Rock-and-roll punk spectacle has rarely looked more spiffy or energetic than it does in Flori Sigmundi’s The Runaways, an entertaining and authentic biopic of the 1970’s all-girl band. Sigmundi shows an incredible flair for realism within the rock scene, employing a fly-on-the-wall perspective to the troubles and triumphs that come with being young, famous and surrounded by too many drugs and choices.

The Runaways never downplays the serious consequences its young protagonists face but it also steers clear of turgid melodrama by delivering spectacular performance pieces. If there is a flaw to the picture overall, it is one I’m not used to writing in print; the movie needs more Kristen Stewart.

Stewart, the usually bland but stalwart star of the Twilight pictures, proves her that her talent is indeed being wasted on that series. In fact, if she can harness half the restless energy and internal spirit that she summons as Joan Jett and filter it into Bella Swan, then I might be interested in tuning in for the rest of that milquetoast vampire saga. Of course, she’s got something here that she was never given in Twilight; a strong script and a living breathing person to inhabit.

Does it help that Joan Jett is both very real and very lively, and served as a consultant to Stewart on the film? Perhaps, but those are only the tools used. Stewart takes those resources and proves a vital point that Sigmundi might have missed; the film should have focused on Joan and filtered all of its gritty details and organic atmosphere through her perspective.

Of course, this is where reality gets in the way. Cherrie Currie, the quite young leader singer of The Runaways, wrote the book that the film is based on and Dakota Fanning portrays her in the movie. Jett was the one who approached Kim Fowley, the sometimes addled, sometimes creepy, preeminent  rock manager of the time, and asked him to handle the band. It is also Jett that managed to rise up from the ashes of the Runaways and have a quite successful 80’s career. She seems to come packaged with less dramatic issues than the unfortunate Currie, but she’s also more interesting as an artist. When Stewart nails the beating ambition and the punky spunky charm of Jett, the movie detaches from its imposed focus and gravitates towards Jett.

I liked Fanning fine as Cherie, and she really shines in those moments when the band is up on stage and performing. The work that more than likely drew her to the role–the dramatic bits that deal with her fractured family life and her dalliances with all manner of sex and drugs, including a superficial (or was it?) fling with Jett—is never quite as convincing. I felt like I was watching Fanning mimicking Currie’s habits and style in those moments, but when she’s rocking out, she appears to be completely at home within the skin of someone who never seemed all that comfortable in hers.

Part of this no doubt has to do with the fact that the trajectory of the band, including the usual rise and fall, lacks a lot of intense drama that might have come with a different group. There are the usual issues and tragedies that arise from being cast into a life you have little preparation to deal with. Sigmundi wisely focuses on the music and the snarly allure of these gal pal rockers, and in doing so, the movie occasionally feels at odds with itself. I found myself wondering afterwards if The Runaways might not have been more compelling as a fictional concert film of sorts, possibly condensing events down to an evening or two, or perhaps a focus on the tour circuit.

However, it does dawn on me that we might have a bit less development of Michael Shannon’s Kim Fowley if that were the case, and that would have been a shame. By far the most seasoned performer in the cast, Shannon came ready to work for The Runaways. He nails the portrayal of Fowley as a man both talented and diseased, opportunistic and caring; a borderline predator curiously contrasted with a warped surrogate daddy.

Shannon can deliver the unsettling, as was demonstrated in 2006’s Bug, where he played a crazed ex-military man who wanted desperately to search Ashley Judd’s skin for crawling microbes. What he can also do is perfectly encapsulate the external perception of a character while drawing inside a totally different landscape, and then using all of his acting skill to slowly and surely integrate the two disparate pieces into an intriguing whole. In a different film, Fowley might have been a background player despite being front and center for Currie’s book. With Shannon, he’s right there in the foreground sharing glorious interaction with the female leads.

The Runaways may have a few issues when it comes to focus, but it’s as strong as they come in terms of delivery. Sigmundi and her production team have given us a 70’s rock microcosm that feels as authentic as any captured. She pushes her stars to great heights and gets for her troubles, characters that fit snuggly into that world, all the while striving for it and straining against it all at the same time. The Runaways is an anthem for punk chick angst, and the surprising thing is that it never feels flimsy or adolescent.

Rating: ★★★★☆ 

I’m a huge fan of musicals. From Disney movies with their catchy songs, to aurally stunning operas, I really feel that music can be a tremendous addition to telling a story.

In the last decade, Hollywood has given us a pretty fair number of musicals. Some have been excellent, while others fell flat. Having grown up on musicals, I tend to be rather critical when I see them, and there were several that I found disappointing.

HOWEVER! The upcoming Nine looks like it might just be one of the good ones. I was intrigued by the first trailer for the film, which was simply snippets from the film put to one of the movie’s songs. The second trailer, though, gives us a little more of what the story is, and now instead of simply being interested in the movie, I’m excited for it.

Nine looks to have big, over the top musical numbers, with the drama of interwoven relationships–all centering around one man–giving it a story with plenty to work off of.

The Broadway production of Nine did quite well during its runs, earning 5 Tonys in its 1982 debut, and 2 more for its 2003 revival. This means the bar is already set pretty high for the movie, but from the looks of the trailer(s) it seems possible that the film could meet that standard.

Have a look for yourself, and see what you think.

Nine hits theaters December 25th.

Adam Shankman is a busy, busy man. Since directing 2005′s The Pacifier and Cheaper By the Dozen, Shankman has barely had a break, taking on numerous projects directing, producing, and choreographing films, as well as being a judge on the hit show So You Think You Can Dance. Now Shankman is adding another project to his résumé with a film version of the Broadway musical Rock of Ages.

Rock of Ages has been incredibly successful on the stage (the play has earned five Tony nominations), and if his work with Hairspray is any indicator, Shankman is just the man to make the stage production translate to the big screen.

With films such as dance flicks Step Up and Step Up 2: The Streets and the hit musical Hairspray to his credit, Shankman has had experience working in genres that may have less widespread appeal than some. This is part of the reason Rock of Ages caught Shankman’s interest.

According to Daily Variety, Shankman said of Rock of Ages:

I had the best time of my life making ‘Hairspray’ and badly wanted another musical, and when I watched ‘Rock of Ages,’ I was struck by the fact that not only had much of the audience seen it more than once, every guy in the audience knew the words to the songs…What an extraordinary opportunity to open the genre to an audience that otherwise wouldn’t go see a musical.

Chris D’Arienzo, the creator of the play, also wrote the script to adapt Rock of Ages to the screen, which should help his original artistic plan for the piece to transition between mediums.

The musical is the story of two people who meet at a club (Rock of Ages) on the Sunset Strip, fall in love, and try developing a relationship, all set to a soundtrack of 80s rock anthems. New Line Cinema is currently working on getting the rights to use songs by such 80s stars as Journey, Twisted Sister, Joan Jett, Bon Jobi, Pat Benatar, and others.

No actors have been cast yet, but Shankman hopes to fill the roles with big Hollywood names. His vision for the film would also, ideally, be shot on location in Los Angeles.

Production on Rock of Ages will begin by next summer, to be released by Warner Bros. in 2011.

Let me clear the air by saying that I was unwillingly dragged to see “Mamma Mia!”, the latest Hollywood interpretation of a stage musical.

Clearly, I’m not the type of person the people behind the film adaptation of “Mamma Mia!” were trying to please.  People like me, who are generally against musicals can and should find a better way to spend their time at the movies and leave the people who are actually interested in this film to see it.  However, I truly feel bad for anybody dragged to this incessantly corny and nearly insufferable movie musical that is so bad, even the presence of Meryl Streep can’t save it.

So, if I normally resist big, lavish movie musicals such as this, am I really the right person to review “Mamma Mia!”?  Well, I’d say no, but I’ll let you be the judge of that.  I’m not reviewing this movie for the fans of the musical, because I know that they’ll be pleased with what they get; I’m reviewing it for everyone else.  Now, that’s not to say that I automatically give every single musical I see a negative review.  I really enjoyed 2005′s “The Producers” as well as “Chicago” from 2002, and last year’s “Sweeney Todd” was my pick for the second-best film of 2007.  What ultimately made me not like “Mamma Mia!”, I guess you could say, was the simple fact that the film seriously missed every single mark it was trying to hit.  This movie is meant to be a fun, breezy hour and forty-eight minutes at the theater, but I thought there wasn’t any fun to be had and due to its dragged-out songs, there was nothing breezy about it.  Whereas “Sweeney Todd” played like a smooth flowing and hauntingly beautiful opera, and rather successfully at that, “Mamma Mia!” instead plays out like karaoke night in Greece.

Well, let’s face it.  Musicals aren’t meant to have elaborate or intricately crafted plots and that’s the case here (which invites another comparison to “Sweeney Todd” that I’ll make later).  The plot for “Mamma Mia!” is paper-thin and it always comes to a complete halt whenever the next musical number starts up.  So, the light and bright Sophie Sheridan (Amanda Seyfried) is about to get married to stud muffin Sky (Dominic Cooper), who incidentally has cloudy eyes.  Sophia’s one wish, though, is to have her father attend her wedding and give her away to her McDreamy.  The only problem is that her catamite of a mother named Donna (Meryl Streep) slept with three different men around the time Sophia would have been conceived.  That means that there are three possible candidates for the title of ‘Dear Old Dad’: Bill (Stellan Skarsgard), Sam (Pierce Brosnan) and Harry (Colin Firth).  And yet another problem is that Donna doesn’t want any of them at the wedding.  But as we all know, they’ll inevitably stay and that will cause serious romantic decisions to be made in one weekend that would normally take more than a weekend to decide to be made in, well, one weekend.

The plot’s only true purpose is to act as an engine to get us from one musical to the next, and that’s one of the biggest problems I’ve always had with musicals.  I can understand the necessity for an uncomplicated plot, but still, why can’t the writers at least try to bring more to the storyline so that the movie doesn’t feel like it can simply end at any given moment if one of the three men just came up and revealed that they are the father of Sophie?  Plus, I think it’s safe to say that you can pretty much guess who the father is by the way the camera lingers on each individual bachelor.  Now, I will admit that “Sweeney Todd”  does have a similarly thin plot, but the difference there is that the songs of that movie essentially were part of the plot.  It avoided that choppy style because the songs actually moved everything forward.  Here, the songs seem to be there just for the heck of it and while they may be mildly enjoyable, the choreography that accompanies them just makes everything feel like an overdone production of Riverdance.  And I’ll say this: if I had to sit through one more musical number where men and/or teenage boys tried to imitate professional dancers on a pier, I’d have been ready to throw my bag of popcorn at the screen.

For a musical meant to have purposefully bland performances made even more bland by professional actors such as Meryl Streep and Pierce Brosnan, then there’s something wrong in the acting department.  Meryl Streep has always been a terrific actress, but she’s given virtually nothing to work with here.  Oh, she can sing just fine and is definitely capable of holding her own whenever she bursts  into song, but it’s the in-between stuff that had me scratching my head in wonderment, trying to discern how Streep couldn’t be up to her own standards.  Also, her two shallow, giggly girlfriends portrayed by Julie Walters and Christine Baranski are the character equivalents of nails on a chalkboard.  And the serious overacting of Amanda Seyfried as Sophie doesn’t help much, either.

I think the best thing about “Mamma Mia!”, though, is the scenery of Greece.  Every outside scene carries vibrant sunshine, aqua-blue ocean and lime-green trees that at least give the movie points for eye candy.  And if I had to say something good about the cast, it would be that Colin Firth and Stellan Skarsgard do pretty decent work and are the most interesting to watch.

However, when a musical is iffy on the music and very noticeably at that in addition to being a challenge to sit through, then something went wrong somewhere.  I think it’s safe to say that the people who want to see “Mamma Mia!” will probably end up liking it, but me personally, I prefer my musicals to lay off the annoying choreography and make the songs pieces of the plot, rather than roadblocks to it.

Rating: ★½☆☆☆