Last summer, Clint Eastwood's generally fun-less musical Jersey Boys made its mark. This time, he's got the true life story American Sniper to tell. It's quite better than Jersey Boys but is it a masterpiece?
The American Sniper was Chris Kyle (Bradley Cooper), a rodeo star turned Navy Seal. He accumulated 160 confirmed kills on his four tour of duties which made him the deadliest shot in US military history. He wrote a memoir that writer Jason Hall adapted into this film's screenplay.
And he was killed by an unstable fellow veteran.
Oh yes, there's more to this movie.
See Chris meet and marry Taya (Sienna Miller). See their family grow. See Chris deploy to Iraq in service of his country. See Chris do battle against Al-Qaeda's own deadliest shot Mustafa (Sammy Sheik). See Chris struggle a bit against PTSD.
The film neither condemns nor praises Kyle or the Iraq war. It just shows events in Kyle's life. And then it abruptly ends. Some might say it has no thesis, but I think "sense of duty" suits it well. Kyle eventually admits to a psychologist he wishes he saved more servicemen. In other words, "If I don't do it, who will?" It's a compelling theme but the film's distant tone keeps it from resonating.
Three of its six Oscar nominations went to the film's editors and sound designers. And with good reason. Their work is inseparable in portraying the dangers of war. It does especially well in portraying the misery of PTSD.
American Sniper focuses mainly on the "Legend" and not enough on the man behind the "Legend." I'm sure it's possible to do that without offending anyone on the right or left. I found it an OK war film overall. But at least it was the best of the three war films 2014 unveiled.
About Me
- Jethrotcat
- This is the blog where I talk about the latest movies I've seen. These are my two Schnauzers, Rufus (left) and Marley (right, RIP). As of now, the Double Hollywood Strikes are officially over. May the next strikes not last as long as these ones did.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Foxcatcher
The dark wrestling drama Foxcatcher is another real life story told by director Bennett Miller. Don't be surprised if I allude to the endgame.
In 1984, brothers Mark (Channing Tatum) and Dave Schultz (Mark Ruffalo) both won Olympic gold for wrestling in Los Angeles. Three years later, Mark is an aimless young man while Dave is a successful high school coach and family man. They've been close since childhood but Mark feels overshadowed by Dave's success. Mark gets a phone call from a representative of a certain John E. Du Pont.
Du Pont (Steve Carrell) is the reclusive heir of his family's chemical company. He invites Mark over to his family's Pennsylvania estate Foxcatcher Farm. Du Pont is a huge wrestling fan and wants to sponsor the next U.S. Olympic wrestling team. Mark accepts the offer and joins Du Pont at Foxcatcher. Dave eventually joins the team as well. Meanwhile, the initially affable Du Pont devolves into an unstable control freak.
Steve Carrell certainly acts like a creepy old man. He's generous to his would-be protege at first. But that disappears when things don't go his way. His agitation is so subdued that you'd think he'd kill someone before the moment he does. The now Oscar-nominated makeup work lets Carrell look creepy as well.
Mark Ruffalo is even more unrecognizable as the bearded, balding Dave. He's also a likable family man and a good voice of reason. That makes the ending more painful to watch.
Channing Tatum perfectly plays Mark as the deconstructed idealist. All he wants is to do the best he can for himself and country. In one scene, he argues with his sister-in-law Nancy (Sienna Miller) when she doesn't greet Du Pont like royalty. It also leads him to trust in Du Pont's increasingly poor judgement. We might want Mark to succeed but not at a terrible cost.
The dark outcome of Foxcatcher might put off casual viewers. I found it an interesting morality play of the dangers of greed and idealism. So while tragic, the ending gives you a lot to think about.
In 1984, brothers Mark (Channing Tatum) and Dave Schultz (Mark Ruffalo) both won Olympic gold for wrestling in Los Angeles. Three years later, Mark is an aimless young man while Dave is a successful high school coach and family man. They've been close since childhood but Mark feels overshadowed by Dave's success. Mark gets a phone call from a representative of a certain John E. Du Pont.
Du Pont (Steve Carrell) is the reclusive heir of his family's chemical company. He invites Mark over to his family's Pennsylvania estate Foxcatcher Farm. Du Pont is a huge wrestling fan and wants to sponsor the next U.S. Olympic wrestling team. Mark accepts the offer and joins Du Pont at Foxcatcher. Dave eventually joins the team as well. Meanwhile, the initially affable Du Pont devolves into an unstable control freak.
Steve Carrell certainly acts like a creepy old man. He's generous to his would-be protege at first. But that disappears when things don't go his way. His agitation is so subdued that you'd think he'd kill someone before the moment he does. The now Oscar-nominated makeup work lets Carrell look creepy as well.
Mark Ruffalo is even more unrecognizable as the bearded, balding Dave. He's also a likable family man and a good voice of reason. That makes the ending more painful to watch.
Channing Tatum perfectly plays Mark as the deconstructed idealist. All he wants is to do the best he can for himself and country. In one scene, he argues with his sister-in-law Nancy (Sienna Miller) when she doesn't greet Du Pont like royalty. It also leads him to trust in Du Pont's increasingly poor judgement. We might want Mark to succeed but not at a terrible cost.
The dark outcome of Foxcatcher might put off casual viewers. I found it an interesting morality play of the dangers of greed and idealism. So while tragic, the ending gives you a lot to think about.
Monday, January 19, 2015
Paddington
Paddington, the most famous literary immigrant bear, has a movie to call his own. Movie audiences now have the first great family film of the year.
The movie opens with a newsreel of sorts by explorer Montgomery Clyde. Clyde tells about his time in "darkest Peru." There, he met a family of talking bears who just love some marmalade. He tells them that they're always welcome to visit London.
Years later, the bears Lucy (Imelda Staunton) and Pastuzo (Michael Gambon) live out their golden years together. Their nephew (Ben Whishaw, who replaced Colin Firth last summer) also lives with them. An Earthquake strikes their home and kills Pastuzo. Aunt Lucy heads off to a retirement home for bears. Her nephew stows away on the first freighter to London.
He winds up in Paddington Station. The Brown family gives him a new home and name. Mrs. Brown (Sally Hawkins) loves Paddington's company but Mr. Brown (Hugh Bonneville) wants him out. Paddington proves a good companion to the Brown children, Judy and Jonathan. The wicked museum taxidermist Millicent (Nicole Kidman) wants Paddington for her collection.
It's not as stupid as the advertisements suggest. Paddington's heavily-advertised bathroom trouble is one scene out of many. The rest of it is delightfully deadpan (Mr. Brown's long but unpleasing euphemism for an orphanage) and punny (a gag with a Chihuahua). Julie Walters provides great comic relief as the eccentric Mrs. Bird. It gets serious when it needs to be and it's honest when it does.
Writer/Director Paul King shows what $55 million can create. Paddington is a well-animated CGI creation. He feels real even if you can tell he isn't. There's an inventive flashback scene set aboard a miniature train. The best effect depicts the Brown household as a dollhouse. The film's colorful production design brings out the best in London.
Paddington is a film kids and adults are sure to love together. Though be warned that some of it can upset the youngest of filmgoers. Still, its good humor makes it a fine introduction to Michael Bond's most famous creation.
The movie opens with a newsreel of sorts by explorer Montgomery Clyde. Clyde tells about his time in "darkest Peru." There, he met a family of talking bears who just love some marmalade. He tells them that they're always welcome to visit London.
Years later, the bears Lucy (Imelda Staunton) and Pastuzo (Michael Gambon) live out their golden years together. Their nephew (Ben Whishaw, who replaced Colin Firth last summer) also lives with them. An Earthquake strikes their home and kills Pastuzo. Aunt Lucy heads off to a retirement home for bears. Her nephew stows away on the first freighter to London.
He winds up in Paddington Station. The Brown family gives him a new home and name. Mrs. Brown (Sally Hawkins) loves Paddington's company but Mr. Brown (Hugh Bonneville) wants him out. Paddington proves a good companion to the Brown children, Judy and Jonathan. The wicked museum taxidermist Millicent (Nicole Kidman) wants Paddington for her collection.
It's not as stupid as the advertisements suggest. Paddington's heavily-advertised bathroom trouble is one scene out of many. The rest of it is delightfully deadpan (Mr. Brown's long but unpleasing euphemism for an orphanage) and punny (a gag with a Chihuahua). Julie Walters provides great comic relief as the eccentric Mrs. Bird. It gets serious when it needs to be and it's honest when it does.
Writer/Director Paul King shows what $55 million can create. Paddington is a well-animated CGI creation. He feels real even if you can tell he isn't. There's an inventive flashback scene set aboard a miniature train. The best effect depicts the Brown household as a dollhouse. The film's colorful production design brings out the best in London.
Paddington is a film kids and adults are sure to love together. Though be warned that some of it can upset the youngest of filmgoers. Still, its good humor makes it a fine introduction to Michael Bond's most famous creation.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Big Eyes
Big Eyes is, without a doubt, director Tim Burton's most subdued film in years. Yes, subdued. It's got bright primaries but his gothic stylings aren't there. It's all the more impressive for it.
In 1958, housewife Margaret Ulbrich (Amy Adams) leaves her husband Frank and begins life anew in San Francisco. She has no job experience but a lot of paintings. These paintings are of children and animals with big puppy dog eyes. One day, Margaret sells her work at an outdoor art gallery. That's when fellow artist Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz) shows up. They fall for each other right away.
Walter sells Margaret's paintings at a nightclub. Walter takes advantage of a few misunderstandings and starts taking credit for Margaret's work. He convinces her to go along with it despite her misgivings. Eventually, copies of Walter-but-really-Margaret's work is mass produced. Margaret feels powerless to stop Walter's misdeeds. She'll have to act as Walter's ego grows out of control.
As I said, the film emphasizes bright primaries. It has the brightest shades of red, green and blue possible. It easily evokes the suburbs of Burton's Edward Scissorhands. It also looked like a living painting at times.
The film is about Margaret learning to assert herself in life and art. As portrayed by Amy Adams, her arc is a compelling story. As Walter, Waltz is slick and charming as if to say "obvious con artist alert." He's scary once he drops the nice act. He's amusing again once we understand him as a pathetic loser. Among the supporting cast, James Saito stands out as the Judge of the Keanes' climactic trial who won't tolerate the family circus.
The music also scores good points here. Danny Elfman's emotive score is another memorable score. Singer-Songwriter Lana Del Ray has two songs which include a mesmerizing title track. It's also a great lyrical description of the story. Listen to it and you'll hear what I mean.
Those who can't stand Burton's usual styling may find Big Eyes more to their liking. Its true-life story isn't drowned out by the production design. It's a story you'll be invested in from beginning to end. When you look into the story, you're sure to find many interesting overlaps.
In 1958, housewife Margaret Ulbrich (Amy Adams) leaves her husband Frank and begins life anew in San Francisco. She has no job experience but a lot of paintings. These paintings are of children and animals with big puppy dog eyes. One day, Margaret sells her work at an outdoor art gallery. That's when fellow artist Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz) shows up. They fall for each other right away.
Walter sells Margaret's paintings at a nightclub. Walter takes advantage of a few misunderstandings and starts taking credit for Margaret's work. He convinces her to go along with it despite her misgivings. Eventually, copies of Walter-but-really-Margaret's work is mass produced. Margaret feels powerless to stop Walter's misdeeds. She'll have to act as Walter's ego grows out of control.
As I said, the film emphasizes bright primaries. It has the brightest shades of red, green and blue possible. It easily evokes the suburbs of Burton's Edward Scissorhands. It also looked like a living painting at times.
The film is about Margaret learning to assert herself in life and art. As portrayed by Amy Adams, her arc is a compelling story. As Walter, Waltz is slick and charming as if to say "obvious con artist alert." He's scary once he drops the nice act. He's amusing again once we understand him as a pathetic loser. Among the supporting cast, James Saito stands out as the Judge of the Keanes' climactic trial who won't tolerate the family circus.
The music also scores good points here. Danny Elfman's emotive score is another memorable score. Singer-Songwriter Lana Del Ray has two songs which include a mesmerizing title track. It's also a great lyrical description of the story. Listen to it and you'll hear what I mean.
Those who can't stand Burton's usual styling may find Big Eyes more to their liking. Its true-life story isn't drowned out by the production design. It's a story you'll be invested in from beginning to end. When you look into the story, you're sure to find many interesting overlaps.
The Imitation Game
The Imitation Game opens with an effective fourth-wall breaking narration. It's addressed to a police officer, but it may as well address the moviegoers in the audience. "Are you paying attention?" the narrator asks. "If you are not listening carefully, you will miss things. Important things. If you cannot commit to this, then please leave the room."
Writer Graham Moore's foresight works. The screenplay might throw off people as it goes between three different time periods. But if you heed the advice and pay attention, you'll be amazed as the relevance of certain plot points is clarified.
Now I have to get to the movie.
1939-1945. War is declared. Prof. Alan Turing (Benedict Cumberbatch) is summoned to Bletchley Park for a secret mission. The British Army has an Enigma code machine in its possession. Alan's mission is to lead a team to crack the Nazi's code so the Army can get the drop on them. Alan works to create a machine to do the work, the ancestor of the modern Computer.
One of the team is Joan Clarke (Keira Knightley), who Turing likes but not in that way...
1920's. Young Alan is picked on by the older boys at Sherbone School. Christopher Morcrom is Alan's only friend and secret crush. But his fondness for Christopher was cut short...
1953. Alan is arrested for the crime of homosexuality (termed "Gross indecency" by the court). The government he dutifully served gives him a dreadful choice...
As Turing, Cumberbatch convincingly plays a repressed genius. He might seem arrogant, but he's someone who can't properly express himself. His inner torment is easily understandable. He'll surely have the audience's support as Cdr. Denniston (Charles Dance) threatens him with unemployment.
The crew assembled by director Morten Tyldum is also great. Composer Alexandre Desplat has another fine score to his name. Editor William Goldenberg keeps it moving as the Nazis and strict officials threaten Alan's progress. Cinematographer Oscar Faura provides subdued imagery to suit the thriller mood. And the sets and costumes evoke the time periods in style.
The Imitation Game does a great job telling a story not many have heard. Whatever Oscar cliches it may have, they didn't bother me as the story kept me interested throughout.
And speaking of Oscars, it's a few hours till the nominations announcement. Expect this to show up at least a few times. It earns its praise.
Writer Graham Moore's foresight works. The screenplay might throw off people as it goes between three different time periods. But if you heed the advice and pay attention, you'll be amazed as the relevance of certain plot points is clarified.
Now I have to get to the movie.
1939-1945. War is declared. Prof. Alan Turing (Benedict Cumberbatch) is summoned to Bletchley Park for a secret mission. The British Army has an Enigma code machine in its possession. Alan's mission is to lead a team to crack the Nazi's code so the Army can get the drop on them. Alan works to create a machine to do the work, the ancestor of the modern Computer.
One of the team is Joan Clarke (Keira Knightley), who Turing likes but not in that way...
1920's. Young Alan is picked on by the older boys at Sherbone School. Christopher Morcrom is Alan's only friend and secret crush. But his fondness for Christopher was cut short...
1953. Alan is arrested for the crime of homosexuality (termed "Gross indecency" by the court). The government he dutifully served gives him a dreadful choice...
As Turing, Cumberbatch convincingly plays a repressed genius. He might seem arrogant, but he's someone who can't properly express himself. His inner torment is easily understandable. He'll surely have the audience's support as Cdr. Denniston (Charles Dance) threatens him with unemployment.
The crew assembled by director Morten Tyldum is also great. Composer Alexandre Desplat has another fine score to his name. Editor William Goldenberg keeps it moving as the Nazis and strict officials threaten Alan's progress. Cinematographer Oscar Faura provides subdued imagery to suit the thriller mood. And the sets and costumes evoke the time periods in style.
The Imitation Game does a great job telling a story not many have heard. Whatever Oscar cliches it may have, they didn't bother me as the story kept me interested throughout.
And speaking of Oscars, it's a few hours till the nominations announcement. Expect this to show up at least a few times. It earns its praise.
Friday, January 9, 2015
Selma
Selma is about yesterday today. One can't help see this movie without thinking of certain modern mass demonstrations today. I know as I witnessed one such mass demonstration during my latest excursion to San Francisco.
Selma opens with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (David Oyelowo) accepting his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo. Back home, he tries to convince President Johnson (Tom Wilkinson) to pass pivotal legislation guaranteeing the black vote. But Johnson wants to put it off until whenever. So King and his associates set their sights on Selma. From there, they and their supporters will march to Montgomery to demand equality.
The mission isn't easy. Racist cops and citizens will do anything to uphold their values. King's life unravels as spies reveal his secrets. Supporters start to wonder if the cause is worth it. The movement needs a leader and King is that leader. But King needs to persuade President Johnson to act if it's to succeed.
Its creative team is a great one. The names to remember the most are writer Paul Webb, director Ava DuVernay, cinematographer Bradford Young and editor Spencer Averick. Their movie's tone lets the audience understand the cruelty of injustice for themselves. Its depiction of police brutality is sure to provoke moral outrage in any viewer. A certain act in the opening is far too easy to see coming and its depiction is disturbing. The film surely succeeds in depicting a tough time in American history.
Its ensemble is made of great actors. You'll think of them as characters and not as actors on screen. Oywelo, as King, perfectly humanizes the legendary man. Kudos to the makeup team for making Oyewelo into nothing short of a dead-ringer to King. Wilkinson, as Johnson, antagonizes King, but is more exhausted by other matters than stubborn. Carmen Ejogo, as Coretta Scott King, has a test of faith that earns the audience's empathy.
Selma is subdued for an "Oscar movie." And that's a good thing. Its manner of story-telling gets its message across in its 127 minute run-time. That by itself is praise worthy.
Selma opens with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (David Oyelowo) accepting his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo. Back home, he tries to convince President Johnson (Tom Wilkinson) to pass pivotal legislation guaranteeing the black vote. But Johnson wants to put it off until whenever. So King and his associates set their sights on Selma. From there, they and their supporters will march to Montgomery to demand equality.
The mission isn't easy. Racist cops and citizens will do anything to uphold their values. King's life unravels as spies reveal his secrets. Supporters start to wonder if the cause is worth it. The movement needs a leader and King is that leader. But King needs to persuade President Johnson to act if it's to succeed.
Its creative team is a great one. The names to remember the most are writer Paul Webb, director Ava DuVernay, cinematographer Bradford Young and editor Spencer Averick. Their movie's tone lets the audience understand the cruelty of injustice for themselves. Its depiction of police brutality is sure to provoke moral outrage in any viewer. A certain act in the opening is far too easy to see coming and its depiction is disturbing. The film surely succeeds in depicting a tough time in American history.
Its ensemble is made of great actors. You'll think of them as characters and not as actors on screen. Oywelo, as King, perfectly humanizes the legendary man. Kudos to the makeup team for making Oyewelo into nothing short of a dead-ringer to King. Wilkinson, as Johnson, antagonizes King, but is more exhausted by other matters than stubborn. Carmen Ejogo, as Coretta Scott King, has a test of faith that earns the audience's empathy.
Selma is subdued for an "Oscar movie." And that's a good thing. Its manner of story-telling gets its message across in its 127 minute run-time. That by itself is praise worthy.
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Unbroken
Olympic athlete and war survivor Louis Zamperini's long life ended peacefully on July 2nd, 2014. Before then, Laura Hillenbrand documented said epic life in her 2010 book, Unbroken. That book is now the basis of Angelina Jolie's 2nd film as director, also titled Unbroken.
Zampeirini (Jack O'Connell) grew up the son of Italian immigrants. After a childhood of mischief making, his brother Pete (Alex Russell) inspired him to greatness. He successfully tried out for a regional track team and made it to the 1936 Olympics.
Those events above are flashbacks in the film's bigger story. In it, Louis serves his country in World War II as a bombardier. On a routine mission, Louis's Lemon plane goes kaput and crashes into the Ocean. Only two other crew members survive the crash with him. He and his friends survive in lifeboats on shark-infested waters for 47 days. Only one crew member survives with Louis by the time the Japanese navy finds them.
For the next two years, Louis and his other crew member (but mostly Louis) are prisoners of war. Their camp commander is Mutsuhiro Watanabe (Miyavi), a man who will find any excuse to beat up Louis. Louis has to stay tough if he's to survive the ordeal.
Four writers are credited on the film. It's more like three writers considering that two of the four are the always together Joel and Ethan Coen. The other two are Richard LaGravenese and William Nicholson. Their screen story is a juggling act about to collapse.
Let's start with some ending captions. It said how Zamperini had struggled with PTSD for years after his interment and eventually made peace with his captors. Why's that the ending caption? That's a great movie right there! The interment scenes, which make up a bulk of the film, should have been flashbacks. Kind of a missed opportunity.
And why did they give Watanabe a hint of sympathy near the end instead of anytime before then? He kind of wants Zamperini to respect him but the audience can't oblige him. His favorite tactic ("(Don't) Look at me!" *Whack!*) is so protracted it kind of turns into a running gag.
It was not all a loss. Alexandre Desplat has yet another good score, one which I had time to experience as my theater's sound system muffled quite a bit of the dialogue. The art department crafted incredible recreations of the 1940's. Roger Deakins' cinematography was rich and colorful as always.
Jolie personally knew Zamperini, which led her to this project. So while I may fault Unbroken for being a wobbly juggling act, at least it was a well-intentioned one.
Zampeirini (Jack O'Connell) grew up the son of Italian immigrants. After a childhood of mischief making, his brother Pete (Alex Russell) inspired him to greatness. He successfully tried out for a regional track team and made it to the 1936 Olympics.
Those events above are flashbacks in the film's bigger story. In it, Louis serves his country in World War II as a bombardier. On a routine mission, Louis's Lemon plane goes kaput and crashes into the Ocean. Only two other crew members survive the crash with him. He and his friends survive in lifeboats on shark-infested waters for 47 days. Only one crew member survives with Louis by the time the Japanese navy finds them.
For the next two years, Louis and his other crew member (but mostly Louis) are prisoners of war. Their camp commander is Mutsuhiro Watanabe (Miyavi), a man who will find any excuse to beat up Louis. Louis has to stay tough if he's to survive the ordeal.
Four writers are credited on the film. It's more like three writers considering that two of the four are the always together Joel and Ethan Coen. The other two are Richard LaGravenese and William Nicholson. Their screen story is a juggling act about to collapse.
Let's start with some ending captions. It said how Zamperini had struggled with PTSD for years after his interment and eventually made peace with his captors. Why's that the ending caption? That's a great movie right there! The interment scenes, which make up a bulk of the film, should have been flashbacks. Kind of a missed opportunity.
And why did they give Watanabe a hint of sympathy near the end instead of anytime before then? He kind of wants Zamperini to respect him but the audience can't oblige him. His favorite tactic ("(Don't) Look at me!" *Whack!*) is so protracted it kind of turns into a running gag.
It was not all a loss. Alexandre Desplat has yet another good score, one which I had time to experience as my theater's sound system muffled quite a bit of the dialogue. The art department crafted incredible recreations of the 1940's. Roger Deakins' cinematography was rich and colorful as always.
Jolie personally knew Zamperini, which led her to this project. So while I may fault Unbroken for being a wobbly juggling act, at least it was a well-intentioned one.
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Into the Woods
Into the Woods is far less controversial than The Interview by a wide-margin. Stephen Sondheim and James Lapine's fairy tale mash-up, which originally premiered in my native San Diego in 1986, is now a feature film.
There's a nameless Baker and his wife (James Corden and Emily Blunt) who want a child but are unable to. The Witch (Meryl Streep) who cursed his family into barrenness decides to throw him a bone. She'll lift the curse if she gets some items in three days. But how will they get a white cow, a red cape, a yellow hair and a gold slipper?
There's a nameless Baker and his wife (James Corden and Emily Blunt) who want a child but are unable to. The Witch (Meryl Streep) who cursed his family into barrenness decides to throw him a bone. She'll lift the curse if she gets some items in three days. But how will they get a white cow, a red cape, a yellow hair and a gold slipper?
They get the cow from Jack (Daniel Huttlestone) and give him magic beans. The cape comes from Little Red Riding Hood (Lila Crawford). The gold slipper belongs to Cinderella (Anna Kendrick). Rapunzel's hair looks just right.
These fairy tale characters all wish for things. They want a quick "Happily Ever After" and will do anything to get it. That just brings about a big problem onto the land.
Like the earlier Sondheim rendition Sweeney Todd, this is reasonably adapted for the screen. The alterations to the play's libretto lets it seamlessly run in one continuous act (rather than two). Any unfortunate changes were done for the sake of the film story. You won't get thrown off by the story.
The artistic design isn't as garish as the advertisements suggested. In fact, it's a fine display of fantasy costumes and environments. There's magic in the visuals even in questionable spots. One might snicker at the Big Bad Wolf's (Johnny Depp) suit when he first appears. But he's legitimately creepy and unsettling once he starts singing. You won't be laughing much longer.
Into the Woods has an amazing rendition of its Sondheim score. Each tune is a memorable piece of music. The actors who sing the parts are well chosen. The dramatic numbers do their job well. Chris Pine and Billy Magnussen's (as the dashing Princes) duet is a highlight as it's a ridiculous dramatic number. Sondheim's trademark rapid tempo and lyrics don't overwhelm the cast at all.
This isn't a fun and fancy story, though it's nowhere near as Grimm as the play or its original stories. Keep that it mind when you go Into the Woods and you'll come out good. It really is a memorable cinematic fairy tale.
Monday, December 29, 2014
Special Report
And here it is, a film that I thought I'd never see. A film I thought no one would ever see. A film that certain people didn't want anyone to see. But against all odds, it's here. I am of course talking about The Interview.
Dave Skylark (James Franco) is the star of the talk show Skylark Tonight. His good buddy and producer Aaron Rapoport (co-director Seth Rogen) has seen the show through 1,000 episodes. Aaron's upset that nobody seems to take Dave seriously as a journalist. That all changes when he finds out that no less than Kim Jong-Un (Randall Park) of North Korea is a fan of the show. Aaron personally reaches out to the supreme leader for an interview and surprisingly, Pyongyang agrees.
CIA agent Lacy (Lizzy Caplan) decides the interview is the best chance to permanently deal with Kim. She ropes Dave and Aaron for the Mission Impractical. But since Aaron and Dave are idiots and Kim's cult of personality is strong, the mission looks like it's beyond impossible. How will anyone get out of this OK?
Rogen, co-director Evan Goldberg and their writing partner Dan Sterling certainly got a lot of attention for conceiving this premise. No need for me to explain that. As I see it, the guys set out to make a frat movie set in a politically unstable region rather than the next The Great Dictator. Their end result is stupid and proud of it. That honest tone is the best part of the film.
Franco and Rogen make for a likable pair of idiots. At worst, they're clueless and not overtly offensive. They're the least qualified men for the job and they know it. They get into mishaps along the way that understandably frighten them. All they want to do is party and be serious journalists. The audience will surely want them to at least get out of North Korea alive.
Sony's train-wreck of bad luck forced them to scale back The Interview's release. You can see it in arthouse theaters, the last places you'd expect this kind of movie to be in, or online, which I did. Depending on your choice, you'll see the same silly comedy that certainly dared to exist.
Dave Skylark (James Franco) is the star of the talk show Skylark Tonight. His good buddy and producer Aaron Rapoport (co-director Seth Rogen) has seen the show through 1,000 episodes. Aaron's upset that nobody seems to take Dave seriously as a journalist. That all changes when he finds out that no less than Kim Jong-Un (Randall Park) of North Korea is a fan of the show. Aaron personally reaches out to the supreme leader for an interview and surprisingly, Pyongyang agrees.
CIA agent Lacy (Lizzy Caplan) decides the interview is the best chance to permanently deal with Kim. She ropes Dave and Aaron for the Mission Impractical. But since Aaron and Dave are idiots and Kim's cult of personality is strong, the mission looks like it's beyond impossible. How will anyone get out of this OK?
Rogen, co-director Evan Goldberg and their writing partner Dan Sterling certainly got a lot of attention for conceiving this premise. No need for me to explain that. As I see it, the guys set out to make a frat movie set in a politically unstable region rather than the next The Great Dictator. Their end result is stupid and proud of it. That honest tone is the best part of the film.
Franco and Rogen make for a likable pair of idiots. At worst, they're clueless and not overtly offensive. They're the least qualified men for the job and they know it. They get into mishaps along the way that understandably frighten them. All they want to do is party and be serious journalists. The audience will surely want them to at least get out of North Korea alive.
Sony's train-wreck of bad luck forced them to scale back The Interview's release. You can see it in arthouse theaters, the last places you'd expect this kind of movie to be in, or online, which I did. Depending on your choice, you'll see the same silly comedy that certainly dared to exist.
Saturday, December 27, 2014
Wild
The last two movies I covered were the final installments to two dissimilar trilogies. The film I'm now reviewing, Wild, is a self-contained piece.
In June 1995, Cheryl Strayed (Reese Witherspoon) was at the lowest point in her life. Her mother Bobbi (Laura Dern) died of lung cancer four years earlier. She sought the company of every man she met except her husband Paul (Thomas Sadoski). Now they're divorced. She decides to get over her misery by hiking the Pacific Crest Trail.
It took her three months to hike 1,100 miles. Her most trustworthy companion was her enormous backpack. A collection of kindly strangers helped her along the way. Natural and emotional challenges threatened to stop her trek. But she didn't quit. Her story became a best-selling memoir, which director Jean-Marc Vallée and screenwriter Nick Hornby now present on-screen.
Witherspoon carries the movie a lot easier than that backpack. Her sarcasm provides the film's best laughs (even the title cards get sarcastic at on point!). On a more serious note, we see her as an emotionally damaged woman. She knows she's messed up and wants to redeem herself. That's what keeps the audience invested in her long trek.
Speaking of damage, the makeup department provides many gruesome physical ailments. Its most shocking display is Cheryl's bloody foot in the first scene. Of that I'll describe no more.
Cheryl's trek took her across snowy fields, forests and the open desert. In each environment, cinematographer Yves Bélanger's presentation of the PCT is pretty. They look like nice places to visit if you can get around the wildlife. But don't go unprepared or under-prepared if this movie inspires you.
Wild is a good cinematic hike. Its lead character and involving storyline make it a film to watch out for in the coming months.
In June 1995, Cheryl Strayed (Reese Witherspoon) was at the lowest point in her life. Her mother Bobbi (Laura Dern) died of lung cancer four years earlier. She sought the company of every man she met except her husband Paul (Thomas Sadoski). Now they're divorced. She decides to get over her misery by hiking the Pacific Crest Trail.
It took her three months to hike 1,100 miles. Her most trustworthy companion was her enormous backpack. A collection of kindly strangers helped her along the way. Natural and emotional challenges threatened to stop her trek. But she didn't quit. Her story became a best-selling memoir, which director Jean-Marc Vallée and screenwriter Nick Hornby now present on-screen.
Witherspoon carries the movie a lot easier than that backpack. Her sarcasm provides the film's best laughs (even the title cards get sarcastic at on point!). On a more serious note, we see her as an emotionally damaged woman. She knows she's messed up and wants to redeem herself. That's what keeps the audience invested in her long trek.
Speaking of damage, the makeup department provides many gruesome physical ailments. Its most shocking display is Cheryl's bloody foot in the first scene. Of that I'll describe no more.
Cheryl's trek took her across snowy fields, forests and the open desert. In each environment, cinematographer Yves Bélanger's presentation of the PCT is pretty. They look like nice places to visit if you can get around the wildlife. But don't go unprepared or under-prepared if this movie inspires you.
Wild is a good cinematic hike. Its lead character and involving storyline make it a film to watch out for in the coming months.
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb
It took them five years, but now director Shawn Levy and star Ben Stiller bring another monumental adventure to screen. According to the advertisements, this latest Night at the Museum, subtitled Secret of the Tomb, will be the last.
Larry Daley (Stiller) has the best job possible at the New York Museum of Natural History. As security guard, Larry also supervises events with "living exhibits." Larry's secret is that the exhibits are alive, animated by the mystical tablet of Ahkmenrah. And it's corroding real fast.
The only one who can fix the tablet is its creator, Pharaoh Merenkahre (Ben Kingsley). His wax likeness stands comfortably at the British Museum of Natural History. So Larry and the series' regular exhibits head off to London for a talk. It's all easy until one British exhibit decides to ruin things.
The visual effects, which were shortlisted for Oscar consideration, are awesome. The CGI makes you believe that statues and dinosaur skeletons can move and interact with real people. The miniaturization of actors Steve Coogan and Owen Wilson (as figures Octavius and Jeb) is also well-done. The highlight was a battle inside M.C. Escher's Relativity. One amusing animated character was a mini Garuda statue (which makes sense once you realize who voiced it).
Anyone unfamiliar with the franchise won't get lost. You'll know what's up in these films right away. The details this film adds to the series actually make sense. For instance, it re-introduces the first film's villains in a cameo appearance. When it's revealed that one of the villains actually discovered the tablet as a lad, his actions are understandable.
It's a decent family adventure film. Its 98 minute plot progresses quickly and easily for kids and adults. Any bits of childish humor didn't degrade the film for me. The funniest moment of the film was a performance of Camelot which went awry. It easily got sentimental when it reminded the audience that this was the end. Never was this more evident when Mickey Rooney and Robin Williams, both of whom passed on this year, were on-screen.
Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb ends the franchise pretty well. It may be the end, but it makes the most of it.
Larry Daley (Stiller) has the best job possible at the New York Museum of Natural History. As security guard, Larry also supervises events with "living exhibits." Larry's secret is that the exhibits are alive, animated by the mystical tablet of Ahkmenrah. And it's corroding real fast.
The only one who can fix the tablet is its creator, Pharaoh Merenkahre (Ben Kingsley). His wax likeness stands comfortably at the British Museum of Natural History. So Larry and the series' regular exhibits head off to London for a talk. It's all easy until one British exhibit decides to ruin things.
The visual effects, which were shortlisted for Oscar consideration, are awesome. The CGI makes you believe that statues and dinosaur skeletons can move and interact with real people. The miniaturization of actors Steve Coogan and Owen Wilson (as figures Octavius and Jeb) is also well-done. The highlight was a battle inside M.C. Escher's Relativity. One amusing animated character was a mini Garuda statue (which makes sense once you realize who voiced it).
Anyone unfamiliar with the franchise won't get lost. You'll know what's up in these films right away. The details this film adds to the series actually make sense. For instance, it re-introduces the first film's villains in a cameo appearance. When it's revealed that one of the villains actually discovered the tablet as a lad, his actions are understandable.
It's a decent family adventure film. Its 98 minute plot progresses quickly and easily for kids and adults. Any bits of childish humor didn't degrade the film for me. The funniest moment of the film was a performance of Camelot which went awry. It easily got sentimental when it reminded the audience that this was the end. Never was this more evident when Mickey Rooney and Robin Williams, both of whom passed on this year, were on-screen.
Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb ends the franchise pretty well. It may be the end, but it makes the most of it.
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies
What's it about?
Uh, something about Hobbits and the Dwarves who hire them. And Wizards. And creatures and five armies. And something else. I don't know.
Start again.
We finally reach the end of Bilbo Baggins's extended cinematic outing. FINALLY. Anyway, this is The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, previously subtitled There and Back Again.
The film opens with the evil dragon Smaug out to destroy a nearby town. And he's dead before the subtitle comes up. The heroic Bard the Bowman saved the day. But his villagers are homeless and the closest town is in prince Thorin's territory. He wants Thorin to honor his word about helping the people. And Thorin's like "Make me! Pfft."
So everybody comes to Thorin's place to take over. The Elves, the Orcs, humans of many dispositions, giant animals. It's all a mess. Meanwhile, Thorin tries to get a MacGuffin to certify himself king. The other, saner dwarves try to reason with him. Good luck.
There's also a Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins. Bilbo gets a hold of the MacGuffin and tries to reason with Thorin. That's pretty much it for him.
At 144 minutes, it's much shorter than either of its predecessors. But its main battle, which clocks in at about 45 minutes, goes on forever. It was hard to keep up with who was fighting who and why. The end result was like a food fight stretched to feature length. They don't even explain why they called it "The Battle of the Five Armies."
The visuals redeem this adventure a bit. Smaug looked great as always and he made the most of his minuscule screen-time. The giant creatures who participate in the epic battle were pretty good too. Sets, Costume and Makeup designs were also good. Nothing to complain about in this field.
As I think about it, this whole adventure should have been two films at most. The point of the first film was to find Smaug and he's quickly dispatched in this one. It really deflates his menace. We now have a film of little substance stretched over a long canvas. The best part of this installment is that it's the last one. I can breathe a sigh of relief now.
Uh, something about Hobbits and the Dwarves who hire them. And Wizards. And creatures and five armies. And something else. I don't know.
Start again.
We finally reach the end of Bilbo Baggins's extended cinematic outing. FINALLY. Anyway, this is The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies, previously subtitled There and Back Again.
The film opens with the evil dragon Smaug out to destroy a nearby town. And he's dead before the subtitle comes up. The heroic Bard the Bowman saved the day. But his villagers are homeless and the closest town is in prince Thorin's territory. He wants Thorin to honor his word about helping the people. And Thorin's like "Make me! Pfft."
So everybody comes to Thorin's place to take over. The Elves, the Orcs, humans of many dispositions, giant animals. It's all a mess. Meanwhile, Thorin tries to get a MacGuffin to certify himself king. The other, saner dwarves try to reason with him. Good luck.
There's also a Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins. Bilbo gets a hold of the MacGuffin and tries to reason with Thorin. That's pretty much it for him.
At 144 minutes, it's much shorter than either of its predecessors. But its main battle, which clocks in at about 45 minutes, goes on forever. It was hard to keep up with who was fighting who and why. The end result was like a food fight stretched to feature length. They don't even explain why they called it "The Battle of the Five Armies."
The visuals redeem this adventure a bit. Smaug looked great as always and he made the most of his minuscule screen-time. The giant creatures who participate in the epic battle were pretty good too. Sets, Costume and Makeup designs were also good. Nothing to complain about in this field.
As I think about it, this whole adventure should have been two films at most. The point of the first film was to find Smaug and he's quickly dispatched in this one. It really deflates his menace. We now have a film of little substance stretched over a long canvas. The best part of this installment is that it's the last one. I can breathe a sigh of relief now.
Tuesday, December 16, 2014
The Theory of Everything
Jethro's Note: As you may have noticed, my site is different.
An Oscar-winner for Man on Wire, director James Marsh now examines the life of scientist Stephen Hawking and his first wife, Jane. Jane's memoir, Travelling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen. was the basis for the film called The Theory of Everything.
An Oscar-winner for Man on Wire, director James Marsh now examines the life of scientist Stephen Hawking and his first wife, Jane. Jane's memoir, Travelling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen. was the basis for the film called The Theory of Everything.
In 1963, Stephen Hawking (Eddie Redmayne) studies cosmology at Cambridge. Jane Wilde (Felicity Jones) is an arts student at the same college. The two meet at a party and fall for each other. Stephen's genius impresses instructor Dennis Sciorma (David Thewlis), who mentors him through his doctoral studies and beyond. Stephen's developing Motor Neurone Disease threatens to destroy his future. Nevertheless, Jane sticks with her eventual husband through thick and thin.
That pretty much describes the film.
Redmayne is wonderfully cast as Hawking. His first scenes endear him to the audience with likability and charm. His humor persists even as his mobility decreases. When he finally loses his voice and has to speak through a computer (the real Hawking), his spirit remains. It helps that his makeup job makes him the spitting image of the real man.
Jones's performance is also a highlight. She willingly defies Hawking's borrowed time by loving him. That alone earns her the audience's admiration. She earns the audience's empathy as she and Stephen mutually split.
Johann Johansson provides a magnificent and emotive score. Its pure serenity makes it the best part of the film. The set and costume design set the decades quite nicely. There are some great celestial and earthbound images from cinematographer Benoit Delhomme. The crew firmly establishes the film as a pretty movie.
The Theory of Everything is a great use of 123 minutes. Even if physics and what-not aren't your thing, the well-told love story might attract you. It's a definite crowd pleaser.
That pretty much describes the film.
Redmayne is wonderfully cast as Hawking. His first scenes endear him to the audience with likability and charm. His humor persists even as his mobility decreases. When he finally loses his voice and has to speak through a computer (the real Hawking), his spirit remains. It helps that his makeup job makes him the spitting image of the real man.
Jones's performance is also a highlight. She willingly defies Hawking's borrowed time by loving him. That alone earns her the audience's admiration. She earns the audience's empathy as she and Stephen mutually split.
Johann Johansson provides a magnificent and emotive score. Its pure serenity makes it the best part of the film. The set and costume design set the decades quite nicely. There are some great celestial and earthbound images from cinematographer Benoit Delhomme. The crew firmly establishes the film as a pretty movie.
The Theory of Everything is a great use of 123 minutes. Even if physics and what-not aren't your thing, the well-told love story might attract you. It's a definite crowd pleaser.
Thursday, December 4, 2014
Home
Adam Rex's 2007 novel, The True Meaning of Smekday, introduced its readers to a brand new Alien holiday. This would have been the best time for its film version, Home, to come out.
Skipper (Tom McGrath), Kowalski (Chris Miller), Rico (Conrad Vernon) and Private (Christopher Knights), the flightless co-stars of the Madagascar films, have their own film now. They open the story by ditching their co-stars for a trip to Fort Knox. But they're not there for the gold bullion. They're here for the precious Cheese Dibble snacks in the vending machines. And somehow, Dave knew they'd be there.
The movie gets its first point for casting John Malkovich as Dave. Dave's an over-the-top villain with a ridiculously petty goal and Malkovich is surely having fun here. Dave sometimes earns the audience's sympathy with his bad backstory. He gets his chance at redemption at the end, but throws it away for "more revenge." He's that evil.
The technical aspects get the next point. The animated characters and scenery look great as does the camerawork. The best use of the camera was to show the Penguins make an aerial escape. It was an amazing, almost one take display of the Penguins free-falling from planet to plane and to the desert below.
Penguins of Madagascar is a good matinee. Its quick pace should entertain the kids and adults in the audience. Its sense of humor is fine even if there were a few groaners. It even knows how to make Dave be a legitimate threat. It's a harmless adventure and I'm fine with that.
But Dreamworks didn't see it that way. Home's coming got put off till March. Meanwhile, I have to review the film that was meant to come out that month, Penguins of Madagascar. And surprisingly, it was a bit better than I thought it would be.
Dave the Octopus (John Malkovich) used to be the star of the Central Park Zoo. But the Zoo moved him out when the Penguins moved in. The same thing happened at every other Zoo Dave moved to. And now Dave wants revenge on all of penguin kind. If only Skipper could remember his name.
The Penguins are saved by the North Wind, a crew of secret agent arctic animals. The leader (Benedict Cumberbatch), a wolf whose name is Classified, wants to stop Dave his way. Skipper and the Penguins want to stop Dave their way. They'll have to find the right way to stop Dave's revenge scheme.
The movie gets its first point for casting John Malkovich as Dave. Dave's an over-the-top villain with a ridiculously petty goal and Malkovich is surely having fun here. Dave sometimes earns the audience's sympathy with his bad backstory. He gets his chance at redemption at the end, but throws it away for "more revenge." He's that evil.
The technical aspects get the next point. The animated characters and scenery look great as does the camerawork. The best use of the camera was to show the Penguins make an aerial escape. It was an amazing, almost one take display of the Penguins free-falling from planet to plane and to the desert below.
Penguins of Madagascar is a good matinee. Its quick pace should entertain the kids and adults in the audience. Its sense of humor is fine even if there were a few groaners. It even knows how to make Dave be a legitimate threat. It's a harmless adventure and I'm fine with that.
Friday, November 21, 2014
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part One
Cold Open:
EXT. DYSTOPIAN GOVERNMENT SQUARE
A non-descript future Dystopian society. Citizens are gathered around the square. A chief bad guy, The DYSTOPIAN LACKEY, steps forward. He's surrounded by his fellow lackeys.
Jethro promptly punts the Dystopian Lackey into orbit with a kick. The other lackeys follow.
The Review At Hand:
Yeah, what that guy said.
In the previous film, Catching Fire, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) cancelled the dreaded Hunger Games by destroying the studio. Evil President Sore Loser Snow (Donald Sutherland) responds by carpet-bombing Katniss's home District 12. Katniss finds herself in the underground District 13, which was long thought carpet-bombed too.
Katniss finds herself the Mockingjay, the symbol of the upcoming rebellion against the evil Capitol. The pressure from both sides threatens to crush her. It's especially so once she finds out what happened to her beloved Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson).
Yes, that's it in a nutshell. Why did it need to be two movies? I'd say profit.
It's easily the shortest of the films so far at 123 minutes. And the plot is rather slow. A few plot points and action scenes happen here and there, but that's about it. That's a contrast to the previous films which were quicked pace and at least twenty minutes longer.
It gets good when stuff happens. Katniss's stiff-acting in a series of District 13 propaganda videos is amusing. The action scenes that happen are suitably tense. The acting was pretty good, especially from the leads. The final plot twist was especially suspenseful (even if it wasn't the twist I predicted in the Catching Fire review).
The set, costume and makeup designs are much more subdued than the other films. But I appreciated the artistry behind them. If only there wasn't a year-long gap between this and the next part. There's so much stuff from the story I'm waiting to see done.
EXT. DYSTOPIAN GOVERNMENT SQUARE
A non-descript future Dystopian society. Citizens are gathered around the square. A chief bad guy, The DYSTOPIAN LACKEY, steps forward. He's surrounded by his fellow lackeys.
DYSTOPIAN LACKEY
By order of the Hollywood money machine, all final films of all future film series are to be split into two parts. The Hunger
Games: Mockingjay: Part One shall be one of many of these
two-part trilogies. Future servants include the final films of the
Divergent and The Avengers film series. Any
attempt to subvert our decree shall result in the offender getting
laughed out of Hollywood.Jethro promptly punts the Dystopian Lackey into orbit with a kick. The other lackeys follow.
JETHRO
Not if critics like me have anything to say about it!The Review At Hand:
Yeah, what that guy said.
In the previous film, Catching Fire, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) cancelled the dreaded Hunger Games by destroying the studio. Evil President Sore Loser Snow (Donald Sutherland) responds by carpet-bombing Katniss's home District 12. Katniss finds herself in the underground District 13, which was long thought carpet-bombed too.
Katniss finds herself the Mockingjay, the symbol of the upcoming rebellion against the evil Capitol. The pressure from both sides threatens to crush her. It's especially so once she finds out what happened to her beloved Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson).
Yes, that's it in a nutshell. Why did it need to be two movies? I'd say profit.
It's easily the shortest of the films so far at 123 minutes. And the plot is rather slow. A few plot points and action scenes happen here and there, but that's about it. That's a contrast to the previous films which were quicked pace and at least twenty minutes longer.
It gets good when stuff happens. Katniss's stiff-acting in a series of District 13 propaganda videos is amusing. The action scenes that happen are suitably tense. The acting was pretty good, especially from the leads. The final plot twist was especially suspenseful (even if it wasn't the twist I predicted in the Catching Fire review).
The set, costume and makeup designs are much more subdued than the other films. But I appreciated the artistry behind them. If only there wasn't a year-long gap between this and the next part. There's so much stuff from the story I'm waiting to see done.
Birdman
Follow a bunch of creative egos and see what you think of it. That's one lesson you can learn from the new film, Birdman (or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance).
Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) was once the big-screen superhero Birdman. Years later, Riggan is flat broke and washed up. He aims to remedy his fortunes by bringing Raymond Carver's short story What We Talk About When We Talk About Love to Broadway. A comment from Carver to young Riggan inspired him to go to acting.
Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) was once the big-screen superhero Birdman. Years later, Riggan is flat broke and washed up. He aims to remedy his fortunes by bringing Raymond Carver's short story What We Talk About When We Talk About Love to Broadway. A comment from Carver to young Riggan inspired him to go to acting.
The preview phase is a disaster. Riggan decides to bring on celebrated Broadway star Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) to the production. Mike forcefully takes up the spotlight. A critic wants to tear the production to shreds on the basis of it even existing. Riggan's desire for perfection irritates everybody around him. And even worse, Riggan's grasp of reality is fading away. As his cinematic alter-ego taunts him in his mind, Riggan starts to believe himself greater than great.
What you'll notice the most is its camera style. Shot by cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, the camera follows its actors along. When pieced together by editors Douglas Crise and Stephen Mirrione, the end result appears as one long take.
The story, by director Alejandro González Iñárritu and co-writers Nicolás Giacobone. Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. and Armando Bo, is darkly funny. The show's production is one long comedy of errors. The audience can laugh fine at the set falling apart in one scene. But when the play finally premieres, Riggan's grand finale is shocking.
As Riggan, Keaton convincingly plays an artist on the verge of a nervous breakdown. Reality blurs so much that we often believe, as he does, that Birdman and psychic powers are for real. More often than not, we're made aware that he is hallucinating. It all leads to a last scene open to interpretation.
Birdman's tone isn't for all tastes. There are some great laughs out of it, but it turns dark once we understand its main character. As for me, I found it a good balance of humor and pathos. It's one of the funniest satires I've seen.
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Big Hero 6
Ever since Disney bought Marvel a few years back, an animated film based on one of Marvel's properties was within the realm of possibility. The possible is now actual as Big Hero 6, Marvel's Animesque Super Team, has their own Disney animated feature.
The hero of Big Hero 6 is Hiro Hamada, a teen genius in the futuristic hodgepodge metropolis of San Fransokyo. His brother Tadashi attends the elite San Fransokyo Tech and encourages Hiro to enroll there. Hiro does so by demonstrating his new Microbots at the University science fair. A few hours later, Tadashi and famed instructor Professor Callaghan are killed in a fire at the school.
Hiro is miserable until he finds Tadashi's last invention, the medical balloon-bot Baymax. He also finds a masked villain using his Microbots. Hiro suspects the baddie of starting the fire and vows to catch him. Hiro upgrades Baymax into a fighting robot and enlists Tadashi's friends - tomboy GoGo, peppy Honey Lemon, uptight Wasabi and laidback Fred - to fill up the Big Hero 6.
The city of San Fransokyo may be fictional, but it's great. It's a bright, colorful animated environment which convincingly looks like both of its two inspirations. It especially appealed to me as I was in San Francisco twice this year (and expect to be there again next month). It felt like I was there again.
The Big Heroes of the movie have their charms. Baymax's cuddly design and soft voice should make him an instant hit with kids. Hiro is a likable, relatable protagonist whose youthful misbehaving never annoy the audience. Wasabi and Fred are good comic relief. Honey Lemon's enthusiasm endears herself to all. And GoGo's just cool (her catch-all catchphrase is "Woman Up!"). Overall, this was a great bunch of super heroes. Their final defeat of the masked villain involves some unique uses of their skills.
This super adventure differs a lot from its source material. But that's not bad. The story they devised was funny, meaningful, fun and quick-paced. Whether in 3D or Flatscreen, Big Hero 6 is a Marvelous adventure for all.
An animated short, Feast, opened the film. A story of a Boston Terrier and his love of human food, it was both cute and cringe-worthy at the same time. Stay tuned after the credits for a cameo from Marvel's legendary Stan Lee.
The hero of Big Hero 6 is Hiro Hamada, a teen genius in the futuristic hodgepodge metropolis of San Fransokyo. His brother Tadashi attends the elite San Fransokyo Tech and encourages Hiro to enroll there. Hiro does so by demonstrating his new Microbots at the University science fair. A few hours later, Tadashi and famed instructor Professor Callaghan are killed in a fire at the school.
Hiro is miserable until he finds Tadashi's last invention, the medical balloon-bot Baymax. He also finds a masked villain using his Microbots. Hiro suspects the baddie of starting the fire and vows to catch him. Hiro upgrades Baymax into a fighting robot and enlists Tadashi's friends - tomboy GoGo, peppy Honey Lemon, uptight Wasabi and laidback Fred - to fill up the Big Hero 6.
The city of San Fransokyo may be fictional, but it's great. It's a bright, colorful animated environment which convincingly looks like both of its two inspirations. It especially appealed to me as I was in San Francisco twice this year (and expect to be there again next month). It felt like I was there again.
The Big Heroes of the movie have their charms. Baymax's cuddly design and soft voice should make him an instant hit with kids. Hiro is a likable, relatable protagonist whose youthful misbehaving never annoy the audience. Wasabi and Fred are good comic relief. Honey Lemon's enthusiasm endears herself to all. And GoGo's just cool (her catch-all catchphrase is "Woman Up!"). Overall, this was a great bunch of super heroes. Their final defeat of the masked villain involves some unique uses of their skills.
This super adventure differs a lot from its source material. But that's not bad. The story they devised was funny, meaningful, fun and quick-paced. Whether in 3D or Flatscreen, Big Hero 6 is a Marvelous adventure for all.
An animated short, Feast, opened the film. A story of a Boston Terrier and his love of human food, it was both cute and cringe-worthy at the same time. Stay tuned after the credits for a cameo from Marvel's legendary Stan Lee.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Interstellar
As I said in my Transcendence review:
One film I waited for this year was Interstellar, Christopher Nolan's thought-provoking sci-fi about a wormhole to another universe. What's on the other side?
We now know what's on the other side of the wormhole. It's a big, loud visual extravaganza that sure talks a lot about science.
In the not so distant future, Earth has no future. NASA has gone underground while society has gone agrarian. Crops are going extinct one by one. A new Dust Bowl has gone global. And it's just going to get worst before the end.
Former NASA pilot Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) tries to keep his family safe from catastrophe. One day, he finds a "ghost" in his daughter Murphy's (Mackenzie Foy) room communicating in binary. The binary codes lead them to NASA's last base. The staff discovered a wormhole near Saturn; on the other side are a few potentially hospitable planets. Cooper, the only man left with space experience, is tasked with leading the mission.
Interstellar's visual expectations absolutely live up to the hype. The journey through the wormhole alone ought to warrant the film an Academy Award. Other visual highlights are a frozen planet (even the clouds are frozen!) and a journey through a black hole and eventually time and space. The film's comic relief characters, a pair of robots named TARS and CASE, are great animatronic creations.
The film's mammoth 169 minute runtime can definitely test a few attention spans. It explains all the quantum physics and stuff of its space travel but barely in layman's terms. At least one plot twist was introduced far too early to make it shocking. And the film's final plot twist had me going "huh?" A lot of simple plot details got lost in the shuffle.
Interstellar is a marvel of technical design. It deserves to be seen on the big screen. Its splendor alone is enough to make up for the overly-complex story.
One film I waited for this year was Interstellar, Christopher Nolan's thought-provoking sci-fi about a wormhole to another universe. What's on the other side?
We now know what's on the other side of the wormhole. It's a big, loud visual extravaganza that sure talks a lot about science.
In the not so distant future, Earth has no future. NASA has gone underground while society has gone agrarian. Crops are going extinct one by one. A new Dust Bowl has gone global. And it's just going to get worst before the end.
Former NASA pilot Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) tries to keep his family safe from catastrophe. One day, he finds a "ghost" in his daughter Murphy's (Mackenzie Foy) room communicating in binary. The binary codes lead them to NASA's last base. The staff discovered a wormhole near Saturn; on the other side are a few potentially hospitable planets. Cooper, the only man left with space experience, is tasked with leading the mission.
Interstellar's visual expectations absolutely live up to the hype. The journey through the wormhole alone ought to warrant the film an Academy Award. Other visual highlights are a frozen planet (even the clouds are frozen!) and a journey through a black hole and eventually time and space. The film's comic relief characters, a pair of robots named TARS and CASE, are great animatronic creations.
The film's mammoth 169 minute runtime can definitely test a few attention spans. It explains all the quantum physics and stuff of its space travel but barely in layman's terms. At least one plot twist was introduced far too early to make it shocking. And the film's final plot twist had me going "huh?" A lot of simple plot details got lost in the shuffle.
Interstellar is a marvel of technical design. It deserves to be seen on the big screen. Its splendor alone is enough to make up for the overly-complex story.
Friday, October 24, 2014
Fury
There's lots of bullets and blood flying around in Fury. Let's see if the sound that goes with it means something.
April 1945, the last month of the War in Europe. Hitler orders everybody in Germany to take up arms against the invading Allies. And the crew of the Sherman Tank Fury, which consists of Sergeant "Wardaddy" Collier (Brad Pitt), "Bible" Swan (Shia LaBeouf), "Gordo" Garcia (Michael Pena) and Grady Travis (Jon Bernthal), are more than willing to fight them.
Their newest recruit is typist Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman). Norman is completely unprepared for the carnage of war. Wardaddy and co. try to teach Norman how to be a man. Norman tries to stay sane. Their trek across Germany lets them see just how fanatical the Nazi cause can be.
(That just about sums it up.)
Writer/Director David Ayer, known for contemporary crime dramas such as End of Watch, goes back in time for this one. Ayer does a good job exemplifying that War is not Nice. There's a lot of blood and body-parts flying around in the battle scenes, even a flattened corpse in the mud. It's kind of like Saving Private Ryan except without the emotional impact. We mainly get blood and guts and not accompanying terror.
The standout sequence was Fury and its Ally Tanks dueling an indestructible Nazi tank. No matter what they do, the Nazi tank keeps on going and blasts the Ally Tanks. Only when Fury gets close enough do they blast the crew.
The rest of the 134 minute runtime certainly takes its sweet time. The main plot doesn't kick in until the second half; that leads directly to the overly-extended climax. Meanwhile, we have to endure the Fury's veteran crew treating Norman harshly. Wardaddy redeems himself by showing some dignity later on. Grady, meanwhile, is unbelievably rude and not in a lovable way. The film treats Grady's eventual death with sadness; no wet eyes from me.
The tanks in Fury are actual surviving tanks from the war. That should get the attention of a few War aficionados more than the lingering story. Other than that, this is an average war film. In the meantime, we're two months away before another World War II drama, Unbroken, is released. That should get much more attention.
Saturday, October 18, 2014
The Book of Life
Not all animated Spooktaculars have to be dark and grim. The latest 3D spooktacular, The Book of Life, is a bright, colorful fiesta directed by Jorge Gutierrez and produced by, among others, Guillermo Del Toro.
Once upon a time, during one Day of the Dead celebration, the Gods La Muerte (Kate del Castillo) and Xibalba (Ron Perlman) had a disagreement. La Muerte ruled the good heaven, the Land of the Remembered and Xibalba ruled the bad version, the Land of the Forgotten. Xibalba wants to trade, so the two Gods wager the fate of the cosmos on two mortal amigos named Manolo and Joaquin. La Muerte wins if Manolo ends up with Maria, daughter of the town general, while Xibalba wins if Joaquin does it instead.
Years later, Manolo (Diego Luna) is an aspiring musician forced to uphold the family bull-fighting tradition and Joaquin (Channing Tatum) is a vain war-hero. Maria (Zoe Saldana) tries to keep the peace between the two. Xibalba decides to win the bet with some cheating. Manolo finds himself in the Land of the Remembered and must reinstate La Muerte to return alive. And there's also an evil desperado on the horizon...
And all of this is related to a bunch of schoolkids by a museum tour guide (Christina Applegate).
This is the most vibrant spooktacular you'll see this year. The main characters' puppet-like designs certainly help them stand out. The environments they inhabit are colorful and exaggerated. Some good songs, including some from composer Gustavo Santaolalla and Paul Williams, grab the viewer's attention. It's fitting as the movie is about a holiday which celebrates life rather than dread death.
There's a lot that happens during the 95 minute runtime. The desperado subplot verges on being an after-thought as the guy is an unremarkable villain. Joaquin flip-flops between good guy and full-of-himself so much I barely kept track. If these elements were better developed, we would've had a better narrative. Meawhile, getting to the good stuff can try the patience of a few viewers (like myself at times).
The Book of Life succeeds because of its visual design. Anyone looking for a good animated film about Mexican culture will find it here. It's a good effort that should make for a nice time at the movies.
Once upon a time, during one Day of the Dead celebration, the Gods La Muerte (Kate del Castillo) and Xibalba (Ron Perlman) had a disagreement. La Muerte ruled the good heaven, the Land of the Remembered and Xibalba ruled the bad version, the Land of the Forgotten. Xibalba wants to trade, so the two Gods wager the fate of the cosmos on two mortal amigos named Manolo and Joaquin. La Muerte wins if Manolo ends up with Maria, daughter of the town general, while Xibalba wins if Joaquin does it instead.
Years later, Manolo (Diego Luna) is an aspiring musician forced to uphold the family bull-fighting tradition and Joaquin (Channing Tatum) is a vain war-hero. Maria (Zoe Saldana) tries to keep the peace between the two. Xibalba decides to win the bet with some cheating. Manolo finds himself in the Land of the Remembered and must reinstate La Muerte to return alive. And there's also an evil desperado on the horizon...
And all of this is related to a bunch of schoolkids by a museum tour guide (Christina Applegate).
This is the most vibrant spooktacular you'll see this year. The main characters' puppet-like designs certainly help them stand out. The environments they inhabit are colorful and exaggerated. Some good songs, including some from composer Gustavo Santaolalla and Paul Williams, grab the viewer's attention. It's fitting as the movie is about a holiday which celebrates life rather than dread death.
There's a lot that happens during the 95 minute runtime. The desperado subplot verges on being an after-thought as the guy is an unremarkable villain. Joaquin flip-flops between good guy and full-of-himself so much I barely kept track. If these elements were better developed, we would've had a better narrative. Meawhile, getting to the good stuff can try the patience of a few viewers (like myself at times).
The Book of Life succeeds because of its visual design. Anyone looking for a good animated film about Mexican culture will find it here. It's a good effort that should make for a nice time at the movies.
Friday, October 10, 2014
Gone Girl
A dark, disturbing novel such as Gone Girl got itself its ideal cinematic translator in director David Fincher. The movie's script is by the novel's author, former Entertainment Weekly critic Gillian Flynn. Anyone expecting a twisted tale will get their money's worth.
Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) thought he met his "Amazing Amy" Elliot (Rosamund Pike), the model of her parents' children's book series. They thought that their wedding two years later was the best thing ever. After a few years, however, they've grown to loathe each other. It got worst once they moved to North Carthage to settle Nick's family affairs.
July 5th, 2012. Their fifth wedding anniversary. Nick's awfully-wedded wife finds a new way to torment her husband: she disappears.
The Feds and Police immediately start searching for Amy. The media immediately pegs Nick their prime suspect before they have any evidence. Nick's double life comes to light before public eyes. And we, the audience, see "Amazing Amy's" double-life ... revealing her as a cracked shell one best avoid.
Much of the film is told in Amy's voice-over narration. The first half pegs her as an innocent, frightened woman. The second half reveals her self-destructive, narcissistic, misanthropic true nature. Pike's performance easily allows the audience to sympathize with her before the revelation.
As Nick, Ben Affleck also allows the audience to feel for him. His every public appearance is taken out-of-context and the private pressure is building. Amy's narration does put his audience sympathy levels on shaky ground before the reveal.
Many of David Fincher's usual contributors (Editor Kirk Baxter, Cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth and Composers Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) efficiently build up the suspense and suspicion with their contributions. You will be kept on edge throughout the picture. Carrie Coon as Nick's sister Margo and Tyler Perry as Nick's Lawyer Tanner Bolt are great supporting cast members.
Gone Girl is one of the best thrillers I've seen and one of the best of the year. The suspense works even if you already know what to expect. That's what great direction and a great screenplay should do.
Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) thought he met his "Amazing Amy" Elliot (Rosamund Pike), the model of her parents' children's book series. They thought that their wedding two years later was the best thing ever. After a few years, however, they've grown to loathe each other. It got worst once they moved to North Carthage to settle Nick's family affairs.
July 5th, 2012. Their fifth wedding anniversary. Nick's awfully-wedded wife finds a new way to torment her husband: she disappears.
The Feds and Police immediately start searching for Amy. The media immediately pegs Nick their prime suspect before they have any evidence. Nick's double life comes to light before public eyes. And we, the audience, see "Amazing Amy's" double-life ... revealing her as a cracked shell one best avoid.
Much of the film is told in Amy's voice-over narration. The first half pegs her as an innocent, frightened woman. The second half reveals her self-destructive, narcissistic, misanthropic true nature. Pike's performance easily allows the audience to sympathize with her before the revelation.
As Nick, Ben Affleck also allows the audience to feel for him. His every public appearance is taken out-of-context and the private pressure is building. Amy's narration does put his audience sympathy levels on shaky ground before the reveal.
Many of David Fincher's usual contributors (Editor Kirk Baxter, Cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth and Composers Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross) efficiently build up the suspense and suspicion with their contributions. You will be kept on edge throughout the picture. Carrie Coon as Nick's sister Margo and Tyler Perry as Nick's Lawyer Tanner Bolt are great supporting cast members.
Gone Girl is one of the best thrillers I've seen and one of the best of the year. The suspense works even if you already know what to expect. That's what great direction and a great screenplay should do.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
The Boxtrolls
Here be monsters. Lots of creepy monsters. They're cuddly, though.
A novel by Alan Snow, Here Be Monsters, was the basis for Laika's latest stop-motion spooktacular, The Boxtrolls. The end result is one of the most entertaining films I've seen in a while.
The Boxtrolls are critters who wear cardboard boxes, make stuff out of garbage and live underground. They've raised a human boy (Isaac Hempstead-Wright) to live among them. The Boxtrolls name themselves after their respective box; the boy is Eggs and his Boxtroll stepfather is Fish (Dee Bradley Baker).
Above them is the town of Cheesebridge, which idolizes and only eats cheese. The residents of Cheesebridge believe the Boxtrolls to be monsters who devour children. The evil Archibald P. Snatcher (Ben Kingsley) vows to rid the town of the Boxtrolls, if only to join the prestigious cheese-eating White Hats. Someone ought to drill it into him that he has a grotesque allergy to cheese.
As Snatcher snatches more Boxtrolls, including Fish, Eggs decides to act. Along the way, he meets Winnie (Elle Fanning), daughter of Pompous White Hat Lord Portley-Rind (Jared Harris). Eggs will have to use her help to find the Boxtrolls before Snatcher decides to do away with them.
The screen story, by Irena Brignull and Adam Pava, has plenty of satire. The White Hats are pompous fools so in love with cheese that they buy an expensive cheese wheel rather than build a children's hospital. Let's not forget how Snatcher so loves Cheese even if it kills him. The kids, meanwhile, will enjoy the antics of the Boxtrolls.
The film's puppets and sets are twisted, which suits the spooktacular mood well. The Boxtrolls are more lovable than grotesque, so they may not frighten small kids. But when Snatcher's allergy acts up and turns him into a dead-ringer for Quasimodo, watch out.
On the aural side, there's a good score by Dario Marianelli. A tune to watch out for is "The Boxtroll Song" by Monty Python Eric Idle. That is the catchiest part of the film.
The Boxtrolls keeps up the pace with its 96 minute runtime. So much so that I wasn't bored. The only complaint, a minor one, is that I kept mishearing certain names. But other than that, The Boxtrolls was a fun spooktacular worth remembering.
A novel by Alan Snow, Here Be Monsters, was the basis for Laika's latest stop-motion spooktacular, The Boxtrolls. The end result is one of the most entertaining films I've seen in a while.
The Boxtrolls are critters who wear cardboard boxes, make stuff out of garbage and live underground. They've raised a human boy (Isaac Hempstead-Wright) to live among them. The Boxtrolls name themselves after their respective box; the boy is Eggs and his Boxtroll stepfather is Fish (Dee Bradley Baker).
Above them is the town of Cheesebridge, which idolizes and only eats cheese. The residents of Cheesebridge believe the Boxtrolls to be monsters who devour children. The evil Archibald P. Snatcher (Ben Kingsley) vows to rid the town of the Boxtrolls, if only to join the prestigious cheese-eating White Hats. Someone ought to drill it into him that he has a grotesque allergy to cheese.
As Snatcher snatches more Boxtrolls, including Fish, Eggs decides to act. Along the way, he meets Winnie (Elle Fanning), daughter of Pompous White Hat Lord Portley-Rind (Jared Harris). Eggs will have to use her help to find the Boxtrolls before Snatcher decides to do away with them.
The screen story, by Irena Brignull and Adam Pava, has plenty of satire. The White Hats are pompous fools so in love with cheese that they buy an expensive cheese wheel rather than build a children's hospital. Let's not forget how Snatcher so loves Cheese even if it kills him. The kids, meanwhile, will enjoy the antics of the Boxtrolls.
The film's puppets and sets are twisted, which suits the spooktacular mood well. The Boxtrolls are more lovable than grotesque, so they may not frighten small kids. But when Snatcher's allergy acts up and turns him into a dead-ringer for Quasimodo, watch out.
On the aural side, there's a good score by Dario Marianelli. A tune to watch out for is "The Boxtroll Song" by Monty Python Eric Idle. That is the catchiest part of the film.
The Boxtrolls keeps up the pace with its 96 minute runtime. So much so that I wasn't bored. The only complaint, a minor one, is that I kept mishearing certain names. But other than that, The Boxtrolls was a fun spooktacular worth remembering.
Monday, September 29, 2014
The Equalizer
A gag in The Wolf of Wall Street was one character's obsession with the 80's vigilante for hire show The Equalizer. If any one called during the show the character got mad ... and converse with the caller in an overly-polite voice.
And now, The Equalizer has made its way to the big screen. Just don't call anybody while they're watching this movie, OK?
Robert McCall (Denzel Washington) is a model employee at a BostonHome Depot HomeMart. By day, he's a pal to his co-workers. By night, he reads alone at his apartment and hangs out at the local diner. One regular customer at the diner is a call girl, Teri (Chloë Grace Moretz), who's employed by some Russian Mobsters. Meanwhile, his co-workers at the Not-Home Depot wonder what he used to do.
One night, McCall discovers Teri is abused by her employers. When she lands in the hospital, McCall decides to do what he used to do: brutally beat up bad guys. McCall takes out his calm, collective rage against the Criminal Underworld. Meanwhile, the evil Russian Don Pushkin (Vladimir Kulich) dispatches his enforcer, Teddy (Martin Csokas), to go after McCall.
Antoine Fuqua, who directed Washington in his Oscar-winning role in Training Day, gets another fine performance out of his star. As usual, Denzel's easy-going style endears him to the audience. There's some compulsive behavior (such as continually timing his fights) that pops up during the movie. It's as if to say "that helps explain why he's driven to fight." Overall, he's nice, but don't wrong him or anyone else he knows.
The film is 131 minutes long, yet its pace varies. By the time McCall meets his former superiors (Melissa Leo and Bill Pullman) for a heart-to-heart, I thought it was almost time for the climax. It sped that fast. But I checked my watch and discovered an hour passed. There was another hour left. The actual climax set inside the Fake Home Depot showed McCall at his most brutal and creative.
Anyone unfamiliar with The Equalizer TV series will have no trouble following the movie. Its very straightforward plot relies on the show's basic premise, not continuity. You'll understand Robert McCall once you step out of the theater, rather than after you return home.
I have never watched an episode of the show, but The Equalizer movie is a clear, stylized thriller. Its star's performance sells the movie, which is enough to overcome its slight overlength. And that's a major positive.
And now, The Equalizer has made its way to the big screen. Just don't call anybody while they're watching this movie, OK?
Robert McCall (Denzel Washington) is a model employee at a Boston
One night, McCall discovers Teri is abused by her employers. When she lands in the hospital, McCall decides to do what he used to do: brutally beat up bad guys. McCall takes out his calm, collective rage against the Criminal Underworld. Meanwhile, the evil Russian Don Pushkin (Vladimir Kulich) dispatches his enforcer, Teddy (Martin Csokas), to go after McCall.
Antoine Fuqua, who directed Washington in his Oscar-winning role in Training Day, gets another fine performance out of his star. As usual, Denzel's easy-going style endears him to the audience. There's some compulsive behavior (such as continually timing his fights) that pops up during the movie. It's as if to say "that helps explain why he's driven to fight." Overall, he's nice, but don't wrong him or anyone else he knows.
The film is 131 minutes long, yet its pace varies. By the time McCall meets his former superiors (Melissa Leo and Bill Pullman) for a heart-to-heart, I thought it was almost time for the climax. It sped that fast. But I checked my watch and discovered an hour passed. There was another hour left. The actual climax set inside the Fake Home Depot showed McCall at his most brutal and creative.
Anyone unfamiliar with The Equalizer TV series will have no trouble following the movie. Its very straightforward plot relies on the show's basic premise, not continuity. You'll understand Robert McCall once you step out of the theater, rather than after you return home.
I have never watched an episode of the show, but The Equalizer movie is a clear, stylized thriller. Its star's performance sells the movie, which is enough to overcome its slight overlength. And that's a major positive.
Saturday, September 20, 2014
The Maze Runner
Let's see what's on the Bookshelf.
(A few minutes later.)
Here's one: The Maze Runner, by James Dashner. It's the first of a Young-Adult series. Monsters and Mazes and Film Franchise Potential! Let's see how this latest Literary Film Franchise starter is.
Our hero, Thomas (Dylan O'Brien), wakes up in an Elevator with no memories. His destination is The Glade, a woodland community of amnesiac guys like him. The Glade is in the center of a gigantic, rearranging Maze. The only way out of the Glade is out of the Maze. Anyone who goes into the Maze (the Runners) will have to avoid the resident Spidery Monsters, the Grievers.
The next newcomer to the Glade is a girl, Teresa (Kaya Scodelario). She'll also be the last newcomer The Glade. She also apparently knows who Thomas is. She's also the likely answer to the Glade's mysteries. Thomas decides to become a Runner himself to get the full answer.
Thomas is opposed by two factors. The first is Gally (Will Poulter), the resident tough guy who doesn't want any extraneous maze running. The second is the ending.
To boil it down: It's the future so life sucks. Why life sucks is detailed in the end. There's a bit of confounding ambiguity about certain back-story essential characters thrown in. It'll certainly throw off neophytes to the franchise a bit. At some point, one of these Young-Adult movies ought to put a "Find out the answers next time!" disclaimer. At least that would show self-awareness.
Wes Ball, normally a special-effects artist, makes his feature length directorial debut here. His film realizes some good imagery on a mere $34 million budget. The Grievers are interesting creatures; however, their scenes are edited too fast to comprehend them. The Maze is a wonderfully gritty and gigantic mix of CG and Real set design.
The Maze Runner is good filler for the Fall Movie dead zone. It goes at a good pace and keeps you invested in the characters' fates. That alone should make up for the open-endedness that'll surely be explained more in the next part, The Scorch Trials.
(A few minutes later.)
Here's one: The Maze Runner, by James Dashner. It's the first of a Young-Adult series. Monsters and Mazes and Film Franchise Potential! Let's see how this latest Literary Film Franchise starter is.
Our hero, Thomas (Dylan O'Brien), wakes up in an Elevator with no memories. His destination is The Glade, a woodland community of amnesiac guys like him. The Glade is in the center of a gigantic, rearranging Maze. The only way out of the Glade is out of the Maze. Anyone who goes into the Maze (the Runners) will have to avoid the resident Spidery Monsters, the Grievers.
The next newcomer to the Glade is a girl, Teresa (Kaya Scodelario). She'll also be the last newcomer The Glade. She also apparently knows who Thomas is. She's also the likely answer to the Glade's mysteries. Thomas decides to become a Runner himself to get the full answer.
Thomas is opposed by two factors. The first is Gally (Will Poulter), the resident tough guy who doesn't want any extraneous maze running. The second is the ending.
To boil it down: It's the future so life sucks. Why life sucks is detailed in the end. There's a bit of confounding ambiguity about certain back-story essential characters thrown in. It'll certainly throw off neophytes to the franchise a bit. At some point, one of these Young-Adult movies ought to put a "Find out the answers next time!" disclaimer. At least that would show self-awareness.
Wes Ball, normally a special-effects artist, makes his feature length directorial debut here. His film realizes some good imagery on a mere $34 million budget. The Grievers are interesting creatures; however, their scenes are edited too fast to comprehend them. The Maze is a wonderfully gritty and gigantic mix of CG and Real set design.
The Maze Runner is good filler for the Fall Movie dead zone. It goes at a good pace and keeps you invested in the characters' fates. That alone should make up for the open-endedness that'll surely be explained more in the next part, The Scorch Trials.
Saturday, September 6, 2014
Boyhood
NOTE: Took me long enough but now I have a new review.
Director Richard Linklater could have made his latest film, Boyhood, in one year. Twelve years in the fictional life of one Texas family would have needed multiple actors in the same role. Instead, Linklater started filming in 2002 to document the growth of both actors and characters.
Let's see how it is.
Mason Evans (Ellar Coltrane) begins the film at six-years old. His mother, Olivia (Patricia Arquette), moves him and sister Samantha (Lorelei Linklater, the director's daughter) to Houston so she can attend the University of Houston. On the weekends, Mason and Samantha go on trips with their biological father, Mason Sr. (Ethan Hawke). Mason and Samantha grow up, make friends, lose friends, decide their future, go to college and so forth. Meanwhile, Olivia struggles to support the kids and get through one failed re-marriage after another.
And that's the basic gist of the movie.
It's a story which spans 165 minutes. A lot of it is about character development. Some of it is good, some of it is not. Even minor characters we wouldn't expect to see again return. Seeing the actors age with their characters makes it intriguing.
Both the young and adult actors make a nice ensemble. You won't think of them as actors at all but as characters. Coltrane and Linklater are capable leads whose life lessons keep the viewer invested. Amongst the adults, there's Ethan Hawke as Mason Sr. He's laid-back, carefree and one of the most stable adults in the picture. He makes a good father for the kids.
Its run-time may seem intimidating for a casual viewer at first. But if you can get through it, you'll have a fine cinematic experience. That it was done at all this way is what you'll remember the most about it.
Director Richard Linklater could have made his latest film, Boyhood, in one year. Twelve years in the fictional life of one Texas family would have needed multiple actors in the same role. Instead, Linklater started filming in 2002 to document the growth of both actors and characters.
Let's see how it is.
Mason Evans (Ellar Coltrane) begins the film at six-years old. His mother, Olivia (Patricia Arquette), moves him and sister Samantha (Lorelei Linklater, the director's daughter) to Houston so she can attend the University of Houston. On the weekends, Mason and Samantha go on trips with their biological father, Mason Sr. (Ethan Hawke). Mason and Samantha grow up, make friends, lose friends, decide their future, go to college and so forth. Meanwhile, Olivia struggles to support the kids and get through one failed re-marriage after another.
And that's the basic gist of the movie.
It's a story which spans 165 minutes. A lot of it is about character development. Some of it is good, some of it is not. Even minor characters we wouldn't expect to see again return. Seeing the actors age with their characters makes it intriguing.
Both the young and adult actors make a nice ensemble. You won't think of them as actors at all but as characters. Coltrane and Linklater are capable leads whose life lessons keep the viewer invested. Amongst the adults, there's Ethan Hawke as Mason Sr. He's laid-back, carefree and one of the most stable adults in the picture. He makes a good father for the kids.
Its run-time may seem intimidating for a casual viewer at first. But if you can get through it, you'll have a fine cinematic experience. That it was done at all this way is what you'll remember the most about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)