"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+

"Into the Woods" Review

I would start off with my thoughts on musicals as a while, but by gum you've probably heard that more than Kanye West praising himself by now. Needless to say, the only thing I was looking forward to about this movie was the possibility that the trailer for Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens would be attached to it. (Despite having seen it 38 times online, and once with the 3rd Hobbit). Having a low bar of expectations most likely made it easy to surpass, but it wasn't necessarily great.

Into the Woods revolves around the world of several fairy tales, including Cinderella, Rapunzel, Little Red Riding Hood, Jack and the Beanstalk and more. The stories are tied together through the adventures of a baker and his wife who are struggling to have a child, and a witch who promises to help them.

Story wise, it's rather strong. It ties several fairy tales together plausibly and thankfully cuts out the excess meat that we all already know. The movie was preceded by a trailer for a new Disney version of Cinderella. Seeing that this movie would also tell the story made me sigh with exhaustion that we would have to sit through the same full tale twice in 6 months from the same studio. But thankfully, it's reduced to just the basic beats that we need in order to progress the main plot.

For a Disney movie however, it's notably eschewing. There is some subject matter in here that I didn't expect at all. I'm not totally sure that i'm really comfortable with the way this came across, but I am rather thankful that this didn't go the easy route. It's an appreciative subversion, and it works to the aesthetic that the film has of pointing out the absurdities of these tales in the first place. It's almost meta towards the genre.

Alright, music talk. Ugh.

Actually, it wasn't as excruciating as I find most musicals. In fact the first song is kinda catchy. I found myself humming a couple bars in my head in the car. (There's also another one which lampoons the genre, but that's more to do with Chris Pine's performance. I'll get to that in a minute.) But of course, the slow tempo monolgue-y songs are like slapping a stapler against your head and saying "We get it!!" I didn't nap through the movie, but I briefly dozed off during one of Emily Blunt's songs.

Meryl Streep. How do I put this? Meryl Streep is to me the way that Derek Jeter is to Red Sox fans. You know she has talent, and you respect her for everything she's done. But at some point, you draw the line. It gets old hearing how amazing she is. I think Steve Martin put it best "Every year the academy nominates four very talented actresses. And then, no matter what, they nominate Meryl Streep." She's great it in this, sure. And I respect her deftly. But at some point it gets tiresome hearing how amazing Meryl Streep Is.

Johnny Depp is another I tire of, but to my great pleasure, he does not wear out his welcome as the wolf. However (and this isn't a criticism towards Depp) I can't say I like the wardrobe design. He looks less like a wolf and more like a pimp dressed like a wolf. What kind of wolf wears a tie? I'm not saying you can't try to humanize the wolf, but the costume doesn't even fit in with what they have designed for everyone else. He feels incredibly out of place, and for once, that's not Johnny Depp's fault.

James Corden is one of two highlights of this film. His baker is delightfully skeptical of the world he lives in. He has all the best moments and a great majority of the laughs. His timing and his delivery are fantastic. I'm sure he'll be great as the new host of The Late Late Show, I just hope he still has time to appear in more movies.

Chris Pine is the other highlight. It seems like most fairy tale movies recently involve a really two dimensional Prince who is meant to function only as a handsome face to the female protagonist. Pine isn't. In an ironic way considering his most famous role, he seems to channel William Shatner's Captain Kirk to lampoon the idea of a lame prince. The song "Agony" very much takes the idea of a shirtless man meant only to be handsome, and points out how absolutely ridiculous the notion is. Chris Pine is a delight in the way he makes his character pop in comparison to how it could have been. In his own words, he's meant to be charming but not sincere.

If musicals are your thing, you won't be disappointed with Into the Woods. But if you're not, the story and acting of Corden and Pine will be enough to get you through some of the more snooze worthy songs. I expected to hate this movie, but I didn't.

B-

"Birdman" Review

I've mentioned before how my favorite Batman movie is 1989's Batman starring Michael Keaton. With all due respect to Christian Bale, Christopher Nolan, and the late Heath Ledger, I have a special place in my heart for the original film. (No small honor considering my vocal distaste for most Tim Burton movies.) Michael Keaton's established and determined Bruce Wayne was full of charm and wisdom. Not as fleshed out as other iterations, but Keaton was an excellent Batman. When we talk Birman, we can consider where Keaton has been in his career. But we can also forget about about his Caped Crusader past and watch the magnetism of his performance take over as though the concept of playing a Superhero was brand new to him. Whichever way you look at the film, Michael Keaton is back. And I want to know where he has been. 

Riggan Thomson is a washed up actor famous for playing the superhero Birdman in three films back in the 1990's. Now he is attempting to mount a comeback by directing and starring in a Raymond Carver play. In order to finance the play, he takes out a mortgage on his home, and is left flat broke. With everything on the line, and an controllable supporting actor, Riggan is losing it. 

I am a fanatic when it comes to comic book movies, so seeing a satire of the world behind it was spellbinding. There is so much debate to the quality or saturation of these films in today's box office market, this was a brilliant commentary. Riggan Thomson is established as wanting more, wanting to be relevant, wanting to matter. It's though provoking to wonder if in 30 years we will feel the same way about Christian Bale or Robert Downey Jr. Can someone be an artist in a mask and cape, and can they be something more when they take it off? I choose to think so. And with that, I follow along Riggan and his journey by always rooting for him. There is something enchanting to see with this tale and the risks taken, and I loved every moment. 

The entire movie is filmed and edited to look as though it was one long continuous shot. I have heard that Hitchcock did this once, but I've never seen anything like it until now. The movement of the camera through the scenery and the action makes you feel as though you are actually in the film. There is a hyper reality that is achieved that totally immerses the viewer. There is no way this could have been as simple process to achieve, and for the painstaking efforts they took to make it so, the editors and cinematographers deserve enormous amounts of praise. 

This movie belongs to Michael Keaton. This is fact. The raw inner commentary, the ticks, the facial expressions, the aggression. Michael Keaton doesn't lose himself, he is Riggan Thomson. I am in no way saying that Keaton was ever washed up. I am saying that he blurs the lines between film and life. This is Keaton at the top of his game. Keaton's Bruce Wayne past doesn't really leave the mindsight, but it doesn't overpower the majesty of his work here. It may just be a bit of a bonus to create realism. But whatever it is, Michael Keaton is magic. The Oscar is Michael Keaton's to lose. 

You can't count out the supporting cast however. Edward Norton has a reputation for perfectionism. That's a factor which makes his work a little more plausible too. His narcissistic work as Mike Shiner exudes Norton's perceived pretentiousness. He is not a good guy, but he's a joy to watch. You root against him when he tries to pull out the threads of Riggan's life. But that means Norton is doing his job right. 

I have never taken Zach Galifianakis seriously, but i've never really had a reason to. In Birdman, he finally takes it easy. He doesn't need to be the center of attention. He's calm but concerned for his best friend, and it's a refreshing change of pace. He even gets to cut loose every now and then, but it's never out of tone. 

The score is composed almost entirely from drums, and it adds to the power of the film. It's rhythm goes along with Riggan's mental state, and it's toe tappingly badass.

Right now, Birdman is my top film for 2014, and Michael Keaton is the one to beat for Best Actor. This movie was an absolute thrill, and one to watch over and over. 

A

"Top Five" Review

Just to kick things off in a fun way, here's My personal Top Five: 

1. 2Pac
2. Jay-Z
3. Eminem
4. 50 Cent
5. Snoop

2014 has been a year that has explored the hollowness of celebrity, and the strive for something deeper in the entertainment business. And I have loved every moment of it. My favorite movie of the year is Birdman (as of today). My favorite Netflix original series is Bojack Horseman. It's a deep theme. It's fun to see celebrities painted in a more human light. Coming from someone like Chris Rock, one expects straightforward comedy. That is not what one gets.

Andre Allen is a comedian turned actor who wants to establish himself as a serious actor. However, all people want to talk about is his upcoming televised marriage to a reality TV star. He agrees to be profiled for the New York Times, and is shadowed by a reporter for the day.

This is mainly a character piece, one that I believe explores everything Chris Rock has wanted to express, but couldn't do until he had his own platform. He has never been one to hold back anything. That's a trait that has gotten him into hot water more times than one. But more often than not, it earns him endearing respect for his unflinching honesty.

In Top Five, we get to explore some opinions that Rock chooses to express regarding the state of Hollywood, Celebrity living, and America as a whole. It's beautifully expressed in a manner that doesn't venture into dramedy but steers clear of absurdism. This is a rich screenplay that fully explores it's subjects in a magnificent environment.

Chris Rock is as hilarious as he has ever been, but by his own choosing, he gets to express a more sensitive side in Top Five. We feel a piece of Rock himself in that character, and that makes it so much more graspable. Had Rock cast someone other than himself, it would have lacked power. Together with his brutally honest screenplay and how he embodies it, Chris Rock ushers in a new era of his career in which he can fulfill his desires.

The supporting cast is filled out beautifully with comedic talents such as Tracy Morgan (one of my personal favorites), JB Smoove, Leslie Jones, Jay Pharaoh, Kevin Hart and so many more. But what really grasped me was the performance of the lovely Rosario Dawson who has palpable chemistry with Rock and gives as good as she gets. Her independence cuts through Rock's exterior and allows a human give and take.

Top Five is certainly one for the Top 10 List this year. Chris Rock is deserving of nominations for his outstanding performance, and in a year without Michael Keaton in Birdman, I would be pushing for a win. Do yourself a favor, and see this film.

A

"To Love Somebody" Review

I've worked on the set of two independent movies in the span of the past year, so I'm very aware of the amount of work that goes into something like To Love Somebody. The ambitions of freshman director Ben Rider are certainly impressive, even if the independent romance film is not my personal preference. 

The film follows the saga of two couples struggling through traumatic circumstances thrust upon them. Meryl and Mike are coping with issues stemming from the loss of their child. Joanna and Tim are struggling to conceive one of their own. The resulting tension makes up for most of the drama. 

It is clear that Rider (who writes and directs) has a passion for cinema. After a viewing, there are very strong notes of a formalist approach to the genre, utilizing a very unique editing and shooting process. The sounds and visuals take you back to the era of French New Wave. Whilst today's audiences are used to a more traditional movie experience, the risks that Rider takes will no doubt impress the cinema aficionado. It presents a non linear story line juxtaposed along side the present conflicts to create an excellent contrast. He's certainly done his homework. 

That being said, the film needs a little bit more of a punch. It's a decent character study within the boundaries of what Rider uses to tell his story. But it lacks a real hook. Whilst the journey is an enjoyable one, it's not as bold as it has the potential to be. The third act could use some more spice to give the audience a little more of a satisfying story arc. I was hoping for something a little more exciting. While I certainly wasn't disappointed, it was a little underwhelming. 

The strongest performance in the film comes from the delightful Johanna Taylor. Her character shows a convincing character arc of someone who wants the most out of her marriage but does not want to betray who she is inside. Part of a team whilst independent. I can't reconcile the characters decision of withholding information, but I can find a lot right with the way Taylor expresses the mindset and the results of the disclosure. 

SIDE NOTE: I feel like Johanna Taylor would make an excellent choice for the role of Young Jean Grey in X-Men: Apocalypse.

As a critic, film student, and aspiring filmmaker, there is a lot I can appreciate from this film. And if the only issue I take with it was a need for a more significant "Wow Factor,"  then that's a good sign that Ben Rider has the tools to make it in this business. 

B+