Identity Thief

The concept of this film holds some promise. After having his identity stolen, Sandy Patterson's (Jason Bateman) life is falling apart as he is being held responsible for the crimes committed and debts inured by a career criminal that specializes in credit card fraud. The traditional methods of fixing his credit after ID theft takes years and the authorities won't do anything to help him unless the perp is caught red handed, so Sandy takes a cross country trip on his own to apprehend the fake Sandy. Because Sandy is a unisex name, the thief that stole his identity is a woman (Melissa McCarthy). When they're forced to drive from Florida back to the real Sandy's home in Denver, hilarity supposedly ensues. Unfortunately, the great potential of this film is never realized. Identity Thief is a flawed movie from opening to closing credits. The story itself is straight forward: good guy hunts down bad guy, good guy captures bad guy, good guy drags bad guy back for justice, and in the process bad guy makes many attempts to escape. The screenwriters must have assumed that this story line was too simple so they introduced multiple subplots. These minor plots distracted from the over all story - especially Sandy's desire to enact revenge on his sleazy boss (Jon Favreau) - a concept that worked much better in 1997's Nothing to Lose. Since the victim taking a road trip with the perpetrator concept was too ordinary, their trip is complicated by not just one, but three additional characters hunting down the criminal Sandy, and a police force that interrupts the revenge plan sub-plot. First is a pair of gang hitmen (Genesis Rodriguez & T.I.) sent to kill Sandy for selling bad credit cards to their boss. The other is a bounty hunter known only as Skiptracer (Robert Patrick). These pursuits result in gun play, several punches to the throat, multiple car crashes, and a snakebite. And that punch to the throat is overplayed. First time it was funny, the second time not so much, and every punch after that was just annoying. The biggest error in this movie is the complete unlikability of either of the main characters. Bateman as Sandy is pathetic. He is a pushover who inspires zero empathy. At the beginning of movie, he willingly hands over his social security number, birth date, and enough other pieces of information that even the least ham-fisted criminal could steal his identity. Throughout most of the movie I couldn't help but think, 'he deserves this.' McCarthy as Sandy is a vile and repulsive character. She's an obnoxious and vulgar alcoholic who seems to be doing everything in her power to make people despise her. Like her male counterpart, with people chasing her down to either kill her or throw her in jail, I kept thinking, 'she deserves this.' By the time either character shows any redeemable qualities, it's all ready too late - I can't stand either of them. The only reason I want the real Sandy to succeed is for the sake of his wife (Peet) and friend (Cho). As much as the hitmen/bounty hunter threads distract from the main story, I actually enjoyed the scenes with them more than the ones without them. Even as side characters, they were more compelling than Bateman or McCarthy. Their interactions were funnier than most of the rest of the film - especially the scene where Patrick shoves T.I. into a car trunk and when that trunk is later opened by police. I find it sad that these small roles were more convincing and enjoyable than the movie's protagonists. I wouldn't say Identity Thief is a horrible movie, but in no way is it a good movie either. This is one that is best to wait until it is available on Redbox or wait until it's broadcast on a premium cable channel.

2012

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to set up a bank of TVs and simultaneously play a bunch of disaster flicks on them? The Towering Inferno, Earthquake, Armageddon, The Poseidon Adventure, Dante's Peak, and Hard Rain on a stack of six big screen TV's... I'm sure you haven't, but just in case you have wondered - Roland Emmerich was thinking of you.

Emmerich threw down the gauntlet when he blew up the White House in Independence Day. He is the man who set the standard for the modern era of the disaster genre. Yet, he's never quite lived up to the expectations he created. His movies have been more hype than substance (the quirky Godzilla and the plodding Day After Tomorrow are a couple of examples). Now with 2012 he aims to out do himself (and every other apocalyptic movie ever made) in both it's epic scale and epic duration.

Yes I said duration. It is a long movie. I'd recommend using the facilities immediately before the opening credits. Despite the long running time (158 minutes) Emmerich fills that time wisely. It's not the "when will this movie ever end" kind of Transformers 2 long... just the "my bladder is going to burst at any moment" kind. If it wasn't for the one liter of Mt Dew I chugged prior to the movie's beginning, I would have barely noticed the length.

The scenes of destruction (of which there were many) were evenly spaced - unlike some other movies that pack it all in to the fist 20 minutes of film (I'm talking about you The Core). While the dialog is not Oscar worthy, it's not a distraction. The conversations were practical (all though mildly predictable), punctuated with intentional humor, and a self-parodying outlook on the concept of cataclysmic events.

There are a couple of cheese ball moments (The Governator Schwarzenegger's cameo and an obnoxious fissure that splits a couple after the man mentions feeling like there is something separating them) but those clips are few and do not take away from the grandeur of the total and inescapable destruction that Emmerich celebrates for nearly an two hours and forty minutes.

As California sinks into the Pacific, a cruise ship and aircraft carrier are upended in tidal waves, buildings collapse, Yellowstone explodes, and Woody Harrelson goes crazy, you can't help but think how awesome it all looks. And while we know the story is completely implausible, we enjoy it. We know a puddle-jumper plane can't outrun (outfly?) a pyroclastic flow, but we sit on the edge of our seats to see it happen. We know that the earth will not open up to swallow the Vatican, but it makes compelling cinematography. And amidst the chaos is a plot. A decent one. And while some disaster movies center on one story, 2012 takes on a few. The strength of family, forgiveness, and reconciliation. Political and humanitarian ethics. Sacrifice and hope.

And with all that is splayed on the big screen during 2012, one of my favorite moments came after the movie was over (and I'm not talking about Adam Lambert's caterwauling during the closing credits). On my way out of the theater, I overheard two teen-aged girls talking.

"What sucks is like this is totally going to like happen like three days before Christmas," one of them said. (I wish I was joking.)

First of all... it's not. 2012 is a work of fiction - not a documentary. I won't get into the details, but the world will not end on 12/21/12. Astrophysicists, anthropologists, geologists, and many other scientific peoples have easily discounted the proposed meaning of Mayan prophesies. It is well documented. Google it. So I got a good laugh at the girls' academic naiveté, but I am also a bit puzzled by their arithmetic. The end of the Mayan long count calendar is December 12th of 2012. Last time I checked, Christmas falls on the 25th of December... every year. So, if I do my math correctly, 25 minus 21 is 4... not three. And the movie wasn't vague about the date. But I digress. The movie is well worth the price. Emmerich not only lives up to the expectations, but surpasses it. The sad misguided conversation of two girls who are prone to believe anything is just icing on the cake.

(And (Warning: plot spoiler) good news for dog lovers, a few corgis survive along with a king charles cavalier. Good news for alien lovers, so does District 9)