The Box Presents a Muddled But Intriguing Social Experiment

I avoid horror movies as a general rule. However, I was killing time with my cousin during a visit to my grandparents’, and the 2009 Richard Kelly thriller The Box came on after Date Night, the comedy we’d been watching, so we decided to stick it out even though my uncle warned us it was “freaky”. I figured with a PG-13 rating, it couldn’t be too traumatizing. And really, it wasn’t, though I still was a little nervous about going to sleep that night for fear a nightmare might creep in…

Cameron Diaz is Norma Lewis, a sweet, pretty Southern schoolteacher with a mangled foot. She and her husband Arthur (James Marsden), who works for NASA, enjoy a comfortable, if rather fiscally shaky, life with their pre-teen son Walter (Sam Oz Stone). Christmas is on the horizon when a mysterious package arrives on the porch. Inside the plain brown box is a contraption and a calling card. The Lewises are about to receive a visit from the enigmatic Arlington Steward (Frank Langella), a polite but ominous man with a deformed face. His task is to inform them of the “financial opportunity” presented by the box that they have been given. If they press the button, someone they don’t know will die, and they will receive a million dollars. They can’t tell anyone else about the offer or the deal is off. They have a day to decide.

Norma and Arthur are decent, salt-of-the-earth people, and it’s a little hard to believe that they would seriously consider this long-distance homicide. But a combination of disbelief that it will actually work and a sudden downturn in their fortunes making the money seem particularly palatable pushes them to accept the deal. And then the trouble really begins.

This is a mostly psychological thriller that asks its audience to consider whether they would accept such an offer and what the ramifications might be of a society filled with people who would do such a thing. It’s not an especially violent movie; we hear rumblings of a string of homicides but don’t really see much. It reminded me a bit of Stephen King’s Needful Things, only here, the temptation is far less personalized, and most of the terrible things that happen are a result of people being forced to make a difficult decision. It’s a sick experiment, and whoever is pulling the strings has incredible power.

Langella gives the most compelling performance as the serene but incredibly creepy courier. Is he behind all of this, or is he too caught up in something bigger than himself? While he is the one continually setting events into motion, it is difficult to determine whether he is truly a villain. Diaz and Marsden also deliver solid performances and are very believable as a couple. The Lewises are flawed but likable, and it’s disturbing to watch them descend into near-madness in the aftermath of their fateful decision.

Aside from the main three, I was most interested in Arthur’s colleague Norm Cahill (James Rebhorn) and the eerie family babysitter. I wasn’t too impressed with Stone’s performance, but he wasn’t really in the movie all that much. More than the side characters, the pop culture references caught my attention. The movie includes several clips of shows from the 1970s, which roots us in a very particular time, and the search for alien life is a major thread throughout the film. In some ways, I was also reminded of The Day the Earth Stood Still, as I got the impression that some sort of advanced civilization was observing humanity and unsure of whether it deserved to remain in existence.

The movie does get pretty weird toward the end, and there are at least a couple of sequences that seem confusing and out of place. At times it seemed to me as though it was trying to be two different movies. Ultimately, though, it’s an interesting rumination on human nature. The particulars of the experiment don’t always make a lot of sense, but the general idea behind it is compelling. It’s a make-you-think kind of movie, and if nothing else, I expect that those who watch it may think twice the next time they are tempted to do something that would benefit themselves and hurt someone else.

Shrek Forever After Brings the Happily Ever After

Back in 2007, May brought with it a trio of third installments at the cineplex. I was determined to see them all, and I did, but the third time isn’t always the charm. It certainly wasn’t in the case of Shrek. So I worried that the fourth, and allegedly final, volume in the twisted but tended saga of the grumpy green ogre with a heart of gold would fizzle. And yet as the previews sneaked their way into nearly every commercial break as I watched the LOST finale, I realized that this was perhaps my most anticipated movie of the summer. And I began to think that number four might just make up for the disappointment of number three.

Shrek Forever After is not a wholly original story, but then the Shrek franchise has always been about taking familiar stories and putting new twists on them. In addition to the multitude of traditional fairy tale characters, including sinister newbie Rumpelstiltskin, you’ll find similarities to It’s a Wonderful Life, The Princess Bride and Disney’s version of Beauty and the Beast. Which, of course, is a traditional fairy tale in and of itself, but the echoes of the specific Disney version are particularly strong, just as they were in the first movie.

In many ways, it’s a return to the beginning, with the main difference being that Shrek knows where he has been, and he is aware that he’s more than just a surly ogre. I’ve noticed that many stories being written lately have employed a reboot device of some kind; I guess it’s a creative way of treading old territory in new ways. In this case, we see that Shrek (Mike Myers) has grown rather weary of his domestic bliss. He loves his wife and children, but the monotony is getting him down, as is the sense that his domestication has somehow emasculated him. And when enough little irritations pile up, it turns the docile family man into a raging beast who is so desperate for a change that he’s willing to enter into a bargain with the seedy Rumpel (Walt Dohm) in hopes of letting off a little steam.

It’s at this point that the movie begins to bear a great resemblance to the last season of LOST, as it’s once again the lovelorn Scotsman who is aware of two separate realities and who must try to get his old friends to remember each other, and him. In this case, the problem is that Rumpel tricked Shrek into negating his own birth. Unless he can convince Fiona (Cameron Diaz), in this reality a fierce warrior princess, to kiss him - and to truly mean it - before the end of the day, he will cease to exist, and Far Far Away will forever be ruled by a diminutive tyrant with a wide array of wigs to suit each of his moods.

Rumpel is the most significant new character in the film, and he really is creepy. I find him quite a convincing villain, and more threatening than any of the others the franchise has offered up, in part because he is so adept at figuring out what people want and tempting them with it in such a way that it seems they can’t lose. At the same time, however, as soon as Shrek gets his initial burst of old-timey rampaging out of his system and returns to his senses, Rumpel loses a lot of his power. It seems like an affirmation that evil may loom large, but ultimately it can’t come close to equaling the power of good. As Shrek gains strength with each new ally he makes and each friend he recovers, Rumpel grows more and more desolate as even his sycophants begin to drop off, either defecting or fighting among themselves.

Also new to this tale is a whole colony of ogres ruled by a ferocious Fiona who, never having been rescued from the tower, had to fight her way out and has since become a master military schemer. Among these ogres, Shrek is rather puny-looking, and it’s funny to see him in contrast to those who have embraced their slimier natures. Yet the ogres still come across as noble because they are fighting a corrupt government, and I definitely got a whiff or two of Braveheart as they plotted to bring down the oppressive rule keeping them underground. My favorite of the new ogres is Cookie (Craig Robinson), a jumbo fellow with the build and disposition of Hagrid, but considerably better culinary skills. While his comrades talk weapons and maneuvers, his chief concern is feeding the troops.

I find Shrek at his most lovable yet throughout the course of this movie as he valiantly strives to undo the mess he has made, but the one character in this series who has always had pride of place in my heart is hyper, sweet-as-candy Donkey (Eddie Murphy), and that remains the case. As expected, his awakening comes first, since he is such a pure, open-hearted character, though there’s still a process to it, and I found myself very touched by the way his initial violent resistance to Shrek’s overtures of friendship gives way to trust, to the point when Shrek begins to tell him the most fantastical of tales about his alternate life and Donkey responds not with skepticism but with exuberant acceptance. Puss in Boots (Antonio Banderas) follows a similar path, but unlike Donkey, he is physically much different in this reality, having spent his life pampered and pudgy, so while he is a valuable ally, he’s not quite the stalwart swordsman we’re used to seeing.

I saw the movie in 3-D, and I was rather surprised at how organic the whole thing felt. I expected that they might use the technology to give us a lot of sight gags, like pies being thrown at the audience and that sort of thing. In reality, I can’t remember a single moment like that. So by one token, one might argue that the 3-D is unnecessary, and certainly not worth the extra couple of bucks. But for me, I felt that all the surroundings felt just a bit richer and deeper than they did before. I was able to be drawn more fully into the experience, and I don’t regret springing for 3-D.

Supposedly this is the end of the Shrek tales, and I rather hope it is because it would be nice to see a series that got off to such a promising start go out on such a high note. As much as I enjoyed the first movie, there were a few things about it that left a bad taste in my mouth. Same goes for the second, and the third just dropped the ball. But for me, Shrek Forever After represented all that is best about the series and brought Shrek, Fiona, Donkey, Puss in Boots and all those other characters we love to a true happily ever after.

Shrek the Halls Offers Christmas Chaos

Up until last year, my mentioning a surly green creature who gets extra cranky around Christmas automatically would lead most people to assume that I was talking about the Dr. Seuss's Grinch, but now the old Christmas stealer has a bit of competition. Shrek (Mike Myers), the uncouth ogre who's a romantic at heart, got his own Christmas special last year, hot on the heels of his less-than-smashing third film installment. Shrek the Halls is much shorter than Shrek the Third, and the situation is much simpler: Shrek wants his first Christmas as a family man to be perfect, but he doesn't know how to go about it and his friends' shenanigans are giving him a headache. Poor green grouch...

This special, which clocks in at twenty-some minutes, reunites several popular characters from the films, including Shrek's sweet ladylove Fiona (Cameron Diaz), his hyper best buddy Donkey (Eddie Murphy), his suave defender Puss in Boots (Antonio Banderas), the Gingerbread Man (Conrad Vernon), the Three Blind Mice (Christopher Knights), Pinocchio (Cody Cameron) and the Three Little Pigs (Cameron). As in the movies, when they all come together in Shrek's hovel, enough chaos ensues to aggravate even the most easy-going of folks.

This is a very fast-paced tale, which means the mass confusion comes in short, manageable bursts. Even so, it's nice to have the rewind option available, since there are sometimes several things going on at once and it's easy to miss some of the off-hand remarks by various fairy tale characters. As always, my favorite of the bunch is Donkey, whose youthful enthusiasm has him inundating Shrek with good wishes badly delivered. Donkey has his own idea of what a perfect Christmas involves, and it doesn't match up too well with Shrek's. This makes for many amusing moments, though it's easy to understand why Shrek finds him a bit hard to take.

Those familiar with the series won't be surprised to find that this special contains a bit of suggestive dialogue and a fair amount of humor involving bodily functions. It's all firmly within PG territory, but if you have a low tolerance for belches and sludge, be warned. It's particularly abundant in the specialized version of A Visit From St. Nicholas that Shrek finally gets to recite, after storytime is hi-jacked by Donkey, Puss and Gingy, each of whom has a brief but memorable tale to tell. Puss's is probably my favorite, as it affords him the opportunity to adopt his adorable enormous-eyed expression; Gingy's might be a tad morbid for especially sensitive young viewers.

Like the movies, the special incorporates pop music well, though in this case it's Christmas music. I like the overall theme of familial affection and of togetherness trumping a "perfect" Christmas, though considering that the special starts out in the summer with Shrek's triplets already born, I can't quite work out how it is that this is Shrek's first Christmas with Fiona. Or during their first Christmas, were they too preoccupied with other matters to pay attention to the holiday? At any rate, this potential continuity gap does little to diminish my enjoyment of Shrek the Halls. I wouldn't quite call it a classic, but those who already enjoy these characters should get a kick out of seeing them in such a cheery context.

It's a Jolly Holiday With Cameron, Kate, Jude and Jack

A couple years ago, I read Tara Road, a book by Irish author Maeve Binchy about a pair of middle-aged women, one from Ireland and one from America, who find themselves in the midst of personal crises and spontaneously decide to swap houses for the month. The premise of last year's The Holiday, starring Cameron Diaz, Kate Winslet, Jude Law and Jack Black, is similar enough that I immediately thought of the book when I saw the trailers, even wondering briefly if this was an adaptation of that novel. It's not - and actually that book has been made into a film of the same name, though it wasn't released in American theaters. But the basic idea is that two women in their late twenties or early thirties, one from America and one from England, switch homes for two weeks, during which they try to escape from the misery of two failed relationships, little knowing that far better romances await them in their new surroundings.

The American is fabulously rich but emotionally empty Amanda (Diaz). She makes her millions in L.A. producing movie trailers and is so wrapped up in her work that wherever she goes, she hears the distinct, rumbling tones of renowned movie trailer narrator Hal Douglas, offering cinematic commentary on the story of her life. After her latest break-up with a putz who cheats on her and blames it on her workaholism, Amanda, disturbed that she can't muster a single tear for her sad situation, decides she needs a vacation.

A Google search leads her to Iris (Winslet), a lowly journalist in Surrey who listed her charming cottage in the middle of nowhere on a home exchange site. The timing couldn't be better, since Iris has just learned that Jasper (Rufus Sewell), the rakish co-worker with whom she's been smitten for the past three years, has gotten engaged and never bothered to tell her; in fact, moments before the engagement was announced at the office Christmas party, he was busy flirting with her, inspiring hope that their on-again, off-again relationship might be headed in a positive direction. Now she just wants to get away from him.

It's perhaps a little too convenient how easily these women with sordid romantic pasts stumble upon the men of their dreams, but such is the stuff of Hollywood, and anyway, profound relationships can develop quickly when people are thrown into unfamiliar circumstances. Amanda meets Graham (Law), Iris's brother, when he comes pounding on her door in the middle of the night a scant six hours after her traumatic arrival, drunkenly demanding a bathroom and a place to crash for the night. Equally startled at the sight of each other, both are stricken with an immediate attraction that leads them to plunge recklessly into what both believe will be a one-night stand.

For Iris, the process is more gradual. Her first introduction to Miles (Black), a film composer and acquaintance of Amanda, is brief and awkward, and they don't meet again for a few days, by which point Iris has managed to establish a firm friendship with Amanda's 90-year-old neighbor, feisty screenwriting legend Arthur Abbott (Eli Wallach). Her kinship with Miles develops as an outgrowth of that, and as he already has a girlfriend, they enjoy one another's company but don't outwardly acknowledge any romantic attraction; the kisses Miles plants on her cheek seem more indicative of an old-fashioned gentility than an attempt to woo her. But when Miles learns his darling Maggie (Shannyn Sassamon), supposedly out of state working on a movie, has been back in town for days and shacking up with another man, the game changes a bit...

Although I was rather put off by the way Amanda and Graham's relationship turns physical minutes after meeting each other, there's an undeniable sweetness to the way it progresses from there. In another actor's hands, our first impression could be that Graham is little better than a lecherous drunk. But the devilishly handsome Law is so irresistible in the role, his indiscretions are swiftly forgiven, particularly since it is technically Amanda who puts the moves on him. Though he professes to be a love-'em-and-leave-'em kind of guy, his actions speak louder than words; he shows himself to be gentlemanly, sincere and vulnerable in scene after scene, and even when we learn he has been keeping a major aspect of his life from Amanda, the motivation behind his secrecy only makes him more endearing. The high-maintenance Amanda is the least charming of the main foursome, but she's still quite likable, especially toward the end of the movie.

I'm used to seeing Black in schlub-finds-redemption roles; he always seems to turn out a decent guy, even if those tendencies are a bit buried. Here, he's surprisingly mellow, and his character is both accomplished and courteous, the perfect antidote to the roguish, manipulative Jasper. Black and Winslet don't get nearly as much screen time together as Diaz and Law do, since half of Iris's scenes are focused on the mutually mentorly relationship she develops with Arthur, who reluctantly agrees to appear at an event in his honor after considerable nudging by his new friend. I tend to find many of Winslet's characters a tad abrasive, but Iris is entirely sympathetic, her consideration and respect for Arthur and her easy camaraderie with Miles proving that she does indeed deserve to be the "leading lady" rather than the "best friend", as Arthur observes.

He makes other observations throughout the film as well that constitute a running commentary on the way Hollywood has changed over the years; there's quite a bit of sly self-reference as well, as when he refers to the moment when Iris offers him a lift home as a "meet-cute". With Arthur, Miles and Amanda all deeply involved in some aspect of the film-making process, these sorts of references slip out often, along with amusing cameos from Lindsay Lohan, James Franco and Dustin Hoffman. This is a movie that doesn't allow us to forget it's a movie.

There are a few somewhat shaky plots points to consider. The women switch houses with one day's notice, which seems an awfully short time in which to make arrangements for such a trip. I guess there really are no arrangements; they just pick up and leave with minimal luggage, notifying few people of their plans. Iris even leaves behind her dog, and it's not too clear whether she mentioned this to Amanda. When she first arrives, Amanda is forced to trudge through the snow in high heels because the cab driver refuses to chug down that narrow country road and risk getting stuck, but at the end, the same driver pulls up to the cottage and turns around without protest halfway down the road at Amanda's request. I'd like to think he felt badly about giving Amanda such a crummy first impression of England, but it does seem like slightly inconsistent characterization.

While this is more a stylistic issue than a plot point, I found it strange that the film begins with a voiceover by Iris, but she doesn't provide narration at any other point in the film. I might say it's a nod to her deciding to take the leading lady role, but the narration seems to be rooted in the moment of the Christmas party, at which point she is still feeling very much on the sidelines. Most problematically, while we're offered a blissful final scene that screams happy Hollywood ending, we're not given any solid solution to the problem that has plagued these romances from the beginning - that is, the fact that all four people have considerable commitments which happen to be rooted half a world away from their newfound loves.

But that's a problem for another movie. For this one, the ending is sufficient, leaving us feeling warm and fuzzy, happy it all worked out so nicely for these folks, if only until the credits roll.

Third Time Holds Little Charm With Shrek the Third

I've been looking forward to May as the month of the blockbusters, and a couple weeks ago my movie watching got off to a good start with Spider-Man 3. Though I read some pretty scathing reviews, I thought the film was phenomenal and looked forward to watching the next big premiere, Shrek the Third. There were lines around the lobby for Spidey, so I thought we might do well to buy tickets for Shrek ahead of time. We never got around to it, so I was a little nervous when we got to the theater. I needn't have worried about getting seats; I might have done well to worry instead about other things...

When we walked into our theater at 10:15, the previews had started without us, but we were the only people in the audience. A few minutes later, a couple came in and sat down. And that was it. Seven people at the second showing of Shrek the Third. Impressive. If our reaction was a typical response, I doubt Shrek will be packing folks in. I personally couldn't have laughed aloud more than half a dozen times, and I think every time it was something I'd seen already on the previews.

The movie begins roughly where the second left off, with Shrek (Mike Myers) and Fiona (Cameron Diaz) living a cushy life in the royal kingdom of Far Far Away. They're on an extended visit, but as much as they enjoy their fancy lodgings, they're both anxious to get back to their old life in the swamp. Well, Shrek is, anyway; Fiona thinks it might be time to change things up a bit with some new additions. But any arguments about the pitfalls of parenthood will have to wait, because the king (John Cleese) is dying, and he needs someone to take over. That means either Shrek or Fiona's cousin Arthur (Justin Timberlake). And since the last thing Shrek wants is to rule the kingdom, another quest is in order...

It seems like bringing the Arthurian legend into Shrek's world would be an inspired idea, but it turns out to be only one of many weak threads in a film that is surprisingly lackluster. The most interesting thing about Arthur, an insecure, unpopular boy teased by all of his classmates at his medieval high school, is his former magic teacher, Merlin (Eric Idle), a highly eccentric old man with a trick or two up the sleeves of a robe too short for common decency. There's a bit of conflict between Shrek and Arthur deriving from the fact that the ogre initially conceals the fact that he was actually the first in line, but it never feels very pressing.

Nor was I all that invested in the antics of the women attending Fiona's baby shower at the time when Prince Charming (Rupert Everett) showed up with an army of villains to take over the kingdom. Narcoleptic Sleeping Beauty (Cheri Oteri), mannish stepsister Doris (Larry King) (whose sister Mabel (Regis Philbin) is in league with the villains), tough-talking Snow White (Amy Poehler), bitter Rapunzel (Maya Rudolph) and perfect Cinderella (Amy Sedaris) all have their moments, but nobody really stands out to me as an exciting new character.

The most consistently entertaining characters remain Donkey (Eddie Murphy) and Puss in Boots (Antonio Banderas). In this installment, there's a bit of added amusement when the two inadvertently switch bodies, much to each other's horror. Little of their dialogue is particularly memorable, however, and my favorite aspect of Donkey this time around is his little bunch of baby donkey dragons, which are as adorable as they are physically improbable. In fact, visually speaking, this movie does have a lot to recommend it, though the baby ogres are a bit freakish looking. Several contemporary songs are prominently featured, most effectively Cat's in the Cradle and That's What Friends Are For, but none of them makes much of an impact.

In the end, Shrek the Third is a movie to watch because you loved the two that preceded it. You'll find enjoyment in the familiar characters but bemoan the fact that they aren't delivering as many laughs as usual, nor coming together in service of a story that feels coherent. Hopefully you'll walk out of the theater smiling, but there's certainly not much need to order these tickets ahead of time. Something tells me Shrek won't be catching up to Spidey anytime soon.

Brilliant Animation Spattered with Sludge

If you come to Shrek looking for a squeaky-clean film for your five-year-old to enjoy, you've picked the wrong movie. That isn't to say that he won't enjoy it, but you won't enjoy it when he spends the remainder of the day trying to prove that his belching powers exceed that of an ogre. Just pray the imitation stops there. This is, after all, Mike Myers, the man who brought us Austin Powers. The level of crudeness is taken down a notch for this film marketed towards youngsters, but most of the humor is definitely aimed at adults who haven't quite grown up.

If belching were the only part of this movie that is somewhat uncouth, I'd go ahead and give it a hearty recommendation. But belching doesn't begin to cover the wide array of bodily functions seen here. Young children still in the "doorknob" stage of their lives will, no doubt, find it hilarious when Shrek's flatulence kills a fish, but the smelly jokes get a little old after a while. Beyond physical humor, there is quite a bit of dialogue riddled with profanity and innuendo. Most of this comes from our heroes, Shrek (Myers) and Donkey (Eddie Murphy).

That isn't to say, however, that the film relies solely upon potty humor. Shrek is genuinely funny in many places, tipping a hat to dozens of Disney movies and nursery rhymes. Prince Farquaad (John Lithgow) tortures the gingerbread man during interrogation by dipping his leg in milk and eating it. His magic mirror is frightened into talking when he sees a guard smash a hand mirror. Donkey is lifted off the ground with pixie dust and proclaims, "You ain't never seen a donkey fly!" The princess (Cameron Diaz) sings alternately with a bluebird, but her voice grows too high and the bird explodes trying to imitate it. There's even an allusion towards the end to The Princess Bride.

Most amusing, however, is the frantically friendly Donkey, who could possibly talk the ear of the Micro Machine Man. Okay, so he doesn't talk that fast, but he certainly talks that much. Nonstop. Simultaneously lovable and annoying, Donkey is my favorite character in the film.

Shrek, meanwhile, is a green grouch with a Scottish accent and unpleasant odour. Tired of being judged by his appearance, he agrees to journey with Donkey, partly because the four-legged chatterbox doesn't seem to mind his alarming appearance. But what will happen when he finds himself falling in love with the princess he was sent to rescue, in exchange for the evacuation of his swamp? Could the fairest lady in the land ever see anything in this hideous beast? And what deep dark secret is the princess hiding from her traveling companions?

The animation in this film is breathtaking. Top-notch. The premise is basically another take on Beauty and the Beast, though this film resolves itself much differently than that Disney film did. I certainly wouldn't call this a musical, but there is some singing. Donkey's humming, some background rock and roll, and a couple of incredibly annoying tunes, one welcoming visitors to Farquaad's kingdom and one sung by a dorky French Robin Hood and his merry men. I got a lot of laughs out of this film, but I also got a lot of groans. I would definitely classify it as a film for teens, despite the way Burger King has been saturated with it for the past two months. Enjoy, but be on your guard. Disney this is not.