6/10 - Ron Howard is a good director. What separates him from being great is that he is entirely dependent on his script. He is a good director because when given any material, he plays to its strengths and lets the narrative and characters do the talking. He is not flashy and lets the film breathe, and is a confident, knowledgeable, and smart filmmaker able to make the most of any material he is given. Unfortunately, this also means that bad material he is given will be watchable, but still bad (The Da Vinci Code). Great material lives up to its potential and Howard's assured hand gives the film the extra push to become a top-notch film (Apollo 13). In the Heart of the Sea is in the middle of these two. A solid film that would have been awful under a lesser director, but could have been special with a great director, the film is a middle-of-the-road film with pros and cons.

In the pros column, we have the visuals. Painstakingly gorgeous, it is a shame that this film bombed because it deserved recognition for the cinematography. On land, it beautifully captures the whaling towns and the New England feeling of these small sea towns. In town, the browns and grays are gorgeous. Gratuitous shots of the ocean from Owen Chase's (Chris Hemsworth) home with the green town on the side. With Anthony Dod Mantle's camera gently floating up and catching this beauty of the small seaside town in 1820s Nantucket, it feels practically idyllic. On the open ocean, the sunset lends beautiful oranges and yellows to adorn the film that leads to lush greens and blues. With long shot after long shot of the sun's orange casting down on the green and blue of the open ocean, In the Heart of the Sea is a painfully beautiful film. The cinematography gives this film impeccable visuals that feel like a painting one could find of ships in the 1800s. A true visual accomplishment, In the Heart of the Sea is a film that demands to be seen in order for every living person to be awed by the sheer beauty of the proceedings.

Unfortunately, this perfect cinematography is not matched by the visual effects. Compared to another film based around oil and disasters, Deepwater Horizon, the visual effects in this film are pretty bad at times. The whale looks incredible and, again, shots on the open ocean look great. The fire looks terrific too. Unfortunately, shots during the storm and while whaling are really ruined by how fake it all looks. It is similar to car being driven in a film from the 1940s or 1950s. It looks like it was filmed on a set, which is a shame. Similarly, a few action set pieces also look entirely staged, similar to the effects in a 1970s disaster movie. These moments do no just disrupt the suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience, but just look awful compared to the gritty realism of the rest of the film.

Another major negative for this film is the acting. In the lead role, Chris Hemsworth plays Thor. Pretending to have a New England accent in one scene where he says apaht instead of apart, he is fine and entirely palatable. But, either have an accent throughout the whole thing or just forget about trying. Sean Connery made a whole career on his looks, being cool, and playing every character as a Scotsman. Hemsworth can do the same, but he has to stop pretending. Alongside him, Benjamin Walker is pretty bad Captain Pollard, but nobody is as egregiously bad as Tom Holland. Every line he speaks honestly hurts. From the very beginning, Holland never utters a line with any conviction. He knows he is acting and we know he is acting. Shame the production team made the actors suffer so much (500-600 calories a day) to capture authenticity for such bad performances. Cannot say it was worth it on their parts. The only actors trying are Ben Whishaw and Brendan Gleeson, but as Herman Melville and old Thomas Nickerson, all they do is talk about the story and are not given much to do throughout. Of those who suffer, Cillian Murphy is alright, but even he turns in a lackluster performance compared to his body of work.

With bad visual effects and bad acting, In the Heart of the Sea is a film that simply lacks the depth needed to be a good film. Its story and characters are fine, but never as rich as the cinematography and painting-esque shots adorning the film. That said, as with all Ron Howard films, it is entirely watchable, riveting, and a film that entertains throughout despite its seemingly crusty and aged story.



6/10 - One of Robert Altman's low-budget 1980s play-to-film adaptations, Secret Honor further demonstrates just how little Altman's style works in a play setting. His camera is too constrained, too unable to move, and the whole film feels stiff and claustrophobic as a result. Naturally, the claustrophobia is purposeful given this take on Richard Nixon (Philip Baker Hall) that is centerstage of the film. Unfortunately, it is yet another case of Altman simply being a poor match for the material as a director. The end result is a film that largely feels quite stiff, even if the writing and acting are truly tremendous and hypnotic.

The direction does not give the film that extra little push, however. The acting and writing can only go so far. Here, they are stranded to fend for themselves as Altman tries to feel his way through the material. Cited by some as a representation of how Altman felt at the time with his career at rock bottom and his glory days of the 1970s now behind him, this is likely an incredibly fair reading of the film. Thus, one could anticipate some passion and fire being instilled into the film. Unfortunately, the direction seems to be pretty simple and straight forward to the point that I wondered if the film was just shot in one day. That said, to edit the film to look like one continuous take is always incredible, unless it is just one take. Regardless, you cannot tell and either way is a pretty good accomplishment. That said, otherwise, the camera simply floats around the room following Philip Baker Hall as he freaks out and talks to himself. This is an unfortunately restrained effort from a man more at home with huge casts or large, expansive plot scenarios. Though he can do intimate character studies, he still need the expansive set pieces and production locations in order to explore them. Here, he is reliant upon the writing to explore the character on his behalf.

And boy does the writing ever explore Nixon. Drunk, rambling, and incoherent, Nixon wallows in self-pity for an hour and a half. Drinking himself into a deeper and deeper stupor as he speaks to paintings on the wall and rants at them. Crying out for his mother, blaming Eisenhower, blaming Kissinger, and regretting selling his soul for power, this is a mournful, regretful Nixon and the writing really drives home and figures out who this man was at his very core. He is psychotic in this film, but it is merely a result of being a shell of his former self. Hated by the world, it is clear Nixon himself felt excluded if everybody other than himself hated him, so he joined in on the party. In this way, the film is quite somber and depressing as you see what his past sins have done to him and the perception he has of himself.

In the lead role, Hall may not speak like Nixon, but he brilliantly captures the man. His performance is captivating, hypnotic and truly tremendous. As a one-man performance, Hall commands attention and rewards the audience with a stunning take on this broken man with a troubled past. Without Hall, this film would feel quite dry and entirely disposable. As it stands, he is the glue that holds the entire production together with a crazed, insane take on the man, capturing all of his emotional pains, both past and present. Hall is the reason to watch this film, he knows it, and he rewards the viewer with a career-best performance.

A showcase for Philip Baker Hall, Secret Honor is lesser Altman, but still entirely watchable. Though not playing to his strengths as a director, the acting and writing make Secret Honor a captivating take on Richard Nixon in the aftermath of Watergate a she is trapped in a basement, recording an imaginary trial, and trying himself in the court of his opinion. Calling in witnesses - his mother, Kissinger, and Eisenhower - to provide evidence, it is clear that Nixon is set to find himself guilty, no matter how much he wants to be pardoned and set free from his burden.



8/10 - An absolutely wild film directed by Tony Scott and written by Quentin Tarantino, True Romance is a real guy's movie to watch on Valentine's Day or the day before, as it was in my case. Starring an ensemble cast with a tremendous cast of characters in small cameo-esque roles throughout that really add thunder to this film. Over-the-top, stupid, and thoroughly Tarantino, True Romance is an odd little love story with an affinity for guns, unexpected drug dealing, and a whole cast of gangsters, cops, and movie producers, all vying for the coke from an unexpected source. With great acting and writing, the film may be a bit predictable and is thoroughly cliched, but is remains terrific entertainment throughout its runtime.

The best scene in the film is the infamous "Sicilian scene" with Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper. It is all we see of Walken's mysterious Don Vincenzo, the consigliere for infamous gangster Blue Lou Boyle, who had his coke accidentally stolen by stupid Clarence (Christian Slater). With the coke worth than $500,000, it should be clear that he is unhappy. Going to Clarence's father Clifford (Hopper), Don Vincenzo gives the man a chance to talk. A raw, tough-nosed conversation, it is a brilliantly eloquent, concise, and written sequence by Tarantino. Naturally, Walken nails the role and is a real highlight of the film as a whole. The nervous energy given off by Hopper, but his solid defiance to this brutally violent man before him is equally terrific. This is a scene that gives Tarantino to spin this crime yarn into something of higher literary significance and he does it, with a gorgeously penned scene. Walken and Hopper do the writing justice, plus some.

In a typically chameleon-like performance, Gary Oldman also steals the show as pimp Drexl Spivey. Confronted by Clarence to free Alabama (Patricia Arquette) from his grasp and also the man with the coke from Blue Lou Boyle, Oldman's Drexl is a black man wannabe with a scarred face, one eye, and long brown dreadlocks. This man really is a chameleon. Psychotic, unhinged, and an undeniably wild pimp, Oldman's character may be my favorite from the film, even though Walken's terrific Sicilian gangster gets the best scene in the entire film.

Naturally, James Gandolfini is also tremendous in this film as Don Vincenzo's trigger man Virgil. Roughing up Alabama to find out where the coke is, Virgil takes a liking to her and let's her take one shot before he finishes her off. Menacing, tough, and yet warm and oddly approachable like only an oddly good guy Gandolfini can be, the film finds yet another great scene with Galdolfini's moment in the spotlight.

The film also finds a great source of energy from Brad Pitt's Floyd. He never really gets a scene to himself, rather he is always a supporting character. That said, he is hysterical as a druggy who is always high. Letting the gangsters know Clarence's every move while offering them drugs the whole time, Floyd is a real gem of a character. No surprise he inspired Pineapple Express given how well he would fit in that film. The best moment with Floyd comes as a gangster pulls a gun causing a delayed, high reaction from Pitt as he mutters, "Woah."

Yet, the stars here are Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette. Less compelling than the rest of the supporting cast, their twisted love story is one only Tarantino could concoct. In essence, it is a dry run for Natural Born Killers without the constantly bloodshed and via the direction of Tony Scott. Thus, it is less coked up and more restrained than Oliver Stone's film. Though less interesting than the other characters, their Bonnie & Clyde-esque matchup of a hooker with a heart of gold and a lonely man with limited romantic experience is somehow charming and sweat. True Romance is a film that violently argues that, to love somebody, you must kill for them. Clarence and Alabama pull the trigger for one another, in the most romantic acts ever and in an attempt to be Elvis (Val Kilmer) cool.

Kinetic, insane, and thoroughly Tarantino, the film is not really a Tony Scott film. Yet, his assured hand does help keep it a bit more restrained without descending into complete parody. With a tremendous cast that all nail their roles, True Romance is a very good film that is simply fun and somehow romantic.



8/10 - The Lady From Shanghai is my introduction to Orson Welles. As with every director I have just embarked on, I have no idea why it takes me so long to get to these classics. There is definitely some prejudice on my part, even if I know that I enjoy films from this era. Every time I watch one, I love it. Yet, it feels so demanding and different from modern film that I manage to talk myself out of watching one. When the DVD finally gets put into the player, however, it takes no time at all for me to realize just how stupid I had been. The Lady From Shanghai is yet another stellar example of this stupidity with a masterful film noir with a shocking ending, even if it does take a bit to get to the good, dirty scandalous bits. In hindsight, the beginning is equally terrific, but suffers in the moment.

Taking a long roundabout way to get to the murder, Orson Welles introduces us to Mike O'Hara (Welles). Quickly captivated by the beauty of Rosaline Bannister (Rita Hayworth), she manages to convince her attorney husband Arthur (Everett Sloane) to hire him as a servant. What ensues is a heavily implied love affair between the two. Sharing a natural chemistry due to the fact that Welles and Hayworth were married at the time, the two make for incredibly compatible lovers. However, the first half of the film is seemingly maligned by a roundabout method of speaking that is just entirely odd to listen to as a modern viewer. In particular, George Grisby (Glenn Anders) - Bannister's law partner - has a very odd way of talking. This odd method of speech mirrors Welles' lackadaisical interest in actually telling a conventional plot. This one is more about the characters, the aesthetic, and the set pieces. He will eventually get into the murder, but he needed to take the time to set the scene and really dump the viewer into the world to show that the ending, though seemingly unexpected, should not be unexpected at all.

SPOILERS

From the very beginning, Rosaline cannot be trusted. She claims to not smoke, yet accepts a cigarette from Mike all the same when they first meet. She puts it in her bag, but took it anyways. Soon after, she is a massive smoker and is alleged to have recently taken up the habit. On top of all this, she cheats on her husband and plays the role far too innocently to be anything but a sneaky temptress. She is a dastardly femme fatale and Hayworth plays her so well, we never see it coming. Her acting and Welles' writing bury the lede and sell us so hard on their love for one another that we could never conceive she would double cross him. George is weird, he did it! Arthur is jealous, he did it! But no, Hayworth sells her so well as an innocent woman seeking a love affair and Welles' roundabout writing in the beginning was a mere ruse to make us look away from the real source of the plotting. Even if she had no turned on poor Mike O'Hara, she was still planning on axing both lawyers to collect the insurance money for herself. A dangerous femme fatale, she is one we never see coming, even if a femme fatale is required for a film noir.

END SPOILERS

Alongside the more classic noir elements of the film is terrific comedy in the courtroom sequence, which was unexpected. Arthur Bannister's trickery as Mike's defense lawyer and even questioning himself as a witness is more screwball than noir. It is an odd touch that really adds character to this film and makes a truly entertaining affair. It may make the film a bit tonally odd, but Welles swings it quite well and sells it to no end as merely an odd reality. Once again, just as with the truly oddball beginning and weird delivery of Glenn Anders as George, The Lady From Shanghai is hardly a straight forward noir film. Instead, its elements of comedy and showing the absurdity of life and the weird things that occur everyday make it a film with a unique bite.

A classic film noir for good reason, The Lady From Shanghai features incredible set pieces - especially the amusement park with some iconic cinematography and set pieces in that sequence - and great acting (even Welles). The plot is equally brilliant. Though it takes a bit to get into it heavily, Welles ensures it all comes together at the end with a finale that is unexpected, even if it should be anticipated. That said, this is hardly a film about the story and is more-or-less an experience and an sort of satire on the typically serious nature of noir films with the addition of black comedy, unusual characters, and truly odd interactions. Hell, even Orson Welles' accent is comical and adds to the absurdity of the entire proceeding. I fear that this film may not get the credit it deserves for being a completely weird film that seems to be relatively straight laced on the surface, but is really from straight out of left field.



8/10 - I never saw this film coming. Wow. Ignoring the fact it is just a Hitchcock film that incidentally says "directed by Brian De Palma" at the beginning, this is one twisted flick. No wonder Columbia expressed hesitation with this project. It is pure insanity that drives the final plot twist that adds such a deliciously demented piece of this film that drives it home to being such a great film. Obsession, working with classic De Palma/Hitchcock themes of voyeurism, obsession (duh), and murder, is probably the most straight forward Hitchcock adaptation done by De Palma. His other works do introduce some unique elements or show influence from other directors. Obsession, however, is pure Hitchcock and feels as though it is straight out of the 1940s or 1950s.

Opening up with all of the credits in the beginning and wrapping up with nothing more than "the end" plastered on top of a freeze frame of the final shot, Obsession is structured like a film from the Hays code era. The heavily orchestral score adds to it, cuing you in emotion and thrills like an old black-and-white film. These detailed touches are met with old school pacing, a lack of classic De Palma bloody violence, implied dark themes with nothing explicitly stated, and melodramatic acting and plotting. Obsession is a film that slipped out of the days of Hitchcock's black-and-white thrillers like Suspicion, Shadow of a Doubt or his colored works like Dial M for Murder or Vertigo. Obsession is thoroughly Hitchcock and is a fun film to watch unfold for that very reason, though De Palma does infuse it with his own sense of flair and style throughout.

Taking the extravagant Southern locale of a film such as Gone with the Wind and turning it into a "modern" set thriller, Obsession is a deeply southern film. Set in New Orleans, the film aches with the old school southern way of doing things. As a result, it is incredibly stiff and this rigidity only adds to the risque nature of the plot. This creates an interesting juxtaposition between the old school ways of the town and the city with the events unraveling in the Courtland household.

SPOILER

However, the film really soars where it is compared to Hitchcock. Shadow of a Doubt comes into play with the incest potential between Michael Courtland (Cliff Robertson) and his new love. Turning out to be his daughter (Genevieve Bojuld), but as an adult, the film is incredibly twisted on this note. Falling in love (Sandra/Amy knows, but is complicit in the plot against her father) with Michael and then consummating the marriage, but all of this occurring through a water rippling dream effect to obscure the horrible truth, this film is sordid with its incest implications. This honestly it what defines it as so psychologically messed up as a film, but also what solidifies it as a spellbinding thriller. Hitchcock toyed with incest in Shadow of a Doubt, so it is clear where the influence came from, but its inclusion here just feels so wrong, but it just works so well.

Dial M for Murder is another huge influence here with the murder of Robert La Salle (John Lithgow) by Michael. After setting him up twice, stealing his daughter, and killing Michael's wife, Robert definitely had it coming. But, in a struggle on a desk, Michael is able to grab a pair of scissors and stab Robert with them. A copy of the murder from Hitchcock's classic murder mystery, this is a clear reference to the film, even if the plot itself does not really mirror it too much.

END SPOILERS

Rather, the clearest influence in the film is from Vertigo. Fashioned by De Palma and writer Paul Schrader as a film influenced by Vertigo, it is clear why this is the case. Using double identities to add a further wrinkle to the plot like in that Hitchcock classic, the film also lifts the obsession of Scottie (James Stewart) and gives it to Michael Courtland in this film. His infatuation with his late wife Elizabeth manifests itself into turning new love Sandra into an exact copy of her. Sandra matches this by becoming obsessed with Elizabeth herself and excessively asking questions about what she was like. Adding dashes of voyeurism as Michael stalks Sandra in Florence and at her job at a church, the film further bears resemblance. Yet, again, just as De Palma fashions the film as a 1940s thriller with the credits at the beginning, the devil is in the details. In Vertigo, Kim Novak is obsessed with a painting and is constantly seen putting flowers at a grave. Obsession lifts this repeatedly with Sandra helping to restore a painting of the Madonna in a church, putting flowers at her mother's grave, and the shrine Michael had built for his wife and daughter in New Orleans with a huge grave. Though not mirroring Vertigo and showing some innovation with these inclusions, they are clear homages to the work of Hitchcock yet again.

Obsession is a film that Hitchcock forgot to make, so De Palma made it for him. Twisted, filled with incest, voyeurism, obsession, and homages to the work of Hitchcock in Dial M for Murder and Vertigo, Obsession is the most clear cut remake of a Hitchcock film other than Gus Van Sant's Psycho. Though De Palma pulls influence from various Hitchcock films and changes sequences up a bit, it is always abundantly clear that this is a "remake that is not a remake" of a Hitchcock thriller. That said, it is still brilliant. Terrifically written, well acted, and entirely thrilling, Obsession is a film that is as good as it is twisted.



5/10 - Oh I didn't know they let bad girls in here.
-Harrison Ford as Jack Trainer

I have a head for business and a bod for sin. Is there anything wrong with that?
-Melanie Griffith as Tess McGill

No film with those lines of dialogue could actually be good. Working Girl does not buck the trends and is a cookie cutter romance with my least favorite narrative cliche in the history of humanity. Yet, far too many films seem to think it works. This film may be fun for many, but it just aggravated me to no end and made me desperate to shut it off. The film is incredibly well-written, even if it is cliche ridden and director Mike Nichols allows the film to successfully follow cliches, always remaining relatively palatable in the face of its annoying plot conventions. Oh and of course the bad dialogue that clearly served as inspiration for Melanie Griffith's daughter Dakota Johnson to say the bad dialogue in Fifty Shades of Grey with confidence because, hell, her mom got an Oscar nomination for the same lines.

Featuring a woman beat down by the system, Tess McGill (Griffith), her goofy friend Cynthia (Joan Cusack), and her bitch boss Katharine Parker (Sigourney Weaver), the film's plot is kicked off when Katharine breaks her leg. Having previously pitched an idea to Katharine regarding a possible merger path for a client of their investment firm, Tess - a lowly secretary - learns that Katharine planned to steal the idea and send it off to boyfriend Jack Trainer (Harrison Ford) to bring it home. Well, Tess decides to pose as a tried and true professional in the mergers and acquisitions game, falls in love with Jack, and hides her lies from everybody with the help of Cynthia. You will never guess what happens in the middle though. She almost tells Jack the truth! In the midst of telling him (leading off with, "I have to tell you something"), he gets a phone call to distract him, and then he turns to her and says, "What did you want to tell me?" Later, he learns when Katharine bursts into the big merger meeting where Tess' deal is set to go through and is initially hurt, but quickly gets over it and loves her anyways. Even better, the big client - after Katharine fires Tess - offers Tess a job and gets Katharine fired for stealing the idea from Tess. Is this not just the most upliftingly original plot you have ever heard? No spoiler tags either. I implore you read that past paragraph because it does not spoil anything. If you have seen any romantic comedy, you have seen this plot play out before. It is a shame to see Nichols stuck with such annoyingly derivative material.

That said, he does well with it. Thanks to Harrison Ford and Melanie Griffith, Working Girl nearly comes off. Joan Cusack is annoying here as a loud obnoxious cliche, but all the same, the film nearly gets home. It is quite cute and the ending underscores that when Jack and Tess finally get to be together with no lies between them. But, man did I wish I had read a plot summary beforehand. I will never like a film with this plot. Hell, I hated Some Like It Hot - a classic - for the very same reason. These films where a character misrepresents who they are just leave me agitated and waiting for the same cliched plot to play out where they get exposed, get some egg on their face, but then the people they hid it from do not really care in the end. It is a plot with no tension because it has been played out so much, so it befuddles me to no end to see it constantly played out.

That said, Nichols does write the film quite well. It is cliched throughout, but it does hit all the cliches. The fact it almost works shows that the cliches have some merit, even if it worn out. It is a perfect example of this kind of film, so it is no surprise to see it well received critically. It is a film that is cliche ridden, but has so much bubbly energy from its leads that it masks many of these cliches and, where it does not, the cliches hit sweet notes, though familiar.

Working Girl may be a good film. It did receive a Best Picture nomination. But, its cliched plot is one that simply is not up my alley. It just causes me unnecessary aggravation due to the tediously nature of this particular set of cliches and the prototypical story that ensues. That said, the film does embody the cliches perfectly and for those that enjoy this type of storyline, it will appeal greatly. The acting, particularly from Griffith, is quite good and rise above the derivative material and corny dialogue.



8/10 - Robin: My name is Richard Grayson. The other kids call me Dick.
Batman: Well, children can be cruel.

Fast paced, frenetic, and kinetic, The Lego Batman Movie is another piece of product placement for Lego, Bed, Bath & Beyond, and Pennysaver, that works incredibly well. Though fast paced, it never annoys, while providing bright colors and fun sequences for the target child audience. But, in this spate of incredible energy, The Lego Batman Movie touches on important themes of teamwork, togetherness, and family, that should have a profound impact on children. For adults, the dirtier jokes and the constant fan service with Batman, and the critique of DC films ("brooding" as a Batman trait, mocking the premise of Suicide Squad) will more than provide enough entertainment. Above all, however, the film truly strikes a sweet spot from being self-referential and corny without slipping into becoming annoying a la last year's Deadpool. This is a self-aware superhero satire done right with funny jokes, good action, and tremendous animation.

With Will Arnett anchoring the film with a hysterically selfish and narcissistic take on Batman, Arnett finds some great pieces to the character when he is not just spitting punch lines. Though the punch lines work, the film would tire quickly if it were just a barrage of jokes. Rather, via Batman, the film finds a heart akin to a Pixar film. Lonely and caught in a constant spiral of self-loathing that culminates with a new Batman film being released, the character lives a life of solitude. At times vulnerable, but always lashing out as a result of his inner anger, Arnett does well to play a man who is self-aware. He knows he is alone, but his vanity and pride do not allow him to admit it out loud. His obsession over his abs is vain, yes, but also heavily compensating for how inadequate of a person he feels like without a family to call his own. Though Alfred (Ralph Fiennes) is there for him, he is so blind for self-hatred, this point is lost on him. As a side bar, Fiennes is a brilliant selection for Alfred and does tremendously in the role.

Though the film explains its themes of loneliness, family, and teamwork with no subtlety, it never feels preachy because it is a kids movie. Though the parents get it, the kids do need Ellie Kemper's Phyllis, guardian of the Phantom Zone, the explain to us what makes people good or bad and how people can change. On-the-nose, the film never suffers or feels hokey, rather it is a good time for the adults to calm down and relax from the frenetic pace of the film.

The frenetic pace of the film is not a constant though. Some of the best scenes in the film are ones highlighting Batman's loneliness. An extended shot that has to be somewhere near a minute long or more (a lifetime in this film) of Batman just sitting in his indoor pool eating lobster is absolutely hysterical. Him warming up the lobster and getting his mail also hits comedy highs for its critique of the mundanity of life. It highlights just how plain his life is, but makes him so relatable to the audience and shows that, no matter who you are, the Pennysaver winds up in the mailbox and you always hit the wrong numbers on the microwave the first time. The simple comedy of this film is a pleasure to watch unfold and, though not revolutionary, it is incredible fun and really works in the film with great comedic delivery and director Chris McKay willing to take his time with jokes.

That said, the film's most fervent energy comes into the form of constant references. A who's who of properties that Warner Bros or Lego have their hands in with villains coming left, right, and center, from the 80s, 90s, and 00s, the film is a nerd's dream. Much of the hilarity comes the sheer number of villains introduced - both from Batman's world and others - as well as those that are not real, but included anyways as a punchline. Again, very simple humor, but it is great service to the adults in the crowd who will get the references and enjoy seeing them portrayed in this format.

Plot-wise, the film is in service of its themes. Naturally, one must fail on their own to realize they need help. Yet, the film's interesting action in Arkham Asylum and the city of Gotham, as well as an interesting take on the "end the world" desire of villains of all kinds, the film finds great entertainment from its storyline. It may not be revolutionary, but director Chris McKay does a great job capturing the action and finding innovative ways to utilize the use of legos in the battle and in the aftermath of action sequences (fire). Interestingly, the film also shows the need for evil as the presence of evil ensures the rise of good to overcome evil. In this way, the character of the Joker (Zach Galifianakis) is used incredibly well and his actions in regards to the plot work incredibly well with this recurring theme.

Featuring a stellar voice cast, The Lego Batman Movie is a terrifically animated affair that is pure energy. This will be off-putting to some, but for those willing to go where this wild ride takes them, the film is wholesome family fun that entertains throughout. For adults, the references, adult comedy, and crucial themes to teach their kids will make the film more than worth the ticket price. For kids, the references may go over their head for the most part, but the film's staging of action and animation result in a film that will leave them in awe and in love with a Batman character that may be self-absorbed, but is entirely lovable. If this is a child's first experience with Batman, it is not just a wholesome one, but one that could get them to fall in love with the character.

7/10 - Killing and dismembering a person changes people, as does coming into a lot of money in one fortunate stroke of luck. Danny Boyle's directorial debut Shallow Grave explores just how much one changes when a trio of friends stumble a dead roommate and a suitcase full of cash, only to then wind up in the crosshairs of the cops and gangsters that are closing in fast. Driven to insanity, this black comedy crime film features some of Boyle's trademark fast-paced action and music, but does feel like a debut film. It really does not distinguish itself too much from other crime films at the time and is pretty thinly plotted. That said, the film is incredibly entertaining, well acted, and showed incredible promise for Boyle.

The star here though is Christopher Eccleston. A reserved, innocent, and dorky accountant, his David is brilliant. Driven over the edge after he and his friends find the body and the cash, his change is spurred on by being the guy charged with burying and dismembering the body. He is unable to cope with what he has done and the added stress on his psyche, being driven into madness. Holing up in the attic and frightening both Juliet (Kerry Fox) and Alex (Ewan McGregor), Eccleston plays an unhinged psychotic incredibly well. He really steals the show here and provides a performance that anchors the film incredibly well. One could argue that this is another film about average working men revolting against their boring jobs, even if David does find some enjoyment out of being an accountant. However, even his boss says that accountants are boring. Therefore, it is essentially his revolt against the monotonous life he leads as a timid, reserved people. Killing unleashes his wild side and gives him a shot of adrenaline like no other and it is one that is highly addictive.

Alongside him, Ewan McGregor and Kerry Fox turn in good performances as well in the film that is noteworthy for launching McGregor's career. Both are solid as more straight-laced characters compared to the unhinged Eccleston. That said, they both are punished violently for their actions in the film with helping with the burying of the bodies. The two of them really do bring the film back to Earth a bit, but their best scene definitely comes as they become more unhinged as well at the end. Out for themselves, the film reaches a very dark comedic finale with terrifically maniacal acting on the part of Fox and McGregor in the closing sequence.

That said, the only part that truly feels like Boyle is the opening. With fast-paced music and the cruelly interviewing potential new flatmates while mocking them openly, the quick cuts and general pace feel like Boyle. It is in this opening that he really found his style and it is a shame to see the rest of the film be far more reserved and less indulgent of the typical kinetic nature of his work. The end result is a film that simply feels less polished and stylish than we have become accustomed to from the British director. But, what he does manage to do incredibly well is make the film feel alive. The material is quite derivative at times, especially when with some influence with the Coen brothers' love of having characters steal or fall into a briefcase of money, only to lose it at the end and nobody gets the money. Hitchcock also comes into play with the high-angle shot of voyeurism done through the point of view of David spying on Juliet. It feels similar to the shot of the stairs in Psycho right before Arbogast falls down them or looking down the stairs as in Vertigo. Thus, Boyle's film feels similar at times in that regard, but he finds comedy in odd places and makes the derivative plot feel fresh and new. Though we know it is not, Boyle's approach is always compelling and distracts from the predictable nature of the storyline. Tarantino's Pulp Fiction is a good comparison, though less self-indulgent than that film and it does also feel a bit more unpolished and hesitant. This is a by-product of it being Boyle's debut, albeit one that hinted at the great things to come.

A largely quite predictable and derivative black comedy crime film, Shallow Grave has that "familiar-yet-fresh" feel of many 1990s crime films. With terrific acting and good direction, Shallow Grave hits a sweet spot and is richly entertaining, even if its lacks the cohesion needed to be a very good or great film.



8/10 - The film about teenage rebellion against their unhappy homes and lives, Rebel Without a Cause is a melodramatic rumination on the neglect of parents and what it can do to a growing child. Released about a month after James Dean's death at the age of 24, Rebel Without a Cause has certainly aged a bit, but in executing its themes, it is a brilliantly sympathetic look at teenage angst and the fractured soul a teenager can possess. In the 1950s and even now, this is tragically overlooked and written off as the child being melodramatic and not understanding real suffering. Yet, Rebel Without a Cause shows that there is no greater pain for a teenager than not having parents who love them or who are even there for them. With an iconic performance from Dean, the film is a moving and tragic take on the 1950s America through the eyes of disaffected teenagers. Oh and it ripped off La La Land too with that planetarium sequence. Nicholas Ray just had to copy Damien Chazelle, I guess.

Introducing us to a trio of teenagers - Jim (Dean), Judy (Natalie Wood), and John/Plato (Sal Mineo) - the film starts with them all in jail after being picked up. Jim was arrested for underage drinking. Judy for being a woman out late at night. John for killing puppies. Yes, really. Jim's parents move him from town to town, never letting him settle in and his father gets belittled by his overbearing wife, who definitely wears the pants. This causes Jim great anxiety and anger to watch his father just get beat down without fighting back. Judy is owned by her father who is abusive and controlling. John's parents rightfully bolted, recognizing their son is a serial killer in the making. He now lives with a housekeeper. The three are all suffering from their broken homes and rebelling constantly, along with the rest of the kids in town. Highlighting the damage these parents, who have a woeful understanding of their children, have caused in their lives with how the kids act out the entire day, Rebel Without a Cause is entirely sympathetic to the kids.

The neglect these kids suffer from is highlighted in the bond that forms between them in just a single day. John quickly calls Jim his best friend. When the three of them are at the abandoned mansion, the three bond quickly and John exclaims that this is the best time he ever had at the mansion and the only time he has had fun, because he is not alone this time. Jim and Judy, meanwhile, rapidly fall into love after Jim kisses Judy. With Judy having previously fought with her father about her desire to show affection by kissing, this kiss is the key that opens up her heart. For all three of them, they simply want somebody to love them. When somebody shows them a small level of affection, they fall head over heels and rush into friendships and romantic relationships with that person. These are kids with broken emotions who are seeking for any sort of attention from their parents by acting out and, if they cannot get it from them, they will get it from somebody else. While it may seem like a flaw with how quickly the characters become the best of friends, it is actually a tragically accurate portrayal of how desperate and deprived of emotion these kids are. Things progress quickly because they have no idea how it feels to be loved and they love the feeling.

Of course, the angst and rebellion is not limited to the protagonist trio. The bullies are also starved of authentic feeling and emotion. Buzz Gunderson (Corey Allen) shows this when he quickly becomes friends with Jim, even after hating him initially. Judy also bullies Jim at the beginning to feel accepted the crowd. This is not mere following, however, it is acceptance and a sense of community. By bullying others, these equally disaffected teens are able to feel as though they are part of a group. Though they may not believe in what they are doing or recognize the risks, it is a cry for help and the only source of fun and togetherness they feel. Once they return home, which they dread doing, they have nothing but loneliness awaiting them as their parents ignore them or the relationship is entirely fractured.

A classic from director Nicholas Ray, Rebel Without a Cause is a truly entertaining, tragic, and sympathetic portrayal of teenage angst and the disconnection between parents and their children. Though set in the 1950s, the film never feels distant or old. Rather, it feels like a film that could have come out recently with the same scenarios, characters, and events. This is a film with legs and one that will continue to hit sore spots for ignored and neglected teenagers for as long as cinema serves as a gateway for those kids to feel connected to other human beings and their lives.



7/10 - An inventive and charming romantic comedy with a time travelling twist, Kate & Leopold feels similar to the more recent About Time, but with less impeccable cuteness. Yet, what is lacks in cuteness is makes up for with charm from Hugh Jackman. A real life version of an internet user calling every girl "m'lady", but with the plot twist of him actually meaning it, Jackman plays Leopold, Duke of Albany. Brought to 2001 from 1876 by his great grandson Stuart (Liev Schreiber), a scientist who discovered time portals, time bends and stars collide when he meets Kate (Meg Ryan). The ex-girlfriend of Stuart, Kate and Leopold quickly fall for one another, but must overcome the fact that their time period is over 100 years apart and Leopold must go back to 1876 or Stuart will not be born. Sticky stuff, really. In the vital words of Matthew McConaughey, "Time is a flat circle". Kate & Leopold is the very embodiment of this.

Hinting at its finale - that Kate and Leopold will be together, duh - from the very first scene when Leopold notices Stuart taking photos at a party thrown to celebrate Leopold choosing a wife. As Leopold chases after Stuart, he runs past Kate at the party. How did she get there, you ask? You honestly know without watching the movie. This is the problem with these romantic comedies. They are also so predictable. Kate & Leopold is no exception and is not set to bust expectations. Its time traveling makes no sense and ill-defined, just as in About Time. But man is it ever charming. It is romantic and shows that nothing can keep people apart, but sometimes, you just have to take a leap of faith in order to land the one person meant for you. Here, Jackman and Ryan sell it hard with terrific chemistry, Jackman turning up the charm, and Ryan playing an unlikable, but soon oddly cute character in this romantic comedy. Funnily enough, the film gets a bit self-reflexive in a deleted scene added in the director's cut with Kate at a movie screening in her job as a market researcher. Complaining to the film's director that the entire test audience hated the lead because she was unlikable, he fires back that he believes she is likable, but screws up sometimes and deserves a pass for that just as Kate would get a pass. In a bit of self-reflexiveness, Kate fires back that she is not a character in a romantic comedy. Though not a crucial scene, it is a funny bit since Kate is an unlikable character in a romantic comedy on the surface.

In reality, she is not unlikable at all. How would one react to hearing that a time portal was opened by your ex-boyfriend? Well, Stuart gets locked up in a mad house for spouting off that he opened a portal and both Kate and her brother Charlie (Breckin Meyer) write him off as a hardcore method actor. Kate even goes so far as casting him as a spokesman for a crappy butter company. She is a career-focused woman who gets met with pervy bosses who want her to sleep with them for promotions. Her whole day is marketing crappy products to moronic customers and she, though she spins it in her mind, is unhappy with this lifestyle. She wants more and when offered more by Leopold, it is really an offer she cannot refuse.

Featuring Jackman at his most charming and Ryan, coming off of some plastic surgery that made her upper lip curl up oddly and be too full (it is really distracting once you notice it) and from making romantic movies with every popular 1980s/1990s/early 2000s actor (no seriously, Tom Hanks, Denzel, Matthew Broderick, Kevin Kline, Billy Crystal, Nicolas Cage, Russell Crowe, and Val Kilmer), gets to add another popular leading man from the era to her stable. The duo making for an alluring pairing and really do work together. The are a bit of romantic foils with Leopold a hopelessly old fashioned romantic and Kate a "masculine", career-focused woman who wants romance, but never thinks she will be able to find it. While not inventive here, it does work impeccably well.

Charming, interesting due to the time travel angle, and pairing together two equally charismatic leads, Kate & Leopold is definitely an early-2000s film. That said, it is a fun film that has some messy time travel, is cliched, and predictable, but like a good McDonald's burger with some fries and a coke, it is entirely irresistible when you are hungry.



3/10 - Fashioned as an Awards favorite entering 2016, Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk promised innovative technology in the form of 120fps and 4k, while being helmed by Ang Lee. Coming off of Life of Pi, one had to assume that this film would be Lee's triumphant war film to add to his resume. Unfortunately, it is an absolutely abhorrent film. Perhaps watching it on a television sells it a bit short without the technology, but the 120fps feels like it was nothing more than a band-aid, covering up the gaping and infected wound that is the script. The acting is equally horrible, but the film is akin to the Star Wars prequels. It has a script so bad that no actor could reasonably be expected to save the film and make the dialogue sound natural or anything better than unintentional comedy. Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk is worse than anyone could have ever imagined.

Starring Joe Alwyn as Billy Lynn, a man who fended off the "enemy" as he defended Sgt. Virgil Breen (Vin Diesel) from being attacked further, the video of the incident goes viral. As a result, Lynn and his fellow troops are shuttled around America on a thank you tour, culminating with an appearance at a not-the-Dallas Cowboys game. Appearing in the halftime show with Destiny's Child, the boys are greeted by definitely-not-Jerry Jones (Steve Martin), his stooges, and the many Americans who thank the troops just to feel better about themselves and meet their patriotism quota. Ang Lee's film explores this hollow patriotism, the horrors of war and what it does to young men in the form of PTSD, and is decidedly anti-war, but pro-soldier. Unfortunately, Lee's script misses the mark. With preachy dialogue that explains every little theme he wishes to explore in the film, Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk is in-your-face and entirely hamfisted. Rather than more nuanced looks at heroism and the need of American society to feel connected to the war through these young men, Lee's script merely preaches at the viewer for nearly two hours.

The characters are all incredibly cookie cutter and the scenarios they find themselves in entirely laughable. For example, Wayne Foster (Tim Blake Nelson) - a successful oil industry man involved in fracking - approaches the soldiers to give them thanks and ask how the war is going. Sgt. David Dime (Garret Hedlund) responds by aggressively putting him in his place and preaching Lee's own personal anti-fracking beliefs. In a press conference, Lee has the soldiers being pestered with questions and, before they answer the question, Lynn imagines a fake response in black-and-white that is actually true. Answering a question about the progress of the war, Lynn imagines Dime responding by saying they are doing a great job creating new terrorists. This on-the-nose explanation of what Lee thinks of war is grating and thoroughly unpleasant to experience. For a director capable of great works, it is a shame to see him forget the basic tenant of screenwriting "show and do not tell". By ignoring this advice, you wind up with Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk.

This is further preached at us through Norm Oglesby (Martin). The soldiers are working with Albert (Chris Tucker) to get a movie made about them, but they only have the length of the game to get a deal done (I have no idea why). After initially telling them that Hilary Swank wanted to play Billy Lynn in the movie - which is an offensive joke that finds comedy by mocking transsexuality, again shocking from Lee who made Brokeback Mountain - the deals all fall through. Only left is Oglesby who offers the soldiers $5,500 a piece plus a percentage of the profits for the deal. He then explains to Billy that their story is America's not their own. Naturally, the script has Billy put him in his place and explain that it is their lives and they actually live these events. In the bathroom immediately after, Albert comes in and exclaims that it was like something out of a movie. Hysterical, annoyingly self-aware, and a further example of Lee pummeling the audience with his own personal beliefs and what he wants us to all get out of this film.

As with any awful script, the film is not without horrific dialogue. When not preaching at us, the script still feels inauthentic. It never stops feeling written and it borders on comedy at times. The scenarios they find themselves in - fighting security, fighting an obnoxiously anti-gay guy in the crowd - never feel natural. It all feels so staged and pre-planned. This is a film that never feels real. It consistently feels like it is a movie and goes to great lengths to remind us that it is a film, not just with the interaction in the bathroom with Albert either. While watching the game, Billy shows Albert the cheerleader he made out with earlier, Faison (Makenzie Leigh). Remarking that all great movies have a love story, Lee sets us up for more awful dialogue in the form of this half-baked romance.

The pairing of Billy and Faison could be promising, but they met on the day of the game. Yet, they act as if they have known one another for years and are set to be engaged in no time at all. They quickly fall in love with Faison exclaiming she salvages every second she can with Billy, before then encouraging him to go back to war and be a decorated hero like he supposed to be. What a girl. From making out in the press conference to making out in the loading dock, the romance feels excessive and unnecessary to the plot, other than giving Lee another chance to show us the warped perception of war possessed by Americans. The comedic element of the romance is further underscored by a scene where Billy watches Faison perform. Throughout, we see footage of Billy speaking to his sister Katherine (Kristen Stewart). Billy went to war because he defended Katherine against her boyfriend who dumped her after she got in a serious car accident. As a result, he faced assault charges and had to sign up for war to get out of them. Katherine feels responsible for this and encourages him to leave the military, especially because he is a virgin and should not die one after being such a hero. Yes, this really did happen. Thus, as he watches Faison perform, Billy has a vision of the two of them making passionate love in black-and-white. Lee then cuts out of this brief sex scene to show Billy being overcome by tears as the national anthem plays in the background. He may be crying because it will never happen, but the emotion just does not come off. It looks like he is crying because he will die a virgin and not get to have sex with this hot cheerleader. There is no romance, no charm. It is just lust and Lee tries to smear lipstick on a pig with this portion of the film.

This further highlights an issue with the film. The film's dialogue is so bad and over-the-top, it borders on satire. Paul Verhoeven's Starship Troopers could be a great companion piece to this film, for the way in which that film explores the perverse military complex of America and the way soldiers are viewed by society. Yet, Lee plays it too straight. Scenes of the men, such as Sykes (Barney Harris), freaking out due to fireworks are more akin to The Deer Hunter than Starship Troopers. Lee makes it too real, too emotional, and too painful with the PTSD angle to actually make it come off as a satire. The end result is a tonally confused film that wants to be tongue-in-cheek in its takedown of patriotism, but entirely serious and emotional when it comes to the complete sacrifice undertaken by soldiers. It tries to balance being anti-war with being pro-soldier, but Lee's film simply lacks the nuance and craft to actually work as this balancing act. Thus, if it is satire, it is not very good satire because of too much authentic drama. If it is a straight drama, it is not a very good drama because of too much satire.

That said, the film's greatest strength is its portrayal of brotherhood. Led by Virgil Breen (Diesel), he turns in the film's sole good performance. Powerful moments ensue as he tells all the men he loves them individually before they run off into battle. Lee brilliantly captures this brotherhood element and shows just how tragic Lynn's act of heroism truly was. Without the glitter and fireworks covering up "the worst day of his life", the raw and violent battle sequences in the film are the highlight and it is a shame they are not the focus. The film hits a real high-note in these sequences and shows the potential underneath the surface of bad and preachy dialogue, bad acting, and confused direction.

Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk is a greatly disappointing entry from director Ang Lee. Comically written with hamfisted themes, tonally jumbled, and with bad acting, the film's sole saving grace is its war sequences and display of togetherness on the part of the soldiers. But, as a whole package, the film lacks the nuance and delicate touch of better war films to actually become one itself. Lee was overly concerned with the technology and communicating his anti-war, pro-soldier themes to actually make the film a compelling and richly rewarding exercise. Seeing it in its proper 120fps may provide a better experience, but it is likely that the unique technology is merely a skin-deep distraction from the ugly interior of the film.



5/10 - Ewan McGregor's ambitious adaptation of one of the best novels of the 20th century is admirable and nearly makes the grade, but simply feels neutered. Adapting Philip Roth's American Pastoral and doing it justice would be a challenge for any director. For McGregor to decide to take it on as his directorial debut is admirable and shows courage, something desperately needed for directors. Unfortunately, for future follow-ups, adapting an easier and less complex novel may be advised, for fear of McGregor's directorial career turning into James Franco's. A beautifully written novel, Roth's American Pastoral could be turned into a film, but this is not the film. It lacks the nuance, the grace, and poetry of Roth's prose and replaces it with nothing substantial. In spite of the reviews, it is a crushing disappointment to see the film turn out to be largely quite plain.

Using Roth's famous Nathan Zuckerman (David Strathairn) to introduce us to this tale of despair and the loss of the American dream experienced by Seymour "Swede" Levov. The quintessential American boy, the Swede was a star athlete in high school. Nathan, best friend of the Swede's young brother Jerry (Rupert Evans), reminisces about the now deceased Swede with Jerry at their 45th high school reunion. With the Swede having married Miss New Jersey Dawn Dwyer (Jennifer Connelly) and having a beautiful girl named Meredith "Merry" Levov (Dakota Fanning), to go along with the leather glove factory left to him by his father to run, the Swede had it all. He had the perfect love. Beautiful life. Great daughter. Terrific job that let him interact with all of the people he grew up with in a career he had a great passion for. Yet, things for the Swede when his beautiful, but stuttering daughter grows into a leftist radical in the 1960s during the Vietnam War. Painting a mosaic of life and these defining images of the era, Roth created a gorgeous vignette of a novel that showed the quintessential American man have the beautiful facade of his life blown away. In the same breath, he paints a brilliant conceived allegory of America through the Swede. With his infrastructure blown away in the 1960s with his child revolting against the world he had built, his world continues to crumble when nostalgia kicks in for his wife and she wishes to be young once more. An entrepreneurial son of an immigrant, Swede Levov is America and America is him, in all of its gritty and dark details.

McGregor does a tremendous job capturing this and exploring those themes introduced by Roth. But, the film feels far too rushed and, again, neutered. It explains these themes, but spells them out to you. The connections and themes are explained through narration at the end by Nathan Zuckerman that largely forces him the points of the novel and the film about how we can never truly understand somebody, no matter how perfect their life seems from the outside. Life is not nearly that neat and all is not what it seems. Rather, the facade of American life was broken in the 1960s and the white picket fence found in the wreckage of the wasteland created by the Vietnam War and ensuing riots. The film simply lacks the nuance of Roth's novel and does not paint this cohesive painting of horror and beauty that permeates the novel. It a film that simply feels cut-off and runs like a highlight of the best scenes from the novel with no connecting thread. This lack of nuance comes from McGregor's inexperience most likely with scenes ending too soon or new ones being added to the novel that serve the sole purpose of explaining what happened.

That said, there is still some brilliance on display here is translated from Roth's novel. Again, McGregor does a good job keeping Levov as an allegory for America as a whole. Setting it against these wars and riots is what makes this novel so crucially important and what got it the Pulitzer Prize. Yet, crucial to the tale is Merry. Brought to life by Dakota Fanning, Merry is a very Freudian little girl. In love with her father sexually, she wants him to kiss her life he kisses Mommy. When he refuses, she does two things. One, she deepens her hatred of Dawn for having the Swede's sexual attention. Two, she begins to hate her father for rejecting her advances. What ensues is her spiraling out of control and taking things too far. She acts out through joining anti-war subgroups, violently cursing out Lyndon B. Johnson, and soon becoming an anti-war terrorist bomber that has killed three people. She is a girl that argues everything is political, but for her, everything is sexual. This is all derived of her perceived rejection and prior lust for her father and anger to her mother. As they define America and quintessential products of the American dream with youthful good looks, she seeks to destroy them. How do you destroy a nation? Revolution, bombs, and shattering their innocent image of you. She does this to perfection as she bombs the post office and runs off.

Yet, there is a lot of regret and internal cognitive dissonance. As a child, she loved Audrey Hepburn, had a scrapbook dedicated to her, and asked her father if she looked like her. In many ways, she was like her mother. Incredibly vain and obsessed with her looks. When she loses out to her mother in the race for the Swede, she feels anger at her own prior vanity. Her anger at the current political landscape is a by-product of this and her way of acting out against the forces she believes to be responsible for corrupting her perception of the world. Thus, she turns to jainism, wearing a vail, and renouncing sex and pleasures of the world. As the Swede says in the film, it is a way of her punishing herself for the murders. But, it is more than that. There is a very incestuous source for this punishment, especially when she says she is forbidden from sex. The only sex she has had was via a rape in Chicago and this only served to further corrupt her approach to sexual relations after losing her father. In essence, if she cannot have him, why have anybody at all? Her turning to jainism is a by-product of this, as well as being a punishment for her past obsession with the world and love of people like Audrey Hepburn. She has gone from being very material to anti-materialism and her mind is spinning out of control.

In the role, Fanning is terrific. In their respective roles, Ewan McGregor and Jennifer Connelly also do terrific jobs. The cinematography is gorgeous with shots of the country side with the sun high in the sky or rising along the horizon and a dimly lit silhouette of the Swede walking under a bridge with the water on the streets glistening are real highlights of this imagery. Yet, though McGregor captures the heart of the novel, he lacks the detail in this adaptation that pushes it along and paints a complete picture. He understands and loves the novel, but in the effort of turning it into a film, he left it without the beautiful details and subplots that turn it from a collection of photos to a gorgeous collage. The editing shows this rushed approach as it ends scenes abruptly trying to get to the next moment quickly.

Though a beautiful film that has seemingly found some supporters online, American Pastoral is just a middle-of-the-road take on one of the best novels I have had the pleasure of reading. Though dense ad a bit dry at times, it is a tremendous work and McGregor finds its heart, but forgets the soul along the way. The end result is fine film with the same resonant themes, but lacking the impact and power of the novel. To rectify this, McGregor adds in additional exposition and scenes that explain the main message of the film and, while accurate, they merely highlight the disconnect between the material and the film itself. That said, McGregor does show promise and courage as a director, making him a man to keep an eye on should he direct again in the future.



6/10 - White Nights is an interesting film. Part ballet film and part prison escape film, White Nights concerns a popular ballet dancer, Nikolai Rodchenko (Mikhail Baryshnikov). A defector from the Soviet Union, his life is thrown into turmoil when his plane crashes in Siberia and he suddenly winds up back in his homeland again. Not immediately arrested with the Soviets hoping to have him dance at the opening the ballet season, they pair him up with American defector and tap dancer Raymond Greenwood (Gregory Hines), as well as Raymond's Russian wife Darya (Isabella Rossellini). With KGB agent and Nikolai's handler Colonel Chaiko (Jerzy Skolimowski), the trio plan their escape from the Soviet Union. Occurring during the period when Russia is in constant light ("white nights"), there is no place to hide from the KGB, despite public attention Nikolai's presence in his former homeland as a convicted criminal.

Heavily focused on the dancing, White Nights often shows too much dancing and not enough plot, especially compared to is lengthy two hour and 16 minute runtime, which is far too long. Though the dancing is tremendous and real life Soviet defector and ballet dancer Mikhail Baryshnikov knows what he is doing, the film needed to decide if it was a ballet film or a drama. If the former, then the ballet sequences make a lot of sense and serve a great purpose in the film. If it is a drama, less ballet and tap dancing should have been on the menu. That said, the dancing sequences that add to the plot are tremendous and filled with tension as they use the dancing to lull Chaiko into believing everything is normal.

However, the real highlight of the film comes as they escape from Nikolai's apartment building, narrowly trying to avoid the attention of the KGB. Slipping out the window, the scene is filled with tension and terrifically directed by Taylor Hackford. It is largely silent and perfectly paced. The sequence saves the film from being a relatively average film and perfectly captures the paranoia of escaping these type of regimes. Tying it to an earlier scene, however, it does pack a lot of power. For Nikolai, he says he is still Russian despite previously defecting. But, he is not a Soviet. Providing insight into the position people in the Soviet Union and similar countries find themselves in, the film finds considerable power in this throwaway line for its poignancy and relevance to modern society.

That said, the film is flawed. As said, it is a bit unfocused when it comes to the storyline resulting in it being far too long. Long stretches of the film drag significantly and barely move anything along, even the characters. It really does suffer from this, but also from the acting. Led by two professional dancers, the film has some killer dance sequences as a result, but their inexperience really shows. Heck, even the professional actors struggle here with nobody turning anything better than average-to-mediocre performances. Finally, the film's finale is a bit of a let down. Far too optimistic and uplifting for a film that goes to great lengths to describe the horror of the Soviet Union, it misses an ample opportunity to show us that horror, opting instead for a sweet and safe ending. This is certainly a let down for a film that, otherwise, did a great job showing the oppression and its impact on ordinary people.

A slow and largely unrewarding first half turns into a compelling and tense second half, only to be let down by a happy ending. Largely quite forgettable, Taylor Hackford's White Nights is a solid film that is entertaining with good, if unnecessary, dancing sequences.



6/10 - Bleed for This is just as rousing as one would expect with good performances to boot, but it does wind up being far too cliched to be a great boxing film. As it stands, it is an above average one that manages to be uplifting, powerful, and pure example of feel good cinema amidst the sea of machismo on display in the film. That said, its cliches and beats are all quite predictable and while director Ben Younger's film tells a true story, it remains entirely predictable and never shocks along the way. It is a largely quite palatable film that for those unconvinced by boxing films as a whole, it will hardly produce any converts. For those that enjoy boxing movies, like myself, it is like a decent slice of pizza from the place near campus that people write off as just "drunk food". It is not drunk food though, it is actually pretty okay, I swear.

Starring Miles Teller as Vinnie "The Pazmanian Devil" Paziena, a rough and tough Italian boxer from Providence, Bleed for This goes to great lengths to show how inspiring and unifying his tale is for his family. After losing three bouts in a row, jumping weight classes, and winning his second title belt, Vinnie is in a serious car accident that breaks his neck. Like every proud man before him, he refuses to give up and defies doctors orders to take it easy by working out and making a boxing comeback. He even goes so far as having the screws from his halo - used to stabilize his neck with the screws driven into the skull - removed without anesthetic. We get it, you are tough. Vinnie Paz definitely would frequent The Salty Spitoon from Spongebob, no doubt about that. The high-level of testosterone on display in this film is matched by the excessive sequences in strip clubs, Vinnie's various gorgeous girlfriends (Christine Evangelista mainly), and the shots of the ring girls during boxing matches. The fights ultimately wind up following a sequence of boxing -> bleeding -> boxing -> babe -> pep talk and repeat. That said, the fights still pack all the required tension and cathartic release once the bout is over. In this, the climax reaches a really fever pitch and, though you know the result, it still makes your heart sing with joy.

What does truly benefit Bleed for This is the focus on Paz's family. His father (Ciaran Hinds) is at every match, his mother (Katey Sagal) prays in a very Catholic fashion and refuses to watch, and his sisters and their husbands gather around the television to root him on. Cutting from shots of the fight to the Pazeina household, Younger finds incredibly power in this family unity and gives the film incredible heart. Though Paz's story alone supplies a lot of heart, few boxing movies integrate the family as much as this one, turning Bleed for This into a film that shows the impact a career in boxing has on the family as a whole.

Compared to recent boxing movies such as Creed, however, Bleed for This is hardly as impressive. The boxing scenes are shot pretty typically and the film lacks the feeling of being a spectacle. Rather, it is as if just goes through checking off boxes on the boxing biopic cliche list. Fortunately, the cliches work incredibly well and the film is quite powerful due to its real life story, but it just never feels innovative or compelling for non-athletic reasons. Even films like 2015's Southpaw add in some further depth to its largely straight forward boxing tale with some innovative trauma. Bleed for This, though incredible in real life, feels like every underdog or comeback story about a man told he can never come back. In essence, what I am trying to say, is the film feels like Million Dollar Baby if Hilary Swank boxed again. This is not bad and it is the true story, but it just feels so safe and typical as a result of this.

With strong acting and an uplifting true story, Bleed for This is a film loaded with testosterone and heart, but it follows the tried and true boxing cliches far too closely to be anything more than just another boxing movie about an underdog defeating the incredible odds before him.



9/10 - My life is full because I know I am loved.
-John Hurt as John Merrick

The Elephant Man is a truly brilliant film and my personal new favorite film from David Lynch, though Mulholland Dr is a close second. Playing it largely straight and allowing the story to do the talking, the film tells the story of John Merrick (John Hurt), a severely disfigured man who was born with deformities. As he aged, it became worse and he became a "freak" at carnivals. However, once he taken to the hospital, he is shown human compassion and kindness for the very first time and is able to finally enjoy himself in his life. Here, Lynch's film soars, but it is equally as brilliant in showing the horrible treatment he faces due to his appearance. The Elephant Man features not just a stunning performance from Hurt, but also brilliantly paints a picture of Merrick and the struggles he faced.

After his days his days as a freak, Merrick is founded by Frederick Treves (Anthony Hopkins), a doctor at the London Hospital. Though he is incurable, he is able to secure permanent residence at the hospital due to the efforts of Treves, the nurses, the hospital governor, and the Princess of Wales. He is also able to take in high society thanks to actress Madge Kendal (Anne Bancroft), who takes a liking to Merrick and allows him to see the theater for the first time in his life. In this portion of the film, The Elephant Man shows the beauty of human kindness and how far simple decency can go. Small acts, small gifts, and small acknowledgements that Merrick is a peer, not a monster, go a long way. He brightens up and is no longer a man trapped within his own body. Rather, he is able to live life as anybody else would without fear of judgment and in the comfort of those who love him just the way he is. This is greatest wish and Treves, out of great compassion, sees to it that it happens for him. No longer is he a circus freak. Now, he is a respected individual and friend. For such a kind-hearted and smart man, this is the greatest gift he could ever receive.

But, Lynch's film does not just show the positivity. It also shows the men such as Mr. Bytes (Freddie Jones) who show him off as a freak, others who profit off of his looks, and the townsfolk who see him as a source of comedy and horror. Though some hospital staff first react negatively to him, they soon see his kind heart. For others, he is nothing but a creature and a curse from God. While the positive elements are uplifting, gorgeously written, and truly heartwrenching, the negative stuff is as well. Tough to watch and driving home the empathy the viewer feels for Merrick, the scenes in which he is mocked are horrifyingly upfront and brutal, showing the true underbelly society and the simple atrocities we are capable of committing simply with our eyes and mouths.

In the lead role, John Hurt is tremendous. Under numerous layers of make-up, Hurt turns in an emotionally-packed performance that shows the beauty of Merrick's mind and heart. He may be disfigured, but he is still a human and Hurt goes to great lengths to show this humanity and develops it tremendously. As his doctor, Anthony Hopkins does a tremendous job, particularly when Treves is conflicted over whether or not he is a good man. Using Merrick to better his own career, he may show him love and humanity, be he still believes he is using him. In these emotional moments, Hopkins really is tremendous and brings forth the emotional turmoil faced by Treves as he debates his own actions. For his part, there is some Lynch here with the conclusion and sequence where Merrick first sees himself, with both being very dreamy and almost surreal in their portrayal. However, otherwise, the film is largely quite normal. Lynch may be known for his surreal storytelling, particularly in his debut Eraserhead, but he is incredibly restrained in this film and simply sets forth to do this story justice.

And boy does he ever do it justice. Elegantly written with tiny details in the writing and production design that show how happy Merrick is on the inside now that he is surrounded by love, The Elephant Man is an empathetic film that similarly raises the questions faced by Treves. Is a film exploiting the now deceased Merrick's condition? This is a challenging question, but it is one that is shown in the film. Though the topic is not necessarily broached exactly, Merrick tells Treves that he has never been happier. Thus, though Treves may feel as though he is exploiting Merrick, the man loves him and the positive attention he now receives. A film such as this one normalizes his condition and shows that, though their exterior may be unusual, there is not a monster underneath the surface of people born with deformities. The film even shows a man with dwarfism that helps Merrick escape Bytes. As he sends him back to England, he wishes John luck for the both of them, for they both need it. In this world, both our outcasts. The Elephant Man is a film that seeks to right this wrong and shows they are not freaks, but average human beings with a heart and soul.

Brilliantly written, acted, and directed, The Elephant Man may not be typical Lynch fare, but it is absolutely one of his best works. Empathetic and aiming to show that every person is a human worth common decency and kindness. No matter one's outward appearance, it does not show the true nature of their heart. In the case of John (real name Joshua) Merrick, he was a beautiful soul with an unfortunate deformity, but it does define him. Rather, his actions, love of art, writing, reading, and friendly demeanor, define him and cement him as a man worthy of celebration.

8/10 - In January, I had the pleasure of seeing a Broadway play for the first time in my life. It was a Christmas gift I had gotten for my mother and it was for the latest revival of Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur's play The Front Page. Starring Nathan Lane as Walter Burns, John Slattery as Hildy Johnson, and John Goodman as Sheriff Peter B. Harwell, the play was tremendous. Mind you, I have nothing to compare it to, but for the entire nearly three hour runtime, it had both of us in constant fits of laughter. The fast-paced, witty dialogue barely gives the audience a chance to catch their breathe, plus the talented cast of Lane, Slattery, Goodman, and a smattering of terrific actors that are quintessential "know the face, but not the name" guys, the recent revival of The Front Page was a joy. As a result, I was eagerly anticipating viewing one of the first film adaptations of the play and probably the most well known. Sporting a new title and a more romance-focused plot, Howard Hawks' His Girl Friday often parallels the play with its witty and smart jokes that somehow feel as fresh as ever given today's current political environment.

Needless to say, His Girl Friday hardly disappoints. Changing Hildy Johnson from a man to a woman may not be my favorite choice as it does change the banter a bit between the manipulative Walter Burns and dedicated newsman Hildy, but Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell make it work. Together, they have great comedic chemistry and really let loose with fast-paced and smart jokes that make sure the audience is paying attention. Though the play is focused solely in the press room, His Girl Friday takes a little bit to get to the pressroom, first introducing us to the new scenario before dropping us into the hectic place that is the pressroom. Awaiting the hanging of Earl Williams (John Qualen), a man convicted of killing a black cop who must die for the Mayor and Sheriff to get the black vote, the press room is packed with a whole cast of characters. Unfortunately, the hour and a half gives little room for the supporting cast to make headway like in the play. As opposed to the film, the play opens in the press room with the supporting cast leading the charge for much of the first act until Hildy arrives part way through. Walter Burns does not even appear until the second act. Naturally, with Cary Grant in the film in the 1940s, things had to change for the film. That said, it works and Grant and Russell turn in typically good performances.

The writing, with such great source material, is also very good. Featuring incredible wit and political satire (the gag with the journalists all witnessing the arrest and changing the story to fit their needs), His Girl Friday stands the test of time. It is not the kind of old school comedy that finds jokes in the situations, but in the words and wit of the writing. This is what has helped the material and the film itself not feel so aged in comparison to other comedies of the era. Plus, with such charming leads, it is hard for His Girl Friday to not be at least a little bit funny. This one definitely had me laughing for the whole 90 minutes, which fly by incredibly painlessly.

The other part of this film that came off as a bit hokey was the ending. Likely the by-product of changing Hildy to being a woman and the need of Hollywood to have a happy ending, putting the divorced couple back together and quickly casting aside Hildy's fiance in less than a minute feels disingenuous. She and Walter have great banter, but were fighting less than a minute ago when she found out about the counterfeit money. I have no idea why they had to be together as it feels as though it cheapens the product a bit with a far too whimsical and silly ending to a film that, though incredibly funny, is quite serious in its political critiques and portrayal of the use of the death penalty in an inherently political society.

A classic of screwball comedy, His Girl Friday stands the test of time. Though the DVD copy in my possession looked badly dated and desperately in need of restoration, with the film becoming too bright/white at times or overly dark or the sound randomly decreasing in volume, it is still a great film. A true testament to the smart writing and terrific cast that this film and play is somehow still relevant to society, perhaps even more so than it was back when it was first made.



9/10 - Though L'Atalante was my first foray in French Poetic Realism, it did feel incredibly familiar. Depicting the gritty realism of society, it quickly becomes clear that this movement heavily inspired the Italian Neo-Realism movement, of which I have seen films such as Bicycle Thieves and Umberto D. Both of those films show the raw reality of Italy post-World War II, though in a far more documentary style with non-actors. French Poetic Realism, from what I understand and saw in L'Atalante, depicts reality, but in a produced and staged fashion. It does have real actors and never tries to appear reality, merely it seeks to depict reality and show people how it really was in France at the time. Stylistically, it had a clear impact on the French New Wave via Francois Truffaut or even the No Wave movement in 1980s America led by Jim Jarmusch. It is reality, merely re-produced and these films have incredibly lyrical and poetic style to them that feel at odds with the realism, but are merely an extension of the reality on display. In Jean Vigo's only feature film before his untimely death at age of 29, we see village girl Juliette (Dita Parlo) marry Jean (Jean Daste). Living aboard the L'Atalante with bargeman Pere Jules (Michel Simon), his cats, and a cabin boy, the ship heads off with its first destination being Paris.

Upon making landfall in Paris, we see the group head off into the society. Immediately, we are struck by the desperation. In pre-World War II Paris, the people are already destitute. There is incredible culture on display on some parts of town - the tourist areas, likely - with expensive jewelry for sale. However, Juliette finds herself in the factory part of town that has a sign reading "not hiring" on its chain-link fence with a pack of jobseekers milling about outside. In the town, she has her purse stolen boy a young boy. These scenes highlight the dichotomy that exists. Yes, Paris these great, wealthy stores and people. But, there is still poverty. Peope are still desperate, destitute, and in need of assistance. They are the people the city has forgotten and like the best films of the Italian Neo-Realism movement, L'Atalante tries to show the situation on land faced by people in large cities. It is not just dreams and happiness, it is the real world.

In this fashion, Paris was the perfect stop on this trip. Though not their destination, rather than L'Atalante barge is their final destination, it still serves as the perfect place to spend much of the film. As postmodernists would later suggest, Paris is one of the many cities of the world that is hyperreal. It is a city that does not really exist, in the sense that it does not exist as it is imagined. There is obviously a tangible reality there and that is what people are met by once arriving in Paris, rather than what they had dreamed. For this newlywed couple, brought together because Juliette saw a vision of Jean in the water, Paris is the perfect location to spend some time as a married couple and a perfect example of the reality that awaits them. Typically, poetic realism films end up in disillusionment or death. Here, Paris drives a wedge between them as Jean orders the ship to leave with Juliette when she takes too long to get back. It is a city of dreams and where those same dreams go to die. It is a city of pain and anguish for many and that is the reality that Vigo shows. It is not just a city of dreams, but also of suffering and this is not the reality expected by the dreamers and romantics that arrive.

L'Atalante integrates the poetry and departure from documenting reality after the ship leaves Paris without Juliette. Just as Juliette had told him, Jean sees Juliette in the water and jumps after her. In the water, he sees her twirling in an angelic white dress. It is a vision and one that tells him they are meant to be together. Immediately, they turn back and are reunited. This is incredibly poetic and visually stunning to see in a low-budget French film from 1934. It is a jarring departure from reality and one that displays how detached from reality these films can become. It is an artistic indulgence and one that really benefits the film. Though dreams may die and the harsh world exists, love is still powerful and an eternal connection or bond that brings two souls together, no matter who they are. Jean is a traveler. Juliette never left her village. They seem an odd match, but sequences such as the underwater vision show that it is meant to be. The two souls were somehow destined to be together, in spite of the incredible odds facing them. Yet, it is in this that the film departs from being a full realization of poetic realism. From what I read, the movement was quite loose and not structured like following movements that had strict rules. Thus, films could sometimes differ. Compared to many poetic realism films that end with disillusionment or death, L'Atalante ends happily with the two lovers reunited and joyously embracing one another. It is a surprisingly happy ending for a film that can be so raw and depressing in its portrayal of the desperation that exists in cities such as Paris. But, it works. It feels authentic, rewarding, and powerful, as the poetry of L'Atalante comes to a head in its depiction of love.

Powerful, brilliant, and everlasting, L'Atalante is not a classic for no reason. It is a gorgeously poetic film that is unafraid to show the cruel harsh world around us. Influential since its release, the film is an example of the tragic artist and the cruel world we live in, given that Jean Vigo died only after his film had been critically maligned. It would take until the 1940s for the film to become the celebrated classic it is today, which is an absolute travesty.



8/10 - Boss Paul Vitti: I couldn't get it up last night.
Dr. Ben Sobel: You mean sexually?
Boss Paul Vitti: No, I mean for the big game against Michigan State. Of course sexually! What the fuck's the matter with you?

Analyze This is an incredibly funny film that is pretty much what it sound like it would be about. Starring Billy Crystal as Ben Sobel, a psychiatrist, the film pairs him together with Paul Vitti (Robert De Niro). A tough, hard-nosed, and old school gangster, he is having panic attacks stemming from a threat to his life that brings back memories of his father's murder. In a funny and witty comedy, the film pairs the comedic talents of Crystal with the tough guy nature of De Niro resulting in a perfect setup of comedic foils. Thanks to fun writing from Harold Ramis and Kenneth Lonergan, the film may not be serious, but it makes the most of its premise and really works well. It may be thin and referential to gangster movies, but the film entertains and makes you laugh for the entire runtime.

With irresistible chemistry, Crystal plays the man entrusted to break through the tough guy facade of Paul Vitti. Unfortunately, it comes at the time when he is set to be married to Laura (Lisa Kudrow) in Florida. With Paul following him from New York, he is forced to try and work his magic to figure out what ails this man. Suffering from panic attacks and fits of crying, Vitti is risking being killed due to this weakness. He can hear the footsteps and keeps sending his friend Jelly (Joe Vierelli) to go find the doc, regardless of what stage of getting married he finds himself in. Even worse, gangster Primo Sindone (Chazz Palminteri) wants Paul dead and the mafia, once they find out about the psychiatrist, want Ben dead. What ensues is a pretty predictable and run-of-the-mill comedy that finds humor out of making a gangster soft and a psychiatrist into a gun toting tough guy. Yet, it works.

Crystal and De Niro's chemistry is what sells this one as Crystal smart, witty, and mouthy comedic style really works in this film. De Niro is equally good in his role as a remorseful gangster that does not want to leave his son without a father or see him follow a life as a gangster. Yet, the film does exist on a higher plain to a degree as it examines and breaks down the tough guy facade. In reality, it is merely a copping mechanism to shelter their fragile psyches from being hurt. Or, they are just psycho. The latter obviously being far more dangerous. In the case of Paul Vitti, he just acts out of anger and desperation after being left to fend for himself after his father is killed. Thus, though the film is simply straight forward fun, Ramis and Lonergan manage to make the film have a little more depth in this area. In this blending of their two worlds, the two men are able to learn from one another. Ben Sobel learns to stand up for himself and not take abuse. Paul Vitti learns that being emotional and expressing your feelings does not make you weak. For a silly comedy that is just a twist on the buddy comedy formula, it does provide very well-written characters with solid, well-defined arcs and with purposeful actions in this film.

Honestly, however, there is not much to say about this one. Even what I have written is a bit of a stretch. Bottom line: Analyze This is hysterical. Billy Crystal is Billy Crystal and De Niro turns in one of his funnier performances of his late comedy-focused period. With good writing, great jokes, and terrific comedic timing and delivery from its cast, Analyze This is one of those films that is easy entertainment and will have you laughing throughout.



8/10 - Though a safe historical film, director Amma Asante's A United Kingdom never ceases to be anything less than powerful, riveting, and entirely rousing. Telling the real story of Seretse Khama (David Oyelowo), the Prince of now-Botswana, and his love of Englishwoman Ruth Williams (Rosamund Pike), A United Kingdom shows how they were kept apart. Rejected by Seretse's uncle and current regent of the nation, the British government (both the Labor and Conservative parties), and apartheid-in-progress South Africa (a key British ally and neighbor to Botswana), the marriage is in trouble. Exiled from Botswana and unable to return, Seretse must fight to be able to claim the crown that is rightfully is, return to the people that he loves, and to secure Botswana's future with the prospect of diamond mining occurring on the nation's land.

A tale of injustice and racism, Seretse and Ruth fall in love in England and wish to head to Botswana, where Seretse is set to become Chief/King of his people. However, the South Africans - in the process of installing apartheid - do not want it and threaten to stop following British rule if they allow the marriage. A pawn in large political matters of colonialism and rule, A United Kingdom shows that people have always been caught in the crosshairs of politics and those politicians have always lied. Though they recognize allowing them to marry is the right choice, the fear of the South Africans is far too much to let either the Labor or Conservative parties act on his injustice. They even go so far as lying to Seretse and his legal team about the contents of a report into the situation in Botswana, claiming it is on the brink of civil war because Seretse's uncle refuses to accept Ruth and pass the crown onto Seretse. Though Seretse's people and sister accept Ruth whole heartedly, their battle is one that must be fought uphill.

In crafting its romance, A United Kingdom is often beautiful. It borders on cliff notes at times with how quickly it goes through it, but it works incredibly well all the same. Romantic, nostalgia, and taboo, director Amma Asante's film captures all of the dirty looks, gestures, and actions they get as a result of their love, while also developing their love. The two go hand-in-hand and it shows that the hatred they face only serves to strengthen their bond together. Unwilling to bend to the wills of the families or the government, the two are defiant, strong-willed, and entirely in love with one another. Listening to other people tell them what to do is hardly an option.

However, A United Kingdom is a film far more in line with a political drama. Showing shots in parliament of them debating the issue and the bureaucracy that stops them from being able to be together in Botswana, the film plays out like a political film, not a romantic one. The romance is there and you can tell the connection between them only grows due to the great chemistry between Oyelowo and Pike, but the emphasis here is the politics. Asante uses the film to show how governments do what they know is wrong for political reasons. Though perhaps quite obvious to anybody, A United Kingdom, by first establishing the romance, makes it feel personal and intimate. It is as if the government is not letting us be with our spouse, making the injustice really hit home. How can they deny the love these two people have for one another? How can they bend to the will of a deeply racist country looking? How can they be so greedy, anticipating that diamonds will be found in Botswana? All are obvious, but truly are drilled home perfectly in the film and the end result is a greatly dramatic and oddly thrilling film that wraps you up in the politics of the situation and benefits from it throughout.

That said, the star here is David Oyelowo. The climactic moment from the trailer when he declares he loves his people and land, but also loves his wife is just as rousing and powerful in the film. Oyelowo is an incredibly under-recognized actor, in spite of his stirring turn in Selma as Martin Luther King, Jr. Here, as Seretse Khama, he finds much of the same inspiration and power that he had as King, playing a man who used as a political pawn by entities that had no business dictating affairs in his home country. Oyelowo is a brilliant speaker and delivers his lines with resonance and strength, making him an easy sell as the inspirational political figure. As his wife, Pike is far more reserved, but works on an emotional-level. Showing the hurt in her eyes and face from the suffering her family must go through because of prejudice, Pike may not be nearly as good as Oyelowo here, but she is still very good in her own right.

A United Kingdom may not appeal to everyone, as it is largely what would be expected. A powerful tale of injustice, romance, and politics, director Amma Asante does this true story incredible justice in retelling it in this film. Brilliantly acted, paced, and gorgeously shot when in Africa, A United Kingdom is an inspirational, powerful, and incredibly timely film about how love can transcend government intervention, borders, and race.



8/10 - I'm not really the heroic type. I was beat up by Quakers.
-Woody Allen as Miles Monroe

An uproariously hysterical early comedy from Woody Allen, Sleeper is the earliest work of his that I have seen. Right away, it becomes clear how different the film is from his present work when we see a zoom. That is so 1970s. But, for Allen specifically, the film is far more slapstick and was fashioned as a tribute to Groucho Marx or Bob Hope. This certainly works quite well, though it feels similar to the work of Charlie Chaplin or Buster Keaton as well due to the film's roots in silent comedy. Via gags such as a ladder that cannot reach a building that Allen must climb down, the film relies very heavily on physical comedy. Allowing the camera to linger in these parts and take his time with the humor, the film is not just witty one-liners, but a well-rounded comedic experience from the master comedy writer and director. Inventive, imaginative, and Orwellian, Sleeper certainly ranks among his very best work.

Frozen for 200 years, Miles Monroe (Allen) awakens in 2173. Upon waking up, he learns that America has changed dramatically. Gone are the cities. In their place are districts, all overseen by the Great Leader. Awoken by the underground, Miles is tasked with saving the world because he has no identity so he can more easily infiltrate the ruling class to find out what the mysterious Aries Project entails. In creating this world, Allen naturally mocks his own. With all health foods now cast aside and junk foods now proven to be scientifically healthier for you, the world is upside down. His Miles Monroe is called in as an expert on all things 1900s and used to provide information that had fallen to the wasteside in time, namely the records of Richard Nixon and Howard Cosell (the latter believed to be punishment for criminals). Above all, McDonald's is still around and still updating the counter as to how many people they have served. The film, though set in 2173, is still packed with Allen's typical brand of observational humor and visual gags mocking the present society. In these moments, the film is absolutely hysterical and silly in a way that only the best Allen films can be.

Yet, its 2173 is incredibly inventive. Drawing on Orwell as inspiration, this world of weird vehicles, jet packs, robot butlers, and easy space travel is presided over by the Great Leader. Awoken and covered in tin foil for 200 years, the film may be quirky and goofy, but it is most certainly detailed. Introduced sex machines, sex educations, and more, the film is a high-concept science fiction by way of Woody Allen. Thus, though silly, it does poke a bit of fun at how absurd authoritarian governments can be. Naturally, the scenes in which he identifies Joseph Stalin for historians comes to play when he is confronted by the true Great Leader and the secrets that abound in his presence. In line with Orwell, the Great Leader sees all. In typical Allen fashion, this is done in a parallel with God as he explains that he had learned God dos not watch us, rather the government. This has never been more true than in 2173 where subversives, the underground, and intellectuals are hunted down and killed. The Great Leader is worshiped like a God in this world of plain white walls and drab gray jumpsuits.

Naturally, the observational humor is not limited to 1973, but also spun for 2173 with Allen's neurotic Miles Monroe running about as the savior of the human race and cracking jokes about all the odd things he finds in 2173, even hinting at "futuristic mice" or the huge fruit and chickens he finds roaming about. The world has changed, but his astute attention to detail and the ability to mock that detail will never change and it is on full display in Sleeper. He may have been asleep for 200 years, but he quickly picks up on the weirdest part of the year 2173 and makes fun of them with hysterical precision.

A smart, witty, and neurotic high concept science fiction film brought forth by Woody Allen, the film is far more slapstick and based around physical comedy than his usual fare. This is partially because it is one of his earlier works - known for their roots in slapstick - and the film being a tribute to some of his comic icons of yesteryear. In this tribute, Allen turns out one of his best and most consistently comical works that shows the that there are no bounds to his comedic genius, not even 200 years spent in cryostasis.



6/10 - If I were Gavin O'Connor, I would get down on my knees everyday and thank the good Lord that He allowed me to make Warrior. For if it were not for Warrior, he would be one of the most bland and consistently average directors working in Hollywood today. His resume is also bolstered when viewed alongside that of Peter Berg or David Ayer. That said, The Accountant is just fine. It is a modern day action thriller that screams of O'Connor having finished a viewing of Nicolas Winding Refn's Drive and thinking to himself, "What if the whole movie had the level of tension of the opening heist in that film and my autistic assassin actually talked a bit?" The end result is The Accountant, a film that passes the test and delivers good entertainment, but is hardly brilliant and is maligned by major problems. In essence, this is not a film requiring a forensic accountant. Anybody can plainly see the faults lying beneath the heart of this film.

To the film's credit, however, it is incredibly thrilling. The action is modern and stylish. It is silent, precise, and well-choreographed. Ben Affleck's Christian Wolff is autistic and a savant when it comes to accounting and putting a bullet between a man's eyes. As a result, the kills are thrilling and simply cool. For action junkies or the general public that is merely looking for a good action thriller, The Accountant more than delivers. It is no surprise it has become a champion of the people and made a lot of money at the box office. For a bloody action thriller, it is palatable and easy to digest. It does not entertain a higher purpose beyond advocating for people with autism. It is smart, well-plotted, and delivers the goods when it comes to action and thrills. O'Connor may not be a good director, but he knows his way around an action sequence and shows it here. With constant one-liners and a distant hero that is against the system, comparisons to old school 1980s action movies are incredibly fair. Wolff goes about his business professionally and without fanfare. It is all a matter of fact. He is an easy killer to support because he kills bad men out for themselves, while seeking revenge for those they harm. In essence, he fights for the common man, real salt of the Earth people, and loves his family. The only thing separating him from the average American is he has autism and kills people with precision.

Sadly, the film is maligned with odd transactions. To the film's debit, it is incredibly contrived. Introducing us to federal agent Medina (Cynthia Addai-Robinson), she is threatened with being thrown into jail for lying on her applicatio if she does not find the accountant's true identity within a month by boss Raymond King (J.K. Simmons). Throughout the film, we see her figure out information on Wolff, following mere plot coincidences and contrivances. The most egregious being when she is searching for men that fit her suspect's description and randomly selects a man who does not meet the description, looks into his business, and all the businesses in the same plaza. Slowly, she realizes it is her man: the accountant. How convenient. With no evidence pointing to that fact until the hand of God guides her down the right path, Medina find her man. But oh wait, she did not need to. King knew it all because he had been in contact with the accountant forever, tracked him before, and could seemingly care less who he is and what he does, in spite of pretending to care earlier in the film. It is as if O'Connor changed his mind halfway through and decided that King should work with Wolff, not against him. Ignoring how cliche that is, it is a convenient way to avoid conflict between the government and Wolff, which would make him a bad guy in the eyes of the same general public audience the film was trying to appeal to throughout. Sadly, the fact that the investigation by Medina was pointless, all of the treasury department scenes are useless. Neither King nor Medina add anything to the film beyond another character and supposed depth. In reality, it is bloat, highlighting how overlong this mindless action thriller truly is.

The film punishes the audience further with useless melodrama and backstory on Christian. Used to show how good of a person he is and how important family is to him, the scenes honestly go nowhere. From his mother's funeral, training, and reuniting with his brother, the whole thing is so contrived and oddly manipulative. Once more, it contributes to the film's bloat, not adding depth. The scenes feel useless and exposition heavy for a film that demonstrates its willingness to use its typically silent protagonist as an exposition machine when the plot demands some explanation.

Sadly, despite all the bloat, O'Connor never found a use for Dana Cummings (Anna Kendrick). Why get Anna Kendrick if all she is there for is to look good and say some bad lines that are going to be used in the trailer? She never even kisses Affleck in the film. I know Hollywood loves romance angles to films, but this film does not even have that because Wolff is so incapable of human connection, the romance angle is ignored and cast aside. O'Connor consistently forgets about Dana until the plot demands her simple "damsel in distress" reappears to remind the audience that Wolff is a tragic hero who could not actually find love like the kind he wants to, even if he does love Dana (who he just met and spoke to three times, two of which he coldly responds and non-verbally tells her to leave). The romance is undercooked and extraneous. Either add on to it (bad choice) or cut it and Dana out of the film entirely. A straight forward action film should not be too much to ask for, but instead the film uses Dana as a crutch to add stakes and slow down the film to explain the plot a bit. It is this element - the exposition - that cements the film as one destined to find a home on cable television and be championed as an example of a "misunderstood film" by people who do not watch film. It is not a bad film. It is just a competent one made for an audience that does not understand the predictability or way in which the director and filmmakers lack respect for the audience. It knows it is predictable, contrived, and simple, yet it still explains the plot to you, just in case you were too dumb to put it together yourself. A real shame. But, for viewers on cable television, it will be perfect entertainment because it can be put on, forgotten about yet still easy to track because it explains itself to you constantly, and result in ooo's and ahh's whenever Wolff closes another attacker's account.

That said, Ben Affleck is brilliant. Perhaps a career-best performance, his autistic accountant assassin is brilliant. Meticulous and respectfully brought to life, it is clear why Affleck was drawn to such a derivative film: the character of Christian Wolff. For all of the film's faults in its narrative, plotting, and dialogue, it hits a home run with Wolff and runs with it. A character alone cannot make a film great, but it can make it better and it does so here in The Accountant. As a whole, the film is fine. It is palatable and a crowd pleaser. It is occasionally funny and is action-packed with well-shot and well-staged action. Its plot is aggressively dumb and bloated and it treats its audience even worse by feeling the need to explain the plot and what was happening to us, as if it were complicated. In essence, it is a film version of "Dogs Playing Poker". Loved by the masses and seen as typical, derivative, and unimaginative by more experienced filmgoers. Myself personally, it is fine, but nothing exceptional and a film such as this, sans bloat and exposition, could have been exceptional with Affleck's performance serving as an anchor.



4/10 - Australia is a film with a sweeping vision and epic ambitions, but it simply does not live up to its own expectations. It is hardly a bad film as it has many beautiful and tremendous elements that do justify its efforts. Unfortunately, it is simply maligned by a bevy of issues that hold it back from being a great modern epic. Thinly written, predictable, and tonally jumbled, Australia is a film with an important message and the hope that sum up Australia and its most important pieces - cattle herding, World War II, the wet season, the dry season, aboriginals, and love of theland - in just under three hours. Unfortunately, the end result is a film that simply feels too unfocused and lacking conviction.

This grand scope leads Australia to feeling like two films shoved into being one film. The first half focuses on Lady Ashley (Nicole Kidman) arriving in Australia to find her husband dead and Neil Fletcher (David Wenham) scheming to steal their cattle away. With the help of The Drover (Hugh Jackman), she embarks on a journey to bring 1,500 cattle to Darwin to be used as meat for the Australian troops. Along the way, she falls in love with The Drover and half-aboriginal, half-white boy Nullah (Brandon Walters). In this film, Australia most closely aligns with being a western and is gritty and unafraid to show the dirty and dangerous work entailed by cattle driving. However, the film turns on a dime and becomes a war film in the second half with the bombing of Darwin conducted by the Japanese. Hinted at in the first half with war footage, two years pass from 1939 to 1941 between the first and second halves. The end result is a film that feels too unfocused and split. Both films could reasonably stand on their own, but wind up being part of one overlong film, out of the necessity of scope. While director Baz Luhrmann's ambition is admirable, it simply is a film that never justifies its runtime and could have been either shorter and more focused or split into two separate films that celebrate the various elements of Australia. Together, the two halves simply do not gel with one another.

The film tries to string these two halves together, however, with the love between Lady Ashley and The Drover. From two different worlds, it is a cliched romance but it works incredibly well. The characters are pretty cookie cutter and indistinguishable from a variety of characters in other films, but the romance is the element that comes closest to meeting the grand scope of the film. It feels triumphant and authentic, even if maligned by elements that are clearly scripted and cliched, such as The Drover rejecting an invitation to the ball only to then show up unexpectedly. It is cute, but it is hardly unpredictable or original.

Yet, the writing's greatest fault is Neil Fletcher. A rival cattle herder working for King Carney (Bryan Brown), the head honcho in the meat business in Darwin, he is an unnecessary bad guy. In both halves of the film, he shows up randomly to make the film take longer to get the end. Both the herding and the war are thrilling enough with enough entertainment to work without a villain, so adding in an antagonist merely feels excessive and a useless addition to a film that simply did not need another character. At no point during the film does Luhrmann justify his addition to the film and he merely exists to add turmoil and strife to the point that existed without his presence. Even worse, just as with the romance, each moment with the villain is predictable and easy to see. The expected side characters die and the expected routes are taken to save our heroes in the face of this man who hates them for very little reason.

That said, Australia has a resounding plus that almost makes the whole thing come together: the visuals. Gorgeously dreamy landscapes in the Australian outback, breathtaking aerial shots of the desert, the bombing, the contrast of the black/orange fire with the blues and greens of Darwin, and the absolutely astounding shot of all orange and black overtaking Darwin after the bombing. All of the shots are brilliantly framed and a gorgeous mash-up of color. The end result is an awe-striking beauty that matches the ambitions of Luhrmann and makes the film pure eye candy. For those that love Australia, the visuals have to be the reason why and it is the reason why the film is one that is disappointing. In spite of its great visuals, it offers very little else that matches the quality of the sights to be seen in the film.

For a film seeking to sum up Australia, it is simply unable to reach the grand scope. From hamfistedly bringing forth the nameless drover as a representation of the heroism and strength of the nation to thinly written characters and a predictable and cliched plot to the far-too-long runtime, Australia is an ambitious film but exceeds the grasp of Baz Luhrmann. It is boisterous and at times dream-like film with a heart-wrenching romance and brilliant visuals, but never really outweighs the massive amount of negatives it encounters. It is not an outwardly bad film, nor is it boring. It is, however, an entertaining misfire.



7/10 - A typically neurotic film from Woody Allen, Broadway Danny Rose uses one of Allen's most prominent openings and common threads: a discussion at a restaurant between a group of friends. Reminiscing about theatrical agent Danny Rose (Allen) and the crazy situations he found himself in with his talentless clientele, the group tell a story of how he wound up caught between gangsters, a singer making a comeback, and the singer's mistress. An absurd and comical tale that is quintessential Allen, the film is funny, but not nearly as funny as some of his best work. Lacking the witty comments in favor of comical situations that may be funnier if you were there, Broadway Danny Rose is a good film, but not one of his absolute best works.

Working with singer Lou Canova (Nick Apollo Forte), Danny Rose is dispatched to pick up his girlfriend Tina Vitale (Mia Farrow) before a huge gig. On the way, he is accused of being the reason she broke it off with a gangster who tries to kill himself at a party. Now, the crime family is hunting Danny and he is forced to escape with Tina and winds up in increasingly absurd situations. In these scenarios, Broadway Danny Rose boasts Allen's knack for witty and sarcastic remarks done in the name of observational humor. But, relies upon absurdity and how odd some of these situations are, such as being in a warehouse full of Macy's Parade balloons and all of the participants inhaling helium. Comical and truly odd, these scenarios are often quite funny - such as the aforementioned one - but can often be too subtle to land or simply just miss the mark. While a thoroughly funny film and featuring his trademark style of comedy blended with drama, Broadway Danny Rose is neither as comedic as his best comedy works or as compelling dramatically as his best dramas. Instead, it is a solid marriage between the two with neither taking hold to its full potential.

On the dramatic side, the film explores themes of loyalty and regret. For the latter, it does so via Tina Vitale. Unable to find happiness due to her deep seeded hatred of herself over her past missteps and errors in life, she is unable to see past her self-admonishment and regrets. Thus, when positive opportunities arise, she takes another path and winds up just finding new ways to hate herself. Similarly, Danny Rose finds himself in a similar situation with all of his top acts eventually leaving him for new management. He clearly has regrets and constantly tries to better himself, but keeps falling into the same mistakes and inability to see beyond his own narrow world view. This really drives at the theme of loyalty though as he remains loyal to his clients, no matter how talentless they are. They do not show the same loyalty, just as Lou Canova seeks new management and cheats on his wife with Tina. For Danny, his endless loyalty keeps him trapped in one place and unable to advance his career and keep his clients. Just as his clients move on from him, he should move on from then and aspire to something more. Though buried deeply, it is clear he recognizes this and has regrets about his never-ending loyalty.

That said, Broadway Danny Rose's dramatic situations are very typical for Allen. With a subtle romantic core to the film between the well-matched leads of Allen and Farrow, the film's finale works as it shows much of the same themes as the rest of the film. Immediate regret, hesitation, and an unwilling to break one's loyalty to the current life malign the possible romance from the very beginning as Tina finds Danny as he is surrounded by his useless clients having frozen turkey for Thanksgiving. Comical and absurd, it also speaks to how both are stuck in a rut. Tina regrets what she did to Danny. Danny is unable to move past his bad clients. They are perfect for one another, but naturally, never realize this and the film plays out as expected.

Well-written, funny, and occasionally dramatic, Broadway Danny Rose is considered one of Allen's best films by many respected critics. However, the reason why appears unclear. It is a good film, yes, but a great one? No. It is funny, but not as funny as his best works. It is compelling, but not as compelling as his best works. It feels like one of his more modern works in the sense that it does everything Allen typically would, but a little worse than he used to. The only thing that separates it from his recent work is that this one is from 1984 and came at the time when Allen was in his peak, hence it feeds off of some of that positive energy, elevating it above his current output. In essence, it is not just autopilot Allen, but inspired Allen slightly missing the high bar his works set for himself.

8/10 - One False Move is a quintessential neo-noir film. Had it been released in the 1940s or 1950s, with some small tweaks, it would have been right at home. In 1992, it served as a last beacon of a bygone era in film. Directed by Carl Franklin, One False Move is a Southern-set film about three people - Ray Malcolm (Billy Bob Thornton), Fantasia (Cynda Williams), and Pluto (Michael Beach) - that kill six people and rip off a drug dealer. Headed to Star City, Arkansas after hoping to have sold the drugs in Houston, LAPD detectives Dud Cole (Jim Metzler) and John McFeely (Earl Billings) head to Arkansas to wait for them. In Arkansas, they are greeted by Dale "Hurricane" Dixon (Bill Paxton), the Chief of Police in the small city. A rough and tumble neo-noir, One False Move has flaws, but is also a tightly wound yarn that keeps you guessing till very last drop.

One False Move is one of those films that is incredibly meticulous. The staging is detailed, every word and action is precise and carries great meaning and purpose. There are no throwaway lines or scenes that could be cut to trim any fat. The film is tightly plotted and written. Billy Bob Thornton's script is streamlined and explores a few subplots, but they all contribute to the main plot. For this to be his first produced script, it is incredibly impressive and shows the talent he has as a writer. Yet, the film is quintessential noir in the sense that it is entirely character-driven. Though the plot is important and one that entertains, the characters are really what makes the film sing. This does lead to some problems in the script, but the characters never cease to be entertaining and the actors all bring solid performances to the table that justify the character focus of the film.

However, the film's greatest fault in its characters is how it rests on cultural stereotypes as a shorthand. Dale Dixon, the Arkansas cop, is an over-eager and bubbly fellow who is like a kid at Spring Training yelling for his favorite ballplayer to come sign a baseball for him. He wants to go to Los Angeles and become a cop after this experience and cannot get enough of the LA detectives and the fact that the crime spree is coming to him. The classic smalltown kind of guy from the South, he says the n-word a lot casually. The town of Star City similarly involves cliches with Dale and Fantasia/Lyla Walker having a history that the film seems to believe is a twist, but just typing the words above give it away. It is not a well-hidden secret and one, once hinted at, will become incredibly easy to pick out. Again, it is quite cliche in that element. The LA cops even represent cultural cliches with both feeling above the Arkansas cop, who is not a "real cop". Laughing at his dream to go west and be a cop there, they are self-absorbed jerks who drink their own kool-aid. In other words, they are big city cops that believe they are God's gift to police work. While the script is still terrific, these cultural stereotypes are a bit of a short hand in lieu of unique characterization.

However, in the less character-focused moments, One False Move continues to provide excellent entertainment. Thrilling, edge-of-your-seat sequences such as simple ones in a gas station, being followed on the Texas highway, or the final shootout, the film keeps you guessing and in complete suspense. The film takes its time, never rushing through intense moments and instead allowing the audience to feel every drop of suspense possible. In many ways, it is akin to the recent release, Hell or High Water. It is a country-fried thriller dipped in BBQ, highlighted in One False Move's diegetic score towards the end with the harmonica. It really sets the tone perfectly and, if the country roads were not an indicator, it highlights the country.

One False Move is a terrific neo-noir. Involving a very detailed and thrilling plot, the film is character-driven with the characters taking centerstage. Though they can be a bit cliched, they never stop entertaining the audience with each beat of the story that happens. One False Move's biggest sin is that is can be a predictable, but it more than make up for it with its incredibly written dialogue, characters, and plot that are not smartly put together, but incredibly detailed and highly engrossing. A small film that was fashioned as a straight-to-DVD release in 1992, One False Move is still greatly overlooked in the world of cinema and that is a shame. Though hardly groundbreaking, the tight direction from Carl Franklin, good cast, and incredibly well-written script make the film one that should not be missed.



8/10 - Toying with religious and anti-capitalist themes he would later return to in Pale Rider, High Plains Drifter tells the story of the mining town of Lago. Striking a deal with the devil to conceal facts and make themselves rich in the process, the town organizes the brutal death of Marshal Jim Duncan. Ritualistic and done via a public whipping, the town watches on as the resident criminals finish off the Marshal. Now, after the criminals are sent to jail and set to return with a vengeance to Lago for being betrayed by the town, Lago relies upon a mysterious stranger (Clint Eastwood) to defend them. Unbeknownst to them, this is not the man they should trust. A reverse of Pale Rider, this stranger is here to fulfill Duncan's damning of the town of hell - painting the town red in blood and the lamentation of the town's women. Laced with a haunting score from Dee Barton, High Plains Drifter is a film about a plague brought upon the town of Lago's land.

In a mysterious performance, Eastwood's stranger is a man that arrives in Lago and immediately rapes a girl. In both The Outlaw Josey Wales and Pale Rider, Eastwood's character saves a girl from being raped - cementing his status as a hero. In this film, his first directed western, this is reversed and he is the one doing the raping, establishing himself as a bad man. At every turn, he kills, steals, or forces himself on women. Yet, Lago continues to cement its place in hell by making a deal with this demon sent to make them feel the reckoning. Overtly painting the town red and painting over the name of the town, instead scrawling "HELL" in red paint, High Plains Drifter's stranger is a man set to bring a plague of bullets and death on those guilty of killing an innocent and good man in Marshal Jim Duncan.

There are also references to how one's soul does not rest until their grave is marked. As it happens, Duncan's grave is unmarked and the stranger is a sharpshooter that looks like him. It does not take a genius to put together the fact that this is not merely a film about a man coming to defend a town. It is a man coming to exact his revenge on the town and sent to bring them all down to hell, just as Duncan had asked for right before his own death. With his 1985 film Pale Rider introducing one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, it certainly seems this stranger may be another horseman. Riding silently in town to punish those who sin against God, especially those who use God's name and merely hide behind this faith when their horrible actions are challenged, the stranger is a beast sent to see this town come to ruin. Having sinned by not just killing Duncan, but selling their souls to profit off of a mine that should not be theirs, the time for the devil to collect on the check they already cashed is unfortunately here for the town of Lago.

Highlighting the dark horror element of High Plains Drifter is also the very ritualistic and fire-stroked killing of Duncan. Fire rages in the background as the scene is covered in red as the lashes slam against his face. When the stranger kills a man in a very similar fashion, we see the fire raging behind him and practically obscuring his face. This is a man sent to punish the town for their sins, not save it from the criminals threatening to burn it to the ground. Instead, he will kill the criminals and then burn the town down himself. Of course, what benefits the horror and mystery elements of this western film is the score from Dee Barton. Lifted out of horror movies that rely on creepy and eerie sounds, High Plains Drifter cements its status as being a far more scary and haunting western with this score. Akin to something out of Psycho, the score is frenetic, chaotic, and unpleasing to the ears. It is a work of brilliance that expertly sets the tone for those who may not necessarily read the film in such an apocalyptic/demonic/punishment fashion.

Sent back to Lago for vengeance, the mysterious stranger hired to defend the town is not there to defend it at all. Instead, he is there to punish the town for its greed and murder. In stark contrast to his later work Pale Rider, High Plains Drifter is a film that has Eastwood as an antihero who kills and rapes. At no point is he a good man, which should clue one into just how nefarious his intentions are with the town of Lago and all of its inhabitants. This is no man of God. This a plague sent down to cleanse the world of Lago and all those who call her home, damning them and the town to an eternity spent in Hell.



8/10 - Flesh + Blood is a wholly unique film. Set in the Middle Ages as the Bubonic plague ravishes Europe, a group of mercenaries sack a castle only to be betrayed by their benefactor and their captain. In response, they take revenge by ambushing the benefactor, Arnolfini (Fernando Hilbeck). In the process, they kidnap his son's bride-to-be, Agnes (Jennifer Jason Leigh). Violently raping her and one another, this group of mercenaries are ugly, ugly human beings. They follow a statue of St. Martin, the patron saint of leader Martin (Rutger Hauer), throughout everything and even have a Cardinal in their group. On the other side, Arnolfini is a man consumed by wealth and greed for more money. Even his son Steven (Tom Burlinson) was never interested in marrying Agnes but seems to have quickly gotten over that and will fight for her to the end of the world. What ensues is an odd adventure romp that never feels fully tongue-in-cheek or fully serious.

In many ways, Flesh + Blood is a bit of a run through for Verhoeven's later film Starship Troopers. A satire of the military industrial complex, Flesh + Blood similarly critiques war by showing that both sides are evil. For explorers and warriors, there used to be the belief that they would receive, "God, gold, and glory". This is underscored in this film from the very beginning. As soldiers take the sacraments to ensure they get to go to heaven and have virgins awaiting their arrival, they are equally obsessed with simply getting their hands on some spoils and prostitutes or any woman breathing. Even Arnolfini, a feudal lord, is overtaken by this pursuit as he seeks as much gold as possible, reneging on a promise to give the hired mercenaries their share of gold. While Arnolfini is not a rapist, he is one who buys women and has no concern for the will of his son or the other woman, just the size of her dowry. In essence, neither side is good. The band of mercenaries, however, believe they are and declare that they have God on their side. Similarly, Arnolfini has no reason to believe he is not the good guy. In Flesh + Blood, the film shows that war is never straight forward. One side is not good and the other is not bad. Both are a blend of each. While it goes to great lengths to show how horrible the mercenaries can be, it equally shows that they can be good to one another and are not necessarily completely evil. Nobody is fully evil and this film shows that. However, doing it with an emphasis on war, it drives home the belief that there is no hero in war. Both sides have evil intentions, no matter how much they claim God is on their side.

In this fashion, the film also shows the underbelly of society. With a long, graphic rape sequence involves Agnes being passed around the mercenaries, Flesh + Blood is thoroughly Verhoeven, but also shows how truly horrible human beings can be too one another. For these people, overwhelmed by greed and lust, the word of God is lost on them. They claim to be following signs from God, but are wholly misguided and merely following their own carnal and wordly desires. They are pursuing greed instead of God and it has blown them off course as they follow the false gods they worship in God's stead. Yet, Verhoeven's film is not remiss without critiquing religion as well. By following St. Martin, they look like morons following some idol that just spins randomly. Additionally when a man is afflicted by the bubonic plague, Steven tells the doctor/priest to cut the wounds, not bleed him. Rejecting it as unchristian, he soon learns that cutting the wounds results in the stricken overcoming the plague. In essence, he soon learns the power of science. Thus, Flesh + Blood is hardly a thoroughly Christian film, but as with its depiction of war, it shows there are two sides to everything. Being Christian does not necessarily mean you are a good person, and being a scientist does not make you a bad person, and vice versa. In essence, the line is incredibly blurry.

Never afraid to get nasty, Flesh + Blood can be best summed up as a film that shows the result of war: flesh and blood. Women are raped, flesh is wounded, and people bleed. In all honestly, with its graphic portrayal of each, Flesh + Blood may be the most horrifyingly accurate anti-war film released. It is not subtle nor is it trying to hide its beliefs. It is a film that goes full-boar into its message and takes no half-measures whatsoever. Verhoeven is not one to not go all out in his critique of something he deems to be wrong and Flesh + Blood is hardly an exception to that rule. In critiquing the horrors of war and pulling back the lies hidden behind (for God, for glory, for wealth, for land, etc.), Flesh + Blood may not be nearly as satirical as his best work, but it still works incredibly well as a critique of war and the ugliness that can ensue in the name of victory.

The fact that Flesh + Blood is not nearly as satirical as his best critiques may be its biggest fault, however. It can be indulgent like any Verhoeven film, but seems to be playing it far too straight. Thus, when Steven breaks free from captivity because lightning hits his chain, it feels entirely off-tone. The film's depictions of violence, the bubonic plague, and gang rape, are far too serious to match with any satirical tone that may be implied by the chain breaking scene. In that way, the film feels relatively unsure of whether it wants to be tongue-in-cheek or play its anti-war sentiment entirely straight. In essence, Flesh + Blood wants to be like Showgirls or Starship Troopers - full-on satires - but never really has the guts to go for the comedic jugular.

A fun and thoroughly entertaining adventure film, Flesh + Blood is one that left me feeling cold when it finished, but given an hour and a half to calm down, it is clear my feelings have improved significantly and are less mixed. It is a film that may be served a rewatch, but even on the first watch, it is a tremendous anti-war romp through the Middle Ages that show how both sides in war can be evil or good, but no side is all one, despite possible beliefs that "God is on their side". Along the way, it also critiques false Christianity and the carnal desires of man that must come at any expense.



9/10 - Utter brilliance. Born straight out of cinema verite and Dogme 95, Jonathan Demme's Rachel Getting Married opens with a scene reminiscent of Jean-Luc Godard's Breathless in which Kym (Anne Hathaway) is picked up from rehab by her father Paul (Bill Irwin). Putting the camera in the car and immediately making the audience an intimate part of this story and this family, this sequence uses a few jump cuts akin to that Godard film and the plot that plays out feels like a spiritual successor to Thomas Vinterberg's The Celebration. Putting Kym in the throws of her sister Rachel (Rosemarie Dewitt) getting married, the resultant film is powerful, engrossing, and a truly brilliant experience.

The decision to use cinema verite - documentary-style filmmaking - as the main source of camerawork in Rachel Getting Married is an absolutely brilliant choice by Demme. Instead of just a film about a recovering drug addict arriving home and causing chaos wherever she goes, Rachel Getting Married is an intimate experience. The pain of the characters becomes our pain. Awkward moments are felt. We cry, we laugh, we smile, and we get angry with the characters. All out of love. By the end of the film, this family has become our own. Spending two hours with them feels like a lifetime, as the audience is given such an intimate look at their struggles, past pain, and joy. These characters on display in Rachel Getting Married are beautifully written and achingly real. The situations they find themselves are equally so. By using the documentary-style filmmaking, we are the one's holding the camera. Floating by without fear of using extreme close-ups - which have the added benefit of making us feel even closer to the action - the camera is a tool of intimacy in the film and one that creates a world so authentic, so within reach, it is as if we are not just a fly on the wall. The audience has become a silent family member, sitting by and watching the action unfold without feeling the need to speak out. This manifests itself in making the film feel personal and the characters are our family. I want to reach out to Kym, see how she is doing. Call Rachel and ask how the marriage is and what she is up to nowadays. How is the baby? I want to call Paul, just chat about music or whatever. Rachel Getting Married turns itself into the Buchman family's own home video and one that fills the audience with odd feelings of nostalgia and familiarity.

What truly helps to sell the authenticity and broken reality of the film is the acting. As the broken Kym, Hathaway is a revelation. Raw and immature, her Kym is self-centered, self-loathing, and eternally depressed. Responsible for the death of her younger brother because of her drug addiction, she will never forgive herself, further feeding into her spiral into drugs and alcohol. She is a beautiful soul, but one that will never blossom to her potential because of her past sins. Hathaway plays a recovering drug addict that, in spite of how many times she missteps during the film, makes you root for her. The audience can see her good heart and her desire to forgive herself, but she can simply not get over that mountain and continuously acts out to try and cry out for help. Hathaway is brilliant is portraying this complex and deeply moving character.

Yet, her family is also at the top of their game. As her father Paul, Bill Irwin is tremendous. Emotional and constantly trying to parent Kym, knowing how fragile she is, Paul is a good man but has trouble forgiving his daughter for being under the influence, leading to the death of his young son. Outwardly, he forgives her, but you can see just how much Ethan's death hurts him and merely seeing his name causes him to breakdown mentally and emotionally. Along the same lines, Kym's sister Rachel is terrifically brought to life by Rosemarie Dewitt. Elated over her marriage and completely loving towards her sisters, she is constantly driven to the edge by her sister's antics. As Kym self-destructs and draws attention to herself, Rachel is driven away, but never leaves. She always comes back, culminating in a beautiful hug shared between them at the end. Chills. No matter what they go through, they will always be sisters and the both of them will go to the end of the world for one another. Of all the film's accomplishments, this portrayal of sisterhoods may be one of its most defiant triumphs. Authentic and showing how one can go between loving and hating their troublesome siblings in an instant, it is never exploitative and never feels scripted. These are real people and scenarios that are merely being reenacted for this film.

What reveals the brilliance of Rachel Getting Married, however, is the final shot. Parking the camera on the porch as Rachel looks out at the remaining wedding guests the day after as they gather around a man playing a guitar, it is a scene that makes you want to walk out there with Rachel. Its aesthetic and poetic quality is one that makes you want to drop the camera, go the guitar player with her, and simply sit there with one another - basking in the joy of their company. That is how intimate this film is, largely due to the cinema verite stylings. This is not a film about some family with a sister getting married and her troubled drug addict sister returning home. It is a film that feels like the audience's own family and one where we know all the inner workings of the family. It can be crazy sometimes, but these are the people we love and, at the end of the day, just want to be near. Though it is a film that presents scenarios foreign to me, its depiction of family - the connection and the bond - is like no other.



7/10 - Neil Jordan makes truly unique films and Mona Lisa is no exception. Part romantic drama, part character study, and part neo-noir, Mona Lisa is a contemplative and slow-paced film that may not be perfect, but is certainly a compelling and well told tale. Starring Bob Hoskins as George, a man who was just released after seven years in prison, the film depicts him working for a mysterious gangster named Denny Mortwell (Michael Caine) as a driver for a high-class prostitute Simone (Cathy Tyson). Driving Simone around town to meet her johns, she eventually asks George to find a young girl for her, Cathy (Kate Hardie). As Cathy is underage, Simone is afraid for her safety. The search eventually brings George into direct conflict with Denny and a cruel pimp named Anderson (Clarke Peters).

Smart and intricately plotted, Jordan's script for Mona Lisa is incredibly tight and focused. Not a detail is out of place with every word or small detail coming back to make an impact on the plot in a large way. He even works in elements of detective story told to George by his friend Thomas (Robbie Coltrane), as the pieces of those stories wind up popping up in unexpected places. But, Jordan's film can feel incredibly unique for its focus on romance. First introducing us to George and then his friendly romance with Simone, he quickly falls for her even as she continues to work as a prostitute and show no affection towards him beyond that of a friend. He is willing to do anything for her so when she asks him to find Cathy, he jumps at the opportunity. Unfortunately, one of Mona Lisa's greatest strengths is its portrayal of romance and its impact on a person. Constantly distorting his vision of both Simone and the truth of the situation, George is constantly struggling to keep up while Simone and everybody else - who is not distracted by love - is three steps ahead of poor George. That said, she is not necessarily a femme fatale by any means, but she is definitely not what George perceives her to be. As she explains about her johns, they become attached to what they perceive her to be. Even if George never sleeps with her, he too falls in love with what he thinks she is and should be.

In depicting the dark underbelly of the sex industry, Mona Lisa is incredibly reserved, yet powerful. For Simone and Cathy, they were exploited from young ages ad forced to have sex with anybody and everybody. If the man said they were unhappy or even if they said they were happy, their pimp - Anderson - knocked them around a bit. This has had a profound effect on them and every other girl in the trade. Though the film never goes too in-depth on it and is not dedicated to revealing the horrors of the sex industry, it does explore it to some degree and the portrait it paints in that regard is horrifying and helps to set the stakes for the film. When we see the sex clubs and other prostitutes and learn that Cathy is underage, the audience's heart aches and desperately roots for George to find her and rescue her from her predicament.

In his role as the mysterious gangster Denny, who George served time in prison for, Michael Caine honestly steals the show for myself. He is mysterious and menacing like never before and, though his screentime is limited, he nails the role and instills fear wherever he goes. That said, Hoskins is brilliant. Nominated for an Academy Award for his performance, it is not hard to see why as he terrifically portrays this hard luck guy who is trying his best after the screw up of a lifetime. Both play key parts in a plot that is actually quite unpredictable. Until now, the only other work by Jordan that I had encountered was The Crying Game. Though Mona Lisa is not nearly as unpredictable as that film, it definitely does not show the viewer all of its tricks until it absolutely has to, keeping us in the dark alongside George for the vast majority of the film. Also to the film's credit is its score. Dramatic, thrilling, and suspenseful, the score sets a tense tone for a great amount of scenes.

One of the real highlights of the film, however, is the use of mirrors. Various scenes begin with a door opening, the camera looking in and then it is shown to be a mirror. Scenes such as this include every shot in the rear-view mirror of Simone in the car, the finale with Denny sitting in the room first shown via a mirror opposite him by the door. Jordan also introduces mirrors in the form of a one-way mirror in a room where Cathy meets johns. Opening to a small room opposite the bedroom, it allows George to see her as she is having sex with an old man. This unique emphasis on mirror shots truly emphasizes the distortion experienced by George. Every other character - aside from maybe Thomas - knows what is going on. Yet, George is still working without the full information. He never gets the full picture and merely gets a copy or slightly altered portrait of the situation. Using mirrors, Jordan finds a strong visual motif to show just how off George's take is on the situation and how lost he is in figuring out where Cathy is, falling in love with Simone, and dealing with his tough rabbit loving boss Denny.

A smartly and tightly wound yarn, Mona Lisa's ending is a bit too abrupt and does not quite land properly. The same thing afflicted The Crying Game with the seemingly too-sudden ending in that film as well. That said, its ending is not bad, it is just a bit clunky with some poor acting choices adorning its explosive and shocking finale. Well acted, well paced, and terrifically written, this ending is the only thing separating Mona Lisa from being a better film. Thoroughly entertaining and unfortunately underseen, the film pits together Bob Hoskins and Michael Caine in some of their best performances.



5/10 - Whenever I watch a standard biopic, a thought crosses my mind: Do directors and writers ever feel bad about turning somebody's life into something unextraordinary? In a film such as this, a real life tale of heroism, Clint Eastwood just shoves Sully's life into being a rehash of every inspirational biopic ever made. In the process, the extraordinary becomes typical and loses its power. He tries to change the formula a bit and turns the film into an occasionally flashback look at the Miracle on the Hudson and the impact it had on Chesley Sullenberger (Tom Hanks) and all those on-board, but the film just never really sticks the landing. Its real power is found on the plane, but Eastwood seems reluctant to go to the plane at all and instead tells uninteresting side stories.

One of the main culprits in the crash of Sully is the inclusion of the NTSB investigation. Cliched, annoying, and unfair to the NTSB who did not interrogate Sully or make him out to be a villain, these portions of the film are included to add stakes and tension to non-flight scenes. However, they just feel like inclusions from every cliched feel good biopic of the past century. The scenes do not add tension, rather they merely annoy and distract from the true story: the landing of the plane on the Hudson. They do not add greater understanding to the story and merely exist to add the false tension that the film could find on the plane, but refuses to do so for a long stretch. Worse yet, the NTSB investigation is greatly predictable. As it is not true, it is clear it will always come back positive for Sully after he is persecuted for much of the film. Eastwood tries to strike an anti-bureaucracy tone here as they try to tear down this great American hero. Unfortunately, he misses the mark. Throughout the film, we see nothing but evidence he could have made it back and an over-eager Sully taking a nosedive into the Hudson. The way the film paints it, it seems like he wanted to land in the Hudson regardless of the options available to him. By the end, he is cleared and we all celebrate that he has been vindicated, but this does not excuse the scattershot approach to the treatment of Sully's decision or the actions of the NTSB.

The film also tacks on Sully's wife Lorraine (Laura Linney). Watching a talented actress get stuck in a somebody's wife role is always tough, just as it is watching Linney struggle for air in a film that strips her of any role in the film. Randomly popping up to further add pathos and power with Sully's family, the scenes are flat, dull, and useless. Linney tries her best, but the scenes feel scripted and nonsensical. Perhaps they are real, but they never feel authentic and are akin to the flight simulations run throughout the film. The scenes simply miss the mark and do not add emotional depth to the film, especially since it did not need any more stakes or suspense. The scenes are all shown in the aftermath of the accident, so we know Sully survived. Thus, Eastwood is forced into showing delayed reaction on the part of Lorraine or her first seeing it on the news, but even then it lacks the suspense of her not knowing about Sully's safety, since he was the one who told her to see the television. In other words, the scenes are useless.

The only scenes that work are the ones in the plane. Unfortunately, Eastwood even strips these of tension by showing them out of order. The film could have been 24 minutes and 208 seconds long without missing any of the good parts. The only successful parts of this film come as a result of the natural pathos, tension, and thrills aboard this plane that is coming down on the Hudson. Fluff added via the control tower and the guy who thinks the plane crashed, the rescue teams, and otherwise, are unnecessary additions of hero worship or suspense. The plane hitting the birds, them landing the plane, the flight crew preparing the passengers, the passengers telling one another they love each other, the landing, and then the rescue. That is it. That should be the whole film. End credits. Fin. In these scenes, Tom Hanks is in full control and Aaron Eckhart is equally terrific. Eastwood's direction is reserved, relying upon the scene to provide the tension with no artificial additions to try and make it even more suspenseful. The scenes just play out to perfection, but are sadly chopped up and strewn throughout the film. It seems as if Eastwood knew they were the only scenes that worked, so he tried to make it last longer as he built a film from scraps around these top-notch sequences. Unfortunately, the film suffers under this bloat and the excess scenes feel so much worse in comparison to the scenes that do work. In essence, Sully is a film with a great core - the acting and the flight sequences - but it refuses to use them, in favor of peripheral element that suck the life out of the entire picture.

A mixed bag, Sully would be a great short film. As a feature length film, it is not. Eastwood celebrates the heroes of the day in hamfisted fashion, never letting the heroism speak for itself. It is as if he does not trust the film to judge Sully harshly, so he reminds the audience he is a hero constantly. In the aftermath of Suicide Squad reminding the audience its characters were the bad guys, Sully does not feel any less guilty. Unfortunately, the only reason somebody would come away thinking he was not a hero is because of the film. Painting the NTSB as out-of-touch bureaucratic antagonists, the film equally makes it seem like Sully wanted to land in the Hudson, even if other options were constantly being made available. In reality, he had no choice and had to land on the Hudson. By introducing this to the film, Eastwood makes a solid counter-argument to Sully being a hero and instead paints him as a reckless pilot who is over-the-hill and suffering from acute visions of a plane blowing up in New York. In essence, the film's details miss the mark. Bloated, cliched, and predictable, Sully finds strength and great emotional power on the plane and rescue, but drowns it out with useless scenes of the NTSB investigation, Sully's family, and flashbacks to Sully's life of flying, none of which actually add depth to the film, only make the film take longer to get to its obvious and hamfisted conclusion: Sully is a hero and even the NTSB is lining up to shake his hand after spending the prior hour and a half doing their jobs wrong like the out-of-touch bureaucrat scum that they are, right?



7/10 - One of the most soapy and melodramatic melodramas ever made, Douglas Sirk's Magnificent Obsession may be a bit much at times, but is as elegantly constructed as ever and oddly romantic and endearing. Pairing together Jane Wyman and Rock Hudson a year before their triumphant turn in Sirk's All That Heaven Allows, the film may not be nearly as masterful as that film, but brings many of the same dream-like qualities to the table. However, its soapy nature is often just too much and drags the film down into being an oddly comedic film with a plot - that while excellently executed - could probably pass as one used by General Hospital. That said, its acting, directing, and production value is simply too much to look past.

Charismatic as ever, Rock Hudson stars as Bob Merrick. A rich playboy, he crashes on his boat as he speeds around the lake. Requiring a resuscitator, one is procured from local doctor Wayne Phillips. Unfortunately, as Merrick is saved, Phillips suffers a heart attack and the resuscitator cannot arrive back at his home in time. Widowed, Helen Phillips (Jane Wyman) is left with Wayne's daughter from a past marriage, Joyce (Barbara Rush). The two lean on one another as they put Wayne's estate - the home and hospital he owns - in order. In the process, they learn he often refused payment in an effort to become his truest self. Upon learning about the death of Phillips, Bob Merrick seeks out Helen to give her money to help run the hospital, but she too refuses. Eventually, he comes to the same beliefs as Wayne and seeks to do good and becomes his truest self. Unfortunately, it manifests itself into an obsession over Helen that has horrible consequences for Helen, but eventually leads to a beautiful romance between Helen and Bob.

Soapy and silly, the plot goes exactly as one would expect after watching half of the film. It is unfortunate to see it become so predictable, but Sirk is unable to conjure a lot of the same magic he would a year later in All That Heaven Allows. Fortunately, the romance between Bob and Helen is incredibly well put together, even if he is not being totally honest with her. As Joyce explains, full honesty is hardly required when he is as kind and giving to her as he is throughout the film. Regardless of the oddity behind their relationship and the gooey core of the film, both Hudson and Wyman turn in good performances and have tremendous chemistry with one another. There can be a bit overacting, but is a melodrama after all so it is only natural.

Compared to the reds and browns of All That Heaven Allows, Magnificent Obsession is far colder. Relying upon pale blues and greens, the film's extensive use of cold colors for much of the film reveals a lot about its nature. In spite of its positive ending, it is a largely quite somber and depressing film. Its gooey romance and melodrama charms are hardly a match for a plot where a woman loses her husband and then is blinded in a weird accident. The color palette of the film really reflects this sadness, particularly in the beginning where even the clothing is blue. Compared to the loud reds and comforting browns of All That Heaven Allows, the cold blues and distant greens highlight the initial state of the relationship between Helen and Bob. Cold and unfeeling, the two eventually grow closer, but only because she has no idea who he is. At the core of this film is Bob's odd obsession with Helen and one that has brought her nothing but pain, even if he continues to better himself by giving to her. In essence, he merely - unintentionally - uses her and her suffering to find opportunities to better himself. Yes, he saves her with his newly acquired knowledge and generosity, but still. Thus, in spite of its more fluffy and soapy elements, Magnificent Obsession still remains a far colder and less emphatic romance, highlighted by its color scheme from the very beginning of the film.

While less dreamy and a bit creepy at times with how Bob misleads Helen, Magnificent Obsession is still classic Sirk. Melodramatic and soapy, it somehow makes those uncomfortable bits feel good and wholesome. Shot with a great color palette, good acting, and terrific direction, Magnificent Obsession may be a bit too soapy for some, but its cheesy goodness is honestly too hard to resist for a cheese enthusiast like myself. If Magnificent Obsession were cheese, it would be gooey and stringy mozzarella.



2/10 - Directed by Russell Mulcahy, Ricochet is a film I managed to somehow finish. Complete garbage, Ricochet is classic early 1990s macho man trash. Cheap, disposable, cheesy, and violent, Ricochet finds no joy in its horrible excess, rather just feeling like childish garbage. The film tells the story of Earl Blake (John Lithgow), a convicted criminal, who wants revenge on Nicholas Styles (Denzel Washington). Arrested and humiliated by Styles, Blake breaks out of prison and begins to frame Nick as an associate of a pedophile, drug user, frequenter of prostitutes, murderer, and complete loser. All of this occurs as Styles begins to make a run for District Attorney after winning a big case as the Assistant District Attorney. Juvenile trash, Richochet is simply unenjoyable and the fact I finished it seems more closely aligned with masochism than anything else.

Making it appear as though he died, Blake immediately sets up one of the most generic and cliched plots put to film in a long time. Now legally dead, he is free to do what he pleases. He kills a friend of Nick's and make him appear to be into child porn. Then he kidnaps Nicks, tortures him, injects him drugs, and has a prostitute with the clap rape him. Along the way, he makes little adjustments to the sound with recordings he made earlier with this clearly his intention, allowing to appear as though Styles was into everything. If anybody was smart, however, you could see that Styles was passed out and not moving his lips. But, I guess that is neither here nor there. After releasing him, everybody is convinced Styles is a pervert, drug user, and cheater, because Blake has deleted all evidence except what he wants the world to see. Losing his job and nearly losing his wife, he must fight back against Earl Blake and kill him in front of everybody, but not after Blake kills Nick's sidekick friend. Now pissed off, Nick embraces everything and kills Blake in front of everybody, being proven innocent with "incontestable" evidence. Yes, it was a frame job, but I would love to know what was so incontestable.

Ricochet is one that is completely brain dead. Macho man garbage that simply serves as an excuse for Denzel to use his charm in the early 1990s, the film is incredibly dumb. The aforementioned pieces that should clearly allow for anybody to reasonably see that Styles is innocent, but Mulcahy is unwilling to compromise. Instead, he continues to follow every beat of the classic "frame job" storyline where rage builds up because our protagonist is being framed by an evil bad guy who should have been clearly seen as somebody who would attack Styles because of the sheer number of pictures he had of him. From faking his death to the climactic finale, Ricochet annoyingly and tediously follows each beat expected and never deviates. Given the way in which the film follows cliches and spices them up with violence and childish reactions to the situation, the film feels as though it were written, directed, and produced, by people that do not exist in the real world. There is no way Styles could be so easily railroaded and seen as a psycho. The first set-up piece - his friend being framed as a child porn guy - is ludicrous. Somehow, after taking telethon money to the bank, he tosses on some women's clothing and has a briefcase full of child porn. For what reason? Why the hell would he bring that with him? Is it not clearly a frame job, regardless of the evidence they think they have? I guess not, because it is the first thing to go. After that, Styles collects evidence, leaves it behind when he runs out inside in pink bathrobes, and shocker of all shockers, Blake replaces the evidence with one that either makes him look crazy or exposes another altered element that makes him look bad. Tediously and aggressively dumb, the film feels as though it believes it is being original. For many cliche films, it can be excused because he tries to spruce it up with some original elements. Ricochet, however, does not. Instead it just goes straight for the early 1990s jugular with cheesy sequences, over-the-top action, useless and bloody violence, and stupid explosions with an even stupider media and populace that believe things with no evidence or evidence that can clearly be debunked.

As the evidence and cliches pile up, Ricochet is just a film that drove me to the edge of sanity. Its annoying 1990s excess feels overly serious for a film that never innovates on them and instead opts to embrace every goofy 1990s element. Worse yet, it feels entirely juvenile. It lacks any coherent logic as to why Blake would go to such lengths and when Styles is vindicated, his finale where he tells the reporter to kiss his ass followed by an explosion into the end credits simply exudes 1990s brain dead garbage. Ricochet is not a fun film. It is one made by sadists to subtly torture the masses and lower standards for action/neo-noir crime films. It is a film that exists for people to say, "Yeah that was bad, but it was no Ricochet". The film is one without style. Without heart. Without passion. Without inner logic. It is also far worse than Cape Fear, a film that similarly has a convict exact revenge on his "captor". Far less exploitative than Ricochet, Cape Fear simply makes it tense and uses its set up with devolving into constant cliches. Instead, Ricochet lacks the confidence to do anything not by the book and feels like early 1990s exploitative, brain dead, juvenile trash. Nobody else will likely feel so strongly about Ricochet being the scum of cinema, but it was a film that made me desperate for it to end out of pure mercy. Very few films make me feel this way, but this one - in its abject stupidity and constant idiocy - drove me to the edge of sanity.

8/10 - Directors of horror films or just weird movies in general tend to gravitate towards tales of identical or siamese twins. David Cronenberg is no different as he demonstrates in Dead Ringers. Based on a true story to a certain degree, the film tells the story of Beverly and Elliott Mantle (Jeremy Irons), twin gynecologists who often pretend to be one another, even with women such as actress Claire Niveau (Genevieve Bujold). Unfortunately for them, this "pretending" is really a manifestation of their affliction: they are siamese twins that are not connected. Their bodies and souls are one, even if their brains go elsewhere. As a result, one becoming addicted to drugs has a detrimental effect on the duo. Featuring class Cronenberg psychology and body horror, Dead Ringers is a creepy and unsettling film from beginning to end.

Featuring Jeremy Irons in a tremendous dual role, Dead Ringers explores the inner working of the mind of a twin who is unmistakably connected to their twin. Messing with their mind and interfering with their daily lives, this connection is one neither is truly aware of or able to cope with. Irons plays these two tormented souls drifting between the calm, cool, and collected nature of them initially during undergrad and when they begin their careers to when their twisted insides and mutant nature interferes on their daily lives and turns both into dying drug addicts who have lost their minds. Deeply psychological, Irons convincingly brings to life the fractured nature of these men's psyches and deftly shows the impact it has on their daily lives with Claire or any of their patients.

Cronenberg, for his part, never truly exploits the situation or the afflictions of his character. Rather, as he is prone to do, he explores the difference. The mutant nature and convoluted interiors of a siamese/identical twin is on full display here, as well as the mental torment it can cause for a person. In exploring this dark side of the human mind, Cronenberg naturally finds a lot of horror and effectively delivers scares to the audience via the torment the characters go through. Above all, his trademark body horror comes into play throughout and at the very end. Surgery and gynecology are a natural fit for Cronenberg, especially when the men believe they are looking at mutant women with weird insides. This paranoia and weird bit of body horror is vintage Cronenberg in how he has fun with messing up the human body and finding horror by making the audience's skin crawl as weird surgical tools are used in operation or people are cut open. The film is very visceral in this front as can be expected. It is also where much of the horror can be found, particularly with the violent psychological body horror finale when Beverly tries to separate them as conjoined twins, even though they are not actually conjoined.

Messed up, twisted, and classic Cronenberg, Dead Ringers may not be nearly as effective in creating scares or messing with one's mind as some of his best work, but it does succeed in creating a creepy atmosphere for Jeremy Irons to have terrific fun with. Irons is creepy, weird, and oddly charismatic in the role as the two twins, playing two distinctly different people who just happen to share a deep, deep connection. This atmosphere lends itself to the excellent character study, writing, and embracing of the more psychological and twisted elements brought forth by the film. Though perhaps not as great of a study of the mind as his later film Spider, the film still explores this unique mental illness to chilling effect, making up for its "lesser" character study with more effective scares and chills. Though hardly one of Croneberg's weirder films, Dead Ringers is oddly reserved for this period in his career and, aside from a few gross out scenes, is largely far more mental and less focused on absurd elements such as the underground. Instead, Dead Ringers is about the connection between twins seen through the eyes of a master of body horror. The end result is just as good as one could expect.



6/10 - A sleek, stylish, and gritty gangster crime thriller from director Matthew Vaughn, Layer Cake is a pretty damn good film. In a truly charismatic turn, Daniel Craig stars as the nameless protagonist. Looking to get out of the drug business, our hero gets caught between stolen Serbian drugs and the search for a girl strung out on drugs and hanging with bad company. A pretty straight forward crime film, Layer Cake is flawed and a bit messy at times, but has terrific kinetic energy that keeps it going. Layer Cake may not convince me Matthew Vaughn is a very good director (Kingsman can die in a fire), but it is another surprisingly good entry in his filmography.

Starring Craig as XXXX, the unnamed gangster, the film's biggest fault is its plot lacks resolution. He is hired to find this girl and the film forgets about her. He begins to have sex with Sienna Miller, but gets pulled out of the room and then it jumps to him leaving a country club with her at the end. Many of the film's plot elements are just skimmed through, names get jumbled up, or events and people are simply forgotten. Vaughn tries to string these together quite loosely and it only slightly works out at times. Fortunately, its energy and action allow you to forget about the plot a bit, but it hurts because then there is very little meat on the film's bones. The characters, regardless of sex, are useless. This is one of the film's biggest problems. While its style is nice, the same cannot be said for a pretty run-of-the-mill script that feels like a rehash of Snatch or Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. The fact that Vaughn was a producer on those films is hardly a surprise considering how similar the style is between this film and those Guy Ritchie films. That said, the poor characterization and lack of plot cohesiveness is hardly too detrimental, it just prevents the film from being better.

What is quite detrimental for Layer Cake is its shaky cam. I hate shaky cam. Using shaky cam through a lot of the action scenes, it was annoying and disorienting. Shaky cam is used in one of the most climactic portions of the film and it is a real buzzkill, leaving the sequence with no tension and, in its place, annoyance and a headache. That said, it is an exception as most of the film does not rely on shaky cam, thankfully. Unfortunately, it only makes that one sequence all the more jarring and horrible to watch, as the film has hardly prepared the viewer to take it all in via shaky cam.

That said, the film's plot is quite tense and thrilling at times. Even if its characters lack definition, they are quite engaging to watch and provide interest in the film. The complex and always changing plot is more than engaging and leaves the audience guessing throughout. While hardly original, there are enough moving parts that keep you distracted and focused on the intrigue and more engaging bits of the plot, namely the impending arrival of the Serbian mafia threatening XXXX's life. While diversions into his love life are unwelcome and the film can outdo itself at time, the plot - for a run-of-the-mill gangster action thriller - is hardly anything I can complain about.

One of the more surprising strengths of the film is definitely the editing. Smooth transitions define much of the film, sleekly slipping from scene-to-scene with nice transitions and passage of time in the process. While the editing may not be the focus of the film, it is quite impressive and worth noting. The great editing is a real highlight in the non-shaky cam action scenes and in any dramatic scene in the film, adding to the sense of style utilized by Vaughn in this film that feels, again, heavily influenced by Guy Ritchie and establishes Layer Cake as a thoroughly British crime film.

All in all, Layer Cake is a fine film. It is unoffensive and palatable. Well-directed and incredibly stylish, it has its flaws, but it is a largely fun experience that simply lacks any mean or substance. For action junkies or people who like films of this kind, it will more than quench your thirst. For those who like some more meat on their films, Layer Cake may leave you quite cool and under the mistaken belief that there had to be more to this film than was shown. Fortunately, even for the latter group, the cool and charismatic Daniel Craig more than saves the film and helps to contribute to a film, while disposable, is more than entertaining and is great popcorn entertainment.



8/10 - One of Woody Allen's greatest box office successes, but also ranked among his worst films by critics, To Rome with Love is an odd little film. Personally, I have no idea why it is so maligned. It is a hysterical take on love in Rome via four vignettes of romance, lust, and passion set against the back drop of Rome. Many read the film as merely a tourist advertisement for the city, but it is a brilliant choice as setting for the film. A city of passion, history, antiquity, and wholly unique, it is one of those places that people romanticize about and turn into a city afflicted by hyperreality. It is a place of dreams, to the point that Allen's attempt at magical realism feels right at home in this collection of hopes, aspirations, and romantic entangling. Funny throughout, expertly written with a great balance between the comedy, magical realism, and romance, and terrifically acted, To Rome with Love may be seen as one of his worst films, but it really hits a sweet note.

The first vignette concerns Hayley (Alison Pill), an American tourist. Falling in love with Italian man Michelangelo (Flavio Parenti), she brings her parents over to meet her new love and his family. Upon arrival, Jerry (Woody Allen) and Phyllis (Judy Davis) immediately strike a sour note because of Jerry. A classic Allen character, he is neurotic, weird, and unabashedly blunt with his pessimistic take on life. A retired music industry "executive" of sorts, he is struck by the singing voice of Michelangelo's father, Giancarlo (Fabio Armiliato). However, he can only do it in the shower. So what does he do? He puts together a revival of Pagliacci with Giancarlo singing in the shower on stage. Hysterical, casually funny, and one of the most absurd portions of the film, seeing this story is always a welcome occasion and one that never stops being funny. Allen is an excellent comic actor and truly demonstrates it here, with the scenes after he gets touched by the dirty hands of mortician standing as a result highlight. Witty and smart in this section, it is most akin to classic Allen. A look at love between people from different cultures and culture clash it can create, the romance is not really the highlight, but the odd bond between Jerry and Giancarlo. There, it is sweet and unexpected, while being incredibly funny.

Next up is Italian couple Antonio (Alessandro Tiberi) and Milly (Alessandra Mastronardi). Hoping to get her hair done before meeting Antonio's upper class relatives, Milly gets lost in Rome and meets an actor she has a crush on, opting to go to his hotel room. Antonio, meanwhile, is greeted by prostitute Anna (Penelope Cruz). Showing up in the right room but for the wrong person, Anna is forced into posing as Milly for Antonio's family. Though they both cheat on one another (I mean, it was Penelope Cruz after all), this section of the film explores experience and connection. Antonio and Milly obviously love another, but were stuck in a rut. Leaving their small town and old jobs for the promise of Rome, they learn to be less inhibited sexually and to embrace what comes naturally. The end result: they are happier. This section is quite funny, particularly when Anna is at an upper-class party with Antonio and all the men schedule appointments with her and are regular clients of hers. The magic here comes from Minny finding an actor she loves and Antonio a prostitute. Unlikely and chance encounters that are strokes of luck, the encounters have a lasting impact on them and somehow strengthen their passion for one another.

Next we have Leopoldo (Roberto Benigni). An average man who puts his pants on one foot at a time, this section is an odd comment on celebrity, temptation, and the cultish following a person can create simply by being declared famous, even if it is just being famous for being famous. Uproariously hysterical, Leopoldo is going to work one day when the media suddenly follows him and worships the ground he steps on. Whisked to television interviews and stalked wherever he goes, Leopoldo's wife even sets fashion trends with second-hand dresses and having runs in her stockings. Every word he says become celebrated and the women take notice with models lining up to jump in the sack with Leopoldo. However, all of a sudden, the media decides some other random guy is the new "it" guy and forget about Leopoldo. Depressed and seeking the attention once more, he quickly learns how great it feels to be wanted by the public. Hysterical and a great look at celebrity and the impact it has on your family and yourself, the film's magical element is clear, but its realism is less clear. By having as an average guy, Allen shows how an average person would cope with overnight stardom. He trips up and screws up without meaning to. In essence, it is a defense of celebrities for sometimes misspeaking because when your every word is scrutinized, it is easy to say something offensive without intent. However, in large contrast to the more realistic story between Antonio and Minny, this one is defined by its absurdity and magical nature, resulting in it being one of the most reliably funny sections of the film.

Finally, there is Jack (Jesse Eisenberg). Running into famous architect John Foy (Alec Baldwin) on the streets of Rome, Jack - an aspiring architect himself - learns that John used to live around the same area he lives in now. Bringing him over there and welcoming him into his apartment, John meets Jack's girlfriend Sally (Greta Gerwig). However, it immediately becomes clear that John is merely a magical being. Seen by everyone, but not actually there, John is essentially the inner voice of every character in this sequence. Sally's friend Monica (Ellen Page), who arrives and is a very sexual person causing Sally to fear losing to Jack to her, is the main source of John's angst and concern. Repeatedly, he warns Jack to avoid her no matter how enticing she may seem. Funny due to the banter between Baldwin and Eisenberg, this section of the film explores temptation set against the historical side of Rome. Tempted to leave Sally for the raw sexuality of Monica, it quickly becomes clear his romance with Monica would be nothing but a passing comet. Burning brightly very briefly, the romance is doomed to fail and staying with Sally would be the sensible choice. Funny, witty, and observational regarding the temptation felt by Jack, this section of the film - along with Hayley's story - stands as one of the more conventional Allen pieces of the film, but is hysterical all the same and feels oddly fresh.

Smart, witty, observational, and filled with commentary on love, Rome, temptation, passion, and sexuality, To Rome with Love may have a title hated by Allen himself and is maligned by most critics, but it stands as one of the most consistently funny Allen films. Never ceasing to be funny due to its usage of magical realism, the technique is a perfect match for Allen's inclination to go for the absurd and it is used to sheer perfection in the film. Hooking you in from the start and never lets go, in large part because of the four vignettes keeping things fresh and never overstaying their welcome. Using four stories also allows for the exploration of the various themes at play, though it comes at the expense of character development. It may not be one of the more challenging films by him, but To Rome with Love shows Allen's knack for making an audience laugh and the end result is a truly pleasant and incredibly enjoyable film.



5/10 - Savage Grace, in spite of being listed as a drama, is a film that plays akin to a psychological thriller. It also likely ranks as one of the worst films one could watch with their parents. It strikes me as though that would be quite awkward. Based on the true story of Barbara Baekeland (Julianne Moore) and her son Antony (Eddie Redmayne), the film details their life beginning with the birth of Antony. Moving frequently around Europe, separating from her husband, Antony beginning to explore his homosexuality, and Barbara trying to turn him straight by having sex with her son (yep), the film culminates with the real life murder of Barbara by Antony. Shocking, scandalous, and oddly horrifying, Savage Grace is not a perfect film, but it is an incredibly unique psychological drama blended with character study.

As always, Julianne Moore is tremendous. A deeply twisted character, Moore nails the role, as does Eddie Redmayne. Both are incredibly cold, chilling, and distant. Neither wear their hearts on their sleeves, opting for a far more reserved demeanor that feeds into their method speaking. In this film, it almost sounds like somebody else is talking for Redmayne and he is nervously looking around to see who is talking. As these eccentric billionaires, both are incredibly believable. Suffering from schizophrenia and an Oedipus complex, Redmayne's Antony is terrific constantly (to an annoying degree) saying "mommy". By the end, when they actually sleep with each other, it is entirely believable even if it is still incredibly shocking. The ground work had been laid due to how odd these two are, which contributed to how odd their relationship was and how open both were.

Yet, Savage Grace is not perfect. In its depiction of schizophrenia the film misses the mark. Though Redmayne does it justice, the film seems to forget Antony has schizophrenia until the very end. Done through voice-over and the epilogue, the film forgets to develop that angle of him and leaves it up to the imagination of viewer. While this is rewarding sometimes, it can also leave the audience in the dark too much and unaware anything is wrong with him beyond being the garden variety odd guy. In essence, the film is far too focused on the incest and not the schizophrenia that is also a culprit in why Antony killed his mother. Instead, they just paint him as a mama's boy who goes around saying "mommy" and bringing men/women home while providing voice-over about how much he and his mother discussed his sex life. Thus, the film sort of forgets to develop one of its major parts.

The film also struggle until Redmayne arrives. Flying through his youth, the film is in a rush to start building up to the incest and cannot do much when he is a kid. The end result is a smattering of shots from a collection of cities that simply goes by too fast and nothing ever comes of these sequences. In essence, they are ground work and an introduction to the characters and the only part that matters is when Barbara goes home with a strange man in front of her husband. At that point, we know she is wild. Otherwise, skipping the beginning and jumping to Redmayne would be well advised. The film also struggles at the end. No spoilers, since it is true, but when he kills his mother, it is far too abrupt. They are just talking and boom. It is likely true, but it simply feels too anticlimactic. Only those really paying attention could see him grab the knife and decide to stab her. That said, the follow-up is decidedly cold blooded and drives home just how messed up he is in his mind.

Missing the mark in the beginning and slightly off-the-mark at the end, Savage Grace finds its groove in the middle when Moore and Redmayne can go toe-to-toe. Both giving disconnected upper class psychopath performances, the two are cold, calculated, and deranged. Depicting the incest in a somehow-not-exploitative fashion, the film turns it itself into an absolutely chilling psychological drama that is a thoroughly twisted watch. That said, were it not for Julianne Moore and Eddie Redmayne, Savage Grace would be a far worse film.



9/10 - Upon its release, Spartacus received mixed reviews and was despised by Stanley Kubrick, most likely because he did not retain full artistic control over the film. Now, in 2017, it is revered as a classic. This turn of events is due, in no small part, to the brilliant 196-minute restoration of the film put out by the Criterion Collection. Brilliant, colossal, magnificent, and thoroughly epic, Spartacus is a sword and sandals film for all of the ages. The genre may largely be dead nowadays, but after seeing Spartacus, it is clear that it must be, partially, due to the fact that no film could dream of reaching the heights that Spartacus eclipsed, so directors and studios simply stopped trying. Very fair on their part because, honestly, there is no way any sword and sandals film could ever dream of coming close to the scope and brilliance of Spartacus.

Epic from the very beginning, the film tells the story of Spartacus (Kirk Douglas). Born a slave, he is acquired for the purpose of being a gladiator by Batiatus (Peter Ustinov). Trained alongside numerous other slaves, Spartacus is eventually chosen to battle to the death with a fellow trainee to entertain a Roman senator, Crassus (Laurence Olivier). With his enemy killed for refusing to kill Spartacus, the gladiators-in-training become emboldened to revolt by Spartacus killing a trainer. Organizing behind Spartacus, the slave army marches across Italy to the coast, where a fleet of pirate ships await them. However, the Roman legions are closing in as Crassus is declared "dictator" and the senate, including Crassus' arch enemy Gracchus (Charles Laughton), is rendered useless. With the slave army threatening to throw Rome into chaos, the two square off in an epic battle that will either see Crassus die or Spartacus sent to be crucified or die in battle.

Elegantly written, the film never feels dated. Its battles are epic and incredibly well choreographed. The battles are rife with tension and scale. Kubrick captures them in a way that highlights their importance and the impeccable size of the Roman legions, while never allowing it to seem cheesy or overdone. Instead, it is a film with incredible presence and one that feels like a perfect match for its ambition and grand scale. Kubrick infuses it with purpose and power with each battle taking that on the shoulder and meeting his ambitious scale. The costumes are equally perfect, being quintessential Roman and slave attire. The film's terrific costume design lends itself to being the terrific visual film that is and will forever be. The film feels like an authentic look at the Roman Empire and it is because of the costumes and production design being so true to life and authentic for the era.

Acting-wise, Spartacus further matches the power of its scope. As the titular character, Kirk Douglas is impeccable. Delivering his lines with power and inspiration, it is not a hard sell to believe that all of his men would sacrifice their lives to try and spare him or to die alongside him. He is a man that would make one want to run through a brick wall if he asked them to. Douglas is a perfect match for the role and lives up to the role throughout. He is a believable slave army leader and one that anybody would follow into battle. As his arch-nemesis, Laurence Olivier is typically wonderful. Calculating, evil, and always pretending to be the good guy, Olivier's Crassus is a real highlight of the film and a worthy antagonist for this impeccable film. As always, Charles Laughton and Peter Ustinov also shine in supporting roles. As the venerable Roman senator, Laughton is disliked by Crassus because he always stands up for his beliefs and cannot be bought. Ustinov, meanwhile, plays a moron and fat character who trains gladiators. Easily bought and out for himself, the man is not one to admire, but is certainly an entertaining figure on the screen.

Above all though, Spartacus is a film for all-time. With a sense of scope, it is a film that defines the saying, "They don't make films like that anymore." Spartacus is the literal embodiment of that statement and is a film that should not be missed. At 196 minutes, it is long but never drags. It, instead, sets the scene, introduces us to a variety of characters, and drips with drama and raw energy the entire time. For a film as long as it is, Spartacus should be expected to slack at some point. However, it never takes its foot off the breaks aside from the intermission. This is the pinnacle of sword and sandals film and even if Kubrick hates it, it is undeniably a brilliant work with scale, ambition, and incredible poetic and romantic power about the time of the Roman Empire and of slave army leader Spartacus, who fought for his freedom and for the freedom of his family, his son, and everybody else he met. Powerful, inspirational, and towering, Spartacus is a brilliant piece of cinema.



7/10 - Objectively, two things are true about Army of Darkness. One, it is definitely not very good. Two, I totally screwed up. I had no idea this was a follow-up to Evil Dead and Evil Dead II. Who would guess it, but I had never seen either. Whoops. Mea culpa on that one. Fortunately, I get the feeling I did not miss much plot-wise. 81 minutes long, Army of Darkness is a fast-paced, stupid, and incredibly fun horror comedy. From director Sam Raimi, Ash Williams (Bruce Campbell) reclaims his chainsaw, witty commentary, and need to kill the evil dead in this conclusion to the trilogy (apparently). While hardly perfect, it is impossible to deny that Army of Darkness is really stupid fun.

Due to its runtime and focus on action, the film largely forgets its plot, which stands as the biggest issue. Dumped into the Middle Ages after seeing the Book of the Dead, Ash must fight his way out of various situations and then awakens an army of the dead in the process. Otherwise, it is just chainsaw goodness and women with large breasts serving him. There is not much meat on this bone and very little to digest. Mind you, the film surrounding the plot is fun enough to make you forget there is no plot, but it is a flaw nonetheless. Towards the middle, when the plot can continuously repeat itself with its silly action and jokes along the way, the lack of plot is really felt.

That said, Bruce Campbell is born for this role and hysterical. Charismatic, cool, calm, and collected, Campbell's Ash delivers each punch line to perfection. He is the core of this film and is what it is riding on. He has terrific fun in this film with all the silly gags and seems to derive great pleasure from kicking zombie ass. On that note, Raimi also has a ton of fun here. With bad special effects and low-bar jokes, Army of Darkness is a goofy and entirely tongue-in-cheek affair. He knows it is dumb and outlandish, but that is exactly why he is doing it. This reason is mainly why the bad effects are excusable because it is partially due to limited technology and mostly due to Raimi's own cheesy intention. Bad effects are the perfect backdrop for the quip-ready Ash who has his own special brand of machismo that makes him a truly unique action hero.

On that note, Ash definitely fits some of Yvonne Tasker's definition of a male action hero in the 1980s and apparently early 1990s. Putting his male body through torture via cutting off his own hand, being against the system (defends the middle ages people to save a girl), and saving a damsel in distress, Ash is the quintessential male action hero, though his body does not necessarily become spectacle and suffer from constant torture, aside from the hand the pixie that breaks into his body. In that way, he is a bit of subversion of this and shows Raimi's satirical inclination in the film with even the action hero and action he performs being tongue-in-cheek representations of competing action films of the time.

Funny, subversive, and flat out stupid, Army of Darkness has literally no plot, but is fun because of its bad effects and Bruce Campbell. While I wish I had seen the first two entries in the trilogy first, Army of Darkness is entertaining and fun in its own right, separate from the other Evil Dead films.



8/10 - The Mosquito Coast is a very unique film. Maybe not unique for director Peter Weir, who is known for his slow and contemplative dramas, but definitely unique for star Harrison Ford. No action, no fight scenes, and no archaeological digs. This is a straight drama and Ford was rewarded by it being the only film he starred in to lose money. Playing eccentric inventor Allie Fox, The Mosquito Coast depicts Allie taking his family to Belize where he buys a small village. Fed up with American life and the perceived failure of it as a society, he sees the small village of Jeronimo as a paradise where they can start over. Unfortunately, things go haywire as he gets more-and-more erratic in his behavior. A slow descent into madness, Ford turns in possibly his best acting performance in the film and it is a film with various thematic layers courtesy of Weir.

One of the most readily apparent themes at play in the film is the perceived failure of the American dream. Winding down to the point where people buy things they do not need and sells things to people who also do not need them, commercialization has superseded ambition. Driving past migrant workers in America, Fox laments to his two sons - Charlie (River Phoenix) and Jerry (Jadrien Steele) - that he has no idea why they keep coming here. They work their asses off and for what? Nothing but abject poverty. Constantly complaining about the way in which America has spiraled downward into being practically a parody of itself, Allie Fox is a man who eventually proves just how hard it is to build a society. In Jeronimo, he builds his ice machine that produces ice from fire and provides preservation for food and air conditioning, but his greed and pride lead him to abusing his machine to kill intruders. Backfiring, he winds up quickly destroying his settlement. Viewed in comparison with the theme of the failed American dream, Fox essentially answers his own question. He works hard to build himself up with no expectation of monetary reward. He does it because he has to and he views this place as his best chance for happiness. For immigrants, their reasons are very much the same. Unfortunately, infrastructure of the country they arrive in winds up blowing up in their face and knocking them back down to square one.

Early in the film, Allie also rants about the world. Stating that war has changed immeasurably, he believes that no longer is either side entirely innocent in war. Rather, both sides are different shades of evil. This belief comes to fruition when he battles Reverend Spellgood (Andre Gregory). Bringing Christianity to the area via his missionary, he and Allie do battle and the Reverend accuses Allie of being a communist. Bringing Allie's villagers to his settlement and unafraid to use a gun and kill people, the Reverend is hardly a good man. His own daughter, who befriends Charlie, hardly even likes him. Yet, Allie himself is a murderer and a dangerous psychopath. For both, they felt the call to come out to this area in Belize - the Reverend because of God and Allie because of his rejection of American society - yet they quickly discover there is not enough room for the both of them. Mirroring war, they both quickly divide their settlements and stay the hell away from one another and neither are particularly good people with both exacting violence on one another and their settlements.

As is clear, communism, the red scare, and nuclear holocaust also play a key thematic role in the film. Accused of being a communist, Allie also tells his children that America was destroyed by a nuclear bomb after previously warning that nuclear holocaust was on its way. In the mid-1980s, the red scare may not have been nearly as prevalent as in the 1950s, but it certainly was still around and Allie plays on this paranoia with his own children. Unfortunately for him, he brings nuclear holocaust to Jeronimo with his inventions that pollute the water. The end result being that it is not machines or the warheads we need to be wary of, but the people in control of them. His machine would not have exploded had he not used it for his own nefarious purposes out of greed, pride, and anger. In essence, he was the reason for hellfire coming to his settlement and opened himself up to punishment for his own inclination to fall into excess. Similarly, nuclear holocaust would not be a fear if it were not for the people willing to use them for nefarious purposes. Nuclear energy could be used for good just as his machine could be used for good, but its purpose is perverted and used to promote various agendas or criminal enterprises.

The film also explores racism. One of the nicest men in the film is Mr. Haddy (Conrad Roberts). Panamanian, he takes the Fox's to their new village and gives them food and gas when they need it, while also helping them build up their society. Yet, Allie refers to him and the nearby Indians as "savages" for the way in which they live. Naturally, he lives exactly the same way. He is a hypocrite and lacking self-awareness, while still looking to feel superior to others. His own racism mirrors America's in the way that, in spite of him being on level playing ground with the "savages", he still looks down on them for doing exactly what he does: anything to survive. No matter how kind they are, he is unable to look past his own prejudice and ego to admit that they are good people that have shown him and his family nothing but kindness. In the end, everything would have been fine if he had listened to Haddy, but his own arrogance and pride proved to be the cause of his own demise as he was unwilling to change his prejudiced views. For modern day America, this certainly seems to be the case again with many calling for immigrants and minorities to "go home", in spite of the benefits they bring to society. Just as with whites, there are good and bad people of every race, but those who are prejudiced lump them all into being a group of "savages", making it easier to discriminate against them and look past the good they bring.

Thematically important, The Mosquito Coast may be too slow for some, but it is undeniably riveting to watch unfold. Thrilling, dramatic, and horrifying, Allie Fox's descent into pure insanity and into a dangerous man is hard to watch and a compelling character study of a man who subtly becomes the evil he was warning his kids about in the beginning.



8/10 - Mel Gibson, along with Martin Scorsese, has a finger on the pulse of Christianity. In The Passion of the Christ, Gibson's much maligned film, he brilliantly captures Jesus and his essence. Though many hate the film, it is a personal favorite of mine. Powerful and brilliantly capturing Jesus through the eyes, rather than words, Gibson's film is one that struck at my very core. Hacksaw Ridge did the exact same thing, but rather than showing Jesus himself, he shows how the words of Jesus and actions of those who follow Him can transform lives. Transcending human definitions of courage, the powerful true story of Desmond Doss - a conscientious objector who saved 75 lives on Hacksaw Ridge as a medic - is a brilliantly told and entirely powerful film. For those who are not religious, the film may come home as hokey and corny, which are fair criticisms. But, as a Christian, I ate it up with a spoon and went back for seconds.

Perhaps the biggest flaw of Hacksaw Ridge is how it wears its influences on its sleeve. In particular, Full Metal Jacket. With the first half being set in basic training with a hard-nosed and funny drill instructor, Sergeant Howell (Vince Vaughn), and the second half coming full force with violence, explosions, and shooting, the film lacks the thematic ruminations of Full Metal Jacket while embracing their visceral impact. It is hardly original in this set-up and it is unfortunate that Gibson just ripped off that film - it transcends influence - and gave it his religious twist. The film's first half is also further maligned by cliches with the introduction of Doss's wife, Dorothy (Teresa Palmer). Sweet and romantic, the romance always feel incredibly nostalgic and innocent, but never really feeds into his character development too much. The picture in the Bible or the picture as a "Oh wait, I almost forgot" gift from a girlfriend to her boyfriend heading off to war is a tried and true cliche that is about reaching the end of its run too, right? The cliches of the first half and then the Full Metal Jacket structure render the first half largely being the weaker one by far.

Fortunately, the second half is impeccable. Bloody and brutal, the film's violence can be a bit numbing, but is beautifully captured. Expert staging and choreography plus brilliant cinematography with an emphasis on the greens and browns of battle and bombs, contrasted by the deep blood red of violence, the film is absolutely terrific. It may be a bit comically over-the-top, but Gibson painstakingly captures both the strategy and the violence of war, infusing it all with great tension and thrills. While many cite the second half as being far weaker (as they do with Full Metal Jacket), it is brilliant in my opinion. Yet, one of its greatest complaints is how it contrasts with the first half and the pacifism on display there. Personally, I see no issue. Desmond wanted to go to war and this is war. He knew there would be blood, so the audience and the film understand there must be blood. It is a war film and though Doss's tale is vastly different than many other soldiers, it still must show the brutal reality of war and Gibson does so brilliantly.

Yet, the film finds its greatest power in the last half hour. As Doss races back and saves 75 different men, painfully lowering them down the ridge after his own men had long gone aside from two guards, the film turns into Church. Begging God to let him save one more and asking God what his purpose is in this battle, the film is moving, powerful, and entirely resonant. Though a bit preachy, Gibson's film shows the struggle for Christians in violent situations or the world as a whole. With chaos all around, how do we live up to Jesus' example? Where are we needed and what is our purpose in this world? Doss is confronted with these questions in the heat of the moment and must act quickly, performing what he believes to be God's purpose for him in war. With his bravery and courage quietly performed, Doss is a man that serves as pure inspiration for anybody searching for this purpose in this world as an agent of God or anybody seeking to be brave in an unconventional fashion.

A striking tale of bravery with a tinge of pacifism and an anti-war message, Hacksaw Ridge is a powerful, riveting, and truly gorgeous film. Just as with The Passion of the Christ, it play more resoundingly with Christian audiences, but it is a great war film in its own right. It may be too cliched and influenced by other war films at points, but Gibson knows violence and uses that knowledge to craft brilliantly smart battle sequences that resonate nearly as much as its appeals to its Christian target audience. Hokey and corny, Hacksaw Ridge is the cinematic version of Church and plays strongly at fears of Christian persecution. Yet, in spite of that, it is undeniably powerful and a terrific film for audiences willing to go along with its spiritual core.



8/10 - A slice of life film, Paterson depicts one week (Monday to Sunday) in the life of Paterson (Adam Driver) who lives in Paterson, New Jersey with his girlfriend Laura (Golshifteh Farahani), his dog Marvin, works as a bus driver for the city, and goes to a bar run by Doc (Barry Shabaka Henley). Aside from the weekend, his days are relatively the same. He wakes up, gets breakfast, goes to work, has a conversation with a fellow employee who's life is in shambles, he drives, he goes home, he has dinner, he walks Marvin, he goes to the bar, and then repeat. Yet, much like life, things change every time. To the untrained eye, particularly when it is your own eye, life barely changes from day-to-day. Capturing this beauty and showing how it changes, Paterson is a simple and down-to-earth film that plays like a poem about life and all of its odd idiosyncrasies.

Paterson is, above all, a film about people. That is the biggest change from the day-to-day. Every morning, Paterson wakes up next to Laura. Every morning, their sleeping position is different. Every morning, he eats breakfast. Every morning, he is eating something different, sitting somewhere new, or the dog is somewhere new. Every morning, he goes to work. Every day, he encounters new people, new sights in the city, new conversations, and new incidents. Every day, he goes home. Every day, Laura made something new for dinner, painted something, or purchased something new. Every day, he walks to the bar with Melvin. Every day, he sees somebody new or has a conversation with a stranger. Every day, he goes to the bar. Every day, he sees new people who are new or familiar faces to him and the conversations or situations are different. Though, on the surface, Paterson is a film about seven days that just repeat themselves like Groundhog Day, each day is vibrantly different. It is a film that celebrates the mundane nature of life, but also the subtle changes that make each day feel new. It is not merely a world defined by the fact that the sun rises every morning and sets every evening. The times of the sunrise and sunset even change each day, symbolic of the slight and practically unnoticeable change of each day. We have our routines, especially Melvin, but things will not always go to plan and things will often change from the day-to-day. Jarmusch's picture is tribute to that and a simple and structurally unique poem to that simplicity.

Beautifully acted by Adam Driver, the role is incredibly reserved as he plays the quite and meditative Paterson. Constantly writing in his secret notebook of poems, he writes about simple things like a box of matches. He finds the poetry in life and pens poems based upon that simple beauty. Largely not emotive, he is a man that simply goes through life and likes what he likes and what he likes most is poetry. Yet, his reserved nature even applies to his love. He does not read his poems to his girlfriend, he does identify himself as an aspiring poet to people he meets, and he does not want to share his poems with the world. Writing the poems is enough for him, nothing more and nothing less. He is content with his life in Paterson, driving a bus, living with his girlfriend, and going to the bar. His poetry, as it stands, is all he wants it to be. Every inch of his life, even his girlfriend and her obsession with black-and-white, is what he wants it to be. His aspirations are to wake up as himself the next day and to do what he likes, even if it does not conform with the aspirations and dreams of society.

Yet, what sets Paterson apart is its complete lack of cinematic aspirations. In many ways, Jarmusch's film is like Paterson himself. As Laura pushes him to release his poems, he half-heartedly promises to make copies of the poems. Whenever the audience thinks the film is setting up something via foreshadowing or about to reach a scene of unspeakable tension, the film refuses. With a street tough warning Paterson about how Melvin might get dog jacked, Paterson talking to an aspiring rapper who seems oddly intrigued by the dog, Everett (William Jackson Harper) bringing a gun to the bar, and Paterson's bus breaking down, it feels like the film is constantly foreshadowing or introducing palpable drama. The most common fear is regarding the dog and that fear could be felt in the theater. Left outside the bar as Paterson drinks and pals around, we are constantly left with the belief that Melvin will be stolen. But, inevitably, the screen fades to black and he begins the next day next to Laura in bed. There is even a scene where the door is open and Melvin runs out, but it is shown to be merely part of his routine as he immediately scampers back in. Jarmusch even openly mocks his audience in regards to the bus incident. With it breaking down due to an electical problem, passengers immediately ask if it will blow up. The film seems to play into this by having Paterson tell everybody to stay a good distance away from the bus. When he goes home and tells Laura the bus broke down, she asks if it explodes. At the bar, Doc asks if it exploded and then he and Paterson share a laugh at the thought. The film consistently foreshadows at dramatic and thrilling events, but they never come and the conclusion is merely Jarmusch laughing at the audience with his characters. An explosion? Are you out of your mind? This makes the final frame really the only act of foreshadowing to be found in the film with Paterson waking up again on another Monday. The foreshadowing there merely hints at the fact that his life will continue on like this for the foreseeable future. Things will change from day-to-day, but the general layout will remain unaffected by time.

Poetic, beautifully structured, and defiant to not play into expectations, Paterson feels wholly unique. It is realism with splashes of formalism in the editing via images of Laura appearing via a slight dissolve as Paterson writes a poem about her or the words appearing on the screen. Simple, elegant, and achingly real, Paterson is simply a film about life. Nothing more and nothing less. It is a film that aspires to be what it is and does not pretend to be something it is not.

Also, pairing together Kara Hayward and Jared Gilman (stars of Moonrise Kingdom) as unnamed students living in Paterson and anarchists is pretty funny.

<a href='index.php?showuser=3' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-50'>Spangle</a> you crying

Originally posted by BasedMinkus@Feb 26 2017, 11:34 PM
<a href='index.php?showuser=3' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-50'>Spangle</a> you crying

Rip <a href='index.php?showuser=3' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-50'>Spangle</a>

Nah. La La Land is my personal favorite, yes. But Moonlight is a brilliant work and cinema is well served by it winning. Desperately need more stories like Moonlight in today's atmosphere. La La Land is a terrific film and touched me on a personal level, but I'd be hard pressed to be upset that such a film as beautiful as Moonlight would win.

Originally posted by Spangle@Feb 26 2017, 10:11 PM
Nah. La La Land is my personal favorite, yes. But Moonlight is a brilliant work and cinema is well served by it winning. Desperately need more stories like Moonlight in today's atmosphere. La La Land is a terrific film and touched me on a personal level, but I'd be hard pressed to be upset that such a film as beautiful as Moonlight would win.

yea hes cryin

Originally posted by Spangle@Feb 27 2017, 12:11 AM
Nah. La La Land is my personal favorite, yes. But Moonlight is a brilliant work and cinema is well served by it winning. Desperately need more stories like Moonlight in today's atmosphere. La La Land is a terrific film and touched me on a personal level, but I'd be hard pressed to be upset that such a film as beautiful as Moonlight would win.

When u gunna watch Get Out? I am gunna watch it 2night imo.

Originally posted by ThatDamnMcJesus@Feb 27 2017, 03:14 PM


When u gunna watch Get Out? I am gunna watch it 2night imo.

Dunno, maybe soon. Not a huge fan of Key & Peele so I'm not exactly rushing out, but I'll probably see it soon.

Originally posted by Spangle@Feb 27 2017, 03:20 PM


Dunno, maybe soon. Not a huge fan of Key & Peele so I'm not exactly rushing out, but I'll probably see it soon.

Its Great. Watch it ASAP. Dark, Creepy as Fuck and hilarious. Its not a typical Key & Peele Film. Easily the Best Film so far of 2017 tbh.

Originally posted by ThatDamnMcJesus@Mar 1 2017, 10:42 PM


Its Great. Watch it ASAP. Dark, Creepy as Fuck and hilarious. Its not a typical Key & Peele Film. Easily the Best Film so far of 2017 tbh.

It is not the best film of 2017.

Was a solid 7 though

Originally posted by BasedMinkus@Mar 2 2017, 11:54 AM


It is not the best film of 2017.

Was a solid 7 though

fack forgot about John Wick 2. 2nd best film den.