DVD Review: The Adjustment Bureau

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt star in a sophisticated, elegant thriller of predestination.

There’s an old proverb, certainly hundreds of years old and probably British, that begins with a horseshoe losing a nail and ultimately leading, through a cascade of dire consequences, to the collapse of an entire kingdom. Such small twists of fate – seemingly random yet maddeningly well- and ill-timed, holding the potential for disaster or joy – lie at the intelligent heart of The Adjustment Bureau. Helmed by first-time director George Nolfi (who also adapted the Philip K. Dick short story), the film trusts its audience to reach their own conclusions and rewards their patience with genuine suspense and characterization of an elegant, old-school Hollywood flavor. Until its last few moments, when the script veers into a pat ending, it’s one of the year’s best films.

Matt Damon stars as David Norris, a New York congressman whose hard-partying past (which fortunately does not involve Twitter) has cost him a Senate race in a bitter upset. Moments before his concession speech he meets Elise Sellas (Emily Blunt), a free-spirited woman who’s crashed a party elsewhere in the labyrinthine hotel. The two have an immediate, undeniable romantic chemistry, their flirtation relaxed and smart without seeming forced or purely sexual: more than simply attracted, they’re fascinated by one another. Norris has to make that speech, however, and thanks to Elise’s inspiration he gives one that revitalizes his political fortunes.

But forces are literally conspiring to keep them apart: Norris has been watched since childhood by “adjusters,” men in mid-20th Century clothing who periodically fine-tune reality on behalf of a vaguely defined “Chairman” who lays out intricate plans for everyone on Earth. Norris and Elise must not be together, the group’s leader (John Slattery) explains, because their togetherness violates the plan intended for Norris. (The Chairman, we learn later, wants him to be President.) When Norris intrudes on the adjustment team tweaking the venture capital firm where he works, the team makes him swear to not pursue Elise again. Confused and frightened, he agrees.

The film jumps ahead three years, to when a chance encounter brings the two would-be lovers together again. But the adjustment team is right there to intervene, even as one of their number (Anthony Mackie) decides to work on the couple’s behalf. Norris’ attempt to reach Elise through narrow Manhattan streets, while the adjusters manipulate reality and circumstance around him, makes for an unusual but gripping chase sequence that’s breathlessly staged and handsomely photographed.

Comparisons to last year’s far murkier Inception are unavoidable, but where that film sacrificed plot for spectacle Nolfi’s script and direction keep emphasis on character – particularly Norris’, but also allowing Elise ample screen time to develop into something more than the object of Norris’ obsession. She’s a well-rounded character in her own right, deserving of happiness and even sometimes pitiable: suffering without benefit of knowledge of the adjuster’s machinations, much of her life through the story is lonely and frustrated. (How many of us have wondered, sometime in our life, if vast forces weren’t keeping us alone? Elise becomes our proxy for that dilemma.)

The two leads, as mentioned above, deliver performances rich with maturity and depth. Damon the actor has virtually grown up on camera since his earliest appearances in the 1990s, and here he’s able to convey confidence and vulnerability without coming across as showy, and to his and Nolfi’s credit the screenplay never provides him a showy monologue or expressive scene in which – as we can imagine lesser films might – he gets to rage at the heavens. The film is too smart for that.

Can you imagine if the plan for your life included her?

Blunt, without benefit of Damon’s comparatively greater screen time, matches Damon’s restraint while making her character alluring on several levels. In that initial men’s room scene, her dialogue suggests a free-spirited type similar to the over-used and (and perhaps over-celebrated) pixie dream girl trope. Thankfully Elise the character outgrows that shoebox in seconds; she’s too old for the impish behavior suggested by the scene, for one thing; for another, such contrivance would derail the film’s better aspirations. Blunt’s best moment in the film comes later, when Elise confronts Norris for abandoning her: rather than allow herself to sink into bitchiness or spite, her hurt and anger fuel her reasoning with him.

The adjusters, meanwhile, carry frustrations with their job but keep a brusque professionalism with each other. John Slattery, playing the adjuster Richardson, makes an effective foil for Norris’ determination, at once amused by the humans’ resolve but wary of the consequences of defiance. His impatience and disappointment with Mackie’s rebel angel, communicated with impatient gestures and harried asides, speaks volumes without lapsing into bald exposition. “Three years later and I’m still cleaning up your mess,” Richardson tells him bitterly, as they pass in a hallway. You get the sense the adjusters feel as mystified by the Chairman’s plans as anyone else, but their’s isn’t to question why, no matter how much the job drains them.

In turn this only raises larger issues, but they’re the issues that the movie wants to face. Predestination is an old, old subject in art and culture, and here the film’s split-the-difference explanation of determinism grinding against free will might either intrigue or annoy you, depending on how you felt about such matters in the first place. Thompson (Terence Stamp, imperious as ever), the adjuster’s “hammer” sent in to separate Norris and Elise once and for all, explains the rises and falls of human history as a series of interspersed periods of free will and divine engineering. Agree with him or not, his perspective is both smart and chilling. The film’s submerged theme – that there is a plan, but it’s imperfect, and it changes all the time – is also troubling on any number of levels. The film doesn’t provide any answers, but there’s something to say for a mainstream film of this day and age even asking the questions.

With so much done right and most often done very well, it’s almost inevitable that the film underwhelm a little at the ending. It does, but only mildly and only very narrowly. A resolution that allows for – well, a happy ending, honestly – comes along too tidily and too conveniently to earn its place among the scenes preceding it; listen to the dialogue closely and you may even be reminded of The Wizard of Oz, and realistically we can imagine that wasn’t Dick’s or Nolfi’s intent. Until those last moments, however, The Adjustment Bureau is handsome, near-excellent filmmaking.

- Michael Kabel

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Review: The Adjustment Bureau

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt star in a sophisticated, elegant thriller of predestination.

There’s an old proverb, certainly hundreds of years old and probably British, that begins with a horseshoe losing a nail and ultimately leading, through a cascade of dire consequences, to the collapse of an entire kingdom. Such small twists of fate – seemingly random yet maddeningly well- and ill-timed alike, holding the potential for disaster or joy - lie at the intelligent heart of The Adjustment Bureau. Helmed by first-time director George Nolfi (who also adapted the Philip K. Dick short story), the film trusts its audience to reach their own conclusions and rewards their patience with genuine suspense and characterization of an elegant, old-school Hollywood flavor. Until its few moments, when the script veers into a pat ending, it’s probably the best new release of the year to date.

Matt Damon plays David Norris, a New York congressman whose hard-partying past has cost him a Senate race that, it’s explained to us, most voters felt certain he’d win. Moments before his concession speech he encounters Elise Sellas (Emily Blunt), a free-spirited woman who’s crashed a party elsewhere in the labyrinthine hotel. The two have an immediate, undeniable romantic chemistry, their flirtation relaxed and smart without seeming forced or purely sexual: more than simply attracted, they’re fascinated by one another. Norris has to make that speech, however, and thanks to Elise’s inspiration he gives one that revitalizes his political fortunes.

But forces are literally conspiring to keep them apart: Norris has been watched since childhood by “adjusters,” men in mid-20th Century clothing who periodically fine-tune reality on behalf of a vaguely defined ”Chairman” who lays out intricate plans for everyone on Earth. Norris and Elise must not be together, the group’s leader (John Slattery) explains, because their togetherness violates the plan intended for Norris. (The Chairman, we learn later, wants him to be President.) When Norris intrudes on the adjustment team tweaking the venture capital firm where he works, the team makes him swear to not pursue Elise again. Confused and frightened, he agrees.

The film jumps ahead three years, to when a chance encounter brings the two would-be lovers together again. But the adjustment team is right there to intervene, even as one of their number (Anthony Mackie) decides to work on their behalf. Norris’ attempt to reach Elise through narrow Manhattan streets, while the adjusters manipulate reality and circumstance around him, makes for an unusual but gripping chase sequence that’s breathlessly staged and handsomely photographed.

Comparisons to last year’s far murkier Inception are unavoidable, probably, but where that film sacrificed plot for spectacle Nolfi’s script and direction keep emphasis on character – particularly Norris’, but also allowing Elise ample screen time to develop into something more than the object of Norris’ obsession. She’s a well-rounded character in her own right, deserving of happiness and even sometimes pitiable: suffering without benefit of knowledge of the adjuster’s machinations, much of her life through the story is lonely and frustrated. (How many of us have wondered, sometime in our life, if vast forces weren’t keeping us alone? Elise becomes our proxy for that dilemma.)

The two leads, as mentioned above, deliver spotless performances rich with maturity and depth. Damon the actor has virtually grown up on camera since his earliest appearances in the 1990s, and here he’s able to convey confidence and vulnerability at the same time. His performance isn’t for a moment showy, and to his and Nolfi’s credit the screenplay never provides him a showy monologue or expressive scene in which – as we can imagine lesser films might – he gets to rage at the heavens. In this way, too, the film is too smart for that.

Can you imagine if the plan for your life included her?

Blunt, without benefit of Damon’s comparatively greater screen time, matches Damon’s restraint while making her character alluring on several levels. In that initial men’s room scene, her dialogue suggests a free-spirited type similar to the over-used and (and perhaps over-celebrated) pixie dream girl trope. Thankfully Elise the character outgrows that shoebox in seconds; she’s too old for the impish behavior suggested by the scene, for one thing; for another, such contrivance would derail the film’s better aspirations. Blunt’s best moment in the film comes later, when Elise confronts Norris for abandoning her: rather than allow herself to sink into bitchiness or spite, her hurt and anger fuel her reasoning with him.

The adjusters, meanwhile, carry frustrations with their job but keep a brusque professionalism with each other. John Slattery, playing the adjuster Richardson, makes an effective foil for Norris’ determination, at once amused by the humans’ resolve but wary of the consequences of defiance. His impatience and disappointment with Mackie’s rebel angel, communicated with impatient gestures and harried asides, speaks volumes without lapsing into bald exposition. “Three years later and I’m still cleaning up your mess,” Richardson tells him bitterly, as they pass in a hallway. You get the sense the adjusters feel as mystified by the Chairman’s plans as anyone else, but their’s isn’t to question why, no matter how much the job drains them.

In turn this only raises larger issues, but they’re the issues that the movie wants to face. Predestination is an old, old subject in art and culture, and here the film’s split-the-difference explanation of determinism grinding against free will might either intrigue or annoy you, depending on how you felt about such matters in the first place. Thompson (Terence Stamp, imperious as ever), the adjuster’s “hammer” sent in to separate Norris and Elise once and for all, explains the rises and falls of human history as a series of interspersed periods of free will and divine engineering. Agree with him or not, his perspective is both smart and chilling. The film’s submerged theme – that there is a plan, but it’s imperfect, and it changes all the time – is also troubling on any number of levels. The film doesn’t provide any answers, but  there’s something to say for a mainstream film of this day and age even asking the questions.

With so much done right and most often done very well, it’s almost inevitable that the film underwhelm a little at the ending. It does, but only mildly and only very narrowly. A resolution that allows for – well, a happy ending, honestly – comes along too tidily and too conveniently to earn its place among the scenes preceding it; listen to the dialogue closely and you may even be reminded of The Wizard of Oz, and realistically we can imagine that wasn’t Dick’s or Nolfi’s intent. Until those last moments, however, The Adjustment Bureau is handsomely excellent filmmaking.

- Michael Kabel

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

TV Reviews: The Event, Hawaii Five-0

Considering the quality and ratings of two of the fall season’s most extravagant new series

For whatever its flaws and shortcomings, or even its enduring commitment to garbage, the fall 2010 season has at least offered more variety among its new shows than probably any other in recent years. With the major networks rededicating themselves, somewhat, to scripted dramas and comedies while once-juggernaut reality fare like Survivor and American Idol continue to show their age, broadcast TV may finally be rising to the saber-rattling that cable networks including TNT and USA have threatened for years.

As a representative sample of the dozens of new shows, we watched the first two episodes of The Event and Hawaii Five-0, serial dramas with virtually nothing in common except that they air on Monday nights, albeit in different time slots and on different networks. The two series seemed to start and develop in opposite directions between their first and second episodes, one getting much better, the other showing signs of fatigue already.

NBC’s The Event, with its myriad of murky conspiracies and guess-what-this-means clues, is fairly naked in its ambition to capture the audiences previously entertained by Lost and 24. The pilot episode, “I Haven’t Told  You Everything,” was oddly paced and sometimes hard to follow, thanks to a tiered succession of flashback sequences that established some of the overarching narrative’s (apparently very well thought out) back story. Some of the multiple storylines introduced in the first hour include: a college student (Jason Ritter) attempting to stop a plane hijacking connected to the kidnapping of his girlfriend (Sarah Roemer); the President (Blair Underwood) wrestling with freeing 97 political prisoners despite the wishes of his CIA chief (Zeljko Ivanek); a government agent (Ian Anthony Dale) with ties to the prisoners working to stop the same hijacking.

Despite putting so many balls in the air, show creator/writer Nick Wauters managed to bring everything together, as far as he could for one episode of a multi-part episodic, with a climax that was both unsettling and audacious by virtue of its 9/11 overtones. The expansive cast of TV veterans (this must be Ivanek’s 4,000th role as a government creep) settled into their parts easily, and relative newcomer Jason Ritter was compelling and charismatic as the everyman getting in way over his head for no reason he deserved.

If the first episode was only good, the second (titled “To Keep Us Safe”) stomped on the gas pedal, answering many of the questions raised by the pilot but prodding many more (often simultaneously). Most importantly, the episode revealed the nature of the prisoner’s identities and why the government would take desperate measures to contain them. SPOILERS. It seems the United States has kept close to a hundred extraterrestrials prisoner in Alaska since World War II; the aliens are led, after a fashion, by a pacifist (Laura Innes, getting past ER‘s Kerry Weaver at long last) who’s kept them more or less cooperative. But now a second group of aliens, more militant and resentful of the imprisonment, has begun working to free them, starting with an attempt on the President’s life. Double agents and intrigue are already piling on top of one another, with plot twists that, for once, don’t feel numbingly familiar. The first two episodes should probably have aired together, either as a movie or double feature, in order to make the strongest impression on audiences; we can’t help but feel the combined punch would’ve created bigger shockwaves through the entertainment media.

If The Event is so far occasionally original, and bold but uneven, the heavily publicized remake of Hawaii Five-0 is just the opposite: though polished and confident, it’s too reminiscent by half of established CBS cop dramas – most notably CSI: Miami – and already indulging in some of the hoariest television drama clichés from, ironically, the 1970s and possibly before. The cumulative effect, by and large, is a sleek confection of sex, sunshine, and easily digestible storylines occupied by attractive, affable performers. It’s the definition of safe television, but for older audiences or those wishing for a diversion it’s likely just the thing for its Mondays at 10 timeslot.

Upgraded and tuned up for the 21st Century, the update remakes semi-iconic TV cop Steve McGarrett as a Navy Intelligence counterterrorism expert (played now by Australian heartthrob Alex O’Loughlin) recruited by Hawaii’s governor (Jean Smart) to head an anti-crime task force. McGarrett assembles his team from the fringes of local law enforcement, including New Jersey transplant Danny Williams (Scott Caan), ex-cop Chin Ho Kelley (Daniel Dae Kim) and surfer-police cadet Kona “Kono” Kalakaua (Grace Park). In the pilot they track down the terrorist (James Marsters) responsible for killing McGarrett’s father; in the second episode, “Ohana,” they fight Eastern European gangsters for control of a NSA programmer’s cyber-macguffin. In both cases, the plots are streamlined, simple, and largely free of the complicated moral entanglement that’s been the benchmark of non-CBS cop shows for years now.

Show creators Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci (Fringe, Alias) keep the emphasis on bright colors, splashy stunts, and expensive-looking action sequences that are fun as long as you’re actually watching them. The cast is still feeling their way around one another, but O’Loughlin and Caan already have a Butch-Sundance chemistry that makes for some of the show’s most entertaining moments. Caan is doing the heavy-lifting in building that chemsitry, however. O’Loughlin is effortlessly charismatic but so far his McGarrett lacks the intensity that Jack Lord brought to the role in 1968, and at times he seems outshined by Caan’s blustering blue-collar charm. Kim and Park, as the junior partners in the team, haven’t had enough non-action screen time to flesh out their roles past stock types. It’s also a little strange that the 36-year old Park plays the rookie on the squad, her character written with plenty of earnest neophyte resolve.

Which indicates, in turn, the problems of the past the show seems interested in repeating. Too many clichés lurk in the corners of the scripts: in two weeks the team has saved the islands from two separate Dastardly Threats: terrorists one week and a European crime syndicate the next, effectively saving the entire archiepelago once per week. Kelly and Kalakaua, the team’s two ethnic characters, remain largely in supportive, backup roles for the investigations and in action sequences. Maybe smaller, less ornate cases might allow all the actors room to work if they’re to match the action’s bombast; otherwise the big villains-small character depth model recalls the superficiality of 70s and 80s ensemble shows including the The A-Team and T.J. Hooker, and not in a good way.

Finally, for better and for worse the show looks like a CSI: franchise, with swirling images of the Honolulu cityscape used after commercial breaks and interiors filled with blue and orange color palettes and giant plasma screens. As the CSI: franchise enters its second decade, the network is likely thinking of life and tentpole attractions past that trio of show’s eventual sunset. If Hawaii Five-0 is the first of that new generation,it’s only fair that it have its own look. The promo below implies as much, even while celebrating the CSI: visual formula.

According to ratings tracker website TV By The Numbers, the show lost 10% of its pilot audience during its second week to draw an audience of 12.7 million viewers. The Event‘s second episode drew approximately 9 million people, an almost 20% attrition from its pilot.

- Michael Kabel and Jennifer Vasil

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::