Wednesday, January 21, 2015

MY TOP TEN MOVIES OF 2014


MY TOP TEN MOVIES OF THE YEAR – 2014 Edition

**WARNING: THE FOLLOWING MAY CONVINCE YOU THAT I AM A HUGE GEEK!!

 Hello. If you’re reading this, first off, I want to say thank you. I started this blog about three years ago on the recommendation of a friend simply because I think about and try to analyze movies more than the average person does (maybe more than I should). I imagine I’d like to do this for a living. This blog doesn’t have many followers and doesn’t get too many views, but, every now and then, people comment on the links posted on Facebook or tell me in person that they read my blog or are looking forward to my comments on a certain movie, and, I gotta tell ya, it makes my life. It’s such a blessing! I post links to these posts on Facebook because, I figure, Why Not? Just in case somebody wants to read it. So if you’re reading this, thanks.

If you’re reading this, I also want to say I’M SORRY if you get offended or irritated because I don’t have as much of an appreciation as you for one or more of the movies mentioned below. Please believe me when I say putting this together is something I like doing and wanted to do, but, this year, it was almost unfathomably difficult. Why? Well, for one, I can find something to appreciate in almost any movie (as much as I analyze movies, you may have noticed I’m not that hard of a grader). For another, there were just so many good movies this past year! Yeah, the usual glut of summer blockbusters didn’t impress me as much as I hoped it might, but, since about mid-October, I’ve seen one legitimately great movie after another. Suffice to say, I was deeply impressed by, and would gladly vouch for, any of the movies listed below, regardless of ‘rank’. In fact, ranking them like this is a silly thing, because, as I found out when I set my mind to try to rank them, it’s more than a little difficult to compare a longer, slower, more meditative and dramatic type of movie (that might have a lot of real-life implications and a lot of touching material to analyze), with a more straightforward, entertaining action film with tons of appeal that just thrills the heck out of you. Yeah, it was hard, so hard that the idea of putting this list together and trying to rank these movies often put me in a place where I experienced something rather like this:

“AGONYYYY
That can cut like a kniiiiife!”

 Anyway, regardless of rank below, I enjoyed all of these movies and would watch any one of them again—there was something really impressive and noteworthy about each and every one.

HONORABLE MENTIONS
Guardians of the Galaxy
Foxcatcher
American Sniper
Interstellar

‘Honorable mentions’ is putting it mildly. It was quite tempting to simply have six movies tied for tenth. In fact, there was a twinge of anguish in the back of my head with every new movie I saw that really impressed and touched me, because I knew it meant there was less and less room at the top. And the sucky thing is, I bet I could watch any of these four movies again and, at any given time, think to myself “Man, there is no movie I would rather be watching right now.”

From the rollicking entertainment of Guardians, the epic tragedy of Foxcatcher, the unbelievable tension and stirring drama of Sniper and the straight-up rush of Interstellar, these were all great movies, and, as said before, ones I would gladly watch again.

THE TOP TEN

10. BOYHOOD* (tied with Captain America: The Winter Soldier)
The only reason Boyhood is ranked this low is because it was so stinkin long. At two hours and forty-five minutes, it was an endurance test, even for a movie as quietly-compelling and touchingly-relatable as this. If you haven’t heard, this movie was filmed by director Richard Linklater and the four main actors (Ellar Coltrane, Ethan Hawke, Patricia Arquette and Lorelei Linklater, the director’s daughter) in 39 days over the course of twelve years, from 2002-2013, in order to capture the growth of the main character, Mason (Coltrane), as he grew from age 6 to 18. Fully intent on capturing snippets of everyday life, the movie’s matter-of-factness took some getting used to, but it was absolutely riveting in its best moments, contemplating things like domestic scuffles, a broken home, first love, first heartbreak, and the poignant endings and beginnings that come with a life milestone like graduation. It’s going to win a couple big Oscars and it’ll deserve them all, in my opinion. It was long, but I’d watch it again.
 

10. CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER*
I’m not a comic book fan, per se, so I’ve grown a little weary of the avalanche of comic book-based movies that have come out in recent years. I go see them because they’re popular, of course—I tend to get my hopes up, only to be disappointed by some of the sillier humor, more clichéd plot ‘twists’ and more hackneyed last-second escapes common to the genre. I’ve walked out of several recent Marvel movies (Iron Man 3, Thor: The Dark World, The Amazing Spiderman) contemplating whether it’s worth ever seeing another Marvel movie, since they all seem to follow the same general template. So it means a lot when I say that Captain America: The Winter Soldier was the first Marvel movie in a while that not only surpassed my expectations, but made me legitimately excited for “the next one”. Of course, Chris Evans’ Steve Rogers is one of the more relatable Marvel heroes, and the movie explored relevant themes like national security, secret surveillance, conspiracy theories, and even veterans struggling to integrate themselves back into society after serving in the Middle East. Plus, the Captain’s relationship with The Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) gave this movie a more genuine emotional pulse than most Marvel movies can hope for. But this wasn’t some artsy-fartsy film—the action here was top-notch, including the rare modern-day extended fistfight that wasn’t marred by unnecessary shaky-cam (Cap and The Soldier had some EPIC mano-a-manos). Plus there was a great supporting cast (Scarlett Johansson, Samuel L. Jackson, Anthony Mackie, Robert Redford, Frank Grillo, etc…). Yeah, this was straight-up entertainment at its best.

 
9. BIRDMAN (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)
I remember the first time I saw the trailer for Birdman—it looked like about four different movies. There’s a reason, as this whirling dervish of a flick veers from domestic drama to absurdist comedy to outright fantasy, testing a viewer’s patience and concentration. But the fast and furious dialogue, quietly-epic tracking shots, occasional big laughs, and superb cast made it worth it. Every actor in this group—Michael Keaton, Emma Stone, Edward Norton, Zach Galifianakis, Naomi Watts, Amy Ryan, Andrea Riseborough—was impressive, and could have been even more so if the movie didn’t want to be all ‘weird’ and ‘different’. But, ultimately, this story of a formerly-popular movie star (best known for playing a popular superhero, Birdman) trying to make a comeback in a big Broadway drama opposite a raging dingus (Norton) and a clutch of needy women (Watts, Riseborough) was great when it needed to be. And the ending is one sure to be debated (what actually happened!?!).

 
8. WILD
Like 127 Hours or Into this Wild, this was an intimate study of a real person who sought to find himself or herself out in nature. In this case, it was Cheryl Strayed, a lonely divorcee and recovering junkie who, in 1995, hiked 1,100 miles of the Pacific Northwest Trail, from Mexico to Canada, because she just needed to accomplish something. Along the way, she grew stronger, made some new friends, and learned to cope with the crushing, unexpected death of her mother, which had happened just months before. With Reese Witherspoon in her best role in ages, this was another quiet, poignant movie about love and loss and learning to appreciate the little things.
 

7. THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING
This wrenching true story flick chronicled the unlikely romance and lengthy marriage of Jane and Stephen Hawking. When they met, she was way out of his league, but she admired his depth and sincerity, they became inseparable, and she refused to leave him even when he got a horrible diagnosis—Lou Gehrig’s disease. It was said he would die within 2 years, but, as you know, the physicist is still alive today. Brought to life with expression and feeling by Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones, this movie really made me ponder what it means to truly love someone. If you really love someone, you will do _____ for them… And that’s probably an open-ended sentence. Jane’s self-sacrifice in caring for her brilliant but almost helpless husband was touching, as was the question of whether or not it was right for her to crave affection and physical love when her husband was unable to provide it, or for him to develop an interest in another woman when Jane gave him so much. Great acting, whirlwind romance, multiple tearjerker scenes and hard questions/talking points galore—consider this a prime date movie for serious couples.
 

6. EDGE OF TOMORROW
Let’s get this out of the way first: if you aren’t a Tom Cruise fan, you probably won’t enjoy this movie, because it’s all about him. But if you don’t mind him, check out this Groundhog Day-meets-Starship Troopers sci-fi action flick that hit it out of the park where most of the summer’s bigger, sexier movies (X-Men, Spiderman, Godzilla, Transformers) struggled—it was freakin’ entertaining, but it also made you think and gave you something to invest in. When a cocksure-but-cowardly military officer has a close encounter with an advanced member of an alien race, its DNA-from-another-dimension throws him into a time warp where he relives the day of a major humans-vs-aliens battle again and again. Eventually, he realizes he must use this increasing knowledge to find a way to defeat the aliens before they wreak further havoc on humanity. But the cost of seeing so much death, over and over, is high. Co-starring Emily Blunt (the Baker’s Wife from Into The Woods) as a badass army chick he teams up with to defeat the aliens once and for all, Tomorrow was such an engaging, exciting movie that I was completely swept away.
 

5. THE IMITATION GAME
In a nutshell, Imitation Game was the best of the year’s clear-cut Oscar-bait dramas for a simple reason: it knew how to be deep and thought-provoking and legitimately entertaining. Best Actor nominee Benedict Cumberbatch was perfectly cast as brilliant but socially-awkward mathematician Alan Turing, a real-life figure who served the British government/military while England was getting hammered by Germany in WWII. Turing helped crack the complex, specialized morse code the Nazis used to communicate over the radio without giving their plans away—it allowed England and the other allies to anticipate the worst attacks, and meet them. But despite this breakthrough, Turing was looked down upon for being a homosexual at a time when it was illegal by British law. And part of his social awkwardness came from the cruel twist of fate that befell his first love. With rapid-fire dialogue, endearing character development and moments of deep, deep emotion, Game was a great, well-rounded movie.

 
4. DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES
I really do think this one should have been called Rise and the earlier one should have been called Dawn, but whatever—this was a deep, engaging adventure story highlighted by magnificent special effects. One of the most invaluable, irreplaceable people in the movie industry—motion capture wizard Andy Serkis (aka Gollum)—does it again as Caesar, a smart, talking chimp who leads his tribe of advanced apes with wisdom and grace in a post-apocalyptic world. When the apes unexpectedly come into contact with a band of human survivors (led by Jason Clarke’s compassionate explorer and Gary Oldman’s fierce military leader), both sides struggle over whether or not to better their own race’s chances by trying annihilate the other. But the die are really cast by Koba, one of Caesar’s right-hand apes (voiced and given movement by Toby Kebbell), a malicious, bitter chimp who was a human test subject and wants revenge. This story would be perfectly interesting if both sides were people, but the fact that one side are apes with very humane movements and personalities, but were, in fact, apes, just made it that much more exciting. And that scene of apes riding horses while wielding machine guns as they stormed the humans’ encampment? Freakin’ awesome. Yeah, this was a good one.
 

3. NIGHTCRAWLER
When I watched Nightcrawler, there were times when I thought “this is almost the perfect movie”. It turned out I didn’t quite agree with the note on which it ended, but, overall, this was one of the year’s most mesmerizing and unforgettable films. Jake Gyllenhaal (sadly snubbed in the Oscars’ Best Actor category) was almost unrecognizable as gaunt, ambitious creeper Lou Bloom, who stumbles upon the L.A. crime ‘nightcrawling’ scene and decides he wants in. How do you get in? By getting to the scene of serious incidents (car wrecks, fires, shootings, break-ins) and filming the intimate, sometimes gory details, and selling it to the highest bidder amongst local news stations who want higher ratings (“If it bleeds, it leads!” a fellow nightcrawler proclaims). Lou takes to this ‘profession’ like a duck to water, and becomes a hot commodity amongst the local stations with his ability to get the shots no one else can (partly because he’s willing to manipulate or stage scenes to his liking). Lou’s decision to get more dirt on a particularly-horrific series of murders leads him to stage the most audacious crime yet, and it takes Nightcrawler from an edgy procedural to the year’s single most electrifying and scintillating action sequence (trust me, you’ll know it when you see it). Co-starring Rene Russo as an ambitious news station director Lou blackmails into sleeping with him, Nightcrawler was a dark but brilliant film.
 

2. GONE GIRL
You’d be hard-pressed to find a movie that better exemplifies the phrase “crazy good”. I remember leaving the theater after Gone Girl raving, saying over and over, “that was awesome…that was nuts—that was CRAZY!” Adapted from Gillian Flynn’s novel of the same name (she also wrote the movie’s screenplay), this long, topsy-turvy film takes a look at the deepest, darkest secrets of one particular couple’s stormy marriage. When the woman (Rosamund Pike), goes missing, leaving signs of a violent struggle, the police immediately suspect her overly-calm, slightly-arrogant husband (Ben Affleck) of murder. It doesn’t help his case when they find his wife’s journal, in which she wrote of her husband: “this man may kill me.” But when an old flame of his wife’s ends up dead, it becomes clear things are not what they seem. Boy, aren’t they…Gone Girl is a spellbinding, eye-popping, edge-of-your-seat thriller that will leave you in disbelief. It was only recently edged out of my #1 spot for the year, but it remains one of the year’s most dynamic and memorable movies. It also remains the absolute last movie you should ever watch on a first date; shoot, make that any date in general, even if you think you really, really trust the person. Directed by noted auteur David Fincher (The Social Network, Benjamin Button, Se7en, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), this is an epic white-knuckle thriller I’m half-looking forward to seeing again, and half-dreading. Yeah, it’s like that.

Yeah, it was hard to top Gone Girl, but this last movie just hit me in the sweet spot. That movie?

WHIPLASH (#1)
Now this is how you write a good movie—put two sterling performers in the roles of a pair of men who admire and despise each other, ratchet up the tension and adrenaline to almost unbearable levels, add a killer musical score, and fill the last third of the movie with a jaw-dropping, gut-wrenching game of F*** You. Oh yeah, and end it with one of the most maddening cliffhangers imaginable. It’s true, part of writer/director Damian Chazelle’s genius is that beauty of a cliffhanger—it makes Whiplash about ten times more brilliant and haunting, but it also can frustrate the mess out of you, because, if you’re like me, you want to know What the Hell Happened Next! Seriously—I haven’t loved a movie this much, and yet so badly wanted more, in years.

Yeah, Whiplash got me good. It stars upcoming sensation Miles Teller as an ambitious younger dummer who gains admission to an exclusive musical academy in Manhattan, where he strives to get his big break by catching the eye and ear of the school’s renowned jazz instructor. Catch the eye and ear he does, but it turns out the instructor, Terence Fletcher (J.K. Simmons of the old Spiderman trilogy and the Farmers Insurance commercials), is, behind closed doors, a tyrannical slave driver, a relentless, bullying monster who considers neither verbal nor physical abuse out of the question when it comes to getting the best out of his budding musicians. The musicians, thus, are tense and terrified, practicing obsessively to unhealthy levels and proving quick to turn on each other if anyone even slightly messes up. Teller’s drummer, Andrew, in particular, becomes so hellbent on impressing the instructor that he dumps his girlfriend and starts lying to his father in order to focus exclusively on drumming. Yet impressing Fletcher proves a Herculean task, and Andrew starts to crack. He becomes rude and sour and starts to lose his own humanity. And impressing Fletcher may not, at the end of it all, even be possible. And it may not be worth it.

Headed by a pair of phenomenal performances (Teller was great, and Simmons is on his way to an Oscar), Whiplash was so intense my legs were numb within minutes; by the high-flying, magnificent whopper of an ending, I was practically begging for mercy. The script (by director Damian Chazelle) is raw and brilliant, the drum solos are incredible, and the clash of wits and wills at the center is something I would long like to analyze (if you can’t tell). Just what went on to happen between these two after that final scene, I really want to know. Someone needs to see Whiplash so we can talk about it. That would be quite the conversation.

If you’ve gotten this far, thanks for reading. :)

Monday, January 19, 2015

WHIPLASH

Whiplash
Grade: A

Starring: Miles Teller, J.K. Simmons, and Paul Reiser; with Melissa Benoist as Nicole, Austin Stowell as Ryan Connelly and Nate Lang as Carl Tanner
Premise: A skilled young drummer attending an elite musical academy comes under the tutelage of a renowned but abusive orchestra conductor.

Rated R for constant profanity and abusive language (including racial slurs and sexual references), bloody images, and some intense emotional content

Whiplash:
1. The lash of a whip
2. An abrupt snapping motion or change of direction resembling the lash of a whip
3. Also 'whiplash injury', a neck injury caused by a sudden jerking backward, forward, or both, of the head
                                                (from dictionary.reference.com)

All three listed definitions of the single word in the title of writer/director Damian Chazelle’s nerve-shredding Academy-Award nominated drama are appropriate descriptions of what happens in the film—if not literally then figuratively. Some of the most startling content truly is capable of causing one to recoil, possibly fast enough to give oneself whiplash. But another visceral word that could be used to describe the affect this film has is gutpunch. Yes, that, too, would be accurate.

The 29-year-old Chazelle made a huge splash on the film scene this year—after only a few previous writing and directing credits—with this brutal, harrowing film, and it’s no wonder. The screenplay takes the idea of tough competition at a high-falutin’ music school (the fictional New York-based Shaffer Conservatory) and makes it positively, almost literally, cutthroat. The demanding music instructor that looms large over the proceedings is inspired by a story that jazz saxophonist Charlie Parker only became ‘The Yardbird’ aka 'The Bird' because Jo-Jo Jones threw a cymbal at his head during a mediocre showing with the band and told him to “get the f*** out”. Humiliated but determined, Parker came back and changed jazz music. Thus, the Shaffer Academy instructor considers it his duty to, in his words, “push people beyond what they believe they’re capable of” because he wants to have his own Charlie Parker. Just how far he’ll go to do it is what makes Whiplash such a demanding film. Just how far a young drumming protégé will go to try to impress this monster, and to realize his own dream, is what makes it mesmerizing.

Plot
Nineteen-year-old Andrew Nieman (Miles Teller) is bursting with pride at having gained admission to Shaffer, having been raised by a single parent (Paul Reiser) and idolizing the likes of Buddy Rich his entire life. One day in entry-level orchestra, he catches the eye (and ear) of visiting instructor Terrence Fletcher (J.K. Simmons), the conductor of Shaffer’s nationally-recognized jazz core orchestra. Excited, Andrew goes to the classroom and greets the other musicians, watches Fletcher come in and lead the group in a few warm-up numbers…and someone happens to be out of tune. Fletcher—whose bald, muscular, blue-eyed visage seems the epitome of cool—descends on the offending brass musician and screams obscenities until the kid flees the class in tears. And that’s just the beginning. Within the first week, Andrew, despite being remarkably quick of hand on the drums, has been cussed out, slapped repeatedly, and had a chair thrown at his head.

Despite this abuse, Andrew, who no one has ever thought much of, buckles down, deciding to make drumming his life. He even dumps his cutie girlfriend Nicole (Melissa Benoist) because he’s so intent on being “great”, he wants to dedicate his whole life to it. That means losing sleep, skipping meals, ignoring phone calls from his father, and drumming until his hands are bleeding and blistering and his body is covered in sweat. He wants to be great. After word of Fletcher’s horrific methods gets out, Andrew is asked to inform on him. Andrew has certainly suffered at his hands—having been called unfathomable names and suffering a near-death experience in his attempts to gain the man’s approval—but he feels the better for it. He’s become better then he would’ve been, he’s surpassed all the core orchestra’s other drummers, and he’s good enough that he has might have figured out how beat Fletcher at his own game.

What Works?
Anyone who comes into Whiplash not knowing about the verbal abuse aspect of the film will be appalled. I already knew the gist of what was coming, and yet I was reduced to a quivering blob of jelly within the first half hour. Suspense barely does the movie’s dramatic tension justice. Whiplash is electrifying and grueling, it’s mesmerizing, and it’s torturous. When J.K. Simmons won a Golden Globe a week ago for his performance as Fletcher, he thanked actor Miles Teller for inspiring him “to scream at him and hit him in the face.” He wasn’t exaggerating.

Simmons, who is also the favorite for the Best Supporting Actor Academy Award, towers over the film, as fearsome and loathsome a villain as has appeared on the screen in some time. It's difficult to fathom that this cruel, sadistic man is played by the same actor who fronts the droll Farmers Insurance commercials, and who was once worth several laughs a minute as the blustering J.Jonah Jameson in the original Spiderman trilogy. Here, when he's bending over, leering into the faces of his petrified students--at angle so that the shadows in the lines on his face darken and the folds in his skin become even more pronounced--and starts bellowing, he looks less like a person and more like a twisted gargoyle from someone's nightmare. It's the definition of a commanding performance, and the genius of Chazelle’s writing is that he makes Fletcher an actual person with depth and feelings without any contrived daddy-issues backstory. In the film he’s matched only at the end, when the drummer played by talented Miles Teller (of The Spectacular Now and Divergent fame) engages Fletcher in a gut-wrenching, jaw-dropping game of F*** You that will have viewers on the edges of their seats. Teller is understandably overshadowed by Simmons, but his performance, all coiled force (and a considerable bit of physical agony) is haunting as well.

It’s also impossible to watch this movie without appreciating the music. Jazz may make most people think of Frank Sinatra coffeehouse fare, but the drumming here (“jazz drumming”) is as fierce and unrelenting as that in any rock music I’ve ever heard. The commitment and stamina it must take to learn to play such numbers at a performance level is almost beyond imagination. Some of the most-heard numbers are Hank Levy’s “Whiplash” and Duke Ellington’s “Caravan”. And yes, in case you’re wondering, Teller, who had drumming experience, played all his own numbers after several months of tutelage from notable drummer Nate Lang, who plays one of Andrew’s drumming rivals in the movie. Here’s hoping Lang wasn’t quite as tough as Fletcher.

What Doesn’t Work?
I wouldn’t have minded if the movie was a little bit happier—and it takes a gutpunch (there’s that word again) twist late that makes you want to scream in devastation—but my only real point of issue is that a few of the climactic numbers, impressive though they are, begin to drag on.

Content
Every other word starts with a ‘f’, there’s some graphic shots of bleeding blisters, and there are repeated shots of young men driving themselves almost past the point of endurance to try to please their drill sergeant maestro. This movie is rough.

Bottom Line
“The two most dangerous words in the English language are: good job.” So says the tyrannical monster at the center of this ferociously-intense film. Whiplash didn’t get its Oscar nominations by pleasing voters (at least not in a pleasantries sort of way), it got them by shocking them and giving them something they couldn’t forget. Featuring a couple great performances and some superb drum solos, this is one wild and crazy-good movie.

Whiplash (2014)
Written and Directed by Damien Chazelle
Rated R
Length: 107 minutes

AMERICAN SNIPER / BIRDMAN

A SNIPER AND THE BIRDMAN
Two of 2014's Best Picture Nominees

In the wake of last Thursday's Academy Award nominations, I was fortunate this weekend to be able to see two of the movies nominated for Best Picture, the gritty Iraq War drama American Sniper and the lively dramedy Birdman. At first glance, the movies could hardly seem to be more different, but, upon reflection, they do share some DNA. Each focuses on the outward exploits and inner life of a grown man, and both men are struggling. In Sniper, a man so successful at his profession people literally call him Legend begins to struggle with the morality of what he's doing, and he slowly realizes the livelihood that's made him who he is has begun frittering away his humanity. In Birdman, an actor who once starred as a legendary superhero struggles to make a comeback in a different role amidst a storm of self-doubt, inner demons, outward critics, better actors and all too-human angst. Both films were rock-solid, with sterling performances, moments of almost unbearable intensity, and spectacular direction and camerawork. Neither was perfect, but I would gladly watch both again. I give them each a B+.

AMERICAN SNIPER
Directed by Clint Eastwood

Plot
The movie primarily chronicles about 15 years in the life of Chris Kyle (Bradley Cooper), who grew up an easy-living Texas cowboy and then joined the Navy Seals basically because a military recruiter dared him to. In the film, he makes it through BUD/S and the hellish training regimen, meets his wife-to-be, Taya (Sienna Miller) at a bar and woos her shortly thereafter, and, after 9/11, is constantly on the front lines. Trained as a hunter from an early age, Chris becomes an expert sniper, and his very first sojourn into the post-9-11 war earns him the nickname 'Legend' from his fellow troops, as he guns down every potential threat he can spot. Predictably, the war begins to wear on Chris. Even when he's home, he's less-communicative with his anxious wife and young kids; over there, he's losing friends--sometimes because of his own mistakes--and worrying about the safety and wellbeing of his younger brother, Jeff (Keir O'Donnell), who became a Marine and has grown distant. Plus, he's dogged by an enemy sniper, a Syrian-born Olympic Champion sniper named Mustafa (Sammy Sheik), who might even be deadlier than Chris. Even as he's winning medals and setting records (150+ recorded kills, including one from 2,100 meters away), Chris begins to worry that he's lost, that there's no place for him--not in Afghanistan or Iraq, where all the locals want him dead, and not at home, where no one understands that, even though he has a loving family, he's just not right.

What Works?
Directed by the always sure-handed Eastwood, now 84 (and shockingly snubbed in the Best Director category at the Oscars for this well-constructed film), Sniper, like all the most effective war movies, presents the juxtapostion of the adrenaline rush of combat and the freakish terror of it--audience members are excited one second, shocked and horrified the next. Sniper, in particular, depicting the current war, shows how every soldier over there, Marine, Seal, or anyone else, is potentially a mere second from death at any time, whether it's in the crosshairs of the likes of Mustafa, at the expense of a hidden explosive, or at the hands of a harmless-looking populace who have largely been taught to hate Americans and to try to kill them. Though some of the action scenes are well-done and exciting, I doubt this movie will encourage many to want to go fight.

The movie is also well-acted, even if only two performers really get enough material to make an impression. Having earned his third Academy Award nomination in three years, Cooper is solid, and different than we've ever seen him. He reportedly packed on 40 pounds of muscle and learned to fire military rifles for this role; he's also convincingly dropped the manic energy that defined his last two Oscar-nominated roles, in Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle. Here he's stoic and quietly conflicted, frustratingly silent when his wife (and the audience) would like him to open up, but he's ultimately a well-meaning guy who has just seen and experienced things that he can't quite cope with. It's an effective, and effectively unshowy, portraint. As Kyle's wife, Sienna Miller doesn't actually get to do much more than cry and complain that Chris isn't opening up to her, but she's the surrogate for the audience opposite her increasingly-distant husband, and she's effective.

What Doesn't Work?
It's always a risk with war movies, but Sniper feels a little under-written, basically in that there's little to recommend about it other than the wartime battle scenes of Chris on his four tours of duty (well, that AND a riveting video montage that plays over the credits, conveying some important information about the real-life Chris Kyle). Kyle's wife, Taya, emotionally-open as she is, is underwritten, and the early scenes establishing Chris's upbringing are rushed through. I get that the movie is about what made Chris Kyle "the deadliest sniper in U.S. history", but it would be nice if there was just a little more to invest in. The movie also forgets Chris' brother halfway through after establishing Chris' connection with his brother and concern for his wellbeing in the service. 

Bottom Line
American Sniper, a tribute to a very valuable individual who served his country, is a gritty and sobering look at what military servicemen and woman (and their spouses and families) have gone through during this age of prolonged warfare. It shows the terror of battle, drives home the guts it takes to go out and kick down doors in unfriendly streets, and it helps you understand why some people who do it are just never the same. Well-directed and well-acted, Sniper is a very commendable movie that will stick with many moviegoers.

**AMERICAN SNIPER was rated R for strong, bloody violence and disturbing images (including some torture), constant profanity, some sexual material, and intense emotional content

BIRDMAN (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)
Directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu

Plot
Once upon a time, Riggan Thompson (a wonderful Michael Keaton) was a popular, recognizable actor, adored by millions for his portrayal of the superhero 'Birdman' in a trilogy of hit films. Now, Riggan Thompson is older, and a lonely, slightly-off-his-rocker faded star who's attempting a comeback with a self-written, -directed and -starring stage adaptation of a Raymond Carver poem called "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love". For all intents and purposes, this is Riggan's last chance in acting, and maybe in life, as there's a little suicidal whisper in the back of his brain that says it's all just not worth it anymore. 'All' is his real-life, which includes trying to direct this play amidst the outsize personalities of his tightly-wound friend/producer Jake (Zach Galifianakis), his resentful adult daughter/secretary Sam (Emma Stone), mood-swing-prone lead actress Lesley (Naomi Watts) and drippy some-time love interest Laura (Andrea Riseborough). There's also a hard-ass theater critic (Lindsay Duncan) gearing up to tear the play a new one and effectively end Riggan's career. With all this stress and drama, Riggan would very much like to just hole up in his dressing room (where he likes to pretend he has some of Birdman's powers, like moving objects with his mind). And this is all before the play's other prominent male actor is switched out for renowned thespian Mike Shiner (Edward Norton).

Shiner, an obnoxiously-elitist Method actor, comes onto the already complex theater scene like a hurricane. Sure he memorizes the whole script in no time and considerably raises the play's appeal and dramatic tension, but he's pretentious and unpredictable. He hits on Riggan's daughter, questions Riggan's direction and starts dishing out his own advice, he molests his onstage love interest, Lesley, in order to actually get visibly aroused onstage, and he steals some of Riggan's thoughts in an interview. Mike's just another ball Riggan must juggle, and, when BOTH of the play's preview showings are marred by catastrophies, Riggan considers calling it quits.

What Works?
Unlike the more grounded, focused Sniper, Birdman is a whirling dervish of a film--an explosion of ideas and details and characters for which the viewer must be ready. It's no mystery why the film's screenplay has been lauded. Birdman has unexpected jumps in time, switches from fantasy to reality and back, has a revolving door of characters who can pop into any scene at any time, and constantly walks the fine line between grim realistic drama and snarky comedy. Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki deserves enormous credit for crafting dozens of long, involved tracking shots, and the drums-only musical score appropriately sounds like a quickened pulse for this hyper-realistic world. The entire crew should be applauded, with bonus points to the director (and one of the writers), Oscar nominee Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, who put this whole spastic thing together in a way that is entrancing and seemless while also keeps the viewer's attention high and keeps their head on a swivel, waiting for the next important bit.

When he accepted a Golden Globe for his role as Riggan, Michael Keaton stated that every actor in the room should show up for Inarritu's next project. If they're smart, they will and should. Birdman--like the director's other most-lauded films, 21 Grams and Babel--is a paradise for actors, one in which every player gets at least one key moment or a couple lines to really invest in. Keaton navigates a whole spectrum from wild anger and self-loathing to gut-busting attempts at charm and slapstick (it's a dream role for an actor), and he's ably supported by the likes of Stone, Norton, Watts, and Galifianakis.

What Doesn't Work?
The movie is such a rush, a little more structure couldn't have hurt (I, for one, would have dropped the at-times-overwhelming fantasy sequences, as the real plot and characters were interesting enough). It also sets up its characters and appealing cast only to largely focus on Riggan for the last third, and the ambiguous ending is maddening (WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED!?!?!).

Bottom Line
It's whacky, but Birdman is kind of addicting. Great writing, great camerawork, superb directing, and a great cast--I haven't seen acting this assured and rat-a-tat since TV's 'The West Wing'. Not perfect by any means--it tried to be a little TOO fancy if you ask me--but it was still an engaging time, and, yes, like Michael Keaton said--actors everywhere would be smart to flock to work with Director Inarritu.

**BIRDMAN was rated R for constant profanity, sexual content (including some nudity), some drug use and some violent images

AMERICAN SNIPER (2014)
Directed by Clint Eastwood
Screenplay by Jason Hall
Based on the book 'American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. History' by Chris Kyle, Scott McEwen and James Defelice
Starring: Bradley Cooper and Sienna Miller, with Keir O'Donnell as Jeff Kyle and Sammy Sheik as Mustafa
Rated R
Length: 132 minutes

BIRDMAN (or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)
Directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
Screenplay by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Nicolas Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris and Armando Bo
Starring: Michael Keaton, Edward Norton, Zach Galifianakis, Emma Stone, Noami Watts, Andrea Riseborough and Amy Ryan, with Lindsay Duncan as Tabitha Dickinson
Rated R
Length: 119 minutes

Thursday, January 15, 2015

ACADEMY AWARD NOMINATION REACTION PART 2, 'Will, Should, Could, Wish It Would (Win)'

Will, Should, Could, I Wish It Would (Win)
The Major Categories At the Oscars

BEST PICTURE
American Sniper*
Birdman*
Boyhood
The Grand Budapest Hotel*
The Imitation Game
Selma*
The Theory of Everything
Whiplash*
*-a movie I haven’t seen as of this writing
Notable Snubs: Gone Girl, Foxcatcher, Into The Woods, Interstellar, Unbroken

Reaction: If I were a member of the Academy, I would start praying—regularly and fervently, today—that American Sniper, which opens wide tomorrow, January 16, blows the doors off the box office, builds great word-of-mouth, and becomes a must-see film for the average moviegoer. That’s the only way this group will have an actual hit in their midst—a movie the average American has heard of, and, hopefully, gone to see. As I already stated in my initial reaction blog, Gone Girl’s omission is a travesty, partly because it was a great film that deserved to be nominated, and part because it’s a movie that set the world on fire and that everyone was talking about. The Academy’s snub of David Fincher’s thriller relegates this list almost entirely to the types of movies the average person hasn’t even heard of. Not that they’re bad—the three I’ve seen at this time, Boyhood, The Imitation Game and The Theory of Everything, were all very good-bordering-on-great films—but the Oscars have been slipping in popularity for years, and it doesn’t help when they load the most important category up with movies most people haven’t seen and don’t care about. To whit, this group’s highest current grosser is The Grand Budapest Hotel, which rang up a decent $59 million haul, but it was released last March. And that’s $18 million more than Selma, which is in second place. Meanwhile, Whiplash, unveiled almost entirely in limited release, has grossed but $6 million (yes, I know that sounds like a lot of money to you and me, but in the movie world, it’s not). Of the snubbed films I listed, only Foxcatcher failed to break the $100 million mark domestically. Academy, if you want people to watch your show and care about it, nominate some movies most people have seen; you have two Best Picture slots left under the new rules, for cryin’ out loud!

Anyway, I’ve heard good things about all these movies and, as I mentioned, the three I’ve seen were very, very good. But this bunch won’t do much to endear an entertainment-seeking public to the tastes of the stuffy, old-fashioned Academy.

The Race: If American Sniper can become a runaway success at the box office and really get people talking, it could make an impact on the outcome. As it is, the clear frontrunner is the coming-of-age drama Boyhood (which, you may have heard, was filmed over the course of 12 years) and its closest competitor is the self-aware black comedy Birdman.

Will Win: Boyhood
Should Win: I have no problem with Boyhood taking the prize, but if American Sniper knocks my socks off, I may feel differently.
Dark Horse: Birdman/American Sniper


BEST DIRECTOR
Wes Anderson-The Grand Budapest Hotel*
Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu-Birdman*
Richard Linklater-Boyhood
Bennett Miller-Foxcatcher
Morten Tyldum-The Imitation Game
Notable Snubs: Ava DuVernay (Selma), David Fincher (Gone Girl), Clint Eastwood (American Sniper), Damian Chazelle (Whiplash), Christopher Nolan (Interstellar), James Marsh (The Theory of Everything), Angelina Jolie (Unbroken)

Reaction: Other than being disappointed by Fincher’s exclusion for his fine work on my favorite movie of the year, I don’t care too much about this category either way. Nolan probably deserved a nod for making such a huge film, I’m surprised Eastwood didn’t ride in on Sniper’s coattails when it was obviously a huge hit with the Academy, and I’m a little sorry for DuVernay and Jolie, who made hugely-important films of large scope and didn’t get nominated. But this is still a strong group without being an All-Star team of guys who get nominated for Best Director every year—the Danish Tyldum is the only one without a previous nomination for directing, writing, or producing.

The Race: No question, really. There’s Richard Linklater, 54, and everybody else. The last two years, this award has gone to the director who underwent the most technically-challenging endeavor (Ang Lee for Life of Pi in 2012, Alfonso Cuaron for Gravity in 2013), and Linklater shot Boyhood in 39 days from 2002 to 2013. He also wrote it, gave his daughter Lorelei a key part, and kept his major actors all 12 years without once being accused of being a tyrant or a slave driver. He’s basically got it.

Will Win: Linklater, unless the Academy wants to go for the old Reward-one-movie-with-Best-Director, one-for-Best-Picture route that’s been in vogue lately, but I can’t picture that happening given what Linklater accomplished.
Should Win: Linklater
Dark Horse: Wes Anderson. Grand Budapest Hotel was obviously huge with the Academy, getting all these nods when it came out almost a year ago.


BEST ACTOR
Steve Carell-Foxcatcher
Bradley Cooper-American Sniper*
Benedict Cumberbatch-The Imitation Game
Michael Keaton-Birdman*
Eddie Redmayne-The Theory of Everything
Notable Snubs: Jake Gyllenhaal-Nightcrawler, David Oyelowo-Selma

Reaction: If there ever was a category to expand, this is the one, because Best Actor always seems to have 6-8 really legitimate nominees who get some of the accolades from the guilds and other award shows, but, of course, you can’t nominate 6-8 people for an Oscar. Someone gets left out in the cold. In 2012, it was John Hawkes of The Sessions. Last year it was Tom Hanks from Captain Phillips and one-time front-runner Robert Redford from All is Lost. I believe I’ve stated how I feel about Gyllenhaal’s snub; I’m sure there are many who feel similarly about Oyelowo. I also think there’s a bit of category fraud here—while Carell has basically been booked for this category for over a year (Foxcatcher was originally supposed to come out in late 2013), after seeing the movie, I think he could legitimately have been nominated in the Supporting category without anyone getting upset. For my money, Channing Tatum was the lead in Foxcatcher. Anyway, the Academy loves older guys who’ve been around but just never had the Right Role before (Keaton), Cumberbatch was terrific, Cooper’s a new Academy favorite at the helm of a film they obviously loved, and Redmayne was so good he didn’t appear to be acting, even while playing a man who can’t speak and can barely move (reminiscent of past Best Actor winners who convincingly channeled physically disabled men, such as Colin Firth in The King’s Speech and Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot). .

The Race: Well, Gyllenhaal and Oyelowo’s omissions have made this a tad simpler. I’m gonna say Golden Globe winners Keaton and Redmayne are the front-runners, with Cooper waiting and hoping American Sniper does so well at the box office the Academy feels compelled to give it something—like this, for instance.

Will Win: The toughest call of all the acting races (per usual in years when Daniel Day-Lewis isn’t nominated). It’s Keaton or Redmayne.
Should Win: Redmayne or Cooper (maybe?)
Dark Horse: Cooper


BEST ACTRESS
Marion Cotillard-Two Days, One Night*
Felicity Jones-The Theory of Everything
Julianne Moore-Still Alice*
Rosamund Pike-Gone Girl
Reese Witherspoon-Wild
Notable Snubs: Jennifer Aniston-Cake, Amy Adams-Big Eyes

Reaction: It’s kinda nice. I harbor no dislike for Adams or Aniston (and I didn’t see either of their movies, so I can’t really comment), but the Academy went another way and slipped in 2007’s winner Cotillard, a perpetually great actress who was supposedly great in a movie I’ve only heard of once before today. Otherwise, this is the Golden Globes’ drama category (sans Aniston), and I’m happy to say I’ve seen three of the movies (I think I saw only one of the Best Actress films last year). None of the three I saw blew me away, per se (not even Pike as the titular psycho in Gone Girl), but this is a reasonably strong group in what can sometimes be a joke of a category (see 2012).

The Race: We all know it’s Moore’s to lose. The 54-year-old Moore, four times a bridesmaid previously (including being nominated in the Lead and Supporting categories in 2002), has so far snatched up every prize and all the accolades, so there’s no reason to think differently. She’s an Academy fave who’s never won, and she’s the front-runner. Easy enough.

Will Win: Moore
Should Win: Felicity Jones
Dark Horse: Reese Witherspoon


BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Robert Duvall-The Judge
Ethan Hawke-Boyhood
Edward Norton-Birdman*
Mark Ruffalo-Foxcatcher
J.K. Simmons-Whiplash*
Notable Snubs: Tom Wilkinson (Selma), Josh Brolin (Inherent Vice), Miyavi (Unbroken)

Reaction: This is the same group from the Golden Globes, for a simple reason—it seems to be a good group. Simmons is the clear favorite, with the rest of the guys practicing their “it’s an honor just to be nominated” speeches, but the three whose movies I saw were excellent. It’s nice to see Duvall, at 84, the oldest male acting nominee in Academy history, nominated for his blistering performance in The Judge, a movie that would have been thoroughly mediocre without him (fyi, it’s his 7th nod overall, but first since 1999). Hawke brought desperately-needed energy and charisma to Boyhood, Ruffalo almost stole the show in Foxcatcher, and Norton, repping his first nod since 1998, is always reliably intense.

The Race: Like I said, there’s Simmons, and there’s everybody else. A win by any of the others would pretty much be a monumental upset at this point. Of the ones I saw, only Duvall gave the kind of performance that looks like a turn worthy of winning an Oscar (even if it was a clichéd part in a clichéd movie), but I have a feeling Norton would deserve it if he could spring the upset.

Will Win: Simmons
Should Win: I’m sure Simmons is worthy. And I thought Duvall was excellent.
Dark Horse: Norton (or Duvall)


BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Patricia Arquette-Boyhood
Laura Dern-Wild
Keira Knightley-The Imitation Game
Emma Stone-Birdman*
Meryl Streep-Into The Woods
Notable Snubs: Jessica Chastain-A Most Violent Year, Sienna Miller-American Sniper

Reaction: I actually dropped an expletive when Laura Dern’s name was announced—not because I was irritated, but because I was very pleased with the imagination it took to slip her in over Chastain, an Academy favorite who seemed set in stone. I’m pleased with the outside-the-box thinking, though, having seen Wild, I can tell you it was a tiny part entirely in flashback (then again, Dern had the biggest moment that hit me in the feels during that flick, and it wasn’t even a big over-the-top moment). Then again, nominating Dern isn’t stooping to the level of nominating Jackie-I-did-nothing-in-Silver-Linings-Playbook-but-react-to-the-other-better-actors-around-me-but-I’m-in-Silver-Linings-Playbook-Weaver (2012). The other four have been locks forever. I’m tempted to say Streep could just show up and get nominated (this is the 66-year-old actress’ 19th nomination), but she’s always really, Really good, so there’s no arguing her credibility. Knightley had a classic kind of supportive-woman-with-a-little-fire role, and Stone’s been an A-lister for years now. But Arquette’s running the table.

The Race: Patricia Arquette has won everything and she was very good in Boyhood without being over-the-top. And the most likely actress to usurp her (Streep) has already won three Oscars and only one person has ever won four (Katherine Hepburn) and I’m not sure the Academy’s ready to make that kind of history, and not at a time when it would take an award away from Boyhood.

Will Win, Should Win: Arquette
Dark Horse: Not sure it matters, but I’ll say Streep.


ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
American Sniper
The Imitation Game
Inherent Vice
The Theory of Everything
Whiplash

Obviously, only Vice isn’t a Best Picture nominee, and that film got mixed reviews, so look for this to be a consolation prize for a Best Picture loser. But which one? Well, Theory’s likely to get shut out unless Redmayne wins Best Actor, Whiplash already has Simmons in the driver’s seat, so it’ll be early-season front-runner Imitation Game or late-breaking Academy darling Sniper. Again, if Sniper does gangbusters business in the next month-plus, look for it to grab this one unless it wins something bigger.
Will Win: I’m gonna say Sniper
Should Win: Doesn’t matter
Dark Horse: The Imitation Game or Whiplash


ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Birdman
Boyhood
Foxcatcher
The Grand Budapest Hotel
Nightcrawler

This is a great category where legitimately great movies that just aren’t important or fancy or big enough to win Best Picture usually get their deserving dues (like Her last year, and Pulp Fiction, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Juno in years past). Birdman snapped up this prize at the Golden Globes, but it’s got a shot at Keaton winning Best Actor, which may be its only major win if it gets it, and Boyhood’s got Arquette and Linklater lined up to win. Foxcatcher will likely get shut out, and this is Nightcrawler’s only major nomination. So look to Mr. Anderson.

Will Win: Birdman or The Grand Budapest Hotel (this will probably be a consolation prize--his movies are so quirky and offbeat, Anderson will probably live in this category forever, rather like a less-profane Quentin Tarantino)
Should Win: Nightcrawler. Dan Gilroy’s film about blew my mind, with the slight exception of an end I didn’t totally agree with.
Dark Horse: Birdman


BEST ANIMATED FEATURE
Big Hero 6
Boxtrolls*
How to Train Your Dragon 2
The Song of the Sea*
The Tale of Princess Kaguya*

You might have heard—The Lego Movie didn’t get nominated, even if its rather obnoxiously-infectious anthem (“Everything is Awesome”) made the Original Song category. That, plus Dragon’s win over Lego at the Globes, blows this thing wide open. Smaller stuff has won before. Wallace & Gromit and Rango have won, and, way back in ’02, Hayao Miyizaki’s Spirited Away won this puppy over the more successful likes of Lilo & Stitch and the first Ice Age. But neither of those had the gorgeous animation, emotional maturity, or box-office clout of Dragon or Big Hero 6. I loved the first How to Train Your Dragon, but it sadly didn’t stand a chance against Toy Story 3 in 2010. I thought the sequel was good, but Big Hero 6 was better, not to mention the most gorgeously-animated movie I’d ever seen. I’d give it to Hero (or, if you’ve seen the movie, Hiro).


So yeah. That about does it. Any thoughts?


And, of course, there’s always the possibility that I see Birdman, American Sniper, Grand Budapest Hotel, Whiplash et all and completely change my mind here. I suppose. But don’t hold your breath.

ACADEMY AWARD NOMINATIONS REACTION: Part 1 The 'Girl' is Basically Gone

The 'Girl' is Basically 'Gone'
From Academy Voters' Nomination Sheets

Let's get this out of the way right from the start: the Academy messed up.

The Academy messed up big time. At least I think so.

That Gone Girl wasn't nominated for Best Picture, Best Director or Best Adapted Screenplay according to this morning's announcement of the nominations for the 87th Annual Academy Awards is a shame. It's a travesty. Even aside from the fact that Gone Girl is still the most likely film to be ranked #1 on my personal Top Ten list of 2014 movies (whenever that actually becomes a thing), Gone Girl was a very well-made, well-executed film, and it was also a box-office hit driven by obsessive word of mouth; nominating it would have been a great opportunity for the Academy to take advantage of a well-made, popular movie and not seem so out of touch.

Even just one of the mentioned nominations would have made me feel a lot better. Gone Girl was so effective largely because of its mesmerizing, twisting, unpredictable plot, credit for which goes to the author of the book (who also wrote the screenplay), Gillian Flynn. Not just anyone could have made such a glossy, suspenseful, electrifying movie out of it--mad props to Director David Fincher. And, overall, it was a jaw-dropping, mind-boggling, edge-of-your-seat entertainment that had everyone talking, and blew Yours Truly's mind. So Best Picture would have been nice. To be passed over for all three--I can't remember a prominent movie getting more snubs in major categories since Cold Mountain in 2003 (it was expected to get, and surprisingly didn't get, nominations for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actress), and that movie didn't nearly have the box-office clout, word-of-mouth, or must-see quality of Gone Girl.

I'm sure Academy members--if they could hear my ravings--would point to the fact that the movie's titular 'Girl', actress Rosamund Pike, did get nominated for Best Actress. Yeah, she did. I'd have nominated her, too. Funny thing is, I personally think the movie was more deserving of any of the three nominations it did not get than that one, even though I think Pike's inclusion is justified (a friend of mine suggested that Academy members were so convinced (and terrified) by the actress's portrayal of a psychotic housewife that they nominated her in order to avoid getting their throats slit in revenge). So yeah. Good job, Academy, you're 1-for-4.

It should be noted that I'm not the only upset about this. My Facebook has been blowing up. Gone Girl didn't make $167 million domestically off me, alone, buying a ticket. So that was a misstep.

But, anyway...

Well, no, not anyway--the Academy also let slip Jake Gyllenhaal's brilliant performance in Nightcrawler, leaving him out of the final five for Best Actor. Gyllenhaal, a previous Oscar nominee for 2005's Brokeback Mountain, has been a fairly recognizable actor since 1999's October Sky--certainly since 2001's Donnie Darko--and yet his chameleonic work in Nightcrawler was, in my opinion, his career best. It was a fabulous, engaging, creepy performance--one which I would have outright awarded this trophy, even considering the competition. I'm slightly pacified because the thrilling Nightcrawler did get a Best Original Screenplay nomination (I never had high hopes for its chances in the Best Picture category), but Gyllenhaal's great, memorable work being snubbed is not something I'm happy about.

All right, so, other than these snubs (and I can't remember taking any snubs in the last couple years this personally--this was BAD), I thought the Academy did all right. I'm a little bummed out that, out of the eight Best Picture nominees, I've only seen 3 of them (because the likes of Foxcatcher, Into The Woods, Unbroken, and, oh yeah, Gone Girl, were omitted). But, on the bright side, of the major categories, Best Supporting Actor is the only one that is identical to those which were represented at Sunday night's Golden Globes. There was a one-person-switcheroo done in the Supporting Actress and Lead Actress categories (of which I approve), and I already talked about how they messed up Best Actor and Best Director, buuut...at least they're different.

Oh, and did I mention the Academy didn't nominate The Lego Movie for Best Animated Feature Film? Yeeeaah, that was the first thing that got me wailing and gnashing my teeth.

But, anyway...

Yeah, so, I'm pleased by some 'different' thinking--we've actually got some incredibly-competitive Screenplay categories, and the chance to hear The Lego Movie's uppity theme song 'Everything is Awesome' at the Oscars--but this doesn't figure to be a very competitive year. Most of the top prizes (as always) are gimmies, barring huge upsets that probably won't happen.

Oh, by the way, a couple housekeeping notes about these nominations:
- Birdman and The Grand Budapest Hotel tied for the most nominations, with 9 apiece; The Imitation Game had 8, and Boyhood and American Sniper tied for third with 6 each
- Robert Duvall (nominated for Best Supporting Actor for The Judge), at 84, is now the oldest male acting nominee in Academy history. Yet he is still younger than the oldest-ever female acting nominee--Emmanuelle Riva, 85 (in 2012). This is the Godfather star's 7th career nomination, and his first in 16 years (1999's A Civil Action)
-Meryl Streep's nomination for Best Supporting Actress (for Into The Woods) means her record number of nominations is now 19. And somehow I doubt she's done.

So, anyway, without further ado, I'm going to take a quick look at the major categories (as they are; not as I wish they were) and examine how I think it looks and is going to play out. I haven't seen every movie or performance at this time, but I've read and heard enough that I can make some educated guesses, but, for honesty's sake, I'll put asterisks by the ones I haven't seen.

But since this has been long, that will be in my next post. Feel free to check it out (and thank you, as always) for reading.

Tuesday, January 6, 2015

BOYHOOD

Boyhood
Grade: B+

Starring: Ellar Coltrane, Lorelei Linklater, Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke; and Featuring Marco Perella as Professor Bill Webrock, Jamie Howard as Mindy, Andrew Villarreal as Randy, Zoe Graham as Sheena, Brad Hawkins as Jim, Jenni Tooley as Annie, and Jessi Mechler as Nicole
Premise: The youngest of two in a broken family, Mason grows from age 5 to 18, enduring the highs of lows of growing up including constant moves and new schools, his mom’s multiple marriages, break-ups, drinking, and leaving the nest.

Rated R for constant profanity (including sexual references), intense emotional content, and drug and alcohol use

****************************************************************

“People always say ‘seize the moment’, but I think it’s more the other way around—it’s like the moment seizes us…”  -Nicole


Wow. Just wow.  Filmed with the same quartet of main actors in 39 days over the course of twelve years (2002-2013), Richard Linklater’s Boyhood is a sprawling, monumental film, for which the adjectives just keep coming. It’s a coming-of-age, slice-of-life drama that could be described as endearing, but could also be described as real, epic, intense, powerful, touching, and trippy. It’s day-in-the-life style can be aggravating in its depiction of small, uninteresting details (at 2 hours and 45 minutes, this is a massive movie that feels at least 30 minutes too long), but its matter-of-factness is also a huge asset—anything can happen, because it’s about real things that happen to real people, and it has no clearly telegraphed plot. The “Movie Moments” in the movie could probably be counted on one hand, but it casts an amazing, profound spell nonetheless.

Yeah, I could go on. On one hand, it was way too long. But on the other, I’m in awe, and, as you can tell, I can’t stop talking about it.

Plot
At age 6, Mason (Ellar Coltrane, who played the character from ages 6 to 18) is a thoughtful but observant little kid, part precocious and part bratty. He fights with his older sister Samantha (Lorelei Linklater, the director’s daughter), plays in the yard with his friends, peeks at pictures of women in bras in magazines, and doesn’t quite grasp the concept of moving, at least at first. His parents have split—Mom is a childish flake (Patricia Arquette) and Dad is a free-wheeling rascal (Ethan Hawke), and life can be turbulent. Mom has a succession of stinker marriages, with abrasive drunk Bill (Marco Perella) and sedate, colorless Jim (Brad Hawkins), Sam dyes her hair and has mood swings, Mason has trouble with bullies, and Dad struggles to maintain a meaningful presence in his kids’ lives. As Mason grows, he recognizes the good and the bad about his parents and his sister, he wonders about his place in the universe, he stands up to bullies, he experiences first love and first heartbreak, he graduates, and he goes to school looking to find his own life.

What Works?
Boyhood requires an attentive viewer, and a patient one, because its matter-of-fact air is at first so matter-of-fact it’s almost comical. The shifts in time aren’t laid out on the screen and important moments are left out (this has to be one of the only coming-of-age movies that doesn’t show the protagonist’s first kiss), and things become tense at a moment’s notice. After a while, a pattern begins to emerge, you begin to care, and you become invested—largely because Mason’s life contains a lot of things you, as the viewer, can relate to. The movie’s most riveting moments come when Mom’s second husband, Bill, her former college professor, shows his true colors. I realize the movie probably sounds boring and I’m not doing a great job of explaining it, but there’s not much more to it. It’s about a kid growing up, doing life. But when it ends, it doesn’t just feel “well, okay then, whatever”. It feels epic.

The cast is wonderful, with the four leads all tremendous. Hawke is the best as the charming, charismatic Dad; he brings a great burst of energy. The actor’s sincerity lends each of his moments—often matter-of-fact, just like the movie—significant weight and heft. As the boy who goes through adolescence and becomes a man, Ellar Coltrane—in one of the more unique movie roles and performances I can recall—is great, easily convincing yet never over-dramatic, never flashy (this is also the rare coming-of-age flick in which the protagonist never cries, or even has a big emotional moment). Mason is a normal teen, who becomes quiet and moody and monotone, but he keeps your attention because he’s real. He could be you. Lorelei, the director’s daughter, similarly, is convincing as a bratty teen girl (she never cries, either, in the film), but one who has her moments as a sister. And Patricia Arquette goes for the heartstrings as well-meaning but unreliable, self-centered Mom. The actress uses her natural, quiet manner to embody both the childish and childlike aspects of the character. Sometimes you hate her, and sometimes you want to hug her.

This quartet is ably supported by the likes of Marco Perella, who goes from likeable, charismatic new dad to monster in a matter of minutes, Brad Hawkins, who’s convincing as an attractive but ultimately bland, dead-end sort of guy, and the two main girls who share the screen with Coltrane, Zoe Graham, as his luminous first love Sheena, and Jessi Mechler, who gets to share the film’s last scene, an intimate sunset chat, capped off by the wonderful and fitting quote at the top of this review.

A lot of people will probably question why someone who take the trouble to make a movie just about life like this, but it feels really special. It won’t win over everyone, but if you watch it, I doubt you’ll think it was a waste of time.

What Doesn’t Work?
It didn’t bother me as much as you might think that the movie doesn’t really have a narrative outside the passing of time. The first few scenes were a little uncomfortable in their everyday-ness, with so little effort put into the writing and acting to make it seem natural, and, even though the movie picks up, one does wish it passed over a little less. Why not let us see one of the weddings, or Mason’s first kiss?

And, yeah, it’s really long. If two hours and forty-five minutes is long for an epic adventure through Middle Earth—it’s long for a movie about a random kid growing up and doing life. In retrospect, nearly every scene in the movie was there for a reason and had meaning, but I can’t imagine its impact would have been diminished had it been 30 minutes shorter.  

Content
For a coming-of-age flick about a boy growing into a man, Boyhood is surprisingly light on sexual content (no, there’s no walking in on the rebellious older sister making out with a boyfriend). There’s no nudity, the briefest of sex-related scenes, and only a little kissing. If the depiction of way-underage kids drinking and smoking upsets you, stay away from this movie, and, as is honestly pretty realistic, Boyhood is full of F-bombs.

Bottom Line
It’s difficult to describe. Four primary actors and a director filmed this movie in 39 days over the course of 12 years. I suppose that’s what makes Boyhood special. But it’s also special because, as was intended, the movie captures a slice of life—a big one—and makes it so normal and real it’s impossible not to relate, not to think about your own life. It’s a long movie, and not especially funny or sexy or romantic or dramatic, but it just is something.

Boyhood (2014)
Written and Directed by Richard Linklater
Rated R
Length: 165 minutes

Sunday, January 4, 2015

TALKING TOP TENS

So it's January Fifth...

and I haven't yet written a review for this year, nor have I even compiled my official Top Ten list for 2014. As you probably know, this is a big deal to geeky movie critics, just so we can look back and go "oh, yeah, that was my Number Four movie in 2010!" One reason I hold out is I haven't yet seen every 2014 release I want to. It always happens that I try to put a list together, then, in the late winter or early spring, I see a movie from that year I'd always wanted to that was only in limited release or something, and it shakes the whole thing up after I already made an official list and posted it and got opinions on it. Last year, the movie that shook it up was Nebraska, the Alexander Payne-directed homecoming/road trip flick that was one of the year's most heartfelt and emotionally-rich movies. I also re-watched the well-acted and electrifying racing drama Rush, which I had seen in theaters in September and then largely forgotten about. As you will see below, both ended up on what I am calling my FINAL Top Ten Movies of 2013 List.

2013
1. Gravity
2. Captain Phillips
3. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
4. Rush
5. 12 Years A Slave
6. Nebraska
7. Star Trek Into Darkness
8. Fruitvale Station
9. Saving Mr. Banks
10. Her

There's an argument to be made that this list was a done deal as soon as I walked out of Gravity--I was walking on air and raving to anyone who would listen that it was one of the best movies I'd ever seen. I started to doubt its superiority when I was really impressed by the second Hunger Games film, and then re-watched Captain Phillips on DVD and was blown away (ironically, I was lukewarm on Captain the first time because I saw it, because it was at night on the same day I saw Gravity as a matinee and had yet to recover). I was so impressed by Captain when I watched it at home that I started to think it was the year's best. Happily, Alfonso Cuaron's space epic was back out in theaters, so I saw it again, this time in 3-D, and was, again, thoroughly impressed. So, despite a very strong Top 3 (and, basically, Top 6), Gravity remains on the top of the heap. But this was quite a strong group overall.

*********************************************************************************

Even though 2012 was the first year I started blogging and I saw tons of movies, I never did post a Top 10 list. Maybe I was overwhelmed--or underwhelmed. Anyway, this was tough, because I've only seen a couple of these movies once and it was two years ago, but, considering my remembrance of my original impressions, my thoughts in repeated viewings (for some of them), and their rewatchability (whether I've actually re-watched them or not), I decided on this order:

2012
1. Les Miserables
2. Skyfall
3. Argo
4. ParaNorman
5. The Avengers
6. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
7. Django Unchained
8. Lincoln
9. Silver Linings Playbook
10. The Perks of Being A Wallflower

This list was decided almost as soon as I saw Les Mis in theaters, and, though I would probably pop Skyfall into the DVD player more readily than Les Mis because of its higher entertainment value, it would be disingenuous to not put the musical epic first. It blew my mind, was all I could think about, almost re-shaped my taste in music, and became my obsession for several months. The movie is long and can be slow, so it's not the most re-watchable, but, as is arguably even more important for a musical, its soundtrack can be listened to over and over (and over). The rest of this list is a mixed bag. I only saw Argo once, but I know I greatly enjoyed it; I didn't think much of The Avengers when I first saw it but I have it on DVD and have watched it several times--at its best, it's as enjoyable as any of these movies. My impression of both Lincoln and Django improved with viewings at home, and I've never been able to fully decide what I thought of Silver Linings Playbook, since it's so different from the book (which, at the time I saw the movie, was an obsession of mine; so I was initially disgusted with the movie).

************************************************************************

2014? Well, I have yet to see the celebrated, much-ballyhooed likes of Boyhood, American Sniper, Birdman, Whiplash, Selma and Still Alice; I want to see them mainly because they're all expected to be major players at the Academy Awards this year, and I always like to have opinions for the Best of the Best shows.

On Friday, January 2, I saw The Imitation Game in theaters. I never got around to writing a full review on this blog, but I would have given it an A. Harkening back to the likes of The King's Speech (a movie I call one of my favorites now despite the fact that I was so-so on it after seeing it in theaters), The Imitation Game was a great balance of heavier material fraught with meaning, and real, crackling entertainment. The latter was particularly important, as a lot of this year's most celebrated movies (The Theory of Everything, Foxcatcher, Wild) have proven to be well-made, thought-provoking films, but ones that proved tough acts to sit through at times. So while I may have drawn something from each, I wouldn't watch them again as readily. I probably thought more of The Imitation Game than I would have had the other recent movies I'd seen not been so dull (both Unbroken and Into the Woods were duds), but Game was a well-written, well-developed movie that was more engaging than I expected, and had the big meaningful punch at the end. Benedict Cumberbatch was perfectly cast, Keira Knightley had her best role in years, and any movie that has  actors like Mark Strong and Charles ("Tywin Lannister") Dance in key supporting parts has serious street cred.

While I have not made an official list yet, David Fincher's indomitable, mesmerizing Gone Girl has the #1 vote in my book to this point, largely because it was the only movie I've seen this year that really shut me up and turned me into a viewer and not a critic. I was swept up by the movie's wild spell and dumped out the other side with my jaw agape, thinking I've never seen anything like that before. Holy cow! I'll be surprised if another movie catches it. But Imitation Game just slotted itself into #2 in the running, with Wild, Nightcrawler and Interstellar rounding out the Top Five (at this point, the likeable but slower, heavier flicks Foxcatcher and Theory of Everything are on the next wrung down). Hopefully some of the big titles I have yet to see will really impress me, even though their inclusion may push entertaining, likeable blockbusters Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Edge of Tomorrow and Guardians of the Galaxy out the door.

So I guess we'll see. But the 2014 list is shaping up to be a very strong one from top to bottom, with no guilty-conscience-picks or late additions. God knows when you'll actually see that final Top Ten list, though.