Not Bad Enough: Bad Teacher

This review originally appeared on the San Francisco Appeal.

The success of "Bridesmaids"--both in terms of quality, and in the fact that it made a good amount of money--has me hopeful for the future of female-centric comedies that don't fall into the category of "rom-com." Unfortunately, the new comedy "Bad Teacher" has me equally scared for the future.

Cameron Diaz stars as Elizabeth Halsey, the titular "Bad Teacher," a hot and shallow gold-digger who gets dumped by her rich fiancee, and must return to the job she had just quit to get married: English teacher at a suburban Chicago middle school.

How she actually got a job as a teacher, being that she doesn't give a shit about learning, or kids, or really, anything but landing a rich husband, is never explained. (Which is fine. I had a hard time figuring out how half the teachers I had growing up landed their gigs too.) Once back at school, she sets her sights on nerdy substitute teacher Scott Delacorte, (Justin Timberlake), because he also happens to be the heir to a fancy watch-making family fortune. Her rival for his affection, and rival overall, is Amy Squirrel (Lucy Punch), the social studies teacher across the hall. Meanwhile, Russell (Jason Segel), the laid-back and affable gym teacher, does his best to woo Elizabeth, though she would never deign to date someone who teaches, yuck, gym.

Yes, Elizabeth is a bad teacher. She plays movies about teachers to her students, (things like "Stand and Deliver" and "Dangerous Minds"), while she sits at her desk drinking and sleeping. She smokes pot. She spits out the cookies students bring her, and embezzles money from a charity car wash so she can help pay for a new pair of tits. (The better to land that rich husband with.)

So, with the above evidence laid out, it might sound crazy when I say: Elizabeth is both awful, and not awful enough. Her behavior is bad enough to make her unlikeable, but not bad enough to be funny. I kept wanting the movie to really push her antics way past the point of excusability, or even legality, (her interactions with the students are all very chaste), but instead it plays it safe, and we're left with a self-centered character we have no investment in, be it to see her succeed or get her comeuppance.

That said, Diaz is good in the role and isn't afraid to come off ugly, in all senses of the word. Her co-stars are a mixed bag. Judy Punch is perfect as the prissy and suspicious foil, and has a moment of manic face contortions that is the best bit of physical comedy in the movie. Timberlake, on the other hand, is disappointing, especially since he's been a natural comedian on awards shows, and in his frequent "Saturday Night Live" appearances. Turns out the one-note approach to comedy that can work in a five-minute sketch doesn't come off that well in a full-length movie.

Thank goodness for the presence of Jason Segel. His role lies somewhere between supporting, and cameo, but in every scene he's in, he brings a relaxed sense of comedic timing and (possible) improvisation that results in most of the movie's only genuine laughs. If "Bad Teacher" makes enough money to warrant a sequel, I can only hope it results in something focused on him. "Good Gym Teacher" anyone?

A Waste Of Abs: Green Lantern

This review originally appeared on the San Francisco Appeal.

I'll be upfront: It wasn't until last year that I realized "Green Lantern" and "The Green Hornet" were not the same thing, so it goes without saying that I went into "Green Lantern" not knowing much about it. I knew it involved a powerful ring; I knew it was based on a DC comic book; and I was just glad to know I was going to be watching Ryan Reynolds's six pack and not Seth Rogen's attempt at a pack of any kind. (And, to make matters even more potentially confusing, I was told, before the movie began, that there's also a "Green Arrow" in the DC universe, to which all I can say is seriously??)

I contemplated boning up on "Lantern" lore by delving into Wikipedia before seeing the movie, but then decided against it, thinking perhaps going into it relatively blind, and with no expectations whatsoever, would be a better experience. This was a good choice, if only because the first 15 minutes or so of the movie is nothing but voiceover and exposition about the history of the Green Lantern Corp, and having to experience something so narratively dry more than once would have been even more tedious than sitting through the first part of the movie already is.

Having to go through it again is going to be painful, so I'll make it brief: The universe is mega huge, and full of all kinds of lifeforms. All of these races have a representative Green Lantern, a hero who protects their planets from evil with the help of powerful rings that can manifest anything a Green Lantern can imagine. Parallax, an evil force powered by fear, is making its murderous way across the galaxies, eventually killing one of the most powerful Green Lanterns. A replacement is sought on Earth, and the ring chooses Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), a cocky test pilot who appears to fit the requirement of being "fearless."

Instead of doing a somewhat conventional approach to an origin story, with the audience learning about the hero's destiny and the history behind his gift at the same time the hero does, we know everything before Hal Jordan. Choosing to open the movie this way may have made sense in the abstract--it's unconventional!--but it doesn't work in execution. We are told in narration everything that will eventually be told AGAIN to Hal Jordan as he is whisked into space after donning his magical ring. This is just boring and repetitive storytelling.

That said, the only entertaining moments in the movie are when Jordan gets sucked up to the Planet Oa, and interacts with the Green Lantern Corps. His Earth-bound moments are a little less charming, especially since he's kind of a dick. Sure, I guess introducing him as a guy who leaves a one night stand alone in his apartment because he's late for his job as a test pilot is a shorthand way of showing he doesn't fear such things as robbery, or STDs, or timeclocks. But his subsequent performance in a simulated jet dog fight proves he's more cocky asshole than fearless.

Blake Lively plays Carol Ferris, fellow pilot, up-and-coming businesswoman, and former flame, and she's fine. I guess. I mean, she's a stunner, but she's not given much to do here, aside from yelling at Hal Jordan, and being most impressed by how he can make his Green Lantern mask disappear. (She makes him do this more than once, telling him, "That's so cool!", but seems less awed by his foe-fighting feats.)

Ryan Reynolds does the best he can with the material, which is incredibly thin. I've been impressed by his comic ability more than his action hero antics in the past, and unfortunately, there's more flexing than comedy on display here. Speaking of which, why hire a guy with legendary abs if the suit he "wears" is just going to be a CG creation that could give anyone a virtual six pack?

There's an inexplicable number of good actors in this, and for the most part their talents are wasted. Angela Bassett shows up looking smart and tough, but is eventually flushed away like so much rubbish. (Literally.) Tim Robbins has white hair and is supposed to be kind of a bad guy, but his villainy isn't really defined, aside from the obvious issues he has with his son, played by Peter Sarsgaard, a nerdy scientist who is eventually infected with Parallax juice. (Side effects of Parallax Juice include Elephant Man Head; uncontrollable screaming; and sudden-appearance-of-wheelchair.)

Speaking of the Big Bad, well, he isn't particularly interesting to look at. Sometimes he has a face, and can suck the souls out of living things, leaving behind skeletal husks. But most of the time he's just a gigantic tentacled lava of dookie that too often resembles the Sandman villain in "Spiderman 3."

When a movie is this poorly plotted, the best one can hope for are outstanding visuals, and big, jaw-dropping fights and action sequences. It delivers neither, and in 3D! I found myself praying for dumb explosions and battles, but the ultimate showdown with Parallax comes too late, is completely devoid of any suspense or awe, and is utterly predictable. Hal Jordan has the power to manifest anything his mind can conceive of in a fight with the villain, and I can seriously remember only one of his conjured up weapons. (Something that looked like a Wile E. Coyote-created trebuchet.)

This failure of imagination on Hal Jordan's part is, in fact, an apt metaphor for the movie in general: Limitless budget, an established comic book hero, Ryan Reynolds's abs, and this is the best they could come up with?

Menace, Dread, And A Monkey: The Hangover 2

This review originally appeared on the San Francisco Appeal.

If you liked "The Hangover" but thought what the movie needed was sweatier actors, a bigger sense of menace and dread, and chicks with dicks, then "The Hangover 2" might be the movie for you. But the truth is, if you've seen "The Hangover" then you've also seen "The Hangover 2," because aside from the above, and the addition of a monkey, (an addition I actually applaud), they are the same movie. In fact, this feels more like a remake than a sequel.

Perhaps writer and director Todd Phillips thought the very fact that everything that happens in the first movie is repeated in the sequel is a comedic premise in and of itself. "Ha ha ha! You see? It's so ridiculous that the same debauchery and amnesia would HAPPEN AGAIN. Hilarious!"

Sorry, no.

So, this time around, Stu (Ed Helms) is the one getting married, though, of course, not to the stereotypical ball buster he was with in the first movie. His bride is a young Thai-American woman (played by Jamie Chung, who will always be that boring chick from "The Real World: San Diego" to me), and while it's possible to read some kind of disturbing stereotyping going on with that choice, it probably just exists to get the guys to Thailand.

And get to Thailand they do. Yes, all of them. Phil (Bradley Cooper) has a kid, but is still a bit of a douchebag. Doug is around as much as he was the first time, which is to say, almost not at all. (And how annoyed must actor Justin Bartha be, not getting to have any fun in either of these movies?) Even Alan (Zach Galifianakis), the nut-job responsible for their original mayhem, is asked to join them in Thailand, out of sheer pity.

After a rehearsal dinner, in which Stu's future father-in-law does not hide his contempt for his daughter's choice in life-mate, the "Wolf Pack" take to the beach for a nice, quiet bonfire and a few beers. The bride's little brother, Teddy (Mason Lee) tags along, much to the chagrin of Alan, who views Teddy as a potential threat to his bonding time...

The rest plays out as the first one did. A blurry morning after in a hotel room; someone missing; no memory of the night before; etc. etc. Instead of a baby, there is a monkey. Instead of a missing tooth, there is a tattoo. Instead of a tiger in the room, there is Chow (Ken Jeong). Just recounting these plot points is pissing me off. The sheer lack of imagination should be offensive to anyone who pays money to see this.

And sure, perhaps all this would be forgivable if the movie was actually funny. But it isn't. Instead, there is an overwhelming sense of danger and gloom that overshadows most of the fun. The action sequences aren't particularly exciting, certainly not funny, and definitely not new. Galifianakis's Alan, whose utter weirdness in the first movie was the source of a lot of laughs, is just played out in this one, and nothing he does is surprising in any way.

The goal of many sequels is to be bigger than the film that preceded it. But much of the success of "The Hangover" lay in the complete outrageousness of its comedic situations, and much like Stu in the private dance room of a Bangkok strip club, they simply blew their wad the first time around.

SFIFF: "Miss Representation" Has The Potential To Inspire

This review originally appeared on the San Francisco Appeal.

Jennifer Siebel Newsom has gotten a bit of a bad rap. In case you've forgotten (and I am sure she hopes everyone has), she ran into an Internet smackdown when she came to the defense of her (then) boyfriend, Mayor Gavin Newsom, in the comments of a post on SFist. The original post accused her of being "not a girl's kind of girl" and Siebel maintained that she was. This all branched out even further than one local blog, and before we knew it, Siebel was known as the Bumblebee. (I actually can't even fully remember how that one came about, so if anyone wants to enlighten us, please do!)*

Well, Jennifer Siebel is now Jennifer Siebel Newsom, wife of current California Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, the mother of a young daughter, with a son on the way. And it looks like she's really taken past accusations of not being "a girl's girl" to heart, directing the documentary "Miss Representation," which takes a critical look at how the media depicts and represents women and girls.

Newsom throws herself into the movie right off the bat, perhaps trying to deflect any criticism that by being a Beautiful White Woman of Privilege, she can't possibly have been negatively affected by any of this stuff. So, we see images of her looking forlornly at trees, while accounting the heartbreaks of her life, which include the death of a sister, sexual molestation, and anorexia. These are all horrible things, of course, and I suppose they do provide us with some insight into why she's taken on this subject. I just could have done without the soft focus glamour shots...

The rest of the film is pretty standard documentary filmmaking: Lots of media clips, talking heads, and statistics. There are a lot statistics thrown across the screen, and unless all the statistics come from the same source, and this source is attributed in the credits, I'd have to say these stats are basically uncited, which seems questionable to me. Not because I doubt the stats in any way, but just because it's an easy way for someone who does disagree with the film's premise to shoot down the picture as a whole. (For the record, some of the stats that stuck with me: Teens these days consume over 31 hours of television every week; John Boehner appeared on the cover of at least three national magazine covers during his first week as Speaker of the House, while Nancy Pelosi appeared on none during her entire time as Speaker; women are 51% of the population, and yet comprise only 17% of Congress.)

Where the movie shines the most is with the "talking heads," an impressive gathering of people who are almost universally enlightening, funny, and inspiring. These include Gloria Steinam, Nancy Pelosi, Condoleeza Rica, Rachel Maddow, Geena Davis, Jennifer L. Pozner, Margaret Cho, Katie Couric, Pat Mitchell, and, yes, Gavin Newsom and his piercing green eyes.

Perhaps even more inspiring, and at times, heartbreaking, are the Bay Area high schoolers who are interviewed, all of whom are incredibly bright, articulate, and much more insightful than the youth normally presented in the media. And it is in their words and experiences that we have proof of the negative effects of sexist media and culture.

You really only need to randomly turn the channel on your TV a few times before you'll probably be presented with a scantily clad woman speaking cattily about another woman. And that's most likely just Fox News! And I'm not going to feign innocence about my consumption of the junk television that is disseminating horrible representations of women. And really, I wouldn't feel any sense of loss if every one of the "Real Housewives" franchises was yanked from the screens tomorrow.

Yes, the power to change lies partly in our hands, and in the choices we make when it comes to entertainment. But even more important is forcing change at the top, where this media is created, and correcting the disparity of female representation in TV networks, advertisers, and movie studios.

"Miss Representation" is not a perfect film, but it does manage to raise some important issues in an entertaining way, and I think it has the potential to inspire. Especially now that it's gotten the blessing of perhaps the most powerful woman in media, Oprah Winfrey, on whose network the movie will premiere in October.

* I can! In a comment that followed the comment Siebel Newsom left on that SFist post you reference, "one of Jennifer Siebel's closest and oldest friends" said she "spent a childhood with (Siebel Newsom) saving bees from swimming pools." This turned into a running joke on the lengthy comment thread. I know this, yet can't remember how old my husband is. True story. -- EB

SFIFF: Bleeding Walls And Exploding Toilets In "The Selling"

This review originally appeared on the San Francisco Appeal.

"The Selling" is a horror comedy with some local ties. Director Emily Lou attended San Francisco State University, as did writer and star Gabriel Diani, and costar Etta Devine. Diani and Devine are also a comedy team with some YouTube hits under their belts. (I like the one about replacing the n-word in "Huckleberry Finn" with the word "robot.")

While these locals now call Los Angeles home, they haven't gone Hollywood in terms of budget, as "The Selling" is definitely a low-budget affair. Diani plays Richard Scarry (yes, like the children's book author), a struggling real estate agent in Overlook, California (of course) who decides to buy a sketchy house (on Elm Street, natch) with his business partner in hopes of doing a quick flip and profitable sell. Unfortunately, it turns out the house is haunted, and selling becomes a bit of a challenge. After all, in this market people are already "too scared to buy."

While the film is a horror comedy, it is much better at generating laughs than it is scares, especially if you're a fan of slapstick. But ghostly apparitions, bleeding walls, and exploding toilet effects are all handled well, considering the budget. The majority of the cast are not well known, aside from Barry Bostwick, who has a small part as a priest brought in to "clean" the house. ("Buffy the Vampire Slayer" fans will also recognize the Mayor in a brief cameo.)

Ultimately, I think "The Selling" might have worked better as a short film, as towards its end, it begins to lose some steam, and jokes and scares begin to repeat themselves. Still, it's not a bad entry into the comedic horror genre, and I look forward to seeing more from these SFSU grads.