Posts Tagged ‘Toby Jones’

Captain America: The First Avenger

July 21, 2011

Actually, yes, the United States did flirt with eugenics for a while, and Nazi Germany did try to vaporize whole populations, but of course those scenes played out a lot less wholesomely than do the plot points in “Captain America: The First Avenger.” Even having the word “avenger” in its title at all seems bold for the movie in question, whose emotional baseline is so safe, so neutral, that for a while there he might as well be Captain Switzerland. (Consider also the perforated cheese of the plot.)

Just have a little faith, avers director Joe Johnston, with writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, for maybe you can get a good summer blockbuster from a comic book based on a 70-year-old propaganda trope. Just like maybe you can get a metabolically enhanced “super-soldier” from a puny and sickly but brave and eager kid.

Chances are better than average if the kid’s played by Chris Evans, who got into superhero movies as the man on fire in “Fantastic Four” but now at last inhabits his more suitable element. Here he is as Steve Rogers, the willing World War II enlistee who actualizes a pronouncement made by Stanley Tucci’s sagely-schmaltzy German scientist: “A weak man knows the value of strength.” However weird it is to behold those early scenes with Evans’ head digitally grafted onto somebody else’s much less brawny body, his face and voice seem durable and reassuring. Swerving away from self-pity and into plausible humility, passing tests of character with declarative pluck, his Rogers is as ready for this particular promotion to captain as anybody can be — ready to stand up and sacrifice himself, if necessary, for the privilege of luxuriating in chastely spiffy, square-jawed Americana.

This is twice-filtered nostalgia, really, as Johnston draws much from the vintage Lucas-Spielberg playbook, itself a study of the pulp serials those directors grew up with. But moral reductiveness affords a certain popcorn-compatible clarity of presentation. In “Captain America”’s world, every Allied soldier is a decent guy, every woman a pin-up-worthy beauty, every authority figure an avuncular wit and every villain a faceless monster — be he a bondage-hooded foot soldier or, well, the aptly named Red Skull. Sebastian Stan, Hayley Atwell, Tommy Lee Jones and Hugo Weaving pose very naturally in these respective categories, each enjoying and enlivening the proceedings considerably. Meanwhile Toby Jones gives a glimmer of intelligence to a sub-par supporting role in just such a way as to suggest we’d all be better served had the role been reduced to a single scene.

Affability can’t last forever, and doesn’t, in a film so willing to neutralize its own personality for the sake of humdrum plot. But overall it does compare favorably with recently reviewed YouTube snippets of the draggy 1979 “Captain America” TV movie, which plays like educational-film-strip kitsch, and the 1990 attempt, which appears to have just plain sucked.

Determinedly, this one works as another component of a now familiar franchise kit. Iron Man’s father is here, and the inter-dimensional portal that brought us Thor, and so on. As to that bold extra bit of title, it too obviously sets up next summer’s “The Avengers” — cleverly encouraging us to wonder just how the good captain’s super-square valor and virtue will play in (the comic book movie version of) the America of now.

Frost/Nixon

December 9, 2008

frostnixon31

Without Frost/Nixon, if he’d given us only the goofy Obama endorsement that surfaced on Funny or Die just before the election, Ron Howard would be well advised to stay away from political filmmaking.

In that brief, affectedly self-effacing video, Howard addresses his audience directly, declaring his support for the candidate and, in what he calls a demonstration of sincerity, outfitting himself (complete with wig) as the characters he grew up playing on television. He enlists Andy Griffith and Henry Winkler, reprising their respective roles as sheriff Andy Taylor and the Fonz, for a pair of clunky little skits in which the characters discuss America’s future. Then Howard tells us: “We haven’t done those characters in decades. But the three of us agree that with Barack Obama, we Americans have a rare opportunity to elect an extraordinary president.”

And the connection is…what, exactly?

Still, look who walked away with the presidency. Howard must have been on to something, right? Of this, happily, his new movie offers a more coherent example. It’s important to point out that, although well timed to coincide with the departure from office of the often-Nixon-equated George W. Bush, Frost/Nixon’s prognosis for America ultimately has more to do with growing up on television than with politics. But that’s why Howard seems right for the job of directing it.  

Adapted by Peter Morgan from his own 2006 play, Frost/Nixon dramatizes the origin and accomplishment of the now-forgotten but then-momentous 1977 TV interviews–spanning six broadcast hours in total–between British talk-show host David Frost and a post-Watergate but still very tricky Dick. Michael Sheen and Frank Langella reprise their roles from the award-laden stage version (a hit first in London and then on Broadway), and so it should be; the casting is definitive.

Sheen, so memorably exact as Tony Blair in The Queen (another Morgan script), brings Frost alive more loosely, with a palpable combination of playboy cockiness and vulnerable status anxiety–as befits a ratings-sensitive, reasonably famous media personality who’s not taken seriously as a journalist and not entirely sure he wants to be. He bares his toothy grin as both weapon and shield at once; it’s no wonder at all that Tim Burton has cast Sheen as the Cheshire Cat in the forthcoming film of Alice in Wonderland.

Langella is of course not the first and probably won’t be the last actor to portray the disgraced 37th president on the big screen, but his owership of the role–crass and charming, sonorous and lumbering, venomous and self-loathing–is total. This is so much more than merely an impersonation, and so completely consistent, that every once in a while it becomes hard to remember what the real Nixon looked like.

Through separate actual on-air occasions, Howard introduces the adversaries obliquely, watching from behind as handlers prep them for broadcast. It’s as if both Nixon and Frost are not real to us until they’re camera-ready. Otherwise, the director generally has the good sense to get out of his actors’ way.

Frost/Nixon is inherently reductive–the actual interviews recorded nearly 29 hours worth of material–and its dramatic stakes are accordingly simple. As Nixon puts it, both he and Frost want a way back to the “winner’s podium,” and they both know that when their contest has ended, “the limelight can only shine on one of us.” Each man, in other words, seeks the ultimate comeback–redemption as defined by the public perception of legitimacy.

The duelists have their seconds–and thirds and fourths and so on. Kevin Bacon gamely plays Nixon’s loyal, tough-but-wounded military aide, Marine Colonel Jack Brennan, and Toby Jones is the president’s peculiar, homuncular agent, Swifty Lazar, who compels Frost to cough up $600,000 for the privilege of the interview (even in spite of TV networks unwilling to countenance “checkbook journalism”). Oliver Platt, Matthew Macfadyen and Sam Rockwell round out team Frost, whose shared goal is the telegenic satisfaction of scoring the apology America never got.

Not unlike Howard’s foray into online political PSA, Frost/Nixon has something of a so-what factor. It seems like an exercise mostly for its own sake. But there is also a sense of security with its own limitations. To Howard, understandably, it’s an enduring fascination: Nixon on TV = unhappy days. 

Infamous

August 12, 2006

People will be asking why the world needs another Truman Capote movie. OK, fair enough; timing has fated Infamous as a tough sell. But shouldn’t they be asking instead why the world needs, for just one example, another Jackass movie? Hey, maybe there’s a connection—something about ignorance of the cautionary Capote tale enabling a culture so sociopathically hungry for fame that all it creates are procedural chronicles of that rutting, self-degrading compulsion?

Blah, blah, right? Well, the good news is that Infamous wouldn’t dare affect a tone so archly allegorical. And that sets it apart from Capote right there. Not that it should be this movie’s duty to live down the piety and chilly rigor of its commendable predecessor, but Infamous’ looser, less reflexively sermonizing stance makes a real difference. It affords its protagonist safe passage from voracious self-centeredness into naked self-awareness and affords us an opportunity to adore the man and reproach him at the same time. Chalk that up to the world wisdom of writer-director Douglas McGrath (working from George Plimpton’s book). McGrath knew, regardless of any precedent, that for his movie to work as a human tragedy, foremost it would need humanity.

And because the tale’s essence is indeed a tragedy, it absolutely should be fair game for multiple stagings. So, yes, the two films cover the same ground, but that’s because it is the important stuff: how, in 1959, the author left his highly pampered haute-couture Manhattan nest for rural Kansas to write a “nonfiction novel” about two men who murdered an entire family there. How he won the community’s trust, and the killers’, and then arguably betrayed it. How he required many years to finish the book, partly because he had to wait for the men to hang in order to have an ending. How, in the meantime, he fell in love with one of them. And how the whole experience left him shattered.

Where Capote had unimpeachable credentials, Infamous has unexpected delights. Take the opening, which probably makes better, more efficient use of Gwyneth Paltrow than any other movie ever has. Her short, sharp turn as a nightclub singer who breaks down mid-song launches the movie and confers its priorities beautifully. After that act of good faith, why not accept Sandra Bullock as Harper Lee? As it turns out, she’s quietly terrific. Most of the supporting actors are.

Truman is taken up here by the excellent, appropriately pug-faced English actor Toby Jones. You won’t need to know who he is; just recognize that in Capote, you thought, “Wow, that’s Philip Seymour Hoffman.” In this one, it’s, “Wow, that’s Truman Capote.”

Really, though, the more important Infamous performance comes from Daniel Craig—that is, more important to the structure and meaning of this film and possibly more important to Craig’s career even than his inheritance of James Bond.

Here, as the murderer Perry Smith, he’s a man with a strong sense of himself, discovering that his sense isn’t complete. The revelation comes in fits of fury and need. Without telegraphing it, Craig makes clear the significance of Perry and Truman’s prison-visit transactions—which, though not ever innocent of mutual exploitation, nonetheless contain many mutual blessings. It’s a riveting, deeply unsettling courtship.

Of course, it should be Perry who delivers the truly perceptive literary criticism: “I thought the writing lacked kindness,” he tells Truman in a letter, cutting the maestro’s inflated ego to its quick. That matters, and McGrath is right to track it. When Truman gets fussy over his opus-in-progress—he wants it to be dazzling, he says, “like a Faberge egg”—the movie recognizes something essential and takes the trouble of dramatizing his efforts toward that end. McGrath moves the action around to Truman trying out lines of prose anecdotally on his society friends, revising for impact, relinquishing any fidelity to the facts.

It’s the only absolute betrayal in the movie, and the most costly, but McGrath isn’t wrong to treat it so breezily. That’s his way of respecting your intelligence, saying he knows you’ve already seen the other picture and thanks for seeing this one anyway. Mostly, though, it’s his way of saluting the homespun wisdom Truman gathers from a Kansas farmer—only, tragically, to ignore it: “We’re in control,” the man says, “until we’re not.”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.