ILNews

Hammerle On … '3 Days to Kill' and 'Non-Stop'

Robert Hammerle
March 12, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

bob hammerle movie reviewsYears ago, Indianapolis’ late, great criminal defense lawyer Owen Mullin brought me on board to help him with trials as he aged. Spending a lot of time with him, he would frequently be approached by other lawyers and asked, “Ownie, when are you going to quit this business?” to which Mr. Mullin responded, “You don’t quit the practice of law, it quits you.”

Whether that rule actually has some merit to the practice of criminal law, it definitely does not apply to the cinema. Both Kevin Costner and Liam Neeson proved that with their recent films, “3 Days to Kill” and “Non-Stop.” Though both films have fundamentally ludicrous concepts, these guys are living proof that great acting can overcome flaws in any script.

While Costner may be 59 and Neeson is 61, both are mean as a snake. Costner’s CIA hitman may be dying from brain cancer, but his assassin abilities make him look like James Bond on Social Security.

Neeson is an alcoholic air marshal who is dancing on the edge of a psychotic breakdown. On the other hand, when on a transatlantic flight to London, he literally kicks the living crap out of many unfortunate innocent passengers as he tries to locate a terrorist threatening to blow everyone into kingdom come. You keep waiting for him to mumble, “Sorry, buddy, I hope your scars heal.”hammerle-actionfilms.jpg

“3 Days to Kill” was easier to take for me given that it involved moments of genuinely amusing interaction between Costner’s character and a family whom he walked away from years earlier. Hailee Steinfeld is truly wonderful as a teenage girl who will only address her missing father by his first name.

What makes the film fun is the gradual bridge built between father and daughter, frequently resulting in cell phone calls that interrupt dad during a brutal interrogation of a vicious suspect. Wait for the moment where Costner hands the phone to a petrified, Italian terrorist target, forcing him to converse with Steinfeld’s character to help her make some decent pasta. At all times Steinfeld reminds everyone of her brilliant performance in the remake of “True Grit” (2010).

Finally, you are not likely to forget the stunning performance by Amber Heard, here playing Costner’s extraordinarily hot CIA boss. The scene where she is straddling him in her 5-inch heels as he lays wounded on the pavement, wearing a tight, short dress with black seams running up the back of her nylons is as sexually unnerving as when Margot Robbie stuck her high heel into Leonardo DiCaprio’s forehead as they both were on the floor in “The Wolf of Wall Street.

Along that same line, Neeson embraces his role as a deranged air marshal with the same enthusiasm that he brought to “The Grey” (2011) and the regrettable “Taken” films (2008 and 2012). He is helped immensely by the talented Julianne Moore, here playing a passenger sitting next to him on the plane whose life is nearly as pathetic as his.

Costner kills because that is his job, and Neeson dismisses constitutional rights as if they are a regrettable aggravation. In the end, you end up liking Costner’s agent because he is trying to connect with a lost life, while you get the feeling that Neeson’s humorless character could only find future employment working for Russian President Putin in Crimea.

2014 Academy Awards

If you followed my Oscar predictions, I can only hope that you did not put good money on them. While I hit more than I missed, the failure of “American Hustle” to get one blasted award was profoundly disappointing.

On the other hand, unlike 2012, I couldn’t disagree with any of the winners. For a whole host of reasons, Best Picture winner “12 Years a Slave” was a powerful film. Its only real handicap dealt with the fact that it revealed a moment in American history that we would rather forget, and as a result it was a mesmerizing film that was anything but entertaining.

Lupita Nyong’o deserved her Supporting Actress Oscar, and her acceptance speech was fabulous. As for my pick of June Squibb from “Nebraska,” I once again followed my heart instead of my head. How could I not root for an 84-year-old woman?

Cate Blanchett and Jared Leto were easy picks in their categories, and their acceptance speeches were also brilliant. And though Matthew McConaughey won out over Chiwetel Ejiofor, his performance will justifiably be remembered for a very long time.hammerle-oscars.jpg

The one thing that I did accurately predict was that “Gravity” would dominate in the production areas. While I loved that film, I had the good fortune of seeing it at the IMAX in 3-D. Ironically, I just don’t know how well it can play at home no matter how large your TV screen may be.

Two final observations. It remains hard to understand how a film like “American Hustle” could be left out in the cold despite the fact that all of its actors were nominated as well as director David O. Russell. Good grief, I loudly applauded both “12 Years a Slave” and “Dallas Buyers Club.” However, the box office for “American Hustle” more than doubled the combined total of both of them, and Hollywood can’t simply ignore the opinion of those who treasure the movie experience.

Lastly, the Friday before the Oscars I received a cryptic email from my youngest sister in southern Indiana. Married with two children, she said the following: “Don’t tell my 14-year-old daughter, but I would have sex with Jared Leto any place at any time.” I sent her an email in response that read, “Don’t tell your 14-year-old daughter this either, but so would I!”

And before finding fault with me or my twisted sister, what if all you could remember of the Oscars was the completely smashed Liza Minnelli or the surgically scarred Kim Novak? Like it or not, sometimes an idiotic imagination is far superior to reality.•

__________

Robert Hammerle practices criminal law in Indianapolis. When he is not in the courtroom or working diligently in his Pennsylvania Street office, Bob can likely be found at one of his favorite movie theaters watching and preparing to review the latest films. To read more of his reviews, visit www.bigmouthbobs.com. The opinions expressed are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

  2. Freedom as granted in the Constitution cannot be summarily disallowed without Due Process. Unable to to to the gym, church, bowling alley? What is this 1984 level nonsense? Congrats to Brian for having the courage to say that this was enough! and Congrats to the ACLU on the win!

  3. America's hyper-phobia about convicted sex offenders must end! Politicians must stop pandering to knee-jerk public hysteria. And the public needs to learn the facts. Research by the California Sex Offender Management Board as shown a recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders of less than 1%. Less than 1%! Furthermore, research shows that by year 17 after their conviction, a convicted sex offender is no more likely to commit a new sex offense than any other member of the public. Put away your torches and pitchforks. Get the facts. Stop hysteria.

  4. He was convicted 23 years ago. How old was he then? He probably was a juvenile. People do stupid things, especially before their brain is fully developed. Why are we continuing to punish him in 2016? If he hasn't re-offended by now, it's very, very unlikely he ever will. He paid for his mistake sufficiently. Let him live his life in peace.

  5. This year, Notre Dame actually enrolled an equal amount of male and female students.

ADVERTISEMENT