"Whiplash" Review

No matter what your taste in film or television is, you have seen or heard J.K. Simmons somewhere. You just may never have put a name to the face. But he's always been around. He's just never been as spectacular as he has in Whiplash. 

Andrew Neimann is a first year drum student at Shaffer Conservatory. He is desperate to impress Terrence Fletcher, the studio band conductor with noted prestige. He is accepted into the band, but is pushed to his limits by Fletcher's ruthless methods, and soon questions himself. 

When one watches Whiplash, one is reminded of Black Swan and how it shined a light on the unseen brutality of ballet dancing. This movie does the same for music. It's enlightening, dark, if not a little derivative, yet still strong enough to stand on it's own legs as a movie. The amount of mental engagement and the amount of strength that the musicians show really contributes to how strong the film dabbles in realism. 

However, the film gets off to a bit of a lull. It certainly leads to some unexpected and fascinating places, but the first act lacks any real punch besides J.K. Simmons. In fact, his performance may be TOO good for the film. It almost lessens the power of the other players until around Act II. It leads somewhere amazing, but like any good horse race, you want a real race right out of the gate. 

If I am to be honest, I wasn't really interested in Miles Teller before this movie. He reminded me too much of Jonah Hill. (Especially the voice.) Yet we get a really strong performance from him in Whiplash. His determination and frustration is strongly underplayed until the right moments. 

But J.K. Simmons. Oh my gosh. There is an amazing power to Simmons' performance. He steals absolutely every scene with his command and gravitas. He paints such a broad spectrum that illuminates the screen. One moment screaming, another comforting. There is an awe that just comes from his mere presence. He can scare the hell out of you with just his gaze. This is an absolute lock for the Oscar.

Whiplash is certainly a strong movie, even if it doesn't start that way. But the real power is that of J.K. Simmons. 

B+

"American Sniper" Review

In 2009, if you had introduced the charming teacher from The Hangover as three time "Academy Award Nominee Bradley Cooper", I would have laughed profusely. Then again, let's consider that Jonah Hill has had more nominations than Gary Oldman ever has. But that's not to say either one hasn't earned it, it's just something my younger self could have never seen coming. Let's stick to Cooper.

The true story of Chris Kyle takes place in the aftermath of September 11th. He is considered the deadliest sniper in American history whilst serving in Iraq. However, his obsession with serving his country causes a rift between him and his wife, as he keeps going on tour after tour.

The modern war film has been an interesting one to see grow. From The Hurt Locker to Lone Survivor, it's come to showcase the morality of war and how it can weigh on the soul of the soldier. American Sniper is no exception. The most intense scene comes from one of Kyle's decisions in the field and how he will come to terms with it. He does what he has to in order to fulfill his duty, but comes to grips by telling his comrade to "Shut the fuck up" about what has transpired. It's captured the proper tone to not glorify war, not completely condemn it, but to just show it in an honest fashion. Kudos, Clint Eastwood. This is a step above Jersey Boys.

Yet, I do find some fault in the film. It unfortunately doesn't establish the right amount of narrative for us to really fell the ramifications. For example, when something occurs to a side character, we don't exactly feel the amount of weight that we probably be should since we haven't actually spent a lot of time with him. It doesn't really give us what we need to empathize completely with Chris Kyle's pain.  Not a major complaint, and nothing that takes me out of the experience, but it would have made it deeper if some of the smaller characters were a little more developed.

Bradley Cooper has shown us a great amount of range in the past few years. This is thus far his finest hour. He immerses into the mind of Chris Kyle to give us a monumental portrait of a man who was not perfect, but was heroic in his pursuits. Whilst his intentions aren't always clear, he brings us for the ride with his commitment and it's quite noble that how he wholeheartedly sought to honor this Navy Seal's legacy.

American Sniper isn't perfect. But it's earned the high praise. Clint Eastwood and Bradley Cooper have given us a great film, even if it isn't as developed as I had hoped.

A-

"The Imitation Game" Review

It seems as though the last two years have been about changing my opinion of actors. 2013 saw me do a complete 180 on the biggest rom-com star of the 2000s when he was "alright, alright, alright" in Dallas Buyers Club. This year, it's Benedict Cumberbatch. Why did I dislike him? I'll get to that.

In World War II, Alan Turing worked towards the war effort in trying to crack Germany's secret Enigma code. He struggles against the constant pressure to get the job done, and also to conceal his homosexuality which was illegal in England at the time.

There have been (no exaggeration) dozens and dozens of movies about World War II. Some great, some awful, some starring Nicolas Cage. Saving Private Ryan seems to have set the bar on which all of them are measured. That being said, I always enjoy a new take on the war. So riddle me this: What do you call a war movie without a war in it? New.

The war isn't so much the focus of our attention as Alan Turing's life is, but it makes for a highly compelling backdrop and plot device. Turing's story long hadn't been told, but like Argo before it, it presents us with a tale that had been right under our eyes, and makes us look at history in a new light. It's full of pent up aggression, and enough humor to make it a fully rounded film. Yet it isn't really the story that sells this movie, it's the acting.

Benedict Cumberbatch. I never thought that he was a bad actor. It was more me tiring of everyone telling me how great he was. There has been debate over who portrays the better Sherlock Holmes between him and Robert Downey Jr. (I will not get into this again.) Yet slowly, the man has captured my attention with supporting roles full of a chilling yet compelling presence. This is his best one yet. In a way, his character seems like a British Sheldon Cooper, but infinitely less annoying. Benedict is confident in himself and performs his character with a state of mental preparedness that does not overwhelm. He's strong in his decisions, he has magnificent nuances, and steals all of his scenes.

Keira Knightley shines as well. Her Joan Clarke does not go in expected directions, and plays her cards without showing her hand. She's sweet yet powerful. She is steam full of what it takes to fill a strong female role.

Charles Dance gives us more of what made him so fierce and domineering as Tywin Lannister. Perfect to play the role of a man whose authority refuses to be undermined.

I always love Mark Strong. He is devious, smart, and full of that British Charm that totally sold me on him 6 years ago in Sherlock Holmes. (Not getting into that.) I will see anything with Mark Strong in it. He's probably the only reason I ever tried Miller Fortune.

The Imitation Game is full of fantastic acting, tells a brilliant story and a great blend of drama and humor. It's worth your time.

A-

"Selma" Review

Out of all the Oscar probables so far this year, there have been very few that I have thoroughly enjoyed. The Theory of Everything was very underwhelming in my opinion, Big Eyes was good but tapered out towards the third act, only Birdman has actually "wowed" me. Admittedly, I still have more to see, but I haven't been that impressed with anything but Birdman. Until now. (I did see The Imitation Game so keep an eye out for that review tomorrow.) 

In 1965, Martin Luther King Jr. headed down to Selma, Alabama in order to help peacefully protest the lack of equal voting rights and inequality as a whole. He faces adversity from the Alabama governor and President Lyndon Johnson for a number of reasons, but King perseveres using his non-violent methods. 

Dr. King was one of the most profound, strongest, and purest out of all the revolutionaries. Therefore, if anyone is deserving of a near perfect movie, it is the good Doctor. And that is exactly what he gets. Selma is a powerful period piece that is still incredibly appropriate considering the current social climate surrounding today's society. It infallibly demonstrates the ideals Dr King strove to achieve and the noble methods that he took untoward achieving them.

The screenplay is uplifting and strong. The racial tension is brutal, but honest without being cartoony and shows us exactly why Martin had to do what he did. It causes us to not wish harm on those who act against the Civil Rights movement, but see them brought over to the right side. It may show us the darkness, and the darkness that continues, but it gives us the glimmer of hope that Dr King would have wanted us to have. Even when the movie seems to take a left turn, it doesn't leave us hanging and wondering why. 

The main magnitude of this film is the brilliantly strong performance of David Oyelowo. He effectively captures the essence of Martin Luther King in ways that no one has before. He shows no signs of aggression, just persuasion. He's incredibly passionate and fully immersed into this role. Oyelowo has done masterfully, and this will not go unnoticed. If the Oscar doesn't go to Michael Keaton, it will go to David Oyelowo and I have no problem with that. 

Selma is one of the first Oscar contenders this year that has truly earned it's acclaim. It could not have  come out at a better time, and deserves all the attention it gets. I expect this to do very well this awards season. 

A

"Big Eyes" Review

I have a well documented distaste for Tim Burton. His work is largely unoriginal and reeks of Johnny Depp/Helena Bonham Carter nepotism. The man directed a remake of his own movie for crying out loud. If you asked me, the last good movie that Burton helmed was Batman Returns in 1992......ok, Ed Wood was pretty good. That makes at least 20 years without a decent Tim Burton movie. I'm not exactly sure what compelled me to see another of his films, but I decided to give him one last chance. 

In the late 1950's artist Margaret Keane is painting her signature depictions of children with large eyes. However, her husband Walter receives all the credit for them as he believes people will be more receptive to a male artist. With her spirit broken, Margaret is at a loss for what to do. 

After seeing Dark Shadows, my thoughts were that the only way Tim Burton can stay relevant is to mix up his style. That movie was a huge stinking pile of garbage and that's because it wasn't so much an adaptation of the television show, as much it was an excuse to instill a melee of Burton-isms. To my pleasant surprise, Tim Burton seems to have learned something. 

Big Eyes isn't the Hot Topic commercial that Burton has been making with his most recent movies. It's more honest. The story is very well crafted (yes I know it's a true story), telling us a strong tale of how women were kept down, and then they find their voice. It's a strong feminist message, one that's appropriate for our time. 

Burton hasn't taken this opportunity to make it about him and his quirks, he respects the source material too much, and for that I commend him. There is a sequence involving the application of the "big eyes" to Margaret's imagination, but it doesn't feel out of place. It works in the sense of the character and the turmoil she is experiencing. 

However, and no spoilers, the third act is a little cheesy. It gets a little out of hand with the actions that Walter chooses, and it kinda takes you out of it. But thankfully, this doesn't last too long or ruin what came before.

Amy Adams has a wide range, one that can go from innocence to empowerment to depression as fast as shifting gears on a Pontiac. We feel the strength she puts into Margaret and we cry for her when she is being silenced. When she finally lets loose, it's rewarding. 

There will eventually come a day when I grow tired of Christoph Waltz. Today is not that day. He lures you in with his trademark charm, and you follow him for the most part without really knowing why. Even when he isn't acting reasonably, you still go along with it, because damn that man is persuasive. He's deliciously wicked, and that makes him all the more dangerous. 

All in all, Big Eyes is Tim Burton's best movie in 20 years. It has some minor issues, but it's very strongly acted and told. 

B+

"The Theory of Everything" Review

I've never really known too much about Stephen Hawking. Some people think of him as that "wheelchair smart guy who occasionally pops up in The Big Bang Theory." The more intellectually based know him as one of the most groundbreaking theoretical physicists who has ever lived, and has shaped the modern scientific community. But I don't presume to paraphrase his Wikipedia page. I decided to let this movie tell me his story the way it has chosen. 

The Theory of Everything tells us the love story between Jane Wilde and Stephen Hawking as he develops ALS and defies all expectations with his theories and discoveries despite his handicap.

There is always that one Oscar probable that just doesn't measure up for me, despite what everyone else says. I like to call it Oscar Cheese. 

Firstly, the film does tell a great story. That much is clear. It's a fully thought through story, and it's interesting to see how the relationship between these two flourishes and goes through it's trials. It's not dissimilar to Breaking Bad in a way. The key difference being that the male protagonist here does not start cooking drugs and killing people after his diagnosis. The comparison is a small bit of a stretch, but it's there when you think about it. 

However, and I don't know exactly how this is actually possible, but the film is both slow AND rushed. It dives into aspects of Hawking's life head on without really getting to the meat. It's passive aggressive in a way. It expects us to understand most of the material upon arrival. It starts off running, and wants us to catch up. And the slowness comes in when we see parts of Hawking's life that maybe we can go past. We know how the ALS will come into play, and we know that he eventually receives his computer speaker. But it meanders too slowly on it's way between plot points. 

Frankly, it also feels like it was made purely for Oscar nominations. It's clear they respect the material, but the execution just doesn't feel honest. It feels very hokey in moments which are clearly meant to be dramatic. 

Eddie Redmayne is clearly trying his hardest here. And yes, he does do an admirable job. But it just doesn't feel as strong as I had thought it would be. He has done a ton of work towards this role, but it somehow doesn't feel very sincere. For pure commitment, I will applaud him. 

Felicity Jones gives us a really devoted performance, letting us into her heart when she is struggling to deal with all her obstacles. We can understand why she does what she does, and even if we don't agree with her character's choices, we can appreciate how strongly Jones has committed to them.

The Theory of Everything has a strong story, decent performances, but it's boring to put it lightly. It will most likely appear in ceremony, but I would be surprised if it took home anything major. 

C+