characters are really given any dimension and the actors are not given much in terms of good material. Jillian Bell is funny as Mercedes, a college student who thinks Schmidt looks too old. Like most of the film’s jokes, it too is overplayed but Bell has such good delivery that she makes it work anyway. Ice Cube has a bigger role this time around as Captain Dickson. He continues to deliver his blend of proud father/tough guy police captain with the same vigor and hilarity as the first film. He has a bigger role, but it does not seem to really amount to anything meaningful narratively. Jonah Hill is fairly funny as Schmidt, but he has been funnier in other stuff. Again, the material is just not there and the character development this time is poor. Channing Tatum, however, still seems to get the most out of the film, playing Jenko with lots of charming energy. If the film is entertaining at all, it is solely thanks to Tatum.

Summary & score: 22 Jump Street is pointless (and yet it is still a little entertaining…mostly it is just disappointing). 5/10

Movie of the Week – Bottle Rocket

This week’s movie: Bottle Rocket (1996).

Anthony is about to be released from a metal health sanctuary (one in which he checked himself into because he was having a hard time dealing with normal life and its pressures). Waiting for him with eager anticipation is his best friend Dignan (a mass of nervous energy who might actually be crazy). Dignan has big plans for the friends now that Anthony is out – plans that involve pulling off an elaborate theist.

Bottle Rocket is auteur Wes Anderson’s first film, which he co-wrote with Owen Wilson. Stylistically, the film least resembles what fans of Anderson have come to expect from his work, but it certainly embodies the genesis of his style and directing nuances. What is particularly evident is Anderson’s typical protagonist – a mixture of joy and sadness who is not quite sure how he fits into the world. Anderson worked with composer Mark Mothersbaugh, cinematographer Robert D. Yeoman, and production designer David Wasco, which fostered brilliant partnerships (Motherbaugh has scored four Anderson films; Yeoman has shot six Anderson films; Wasco has designed three Anderson films). James L. Brooks served as the film’s executive producer (and chief engineer in getting it made).

The film also launched the careers of the Wilson brothers – Owen, Luke, and Andrew, who were friends with Anderson at the University of Texas (and the film was made primarily in Austin). Robert Musgrave, Lumi Cavazos, and James Caan feature in support.

Bottle Rocket was not immediately accepted by audiences, finding much more of a cult following. However, critics took notice of it – most notably Martin Scorsese lists it as one of his ten favorite films of the 1990s. The film is a wonderful quirky comedy with rich characters (who are refreshingly different). For fans of Anderson and the resurgence of indie films and auteur filmmakers in the 1990s, this is a must-see.

Trailer: Here

Available on: Blu-ray and Streaming

21 Jump Street (2012) – Review

Review: 21 Jump Street is a funny action comedy that hits the right comedic, action and dramatic notes, while making fun of itself at the same time. The film is about two cops who are screw-ups, and as such are transferred to a recently revived undercover unit forcing them to go back to high school to bust a drug ring. Directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller create sort of a duality to the film, in that it exists within its own real world while also breaking the fourth wall pointing out the almost post-nostalgia inherent in reviving a TV series in film form that most of the targeted audience never watched and the genre stereotypes of action comedies (and/or buddy comedies). For example, the two lead characters Schmidt and Jenko have a movie-based expectation of what being a cop should be like – explosions, car chases, shootouts, and so on – only to realize that their jobs are more mundane than action movies would have them believe, and then all these things happen within the course of their case. Another example has their police captain explaining that they are being transferred to a revived department from the 1980s, and goes off on a tangent about there being no more original ideas, eluding to what is going on in Hollywood currently (and for the last decade or so). These jokes work really well, because they invite the viewers in on the joke, in a sense speaking directly to them. But this would be all for naught if the characters were not relatable, Lord and Miller however do present Schmidt and Jenko in such a manner to get the audience behind them. Something that works really well is that Schmidt and Jenko are shown in the prologue (when they were in high school) as being the loser nerd and cool jock, respectively, but when they return undercover Lord and Miller reverse their roles, which creates both dramatic tension and comedic moments for the characters (which are again relatable to us the viewers). However, aside from Schmidt and Jenko, the supporting characters are not really given much to do other than to fill generic place holders like love interest or villain, holding back the narrative slightly. The audience cares about Schmidt and Jenko, which is the most important thing, but the stakes are not that high because none of the other characters really matter. The villains are never really developed so Schmidt and Jenko are never really in any real peril from the audience’s perspective. Molly is underwritten (though saved by a good performance) so the audience does not really care if it works out between her and Schmidt (we would like it to work out obviously, as we are told they go together narratively, but since Molly is underdeveloped it is not an essential dramatic moment for us). All that said, the point of 21 Jump Street is to be a very entertaining and funny action comedy, and that is what it is. Plus, it is a good overall film too.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Phil Lord and Chris Miller now have two well-received comedies to their names (this and Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs). They twist genre expectations and stereotypes for comedic effect making seemingly played out genres feel renewed (which is nothing new, but they do it well). With a sequel in the works (and assuming they return to helm it), I am interested to see if they can continue to keep the material fresh. Mark Mothersbaugh’s score fits the tone of the film, but mostly plays second fiddle to the great soundtrack (featuring among others Eminem, The Clash and N.W.A). Barry Peterson’s cinematography is fairly standard for the genre, as well, but the car chases and other action set pieces are very good and well-shot (but nothing special). Peter Wenham’s production design stands out among the aesthetics in the film. His sets for the 21 Jump Street station and Schmidt’s house are fantastic. The cast throughout does a good job delivering funny material. Johnny Simmons, Ice Cube, Nick Offerman, Jake M. Johnson, Ellie Kemper, and Johnny Depp all provide great bit stuff (especially Ice Cube and Kemper). Rob Riggle and Dave Franco are good in support, but they are not given too much to do really (Riggle just acts like he is slightly on the edge and Franco like he is super cool). Brie Larson is great as Molly, bringing spunk and humanity to an underdeveloped character. Both leads are fantastic, and are in large part responsible for the film being as good as it is. Jonah Hill plays Schmidt to be unconfident and desperate to be liked, which is a perfect match against Channing Tatum’s overly confident and entitled Jenko (never would have guesses that I would actually really enjoy performances by Tatum, but that is five in a row now, even sometimes in otherwise bad films).

Summary & score: 21 Jump Street delivers on what it promised to be: funny, action packed and highly entertaining. 7/10

Movie of the Week – The Royal Tenenbaums

This week’s movie is The Royal Tenebaums (2001).

The dramedy is about a family of child prodigies that has grown apart. When their estranged father pretends to have cancer in a veiled attempt to make amends for being an asshole his whole life, the family reunites. It is the third feature film from writer-director Wes Anderson, and it is co-written by Owen Wilson (who also co-wrote Rushmore and Bottle Rocket) – he also has a supporting role. Anderson has the same principal crew from his first two features with composer Mark Mothersbaugh (of Devo), director of photography Robert D. Yeoman and production designer David Wasco. The film has a brilliant cast with Gene Hackman, Ben Stiller, Gwyneth Paltrow, Luke Wilson, Bill Murray, Danny Glover, Anjelica Huston, and Owen Wilson. Alec Baldwin serves as the narrator. Anderson’s style is at its apex with The Royal Tenenbaums, building off of Rushmore. Every frame has been specifically designed with no detail left unkempt (I love the paintings in Eli’s house, for example). Just from an artistic perspective, the film is marvelous – should you take the time to watch it multiple times paying attention to the background, how the camera moves and how the blocking is staged. Also, how the images flow with the great soundtrack. However, it is also very good from a comedy and drama perspective. The dry witty humor is wonderful, but the drama and characters are even more powerful. It is quite a sad film really. All these characters are damaged, and while there is reconciliation, many are still left with pain. This is a must-see for fans of Anderson’s work. Check out the trailer.

Available on DVD and Streaming

Movie of the Week – The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

This week’s movie is The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004).

The comedy is about Steve Zissou, a washed up aquatic adventurer who goes on one last exploration with his team of misfits to find and kill the Jaguar Shark, which ate his best friend and partner when he last encountered it. It is the fourth film from writer-director Wes Anderson, and he co-wrote it with Noah Baumbach. Anderson works with the same teams as his first three films, including composer Mark Mothersbaugh (of Devo) and cinematographer Robert D. Yeoman. New to the team is production designer Mark Friedberg (who also designed Anderson’s film The Darjeeling Limited). The cast is fantastic with Bill Murray starring (giving one of his best post-Groundhog Day performances) and supporting work from Owen Wilson, Cate Blanchett, Anjelica Huston, Willem Dafoe, Jeff Goldblum, Michael Gambon, and more. From the animation of Henry Selick to the hysterical deadpan line delivery throughout and the brilliant score/David Bowie covers, The Life Aquatic has a lot to like. It is one of the more underrated films of the decade, encompassing a love of filmmaking mixed with both a very funny comedy and striking almost sad character study. I am a huge fan of the film (and really all of Anderson’s work) and highly recommend it to those looking for a more artistic approach to cinema comedy. Check out the trailer.

Available on DVD and Streaming

Movie of the Week - Rushmore

This week’s movie is Rushmore (1998).

The comedy is about a boy, Max, whose whole life revolves around going to school at Rushmore Academy – so much so that he is the founder and participant in many clubs and activities at the school – but he is also one of the worst students they have. Max falls for a new young teacher and after hatching a grand scheme to win her affections is kicked out of Rushmore. He now must find himself and a new life outside the school. Directed by aesthetics aficionado and master Wes Anderson (who stages everything in every shot) based on the screenplay by himself and Owen Wilson (Anderson is college friends with the Wilsons), the film features Anderson’s directing at its best – shots and scenes are presented as if acts or scenes in a play (which is then taken even further by having plays acted out in the film). Anderson uses the same principal crew members for many of his films and Rushmore has essentially the same crew as his first feature Bottle Rocket. His collaboration with these people enables him to prefect his craft as a director and put out the film just how he wants it to be. His work with director of photography Robert D. Yeoman has always been excellent. Devo front-man Mark Mothersbaugh provides a really great score, accompanied by Anderson’s perfectly placed found music. Editor David Moritz and production designer David Wasco round out the principal group that made Rushmore one of the most aesthetically interesting and innovation films of the 90’s and helped Anderson establish a foothold in Hollywood as an auteur. The film has a great cast overall with good supporting characters, but it is the three leads that truly are wonderful – Jason Schwartzman, Bill Murray and Olivia Williams. What makes this film great is its quirky comedy and filmmaking. It is certainly on of the best films of the decade (one of my top 25 favorite all-time films) and a must see of film fans. Check out the trailer.

Available on Criterion Collection and DVD on Amazon.com or to rent at Netflix.com