photo
‘17 Again’
arts & entertainment
Movie Reviews
Published Thursday, 30-Apr-2009 in issue 1114
‘17 Again’
What’s it about?: Proving that everything “old” can be new again, 17 Again opens in 1989 where star basketball player Mike O’Donnell turns his back on a college scholarship, deciding instead to marry his girlfriend Scarlet when she reveals they are suddenly expecting a baby. Cut to 20 years later, Mike’s marriage and job are floundering when he is physically transformed back into his 17-year-old self although his mind and sensibilities still remain that of a decidedly square thirtysomething dude. With the help of his nerdy-turned-billionaire best childhood buddy Ned, he gets himself enrolled in the same school his own teenage kids now attend. Can he help them avert the same kinds of mistakes now that he (sorta) has a second chance to change?
Who’s in it?: Zac Efron (High School Musical) shoots and scores in a breakout starring role. He shows he’s got the comic chops to believably pull off the way-out-there premise of being a 37-year-old trapped in a 17-year-old’s body. Matthew Perry (Friends) does a nice job bookending the movie as the older Mike, but it’s Efron’s show all the way. Thomas Lennon follows up his hilarious supporting antics as the spurned man-date in I Love You, Man with some equally amusing work as Mike’s friend Ned, while Leslie Mann plays the estranged wife in style. As Mike’s kids who unknowingly become high school buds with their own father, newcomer Sterling Knight and Michelle Trachtenberg get enough screen time to shine. Melora Hardin (The Office) is also quite funny as the school principal that lovelorn Ned keeps stalking.
What’s good?: Although the premise of the adult/kid switcheroo has been done to death, director Burr Steers and writer Jason Filardi take it one step further a la It’s a Wonderful Life or Damn Yankees by letting their main character regain his youth for the chance to see what his life would be like if he could live it another way. This fanciful premise makes this “teen” comedy one that adults will probably enjoy even more.
What’s bad?: The filmmakers sometimes have a tendency to go over the top, particularly in the “Star Wars fight sequence” when the newly transformed Mike confronts old friend Ned with the news and a laser battle erupts (!). Another scene where 17-year-old Mike is seduced by his own unwitting daughter may be funny, but it veers a little too far into creepy territory.
Does this sound familiar?: If you like 17 Again, try renting 18 Again in which 81-year-old George Burns switches places with his grandson. Or how about Big, Vice Versa, Like Father, Like Son or either version of Freaky Friday? And who said there are no original ideas in Hollywood...
Netflix or multiplex?: A no-brainer – the “Zac Pack” will be out in force on opening day.
Bottom line: Hollywood.com rated this film 3 stars.
photo
‘State of Play’
‘State of Play’
What’s it about?: Political intrigue, corruption, scandal, sex – it’s all here in this Americanized adaptation of the much acclaimed 2003 six-hour BBC miniseries. With the story shifting from London to Washington D.C., the focus is now on a married congressman who is chairman of an important committee overseeing defense spending. He is a rising star in his party until his beautiful young assistant, with whom he has been carrying on a clandestine affair is suddenly found dead. Things get complicated when his old friend, Washington Globe investigative reporter Cal McAffrey is assigned to track down the story and try to uncover the identity of the killer. With cub blogger Della Frye forced on him as a partner, the two journalists step into a government coverup that is much bigger than anyone could have imagined.
Who’s in it?: Four days before production kicked off, Brad Pitt dropped and Russell Crowe replaced him in the key reporter’s role. It’s hard to imagine Pitt in this part since Russell Crowe, disheveled-looking with long hair and about 30 pounds overweight owns it in his best performance since A Beautiful Mind. As his blog-savvy young partner, Rachel McAdams firmly captures the essence of a determined but inexperienced young journalist in over her head. A sharp-tongued and feisty Helen Mirren is ideal as the newspaper boss more concerned with profits than integrity as she spouts out lines like “I don’t give a s**t about the rest of the story. We are going to press!” Ben Affleck also has his best screen outing in a while as the ambitious congressman Stephen Collins, who gets caught with his pants down. A bevy of fine supporting turns include Robin Wright Penn as Collins’ unhappy wife; Jeff Daniels, oily and smarmy as a conservative politician, who knows more than he lets on, and especially Jason Bateman, stealing scenes as a slimy PR guy who provides some key details.
What’s good?: Not only does State of Play work well as a political thriller, its pointed take on the failing state of newspapers and lax journalistic standards could not be more timely. Stunning widescreen cinematography and lavish sets add to the authenticity of a movie that in its best moments can be compared favorably with similar ‘70s classics like All the President’s Men.
What’s bad?: As the dense plot unfolds, it gets a bit confusing trying to keep all the players straight, particularly towards the end, where you might need “State of Play for Dummies” just to follow it all.
Favorite scene: A nail-biter beautifully staged by director Kevin MacDonald (Last King of Scotland) where Crowe plays a cat-and-mouse game in an underground garage with a mysterious armed suspect he has just confronted.
How many writers does it take to screw in a light bulb?: Four major ones in this case. Matthew Michael Carnahan (The Kingdom), Tony Gilroy (Duplicity, Michael Clayton), Billy Ray (Breach) and an uncredited Peter Morgan (Frost/Nixon, The Queen) are the superstar team of scribes, who each took a crack at whittling down a six-hour miniseries into a two-hour flick.
Oscar-worthy?: Look for Bateman and the art directors responsible for the massive newspaper office to turn up on the shortlist for next year’s Academy Awards.
Bottom line: Hollywood.com rated this film 3 1/2 stars.
E-mail

Send the story “Movie Reviews”

Recipient's e-mail: 
Your e-mail: 
Additional note: 
(optional) 
E-mail Story     Print Print Story     Share Bookmark & Share Story
Classifieds Place a Classified Ad Business Directory Real Estate
Contact Advertise About GLT