Jude Law wears the future well.

First glance at his feckless exterior, the rakish, devil-may-care attitude, and trademark smarm ousts him as comic relief or romantic interest. He’s a background, side-kick presence in modern-day films, but something about his demeanor and poise causes him to spring to life when placed in artificial worlds of the mind.

He’s the prototypical future man, stripped of obvious rugged qualities and embodying a kind of existential indifference to the cares of the world. Law excels at being oddly normal in a world that is anything but. Just look at Gattaca, A.I., eXistenZ, and Sky Captain. Now, he returns to the future with Repo Men, and surprisingly shucks the passive, fey observer for a hard-edged action hero. The result is slight but quite entertaining.

Repo Men, directed by Miguel Sapochnik, is a bloody, grim sci-fi thriller that heads off into outrageous action and near-satire levels of goofy for its final act. It tells the story of a future world where artificial organs can be purchased on lease, with recipients contracted to pay for them in total by the end of 3 months. If you happen to fail at the last part, the Union’s (the company providing the organs) repo-men will show up at your door, stun you, and then quickly and efficiently remove the merchandise.

Law plays one of these repo men, Remy, who comes into contact with Beth, a young woman whose body turns out to be mostly rent-to-own organs. Remy has a pretty expensive piece of biological installation himself, and when it comes down to making the decision to repo Beth or go on the run, he chooses the latter. Because, without that, there’s no movie.

As it turns out, there’s barely any movie anyway. Although  it pains me to point this out, Repo Men, in addition to appropriating the title of Alex Cox’s 1980′s cult film, has also lifted wholesale the plot of 2008′s Repo: The Genetic Opera!, minus of course the musical interludes and the neon tacky future sets. The rest of the picture is a cut and paste job of other science fiction faves, like Blade Runner, Minority Report, Equilibrium.

A sequence where Law and Braga open each other up (in the surgical sense) in order to destabilize the bar codes on their hijacked parts is reminiscent of Law’s own scenes in A.I, with Gigolo Joe removing his make and model number, and existenZ, where Dafoe helps Law’s hacker install a painful ‘bioport’ into his back. By the end, where Remy is storming the Union with all manner of sharp and deadly weapons, we are fully into Matrix territory and I noticed my check-off list was complete.

If you were to repossess this movie’s stolen parts, there wouldn’t be anything left but a handful of good performances gasping for breath in a pool of half-written ideas. And yet, that’s entirely too harsh on my part, because I did have a certain amount of fun with Repo Men. It helps if you are a sci-fi junkie, and did enjoy those movies I’ve previously mentioned. Repo Men glides so willingly along that it’s easy to allow it an extension on its rental of the borrowed bits just to see where it’s going. With Law redesigning his image and giving us a new way to perceive him–as masculine movie hero– there’s something to focus on, and with Forest Whittaker playing his partner Jake, and Braga as his charge, the movie has a solid emotional base.

What it lacks is any kind of ambition. This one is pure mindless entertainment, but it excels in that regard. I was never bored, never terribly concerned by the plot holes on screen, and when the turn of the screw comes for Law’s character, I bought it. In a time when half the action movies going don’t give us anyone of note to root for, it’s nice to see a picture where there are several interesting characters.

It’s just a shame they were transplanted in a body where the greatest function they can perform is life support.

Rating: ★★★☆☆ 

When was the last time that we were given a really good sketch-comedy film, packed with big names and famous faces each taking just a few minutes to put us in hysterics and then pass the screen to the next wacky cameo? Remember The Kentucky Fried Movie, the 1977 masterpiece of tastelessness that shocked audiences all the way into risque comedy history? What about Monty Python’s The Meaning Of Life? Even Weird Al Yankovic’s brilliantly absurd UHF is considered a classic in its own right these days. So why the significant lack of sketch films in the modern age? They seem like such a perfect vehicle for studios to load with stars and rake in the returns. You’d think more people in Hollywood would be jumping at the chance to revive the genre.

Luckily, there’s a whole slew of names to the sketch-comedy rescue!

Relativity Media has gathered an impressive array of talent for a new sketch movie that’s set to hit production by May. So far, we know that different segments will be directed by Brett Ratner, Peter Farrelly, Bob Odenkirk, Griffin Dunne, and even Zach and Miri Make A Porno actress Elizabeth Banks making her debut behind the camera.

The list of actors signed on for the as-yet-untitled laugh-fest is even more noteworthy. Gerard Butler, Kieran Culkin, Hugh Jackman, Johnny Knoxville, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Chloe Moretz, Liev Schreiber, Sean William Scott, Tony Shalhoub, Emma Stone, Matt Walsh, Patrick Warburton, Naomi Watts, and Kate Winslet are all expected to make appearances, most of them probably pretty brief.

So in honor of this news, Atomic Popcorn wants to know: What’s your favorite sketch-comedy movie?

“Hans Landa would have loved this movie.”
-Scott Marks

For those wondering, Mr. Marks is a pretty good friend of mine who often shares a radically different opinion than my own. Generally, I’ll come out singing the praises of Watchmen whereas he’ll yell at me for being wrong and rip the film to shreds. I can’t remember the last film I didn’t like that Scott loved, but the point has more than been made; unless it’s a classic piece of cinema, we don’t usually see eye-to-eye. Taking Woodstock should be considered an achievement just in that the two of us agreed completely on a movie. Shamefully, neither of us can raise our glasses and salute Ang Lee for making a great film. Truthfully, he’s done just the opposite and made what we agree is a horrendous picture.

What’s so offensive about Taking Woodstock isn’t any of the lack of filmmaking on display. In fact this film’s biggest crime is why I chose to begin this critique a little differently than normal. Ang Lee has decided to throw everything out that entails making a good drama and has instead littered it with every single stereotype he can dig up. The Jewish community gets the worst of it, with Imelda Stauton and Henry Goodman portrayed as the biggest Jewish caricatures likely ever put to screen. Now, I’m not Jewish and find it quite entertaining when a film plays on its stereotypes. This movie doesn’t do that and tries to make the stereotypes full-on characters.

The Jews may get it the worst, but Lee hasn’t forgotten the typical trolls who inhabit these stories. Aside from not being able to carry a picture to save his life, Demetri Martin’s Elliott Teichberg is the typical “miracle boy down on his luck.” Rooting for him is difficult when he (and the film) instill absolutely no more desire in the audience than to grab the complimentary hammer theaters will hand out to those who buy tickets and beat their own heads in. Emilie Hirsch, usually reliable, just floats in and out when the lack of a plot calls for him. Hirsch’s Billy is the “crazy Vietnam vet” that’s been done and done better. The hippies, led by Michael Lang (Jonathan Groff), feel anything but authentic. As for Liev Schreiber, he should be ashamed for playing a character like Vilma. He, she, or it isn’t funny. It’s outright disgusting.

None of the cast get any help from Ang Lee, who has decided that instead of a film, he wanted to make a sleeping pill. Lee has managed to take one of the most exciting events of the 1960s and turn it into a snoozefest. Lee’s reliance on split-screen to show us two different things happening in the same room serves no purpose at all and wears its welcome out quick. He’s not alone in creating a full-on forward assault of suck, thanks to his partner in crime, screenwriter James Schamus. The man’s scripted a film without any identity. Drama won’t be found here, nor will laughs, and excitement didn’t even get an invitation. Schamus also forgot to call a friend that all good screenwriters use: relatable characters. Instead, he opted to show us everything that makes bad cinema, for his lack of a story and lack of character development. His next assignment after this should be writing for the next studio-produced kids movie if he’s going to be so lazy with his methods.

If there’s a purpose to Taking Woodstock I couldn’t find it. This film is so terrible that it almost doesn’t want to be recommended. While most bad movies sometimes have good intentions, Ang Lee goes for the opposite and seems to be set out to make one of the worst films ever put to celluloid. Can’t say he and James Schamus aren’t successful, as together they’ve made an earnest abomination. In fact, the only people who have any business watching this film are insomniacs who have constant sleeping problems. Five minutes in, their problem will be solved and they won’t have to endure this offensive, lurid piece of something.

Rating: ★☆☆☆☆ 

If you survived this review and are somehow still interested in the film, check out our giveaway.

We are on a roll with giving away free stuff to you, our loyal readers. This time we have a prize bundle, well actually 5 of them to giveaway!

Taking Woodstock is Ang Lee’s latest film that opens August 28th and looks to be a pretty solid return to the big screen for Lee. Based on the memoirs of Elliot Tiber, the comedy stars Demetri Martin as Elliot, who inadvertently played a role in making 1969’s Woodstock Music and Arts Festival into the famed happening it was. Featuring a standout ensemble cast, and songs from a score of ‘60s musical icons including The Grateful Dead, The Doors, Jefferson Airplane, and Country Joe and the Fish – plus a new recording of “Freedom” from Richie Havens – Taking Woodstock is a joyous voyage to a moment in time when everything seemed possible.

In case you missed it you can check out the trailer right here.

How to Enter:

You must have a twitter account and be following @atomicpopcorn to enter. Please log into your twitter account and tweet the following:

Win the soundtrack, a t-shirt and an air freshener from #TakingWoodstock. Thanks to @atomicpopcorn 5 followers will win!

Five (5) Winners from Atomic Popcorn will win a Taking Woodstock Prize Bundle which includes the below items:

• Official Soundtrack
• T-Shirt
• Air Freshener

The Soundtrack CD features songs from a collection of music icons including Crosby, Stills & Nash, The Doors, Grateful Dead, Jefferson Airplane, Janis Joplin, and more. Many of the tracks are by artists who performed at Woodstock and are of the era. The soundtrack also includes a newly recorded version of ‘Freedom’ called ‘Freedom 2009′ by Richie Havens and scores elections by Danny Elfman. All songs and score are from the movie. Taking Woodstock is a joyous voyage to a moment in time when everything seemed possible.

1. Freedom (2009) (Richie Havens)
2. Taking Woodstock Titles
3. Wooden Ships (Crosby, Stills & Nash)
4. China Cat Sunflower (Live)(Grateful Dead)
5. Maggie M’Gill (The Doors)
6. Elliot’s Place
7. Coming Into Los Angeles (Live)(Arlo Guthrie)
8. I-Feel-Like-I’m-Fixin’-To-Die Rag (Live)(Country Joe McDonald)
9. Going Up The Country (Live)(Canned Heat)
10. Try (Just A Little Bit Harder) (Live)(Janis Joplin)
11. A Happening (Office #2)
12. The Red Telephone (Love)
13. Beautiful People (Live)(Melanie)
14. I Shall Be Released (Live)(The Band)
15. Perspective Extended
16. One More Mile (The Paul Butterfield Blues Band)
17. Volunteers (Jefferson Airplane)

The contest will win run through Labor Day weekend and the 5 winners will be notified via Twitter. This is for Residents of the USA ONLY. Good Luck and stay tuned.

A rabid photog on the set of Angelina Jolie’s upcoming spy thriller, Salt, snagged some pics of Jolie. I’m not going to lie to you. They’re not really exciting but even lame-ish pics of Ms. Jolie are better than having no pics of the Lipped One.

Salt features Jolie (Wanted, Changeling) as a spy who is desperate to clear her name in the face of double-agent allegations.

The film also stars Liev Schreiber and Chiwetel Ejiofor with Phillip Noyce directing.

Salt hits theaters July of 2010.

Daniel Craig in Defiance

2008 finished with three WWII films (Miracle at St. Anna, Boy in the Striped Pajamas, and Valkyrie), and 2009 continues the trend with Defiance. Even though Striped Pajamas had the least amount of action, I would say it was by far the strongest of the four films with Defiance coming in a close 2nd. But I wonder where this fad is coming from, and how much more Hollywood thinks they can wring out of us before people stop watching.

I enjoyed Defiance, and the true-story aspect of the film. In fact, if it hadn’t been based on a true story, I don’t think it would have had so great an impact as it did. But the weight of the atrocities of this war, as well as the heroic efforts of those who refused to be mere victims, certainly came through in a story worth being told.

Focusing in on the three Bielski brothers,  Tuvia (Daniel Craig), Zus (Liev Schreiber) and Azael (Jamie Bell), the plot unfolds as the band of brothers hide out in the woods from the Germans who are systematically killing off Jews in the region. The growth of the resistance the real story of the movie. As more and more people take refuge in the area, it begins as a matter of survival for them all to band together. From a means of support and survival to the development of intentional resistance, the leadership in the brothers’ lives is mirrored in the larger group – growing, straining, coming undone and finding redemption.

There are certainly other bit players in the film, but they merely orbit the stars. And while it’s a powerful story, it does seem to try to stretch itself onto more film than was needed. Half an hour less would have sufficed and still been true to the plot and characters. Much of the time spent in the forest seemed like filler and could have been cut. And while that time may have been included to bring into sharper focus the harsh and bleak conditions, it never seems that bleak. Yes, we see a scarcity of food, and people beginning to fight among themselves, but then it moves on to other things. You never really feel that bleakness in your gut.

You do feel, however, the evil that prompts the story. And as long as we deal with evil in our world, movies like this need to be made. Attempted genocide must not be forgotten or turned away from. Remembering it in films like this and Hotel Rwanda serve to honor the fallen and to prompt good people to live out what’s right. Celebrating what was right about the Bielski brothers is worth your time.

Rating: ☆☆☆☆☆