Richard Kuklinski has some serious anger management issues. He rarely smiles and when he does all you get out of him is this intimidating thin-lipped expression. His body is always tense; he clenches and unclenches his fists constantly. His eyes are full of rage.
Occasionally, he hits the walls of his house while muttering, “I’m sorry.” Fortunately, he has found an outlet for his rage as a hired killer for the mob. At least that’s the picture director Ariel Vromen and co-scriptwriter Morgan Land paint of the man who claimed to have killed more than 100 people after his arrest in 1986 in “The Iceman”.
We first meet Kuklinski (Michael Shannon) in 1964 at a diner in New Jersey on his first date with future wife Deborah (Winona Ryder). He is uncomfortable, shy. So is she. He lies about his job, claiming that he works for an animation studio when in fact he dubs sound for porn movies distributed by local mobster and Gambino man Roy Demeo (Ray Liotta). Days later, after a pool game at a local dive, Kuklinski keeps his anger in check when a man insults him and Deborah. But not for long: Kuklinski sneaks behind the man as he sits in his car and slashes his throat.
Unhappy with a late delivery, Demeo and his goons try to intimidate Kuklinski, but his cold, icy stare and take no bullshit demeanor impresses Demeo. So, after testing Kuklinski, Demeo hires him as his personal executioner with just one condition: that he work for no else but Demeo. Kuklinski marries Deborah and begins to live a double life: a brutal killer by day —he’s told Deborah that he’s found a job as a currency trader in Wall Street— and family man at night.
Life is good until Josh (David Schwimmer, unrecognizable behind a dark mustache and an equally dark pony tail), Demeo’s right-hand man, kills two Latino drug dealers pissing off the Cuban mafia and the Gambino family. Kuklinski is de-commissioned by Demeo after letting a witness to one of his killings go free. Unemployment does not suit Kuklinski and after much angry moping he soon joins forces with fellow contract killer Robert Pronge a.k.a. Mr. Freezy (played by Captain America himself, Chris Evans) who soon counsels his partner on the most appropriate ways of disposing of a body (freezing them to erase any evidence as to when the deed was done).
The above synopsis would lead you to believe that “The Iceman” is a fascinating study on the banality of evil. However, Vromen’s and Land’s episodic script undermines the film. It has an automatic feel to it, a step-by-step retelling of the story that feels documentary-like without providing any insights into the time, the place and the personalities. Vromen and Land offer only two glimpses into Kuklinski’s past: when he visits his brother in jail (imprisoned for having killed a 12-year old girl) and a flashback to his father violently punishing him in their childhood’s home bathroom. While I can appreciate Vromen’s wish to not weigh down the story with cheap psychologizing, surely there is much more to this man, his almost record-breaking homicidal spree, and his desire to build a picture perfect family than a mere flashback.
It falls on Michael Shannon’s mighty shoulders to hold this icy film together. His is the portrait of the family man as monster. That Shannon can express so much with the little that he is given by the script says a lot about an actor who has been flying under the radar for awhile while conquering critics and public with one beautifully modulated performance after another.
As Pronge, Evans is quite an affable killer, a family man like Kuklinski but far more pragmatic than his partner. Evans turns Pronge into a far more interesting character than Kuklinski even when the film’s episodic structure provides very little backstory to the character.
Kuklinski’s rise and fall story arc, as depicted here, is reminiscent of Henry Hill’s in Marton Scorsese’s mob classic “Goodfellas” and Irish mobster Danny Green in Jonathan Hensleigh’s far superior “Kill the Irishman.” Both films get under their characters’ skin and submerge us in a milieu both exhilarating and deadly. “The Iceman” never reaches the giddy heights of those two films. It keeps us at a distance, leaving us as apathetic to the proceedings as its ice-cold killer.
Alejandro A. Riera writes about culture (Latino and non-Latino alike) in his culture bodega blog.
I went to see the special screening of “Star Trek: Into Darkness” and as a “Trekkie” (meaning a Star Trek fan who is quite comfortable with the characters and history), I was expecting a lot. I grew up watching the reruns of the original cast on tv and saw the movies made during the 1980′s. So do you need to know all the nostalgia and background to enjoy this movie? Not necessarily, but if you do, you will enjoy it that much more.
Captain Kirk, in his typical fashion, bends the rules to his betterment by saving Spock’s life during an exploratory mission. He is reprimanded, costing him the Enterprise and his friendship with his Vulcan pal. Enter the mysterious Starfleet rogue John Harrison, whose vendetta against Starfleet leads to a series of terrorist attacks with consequences that directly impact Kirk. A Starfleet Admiral then sends the Enterprise crew on a mission to track down and kill Harrison, which unveils an even greater mystery than Kirk or Spock could have imagined.
As you watch the movie, you will be amazed at the sheer scope and size of the movie sets that the director, J.J. Abrams, takes the movie goer on. You will get absorbed by the spaceship battles that take place, as well as marvel at the size of Starfleet headquarters home base. Mr. Abrams put as much attention to detail in the sets, locations, and special effects so much so that when a ship crash lands in San Francisco Bay, you feel immersed in it.
So bottom line, is the movie worth it? YES! A big thumbs up to engaging the movie goer into a universe well known by many a fan and offering a fresh take on this very popular movie franchise. Make sure you get your popcorn and go to the restroom before the movie starts. Because once it does, it will pull you into their universe until the very end.
How do the Tampa Bay Rays manage to compete year after year with the big-budget beasts of the American League East? Two words: Joe Maddon.
The club’s skipper consistently finds innovative ways to keep the small-market franchise loose — from bringing a penguin into the clubhouse earlier this season to conducting themed dress-up road trips. The manager’s latest move? Bringing a live Dominican merengue band into the locker room before Tuesday night’s game with the Boston Red Sox.
Tampa’s own Sol Caribe, a four-piece group, provided the pregame entertainment. Reliever Joel Peralta danced with a female singer while outfielder Matt Joyce looked on in the background with approval. And there was more fun too. Closer Fernando Rodney — who introduced us to the “magic plantain” during the World Baseball Classic in March — organized bunches of the banana-like fruit to hang above several of his teammates’ stalls.
Thank you to ’4u6manish’ for sharing the content.
We all waited for the announcement of the Facebook phone, or also known as the HTC First, would be released. Once it was announced, we were underwhelmed. I wonder how many people out there has purchased it or is considering it. Read this if you are considering to get the phone.
HTC First was the first phone to incorporate Facebook Home completely. Here are some numbers that you might want to consider when you are evaluating your phone choices. For example, AT&T could be selling this device at 0.99 cents and the number of devices could be a very low number, somewhere in the realm of 15,000. Which if you compare that to your iPhones, Androids and other devices, they are not even close.
Another thing to consider is that the Facebook Home app can be downloaded on your Android phone and it is not one of the most downloaded apps. The app has a 2-star rating and it only has one millon downloads since it was released last month. Facebook will be releasing an update to the app and hopefully that will kick start more downloads with their app. These upgrades are going to make the app less in your face. So that could be a good thing.
A large part of the people who purchased the device could be the people that really wanted their Facebook phone and ran to their local cell phone store or were online getting it. Now with these numbers, maybe some people are regretting getting the phone. Facebook execs have declined to say how many Home users they have. They did mention that the users of Home use their Facebook account 25% more than previously.
iOS does have limited functionality with Home. They do have the chat heads in the Facebook app for iOS. They have talked about incorporating more functions to the app. But after hearing the news, Apple might have to reconsider that. So we will see what happens with that HTC First and Facebook.
F. Scott Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby” has long taunted filmmakers with its deceitfully simple yet subtle prose. I am not familiar with the 1949 film noir adaptation starring Alan Ladd much less with the 2000 made-for-cable one starring Toby Stephens. However, I did sit through the 1974 version directed by Jack Clayton and starring Robert Redford and Mia Farrow for a film class in college right after reading Fitzgerald’s masterpiece. To this day it stands as a classic textbook example of what not to do when adapting a work of literature to another medium. Sometimes a book IS better than the movie and should be left well enough alone.
So one could hardly blame Australian director Baz Luhrmann for wanting to try his hand at tackling this beast. He brings to the table his usual carnavalesque visual flair as well as a modern score featuring songs produced by Jay-Z and performed by the likes of Beyoncé and Fergie. He bludgeons you with the book’s metaphors over and over (in particular an oculist sign to which he keeps coming back as leitmotif) while creating a rather anachronistic Manhattan through fuzzy digital effects delivered in unnecessary 3-D. It fails to establish a connection between the excesses Fitzgerald depicted so well in the novel and the excesses that led to our current economic debacle. And yet, it is a far better film than the Redford fiasco, far better than it deserves to be once Luhrmann gets the initial bacchanalia out of the way.
As in the novel, the film is narrated by Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), a young Yale graduate just arrived to 1920s New York, eager to be part of the city’s adrenaline-driven world of finance. He moves to a small house in Long Island, right across the bay from his cousin Daisy’s (Carey Mulligan) and husband and fellow Yale graduate Tom Buchanan’s (Joel Edgerton) mansion, and next door to the mysterious Jay Gatsby’s residence.
One day, Nick receives a personal invitation from Gatsby to attend one of his extravagant parties. Nick is literally swept away by the vibrant, ludicrous, over-the-top energy of the entire affair. Everyone’s there: financiers, government officials, gangsters and wannabes. Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio) finally makes his entrance, accompanied by Gershwin’s “Rhapsody in Blue” while fireworks explode in the background.
It turns out that Gatsby has an ulterior motive for making Nick’s acquaintance: he wants Nick to arrange a lunch with Daisy with whom he lived a passionate romance before he was shipped off to war and Daisy married Tom. “You can’t repeat the past,” Nick warns him. Gatsby, who has built his fortune out of nowhere, won’t accept his friend’s advice. Gatsby’s obscure object of desire soon proves his undoing.
Luhrmann and co-scriptwriter Craig Pearce have turned Nick into a Fitzgerald-like character recovering from morbid alcoholism in a sanatorium. His doctor has encouraged him to write down the events that led to his breakdown. And so, instead of the reflections of a man for whom time and distance has given him a clear perspective of the era and the people he met, we have now a man who feverishly writes down everything during the course of an evening, sentences floating in the screen, drifting towards the audience as we hear his redundant voice-over narration. Yet, the conceit works, no matter how visually overblown it may seem.
The fraternal bond between Gatsby and Nick is far more interesting, far more touching, than the romance between Gatsby and Daisy. So much does the film focus in this friendship that narrative strands that were equally important in the book (particularly Tom’s affair with Myrtle Wilson) feel ephemeral, insubstantial, while far more interesting characters, like the social climber Jordan Baker (the stunning Elizabeth Debicki), are left adrift. Luhrmann and Pearce have turned “The Great Gatsby” into “The Great Bromance”.
As underplayed by Carey Mulligan, Daisy is a cipher, a woman torn between two men, willing to live up to the image each has of her. However, Mulligan’s performance is so lifeless you wonder what both Tom and Gatsby saw in her, besides social status and beauty. Debicki, on the other hand, lightens up the screen in her brief appearances: here’s a woman whose beauty, arrogance and sense of entitlement stand for the times she lives in, and who could very well fit in our contemporary “me first” culture.
DiCaprio’s take on Gatsby is far more enigmatic, complex and self-assured than Redford’s. DiCaprio balances his character’s ruthlessness and mysteriousness with a childlike innocence that borders on naïveté. It’s a role that combines his past post-“Titanic” performances with old-fashioned Hollywood glamour. He is the bond that ties this film together, pulling it from the edge of the abyss.
Alejandro A. Riera writes about culture (Latino and non-Latino alike) in his culture bodega blog.
Soldier Field 1410 South Museum Campus Drive
Soldier Field 1410 South Museum Campus Drive