Change Your Image
Ben_Cap
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Gold (2016)
A Piece of Advice Worth It's Weight in Gold, Don't See This Movie
I feel that it is my duty that when I review a movie, that I stick around for the entire run and not bail out early even with the bad ones. The Free State of Jones(2016) tested me in this regard eventually forcing me out to hit the eject button and make it home what seemed like weeks after the movie started. I did not write a review for that movie, and the reason I bring it up is that unfortunately Gold gave me the same feeling. Both star Matt McConaughey, who just a few years after his McConnisance has hit a bit of a rough patch, even though it's not necessarily at fault. Both films were birthed from a good piece of history that is not very well known, but both seem to become about more than the original idea, and maybe they should have kept it simple.
Gold is actually based on true life events, well that's not exactly true. It takes some elements from a real life event, but Gold should not be taken as historical fact. McConaughey plays Kenny Wells, the heir to a mining company run by his father and started by his grandfather. When we first see Stills the company is booming and his father is alive. Then we jump to 7 years later, Stills Sr. has passed on and it seems the company is on the same boat. Then in one of the worst examples of forcing the main character to get off the couch and start his journey, Stills dreams up a gold deposit in Indonesia, and no that is not word play, he really gets drunk, falls asleep, and dreams up the motivating factor in this movie. Stills then goes to Find Mike Acosta(Edgar Ramirez), who is apparently the real mastermind behind this Indonesian gold mine and together they search for the gold deposit in the rain forest. I have just laid out the most interesting and part of this story and that all takes place in the first act.
The news is not all bad, McConaughey is solid in the lead role, but similar to a great player on a bad basketball team it can be difficult to get into a rhythm by yourself. Edgar Ramirez lacks chemistry with McConaughey which was vital for this movie. These two men go through quite a bit together and they never really seemed to click. Bryce Dallas Howard is basically here to give the lead a romantic interest and someone to treat horribly when he inevitably goes off the rails. Side characters are filled with some pretty solid actors such as Corey Stoll and Toby Kebbell, but they basically add up to one role, and neither character is interesting at all.
Gold seemed like it wanted to be a mix of a high level stock market drama and a treasure hunt movie with a dash of historical fiction thrown in there. The problem, other than that mix sounds like a terrible idea for a genre, is that the movie never comes close to succeeding in either regard. The plot is terribly uninteresting and none of the characters save for parts of McConaughey's performance are in any way redeeming. I had expected it to be rough when it was completely skipped over in every year end list but I did not expect this. There is nothing I can say is remotely worth your time here. There are plenty of other places to see good McConaughey performances where he does not look gross and out of shape. After these last two stinkers(which both are probably in the running for the worst movies I have seen in the last year) Mr. McConaughey should think about he chooses his roles. Skip Gold and see something else, I beg of you.
Split (2016)
M. Night Shyamalan's Best Idea In Years.
This past Halloween I revisited The Sixth Sense(1999) to see how well the horror classic had aged. I remembered it being a perfect piece of new age horror, that changed the way ghost stories would be told in movies. While The Sixth Sense does hold up as a terrific movie, there are problems mostly with the direction of the story and the dialogue. It may please you to hear that Split has a lot of the same elements that made The Sixth Sense great, but also some of the faults. They are not the same movie at all, but M. Night Shyamalan may have stumbled upon his best idea since Unbreakable(2000) and while he has taken quite a fall in recent years, he still has the ability to create worlds that are interesting and watchable.
Split is about 3 teenage girls who after attending a birthday party, are abducted by a man who seems to have some significant mental problems. The girls are placed in a room who's only contents are 3 beds, a door and a bathroom. The girls can hear a few different voices on the other side of the door, even a woman who seems to be willing to help the girls, but as the girls find out, their captor has split personality disorder, and has been talking to himself the whole time. The plot is incredibly easy to understand, while also feeling like a complicated web of stories and characters that we will most likely never fully know about.
While Shyamalan has always been known for his twists at the end of his movies, his overall writing ability has been lacking. Where he really excels is in creating worlds that exist in the same one we live in, but adding an element that changes the whole story. For example The Sixth Sense is about a boy who is struggling to grow up, who also happens to see dead people. In Unbreakable Bruce Willis is a regular down on his luck guy looking for meaning in his life, who just happens to not be able to get hurt. Split follows the same formula and it is this which really took Split from a bad movie to a good one for me. The way the different personalities take hold of James McAvoy's character is just so darn cool and inventive. The more I learned about the process the more I wanted to see it used in other movies.
James McAvoy, who is probably best known for playing a young Professor X in the recent X-Men movies has been at this for a while. I first remember him as Mr. Tumnus in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005) movie, but McAvoy has moved out of family movie actor and has become one who takes some challenging roles. McAvoy has played characters with mental disorders before, in Filth(2013) he played a cop with Bipolar Disorder and his performance in that was great. While he takes his role in Split a little over the top, its almost what the character needs, Kevin does not have a run of the mill case of split personality disorder, he has 23 unique personalities who seem to be completely separate people, to the point that one of them can have diabetes while the other 22 do not. While not his grandest performance, McAvoy gives a good one and one that fits into the movie.
I have tried to avoid using the wordplay that I'm sure every other review of this movie has used, but since were almost done I figure using this pun won't ruin your opinion of my opinion. I felt very SPLIT in my opinion of Split while watching it. On one hand there were some lines of dialogue that I could not believe made it past the first draft of the script, let alone into the final cut, but on the other Split kept my attention for most of the 117 minute run time. If you don't understand the ending that is fine, just do a quick internet search and the results should solve at least some of the confusion. Split is an entertaining movie, that was marketed more as a horror movie than a thriller, but if you keep an open mind and allow Split to be entertaining you should have a fun time at the movies.
Hidden Figures (2016)
The Actresses Shine While the Story Lacks
My first thoughts after seeing the trailer to Hidden Figures was to question its watchabliity. My second thought was that Hidden Figures may be just the opposite. It had a story that as the title describes is relatively unknown and deals with one of the most exciting times in history. On top of that is a great solution to a Hollywood problem, the lack of leading roles for women, especially ones of color. Hidden Figures provides 3 leading roles for women of color, but unfortunately focuses far too much on that aspect of the characters, and not enough on their actual accomplishments. Oh and that watchability thing, well that's a problem too.
The real truth is that the story underneath it all is pretty lackluster. These women were certainly achieved some great things in a world that wanted them to do the opposite, but movies do have to be entertaining. The plot is not driven by these women and them overcoming both racism and sexism, but by the space race and the countless amounts of white men who benefited from it. The amount of scenes showing the women being treated like trash almost double the ones that show them succeeding. Race and sexism should certainly be part of this story, but it took over most of the movie which is disappointing.
The best thing about Hidden Figures are the three leads. Octavia Spencer plays Dorothy Vaughan and she fits into the supporting role perfectly. I don't want to call her a motherly figure, but she takes control a few times on the movie and it's great to see Ms. Spencer getting awards looks again. Janelle Monáe plays Mary Jackson and has the difficult task of acting alongside two fantastic actresses. She brings a lot of character to Jackson, but feels flat compared to her co stars. The real jewel here is the performance of Taraji P. Henson as Katherine G. Johnson. Henson lights up the screen, and even though she is normally known as a bit of an over the top actress she brings subtlety to the role. She gets her moments to go all out and boy does she use them, another possible awards candidate and Ms. Henson's finest performance yet.
Hidden Figures will probably have a few Oscar noms by the time all is said and done, and while it is more deserving than movies like Hacksaw Ridge and Birth of a Nation, it does not deserve to be in the same category as Moonlight and La La Land. While watching Hidden Figures I was reminded of Loving, not because racial tensions drive both movies, but because they both have the same nagging issue, they are stories that are just not fit for movies. I would much rather watch a documentary on either the story of the Lovings or the women featured in Hidden Figures. At least I would gain some historical knowledge rather than being made to feel bad because people with the same color skin as me were assholes 60 years ago. Hidden Figures is not a bad movie, it just wants to be something its not, and that is never a good way to make a movie.
The Founder (2016)
The Real Story of a Real Jerk
McDonald's has been one of if not the most influential brands in the world. It has been a staple of not only American fast food but American life, whether you like like it or not. Going into The Founder I did not know a lot Ray Kroc, other than that he was in some way involved with the mega chain. Turns out Kroc is a real piece of work, and while there were things about this story that interested me, overall what we get is the tale of an asshole and how he succeeded in screwing some people out of a lot of money. This is where the movie runs into its main problem, half the time it feels like praying at the alter of Kroc, and the other half feels like a pulled punch to the gut of ultra-capitalists.
The first act tells about Kroc struggling as a milkshake mixer salesman, when he discovers a restaurant unlike any of the others that he has visited. The speed of service, the consistency of the quality of the food and the way it brought the community together draws Kroc to the burger shack known as McDonald's. The rest of the movie plays out with Kroc slowly bleeding the McDonald brothers of their company and really the original intention of the restaurant. Kroc did implement some innovations that pushed McDonald's into a worldwide franchise, but these moments mostly come after the events of the movie. The innovative ideas that we do see are almost exclusively created by the McDonald brothers, who as previously stated basically get screwed the whole movie.
Michael Keaton is probably looking right back at you from both sides of the screen right now, so you have probably figured out he plays an important role here. Keaton plays it with his normal light comedy tone, which would work perfectly if the movie had embraced it more. I have no idea what Ray Kroc is like so I really don't know if he was anything like Keaton's performance, but darn it if he is not enjoyable to watch. When Kroc begins his descent into jerk off Keaton is professional enough to pull off the switch in character just enough to keep the original idea of him intact. For the most part everyone else just pops in and out. Nick Offerman and John Carrol Lynch play the McDonald brothers who come and go quite regularly, again mostly getting screwed. Poor Laura Dern plays Kroc's first wife, who is relegated to the bummer at home. She never gets to be anything but disappointing which in turn, is disappointing.
The McDonald brothers main concern for franchising their restaurant, which had taken them years to perfect just the way they wanted it was that the quality of the food would suffer and thus the name would suffer. Now some 60 odd years later it is funny to think about how that is exactly what happened, and there in lies the main problem with The Founder. There is no critical look at the moves Kroc made. They don't fully back his decisions, but they also don't condemn them. This movie needed a side to take, with it stuck in the middle the story becomes so much less than it could have been. It's like if The Big Short did not make up its mind when it comes to the bankers that caused the financial meltdown.
My final thoughts on the movie are pretty simple, there is an interesting story here, where in some ways the world was changed for the better, and some for the worse. I just don't believe it was told in the right way, and while not an incredibly important tale was one that was not difficult to sit through. at an hour and 55 minute run time, The Founder just sneaks under the magic 2 hour mark, but honestly could have been about 15 minutes shorter. There was something here, but with the tone of the movie stuck on the fence, The Founder is pretty forgettable.
Silence (2016)
A Long, Long, Long, Long, Long Masterpiece.
Martin Scorsese has been trying to make Silence for over 25 years, to call it a passion project does not do it justice. It was while riding a bullet train from Tokyo to Kyoto on the way to film a cameo in an Akira Kurosawa movie that Scorsese finished the book that his movie would be based on. All of this shortly after he had finished one of his if not his most controversial movie The Last Temptation of Christ. Since then Silence has been through all types of development hell, constantly being pushed back by movies like Gangs of New York, The Avaitor, Shutter Island and The Departed. It was once set to star Daniel Day-Lewis, Benicio del Toro, and Gael García Bernal which just makes me all types of sad that we did not get to see that movie. Silence is finally here, from that 1989 trip to Japan to 2017, Scorsese has gotten to make his "passion project" and he has put all he has into it, the good and the bad of the genius that is Martin Scorsese.
The story is about two Portuguese Jesuit priests (Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver) who learn that their teacher, Father Cristóvão Ferreira (Liam Neeson) has publicly renounced his faith in public in Japan. The two priests cannot believe such news and travel to Japan to find Father Ferreira and prove that this news is false. Christianity has been outlawed in Japan and is investigated and eliminated by a man called "the inquisitor". Upon arriving in Japan, both men are shown how horribly Christians are treated there and go through bouts of lost faith. The movie is very well written, other than the length of the movie which I will get into later. For being such a long movie about a seemingly a bit dull topic these days, it moves very well. Other than a few key scenes the movie is always moving forward, but this is not only because of the writing.
Martin Scorsese is one of the greatest directors of his generation, if not all time. His movies have influences countless others and pushed the idea of what movies could be. The master does not slip up in Silence where he puts some of his best work in recent years. The Wolf of Wall Street was incredibly made, but I think Silence is a step ahead when it comes to Scorsese's directing. The movie is presented beautifully, and then we are treated to some astonishingly difficult to watch scenes. There is a level of realism that can only be attained by the best, you are drawn into this world and once you are let out you wont be able to get your mind off it. Scorsese has also always been a director who gets amazing performances out of his actors and Silence is no exception.
If there was an acting award that could be given to the cast of a movie as a whole my vote would be for it to go to Silence. Not only is Andrew Garfield putting up the best performance of his career, not only is Adam Driver a strong supporting actor but there were countless Japanese actors in Silence that were absolutely fantastic. Tadanobu Asano as the Japanese interpreter, Yōsuke Kubozuka as Kichijiro and Issey Ogata as Inoue Masashige all play key roles and play the hell out of them. This movie is packed full of emotion from some characters, but others take the events with a level of normalcy that must have been difficult to perform as well.
My biggest complaint with Silence is the length. 2 hours and 41 minutes is ridiculously long, and I know Mr. Scorsese has earned the right to make his movies as long as he wants, but this movie would surely have been a 9 out of 10 if it were about 20 minutes shorter. Other than that Silence is an incredibly made movie, and maybe the best piece of cinema from 2016. The massive length also kind of adds into the mystique of the movie, and while I found my time to move fairly fast I can see others struggling through it. Silence is also not an easy watch because of some of the intense scenes involving torture, but these were both not very graphically violent and very necessary. Would this movie be better if it had been made in 2009 with del Toro, Bernal and Daniel Day-Lewis I do not know. What I do know is that this one is an amazing movie and a must see for any fan of cinema.
Sing (2016)
An Animated Movie for Pop Music Lovers of Any Age!
In my opinion, the trailer for Sing was one of the best of the last year. I was captivated by the music and wondered to myself "why has no one thought of this before?" This is the first movie by Illumination Entertainment so I did not really know what to expect as far as tone and animation style were concerned and the best way I can describe both of these elements of Sing is safe. In a year with some really great animated movies, Sing was going to have to be something a little more than safe to stand out, but they may just have found a way with the music displayed.
Garth Jennings, known for his adaptation of Hitchhiker Guide to the Galaxy and Son of Rambow wrote and directed Sing and as a big fan of both movies I had pretty high expectations for Sing, and some things lived up to me hype and some fell short. Sing has such a big and varied cast because of the nature of the story, it is an ensemble cast, which as first was a little unnatural, but eventually I cam around to the idea. The characters are well displayed and each have a very specific journey that they take while trying to win the 100,000 prize. While I like the multiple characters, I felt that the movie moved really slowly. It took a really long time to get the ball rolling and an even longer time to set up the third act.
The voice acting in Sing is pretty unique in the way that not only do the voice actors have to voice their characters dialogue but also have quite a few musical numbers to pull off. Each character has multiple musical moments, while some more impressive than others, it is still an accomplishment for all of these voice actors. As I said before some of the performances were stronger than others and in my opinion Taron Egerton as the gorilla Johnny is the real stand out. I could not wait to check my phone in the car and see if he really had sung his parts in the movie and to my joy he had. The young man has quite a voice and we may have gotten a sneak preview of a star being born.
The animation style of Sing was fairly basic for the climate of animated movies these days. Kubo and the Two Strings which used stop-motion animation, which is an incredibly difficult style for such a large scale movie, made you marvel at it as much as making you ask "how did they do that?". Moana pushed the line of computer animated graphics and did things with water that blew my mind. There is nothing really like that in Sing, and to be fair those are two tremendous movies to be compared to, but in that category Sing comes up short.
What really got this movie a whole number score higher were the musical performances, particularly toward the end. The music in the movie is outstanding, and while the original song is not necessarily the best one in the movie, there are just so many great songs featured in Sing and almost all of the big performances were home runs. The music was also extremely varied in both genre and time period. I hope it will get kids into the music of Elton John and Frank Sinatra and hopefully get some of the adults to enjoy newer music. Overall Sing is a fun movie that shows a real love for it's main genre, musical, and even though it moves slowly, the themes and characters hold up and make the experience enjoyable.
Underworld: Blood Wars (2016)
Not Great, but Pretty Par for the Course as Far as Underworld Movies are Concerned
I am going to make this a bit of a shorter review than most of my other ones, well because I don't want to spend so much time bashing Underworld:Blood Wars. There are not many good things to say about the movie and a whole lot of bad stuff so I will keep it pretty simple.
The plot of Blood Wars leaves off a bit after the events of the previous movie, which brings up the stunning revelation that this is the 5th! movie in the Underworld franchise. Before seeing this one I had not seen an Underworld movie since Evolution in 2006, and while the series has not fallen all that far, the quality has definitely fallen. While the overall plot of Vampires battling Lycans all in the name of who knows what is still present, but there are some things missing. There is no Viktor, no Lucian no Markus, and the omission of these classic characters leaves something to be desired. Marius is a confusing antagonist who's inclusion into this war is puzzling. He just does not bring that same villainous tone that the previous villains have.
As I said before I have not seen an Underworld movie in a while, but from my recollection this is the worse use of the staple of the series, blood and gore that I have seen. In the first two the bloodiness and ridiculousness of the gore in the movie was a charming piece, in Blood Wars it seems to get in the way. There is no death that even comes close to Selene's flying face splitting front flip from the first movie, and is instead replaced with an abundance of useless violence. All the best things I can say of this movie are about Kate Beckinsale. You would think she has not aged a day since the first underworld came out in 2003 and she just fits the character so well. So that's basically it, Underworld: Blood Wars is pretty bad, but this universe is just so darn interesting that I can watch an hour an a half of bad movie as long as Vampires will fight Lycans and Kate Beckinsale is in it, and Blood Wars has those things so do with that what you will.
Lion (2016)
Don't Miss Out on One of the Best Movies of the Year!
Lion is a movie that flew under my radar for most of 2016. It was not until it started getting some awards season buzz that I really ever started seeing it brought up around the internet and I was honestly a little skeptical. Being that I did not know much about it anyway, I decided to keep myself in the dark a bit other than looking at the short IMDb summary and looking up the director, who happens to be making his feature film debut, I did not know much going in. I was happy to find that Lion is definitely a movie that belongs on year end lists and may just pull off some upsets when the awards are handed out.
Lion tells the story of Saroo Brierley who when the movie starts is a young boy in an incredibly impoverished small town in India. His mother works moving rocks, so they are basically the poorest people in the world. One night Saroo wakes up as his older brother Guddu is leaving to go to work. Saroo begs to be brought with Guddu, but ends up getting lost at a train station, and then accidentally falls asleep on a train that takes him far away from his hometown. The movie takes you through the frightening trip Saroo takes and into his adult years after being adopted by Australian parents. Saroo then tries desperately to track down his family and find his way back to his home.
Director Garth Davis is a rookie to feature films, but he does not show any signs of being a rookie in Lion. Lion is a beautifully filmed movie, and Davis gets some incredible performances from not only child actors, but complete unknowns who do not even speak English. I cannot put into words how proud of these child actors I am. They captured something about childhood that is so far beyond normal acting ability, and this is also a real testament to Davis as well. The movie moves really well and comes up just short of 2 hours which is always appreciated. Lion is not an easy first movie to tackle, but Garth Davis has put up one of the most impressive efforts of the year.
The rest of the performances are really good as well. Dev Patel has already proved himself to be a great actor and he brings his A game in Lion. Adopting a convincing Australian accent and the fact that he is really only in about half of the movie would make a lot of lesser actors turn the role down. He owned this role and while he probably will get passed up for awards this is a great addition to the filmography. Most of the rest of the characters are in decidedly supporting roles, but Nicole Kidman and Rooney Mara both come pretty strong while not trying to take the movie over.
Lion is also one of the better written movies of the year, while there are some times in the middle to latter points of the movie that lag, it is still a compelling journey and stands as the only movie of 2016 that got be to cry pretty openly, and more than once. Most of the movie is a bummer to be honest, but the good moments make up for that and those depressing moments make the happy ones that much better. I highly recommend Lion to any true movie fan. It is a fantastically made movie with heart and drama in it, but also some really great moments of boyhood that are genuine in any language. I don't see Lion stealing many awards away from Manchester by the Sea or Moonlight, but it certainly deserves to be in the race, and if it did snag some awards I would not make much of an argument.
Why Him? (2016)
Not as Bad as I Expected, But Also Nothing Special
The trailer for a movie can really get the viewer excited for a movie, or it can completely turn the viewer off. Why Him? unfortunate does not just have a trailer that falls into the later category, but is one of the worst trailers I can remember seeing. Not only did I not want to see the movie after seeing countless commercials for it, I actively wanted to hate it, if not just for that rock throwing gag that feels like the first thing cut out of Meet The Parents. Why Him? is not a comedic classic by any stretch, but the trailer really does a bad job of really conveying what the movie is really about, but honestly I don't even really think the movie knows what it wants to be.
Why Him? starts off pretty well. Young collage student falls for an eccentric tech billionaire, who through the course of the movie makes some questionable choices regarding his actions around her family over a holiday weekend. The trailer would have you thinking you were in for a grand competition between James Franco and Bryan Cranston, but the movie makes efforts to prove that is not what is going on here. As the movie goes on it become more and more difficult to ignore what feels like a last minute addition of a Christmas setting by the studio to draw some of the holiday crowd, or the incredibly over the top use of dirty language. That is one of the worst advents in comedy movies over the last 25 or so years. Constant use of bad words do not make movies funnier and kids cursing does not count as good comedy.
Why Him also suffers from the problem of not knowing what it is exactly about. About halfway through the movie, almost every character has proved them to be self centered or downright dis likable in some way shape or form, and they run into the problem where none of the easily predictable outcomes is really a good ending for the characters. This turns the ending into a mess where none of the emotional beats are even close to being well executed or satisfying.
Other than the two lead roles, none of the characters get much to do. They seem to be missing for whole chunks of the movie and then brought back to help make a bad gag work and then we head back to the two leads. James Franco is actually pretty good here for about as much as he could do. His character is unlikable when he needs to be and can steal your heart in the next scene. To be fair this is basically the same role Franco has been doing for the last 3 years, but if it ain't broke don't fix it. Bryan Cranston is a funny dude, his role as Dr. Tim Whatley on Seinfeld is a beautifully subtle comedy role and then he really knocked it out of the park as the Dad in Malcolm in the Middle. He does not get to use any of the real comedic talent he has accrued in his career, rather being stuck to being the incredibly straight guy who for some reason has a "crotch chop" as his signature bowling move.
Why Him? was not as bad as I expected, and while I understand that this is not the best way to talk a movie up, but really it's not that bad. I can't in good conscious recommend it, but I am sure there are people out there who like it and I can understand why. There is actually a decent foundation for an interesting comedy movie here, and I don't know what exactly happened along the way but Why Him? stinks of studio tampering and cuts. Not to mention the movie is way too long, at 1 hour and 51 minutes you are probably better off just leaving 20 minutes early and making up an incredibly generic movie ending, because trust me it will probably be better than what was actually filmed.
I Am Not a Serial Killer (2016)
The Festival Darling Hits Netflix!
It's 2017, and even though I Am Not a Serial Killer was released way back in march of last year, it has recently been added to Netflix thus giving the movie it's most widespread accessibility. I Am Not a Serial Killer has been on my radar since that South By Southwest Film Festival screening and I have only heard good things so when I saw it was headed to Netflix I was quite excited. It has been a while since I have seen a real solid horror movie, actually probably since I saw It Follows in 2015. While it's not really fair to compare the two movies, they do have some similarities.
The basics of I Am Not a Serial Killer are pretty basic. The appropriately named John Wayne Cleaver is our main character, a teenager who has some issues that most normal heroes don't have, he is a diagnosed sociopath. John struggles with the idea that he will become a serial killer, so he comes up with a set of rules to control himself when he starts to think about indulging his impulses. He is good at controlling himself with the help of his therapist, and oddly enough working in the mortuary that his mother owns and operates. The small nondescript mid-western town that John lives in has been plagued by some rather grizzly murders and John feels that he can figure out who has been committing these crimes, either from a connection to the killer or possibly something deeper.
I Am Not a Serial Killer is a slow moving affair. This is not necessarily a bad thing, the movie takes it's time setting up relationships between characters and giving some solid character development that is usually glossed over or explained away with boring exposition. The movie lets the actors show and not tell, which even though it is one of the biggest rules in film making is often forgotten by horror movies. Max Records who plays John Wayne Cleaver does a great job of getting his character into the gray area that seems so difficult to achieve. John is not only a flawed person because of his sociopath, but he is also a kid, he does not always make the right choice or he may not always be quick with a line. He feels like a real high school student, with a bit of a twist.
The pacing of the movie is not the only thing that lends a hand to separate the tone from most other serial killer movies. I Am Not a Serial Killer makes efforts to not be a cookie cutter low budget horror movie, because it's really not. It blends genres quite well I think but also relies on its story and tone to drive the emotion, rather than well timed musical cues and immense gore. There are no jump scares here, which I can appreciate. Jump scares to me are like hot sauce, when used sparingly the effect is much more enjoyable, but when overused the whole thing is ruined. Don't necessarily expect to be given nightmares by I Am Not a Serial Killer, it may just keep you up at night with some self reflection.
While I Am Not a Serial Killer does not stand up to The Babadook or It Follows, it is certainly a good movie and like those other two (which I believe are the two best horror movies I have seen in the last few years) it avoids being a clone of all the mass produced horror movies that make 200x their budget because every guy hopes this will finally be the scary movie that will make that girl he likes jump into his arms for protection. If you come into it looking for more of a good movie rather than a scary or bone chilling one you should be good. Enjoy the creepiness of the atmosphere and the well told story, and the girl you are trying to impress with how tough you are during scary movies may just appreciate your taste in movies a bit more.
Moana (2016)
Disney Rarely Misses when it Comes to Animaton, Moana is no Exception
2016 while being a pretty screwed up year in a few different ways has been a solid year for animated movies. Zootopia and The Secret Life of Pets both did well and Kubo and the Two Strings is one of my favorite movies of the year. So where does Moana fit into this? I tried really hard not to compare Moana to the other terrific animated movies this year, which was really difficult to do, luckily Moana can stand up with those other movies, and in some cases exceeds them.
I want to begin with reviewing the music, and while I believe music is the most subjective piece of art there is, there is no doubting that the music in Moana is fantastic. It has been a while since a Disney musical has gotten songs, that's plural, songs that got stuck in my head. The trio of Lin-Manuel Miranda, Mark Mancina and Opetaia Foa'i absolutely kill on the soundtrack with songs that really help to bolster the events taking place in the movie. If I were to pick the best part of Moana it would be the soundtrack.....or Moana is one of, if not the most impressive looking Disney movie to date. The lush setting of tropical islands really lets the animators do some incredible things, like waterfalls and trees with large green leaves. The water in Moana plays a huge role and man does it look good. There were moments where I was not sure if they had animated it or had combined the animation with real shots of the beach. The character animation is great as well, Moana herself being the best of the bunch. While I lean towards liking the animation in Kubo and the Two String a bit better there is no denying that Moana is the best looking animated movie of the year.
Moanas' plot is pretty straight forward, Moana is the heir to the throne of the island that her family lives on, and even though her father believes it is best for his people to stay in the safety of their reef, Moana is drawn to adventure out into the ocean. There is also a bit of a conservation message in there too, but talking about that too much will be a bit of a spoiler. While both good themes for a children's movie, I feel that by the end of the movie, they had sort of put those to the side and falls off the moral rails a bit. While not plot shattering, I think it is important for these movies to complete their theme and give kids something to learn about when all is said and done.
When I looked up the voice cast after the movie I was shocked to see that there were only 12 credited voice actors in the whole movie. Dwayne Johnson is great at so many things, and he is not a bad voice actor, he is actually a good one, but the performance of Auli'i Cravalho, both in singing and line reading is the performance that stands out in Moana. This young girl has a real talent and certainly a career ahead of her, and again to say that she out performs the Rock is no small feat.
Moana is really great. There is almost no better way to say it. It's enjoyable and just the right length for a good animated movie. Sure there are some corny jokes in there and some decent sized plot holes but overall you really can't beat 2 hours of great animation and even better songs. Weather you have kids or are a big fan of animated movies, I am sure Moana will not disappoint. Worst case it may be nice to sit in a movie theater, or on the couch while it is -17 degrees outside and look at a beautifully drawn tropical paradise for a couple of hours this holiday season.
Rogue One (2016)
The Most "Rogue" of all Star Wars Movies For Sure
Rogue One is the first stand alone movie to be released in the Star Wars franchise, and with that comes some new expectations for the series and more specifically for this movie. With the exception of maybe episode 1 and episode 7 the viewer has had a pretty good idea of what they were going to get from each individual Star Wars movie, we would continue the story from the previous movie and unravel more of the saga. Rogue One tells a very specific story that happens to take place somewhere in between episode 3 and episode 4, but this is not episode 3.5, it is more fleshing out possibly the most beloved universe in movie history, and for the most part it is a success.
One of the really difficult things about how to tell the story of Rogue One is that it does not really have the massive amounts of fan service to draw from. It takes place in a bit of a dark period in the galaxy, not just because it is a war torn galaxy but because we don't know much about the events during this time. There are a few things here and there that are to service the fans, but for the most part this movie introduces us to some new people and places that we have not seen previously, and I think the movie is better for it. It is nice to see what people without the last name of Skywalker are doing, and maybe creating some new characters to inhabit the galaxy.
Rogue One also has the difficult job of being the makeshift bridge between the prequels and the original trilogy, and as stated before they do a great job of not trying to explain everything that happened in that time and instead giving this movie a more focused vision. From the start you can tell that while this movie is about the Star Wars universe, it is definitely has it's own feel. Rogue One is more a war movie than any of the other Star Wars movies. This means a darker tone and a less fun time at the movies. This is not necessarily a bad thing, it helps to separate this movie from the main series but will certainly make it a less enjoyable affair.
While not as well casted as episode 7(few movies are) Rogue One introduces some new characters to us and while I won't go nuts about the acting chops in a Star Wars movie, Felicity Jones holds her own as a bonafide star in Rogue One, even though her character has some likability flaws at the beginning. Another thing that would be silly to judge harshly in a Star Wars movie is the writing. The overall plot has some holes that are covered up in some of the laziest ways I can possibly imagine, and the dialogue is mostly forgettable, but the overall scope of the plot is great, and will satisfy almost every fan of the first 7 movies.
Star Wars has been up at the top of my favorite movie franchises since I was a tot, and just the fact that I get to see a new movie with Darth Vader and storm troopers in it makes me very happy, but Rogue One is not a perfect movie by any stretch. The main thing that I think was missing from episode 7 and hopefully will play a bigger part in the coming movie was space battles. In a movie titled Rogue One there better be some high level fighter pilot battles, and while there is a decent battle at the end, I still felt shorted a bit. This is kind of the overall feel of Rogue One, yes its a good Star Wars movie and yes Vader is in it, but the twist at the end of the punch is missing. All in all I am pretty happy that we are getting solid Star Wars movies almost yearly now, and to be honest I saw keep them coming.
Loving (2016)
Strong Performances Hold Up this Oscar Hopefull
Earlier in the year, before the likes of Swiss Army Man and Moonlight had come out, I had Jeff Nichols's Midnight Special as my top movie of the year(so far). Mr Nichols has chosen his projects very carefully and taken his time to make each one, so when I saw that he had another movie coming out in 2016 I was surprised, and then even more surprised when I learned that it would tell the story of the landmark supreme court case Loving V. Virginia I almost fell off my seat. Not that it does not seem like something that Nichols would do but it does stand out a bit from his other movies. Is Jeff Nichols ready to become a household name? Does the story live up to the Oscar hype? Read on to find out.
The movie is shot beautifully, as is every other Jeff Nichols movie. He is one of the last firm holdouts to still shoot on film not named Paul Thomas Anderson or Quentin Tarantino. The countryside of Virginia has never looked better to me, even surrounded by the extreme bigotry that was going on. Nichols puts some of his strongest scenes right in front of some amazing views and even if the story is kind of bogged down, at least the view is nice.
The performances from both lead actors here are tremendous. Ruth Negga has a sadness of understanding in her eyes through the whole movie. She knows what is happening to her is wrong but also knows that she can't do much to change it. Even when she starts getting help she almost pushes it away because unfortunately she understands the world she is living in. Joel Edgerton is quickly becoming not just one of my favorite actors working today but he is becoming my most respected. This guy just has something watchable about him, and no matter what role he inhabits he always comes strong. After is starring/directing role in last years not too well known "the gift" I started taking notice of Edgerton and he has not disappointed me since. He breathes life into Richard Loving in an almost against type role for Edgerton, but at this point this guy can do anything so I don't know if he even has a type anymore.
Jeff Nichols has written all of the scripts of movies he has worked on. I can appreciate his writing without falling in love with it and Loving is probably his most dull script. His movies have a simplicity to them, that can get a bit more complex depending on the movie, but usually he keeps things fairly easy to understand and follow. Loving just has nowhere to go, its not a poorly written movie, but there is nothing exciting here. This leads into my issue with the movie, which is that it is pretty boring.
Going in I did not know much about the events of the movie, and more horrifyingly how recently they occurred. I did not want the movie to paint with a wide brush or to show any group/race of people as being any better than any other, I think its kind of the point of the whole thing, But unfortunately this movie could have used some extra conflict. The story of the Lovings is an incredible one, again maybe mostly because the world they lived in is only about 40-50 years ago, not 100 like I thought, but it is not exciting enough for a feature length movie. Not much happens other than a few moments of extreme prejudiced and some infuriating court rulings.
I don't want to be misunderstood, what the Lovings did is truly incredible and a story of love and acceptance that we could all use right now, but movies, while a platform to tell these types of stories, have to be entertaining and no amount of pacing can change that about Loving. The direction in this movie is some of the best Jeff Nichols has ever done and you could say that both leads give the performances of their careers until this point, but two hours is two hours. I appreciate Nichols for not fabricating things to make the movie more exciting because this is an important piece of history and punching it up would absolutely tarnish the original goal of the Lovings. When Loving comes to your town in the wake of awards season which I'm sure it will be nominated in a few categories, give it a shot, but don't say I did not warn you.
Nocturnal Animals (2016)
A Solid Thriller Disguised as a Romance
Leading up to the release of Tom Ford's Nocturnal Animals I did not go out of my way to find out much about it. Not because I know Ford has a habit of surprising the viewer and not even because I myself wanted to be surprised. We live in the age of psychological thrillers and this one just sort of slipped under my radar, and once I started hearing about it more I just figured I would try to stay away from it as best as I can. I don't know if this is necessarily the best way to see Nocturnal Animals, but it was my experience and I will give you my impressions based on that.
There is an interesting story telling mechanic used in Nocturnal Animals that really got me excited, and this is not a spoiler alert because it is part of the basic premise of the movie. The opening scenes and some of the later ones take place in real life, showing Amy Addams as a somewhat unsatisfied artist in what seems to be a loveless marriage. The bulk of the movie depicts Amy Addams' character reading a book that has been sent to her by her ex-husband. The rest are memories of her life with her former husband and how they got into the position they are in now. All three different plots are well paced and each seem to reveal new information and answer questions from the other time lines, while asking some new ones.
These types of movies have to set themselves apart, and this is a fantastic way for Nocturnal Animals to handle this. The real good plot stuff happens in the fictional book entitled "Nocturnal Animals", but the things that happen in the book seem to flesh out the characters in real life extremely well. In a genre that is constantly trying to confuse you, this is an appreciated way of keeping the story interesting without trying to twist my brain.
The cast is tremendous, although some of the actors have better performances in this year alone. Amy Addams is one of the most consistent female actors in recent memory, and even though this did not feel like her strongest work, her bad days are better than most actors best days. Jake Gyllenhaal turns in a great performance and even though it will probably not even land him an Oscar nomination, it just helps to fill out an already growing and impressive filmography. Michael Shannon is one of my favorite actors working today and he is perfect for this role. I don't want to give much away but Mr. Shannon continues to shine and also builds on an impressive year.
When all is said and done Nocturnal Animals is an entertaining movie that will cut a lot of viewers deep. Even though the writing is not amazing and the overall stakes of the movie are really just about two people, it is a well told story and has moments that will be tough to forget. Again in a sub genre that is pretty over saturated right now it can be difficult to stand out, Nocturnal Animals does a fine job of setting itself apart. Weather you relate to the characters in a personal way or if you had parents that went through separations this movie will find it's way into that dark part of your mind and stay there for the next few days.
Office Christmas Party (2016)
Will Get Played in the Background for Years to Come!
Holiday movies can have one of two lifespans, they can be added to the pantheon of movies we watch every year during said holiday, or they can be forgotten other than being used as the punchline of a joke about bad holiday movies. After that long run on sentence making a point about there being only 2 types of holiday movies, I have to say that Office Christmas Party may fall into a gray area. If you are looking for a Christmas movie classic, you will not find it here. If you are looking for a semi entertaining movie that has a bit of Christmas flavor without all of the normal season of giving bullshit shoved in your face constantly, then you may be in luck.
Lets start off with the massive cast. This movie is a cornucopia of current comedy acting talent and this is in my opinion where the movie is most impressive. With there being so many characters both large roles and smaller ones, every one makes their mark on the movie. Jason Bateman, Olivia Munn and TJ Miller are probably the leads of the movie, with TJ Miller taking on the real heavy comedy lifting in that trio, but Kate Mckinnon, Jennifer Aniston, Randall Park, Jillian Bell, Vanessa Bayer, Rob Corddry, Sam Richardson and Karan Soni all have varying screen time but all manage to stand out.
The Writing of the movie is not the best. It is somewhere between the writing of Bad Santa and Bad Santa 2. There are a decent amount of jokes in here, but the quality of jokes is where it struggles. There are lots of giggles with a few insane moments and physical gags that seem to creep their way into every comedy movie since Jackass. I really do believe that the reason so many of the jokes even came close to landing was because of the talent on screen. As I said before the comedic talent in the cast is immense and they know how to make things funny.
Is Office Christmas Party a good movie? No not really. Is Office Christmas Party a bad movie? No not really. I gave it a six because I believe 6 to be the lowest score I will give a movie and still recommend it to people. I understand why it is getting bad reviews but to be honest I'm not sure it deserves them.I saw Bad Santa 2 last month which was absolutely worse than this movie subjectively and is getting similar scores. I got at least some enjoyment from Office Christmas Party, and I know not everyone will feel the same but It is at least watchable. If you are looking for a laugh this holiday season this may be your best bet at the theater right now. Worst case you look at some pretty attractive people for about two hours and sometimes laugh at what they say.
Manchester by the Sea (2016)
A Light at the End of the 2016 Tunnel
Manchester by the Sea, since its famous showing at Sundance in January of this year has been a front runner on most year end awards lists by people who saw it, and by more than a few who had not. It can be difficult for a movie to keep a buzz around it for almost a year, especially when it does not have aliens or batmen. Somehow Manchester by the Sea has been able to keep the good word of mouth going and now has finally gotten a wide release. Was the wait worth it? Does Casey Affleck truly step out from his brothers shadow? Will Manchester by the Sea save 2016? Lets find out.
Lets start off with what everybody wants to know. How good is Casey Affleck? I have been impressed with the younger Affleck brother since his monster 2007 when he starred in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford and Gone Baby Gone(Directed by his brother)and then went back and realized that every time he was on screen he was good including his role in the Ocean's Eleven franchise and Good Will Hunting. Is this Casey Affleck's best role? yes. Is it his breakout role? yes. Is it his best performance? probably. He plays a tough character in Lee Chandler who to call a "broken man" would not do him justice. Affleck plays it perfectly and while not a mind blowing performance like something from Daniel Day-Lewis, it is without a doubt the strongest performance from a lead actor I have seen this year.
For what it is, Manchester by the Sea is a white bummer movie. With that being said it is a really good one, and while not necessarily a blast it is a really well made movie. There are actually some really well placed funny moments throughout the movie, but for the most part Manchester by the Sea is a movie about loss. Without giving too much away I will say that the movie takes on this difficult subject head on and tackles it. It is about all different types of loss, losing a loved one or losing a life you once had or just losing yourself. People react differently to everything, and it is no different with loss and Manchester by the Sea shows this brilliantly.
The writer/director Kenneth Lonergan has been around for over twenty years in some form or another. He has written tons of stuff from Analyze This to The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle(2000), he even wrote an episode of the children's show Doug. It is Lonnergan's history with the stage that really makes its mark on Manchester by the Sea more than anything else in his filmography. While there are some pacing issues and the movie is just about 17 minutes too long, Manchester by the Sea is a tremendously told story, both in the script and visually. Long bits of dialogue have real meaning and there is real character development here, not movie character development where everyone is changed drastically at the end, but they do learn and you can realistically see how these characters will live on after the movie.
Manchester by the Sea is certainly one of the best movies of the year. I did not really get a chance before to mention the other actors in the movie but all the lead performances were great. Michelle Williams and Kyle Chandler both are strong supporting characters given their limited time on screen. I had a problem with the way that flashbacks were used at times in the movie but that is something I can forgive. If these types of movies interest you then Manchester by the Sea is necessary viewing. Get ready to do some self refection and enjoy a really well made movie.
Allied (2016)
Big Stars Can't Save This Big Disappointment
On paper, Allied should be a great movie. You have a bona fide movie star in Brad Pitt as the leading man and a bona fide movie star in Marion Cotillard as the leading lady. Robert Zemeckis is directing and the setting is one of the most interesting times in human history, WWII. Both play secret agents tasked with taking out a Nazi ambassador in one of the most beautiful cities in the world, Casablanca. Somehow this movie that has so many good things going for it finds ways to disappoint despite having a solid first half. This review is going to have a lot to do with the overall intention of a movie and how it relates to the scores I give out.
To begin the first half of the movie is not too bad. It shows how the main characters meet and react to each other with the difficult task ahead of them. There was some interesting tension and cinematic moments that can be appreciated. It was paced really well even with quite a few dialogue sections with some exposition but those moments were juxtaposed with some moments with real tension. For some reason the second half of the movie did not follow suit. I'm not sure if the overall plot got in the way or the studio got in the way but the third act was full of holes and felt on rails.
Robert Zemeckis has directed some of the biggest movies of his time, Back to the Future and Forrest Gump to name a few, but I think his age has caught up to him. Allied feels slow and unexciting, even in the high points of the action there seems to be a quick build up with an unexciting pay off. It is not a great looking movie, with some locations either being green screen or just terribly lit. The editing is also not helping but there is really nothing brought by the director that gets the viewer excited.
The performances of Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard are a bit all over the place if only because after that first half they don't spend much time on screen together. Both performances are fine but some of the reactions don't make perfect sense in the context of the story. Really all of the acting is fairly solid and if there is one thing about this movie that is a positive the acting is it.
Overall the writing is not terribly great. There are some high moments that like I have mentioned before mostly take place in the first half of the movie. There seem to be entire scenes that are useless and characters seem to constantly be doing things that left me shaking my head. The idea is a great one, two WWII spys who fall in love, who may be taking deep secrets into their post mission affairs is one I can get behind. What ends up playing out in the movie is in some cases infuriating. disappointment.
Allied, based on the people involved was supposed to be a huge hit and a possible Oscar contender. The movie comes nothing close to that and does not even fall into the "decent" spy thriller genre. Nothing about the characters brings much to be desired and other than the actors playing them are pretty forgettable. I wanted the movie to end up surprising me close to the end with something that would change my opinion of the movie at least a little bit but that moment never came. I don't think the ending of a movie should necessarily define how good a movie is but by the end of Allied I was begging for something off the all to make it all worth it. With quite a few movies being released this holiday season I would recommend you spend your time on something better.
Moonlight (2016)
The Movie to Beat in 2016
I saw Moonlight about a week ago, but because of the holidays and a buys schedule I was not able to get to this review until today. In those 5 days since I saw this movie I have thought about it every day and I think I like it more than I did when I first saw it. I don't want to get into the plot too much in this review for fear of spoiling anything for you guys so this will mostly just be me telling you about how great this movie is.
Lets start with the director, Barry Jenkins. I had never heard of Mr. Jenkins before Moonlight and I don't think I am the only one in that boat. He only has one other feature film in his directorial library, but after seeing Moonlight you would think he has been an industry regular for the last 15 years. Jenkins gives a legitimacy to the setting of this story, which I cannot say I see too often in these types of movies. The slums of Miami may be downtrodden but Jenkins is also able to show the beauty around the madness.
The movie is based off an unproduced play by Tarell Alvin McCraney called "In Moonlight Black Boys Look Blue" but Barry Jenkins is responsible for the script of the movie and what a script it is. The basic outline is the movie takes place at three different time periods in a young boys life, and each of them are both drastically different, but somehow many things stay the same. I will get to the actors in a moment but Jenkins gets so much emotion out of this script, and it is not sappy or searching for tears, it is just real life emotion, pain, happiness, regret, anxiety and more, Moonlight does not shy away from emotions, it uses them.
The interesting thing about Moonlight is that the main character is played by 3 different actors over the course of the movie. In part one, entitled "Little" Alex Hibbert plays the lead. A strong performance from a child actor that rivals some of the best child actor performances I have ever seen. Ashton Sanders takes over the reins and is in charge of the "Chiron" portion of the story and this one I feel I can relate to the most. Sanders plays the quiet troubled portion of Chiron's tale beautifully. Then Trevante Rhodes closes it out in the "Black" portion of the story. This may be the most effecting performance in the movie, just because of the complete transformation for the child in the beginning of the movie to the grown man we see at the end. People have asked me which performance was the best of the three, and honestly I can't pick one. They are all affecting in their own way and would not be as strong if you removed any one of them.
I can't say any movie has gotten to me as much as Moonlight has this year. There are just so many great things here, The writing the directing the acting the classical music that adds to make this story more than just a "hood drama". In my opinion Chiron is the most well made character in a movie since Riggan Thomson in Birdman from a few years ago. By the end of the movie I felt something for Chiron, I can't tell exactly what it was, it is more than pity or compassion but something deeper. There is a reality in his eyes by the end that has been earned by the previous 90 minutes. I have seen quite a few movies this year but in my humble opinion Moonlight is the strongest of 2016 so far. It should be a prominent player come awards season and it would be deserving of everything it gets. Get ahead of everyone and see Moonlight now, you wont be disappointed.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)
More of the Same, but Different.
It has been five years since the release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows part 2 and if I am being honest I did not really like the last 3-4 Harry Potter movies, despite being a huge fan of the books and earlier movies. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is the first spin off movie in the Harry Potter universe and with that comes some pretty big expectations. The fan base is anxiously awaiting more stories from the magical mind of J.K. Rowling and with her taking sole writing credit on this movie, we really get a good look at what this world will look like in future movies.
Lets start with the plot. Any true Potter fan knows that in the original series "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" is what the students at Hogwarts use to study magical creatures. With this in mind I expected to learn about the writing of the book and traveling across the globe finding...well fantastic beasts. The movie takes another direction and chronicles Newt Scamander's trip to New York and while there he gets wrapped up in a sort of magical mystery he must help solve. While not what I expected I am not necessarily disappointed with the plot, but in a movie titled "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" I expected a bit more about the creatures that we eventually got.
The cast of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is deep and extremely solid. Led by Eddie Redmayne, who seems to be playing a character with very much the same demeanor as his own really plays the star well and provides a great hero. Katherine Waterston takes what I believe is her first big step into the public eye. She is great here and I think is poised for big things. Colin Farrel is serviceable in his mysterious role, but I wish he could have used his real accent. Rounded out by Dan Fogler, Samantha Morton and John Voight the world gets filled out with some strong characters from both the magical world and the real world.
One of my biggest concerns coming into this movie was the tone and the relationship to the series that came before it. It is a hard line to play, you don't want this movie to be too much like its predecessor, but you still want people to feel that they exist in the same world. Fantastic Beasts gives you a little bit of both of these options. It is certainly its own movie, and other than maybe having a better understanding of the world and getting a few extra Easter eggs, does not require viewing the previous series. That being said I wish there were a few more hints to flesh out the world. It would not make sense to mention Harry or really almost anyone involved in his story because Fantastic Beasts takes place 70 years prior to those events but I felt it would have been nice to see a few more friendly sights.
Fantastic Beasts had to be more of the same, but different. As I have said before this is a difficult task, but I believe this movie has for the most part succeeded. Much like last years Star Wars The Force Awakens, I was not really blown away by the variety of new creatures. They were there and I will give credit to both movies for tacking such a difficult task but both failed to create the same wonder as their predecessors. That does not mean that these were not good movies. Both I think are solid continuations of beloved franchises and both give me a good feeling about the future to come. I would say most Potter fans will enjoy this movie, and it brings enough new things to the table to keep the series from feeling stale. I am excited to see where this magical series takes us next.
Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk (2016)
An Oscar Hopefull is really a high priced Lifetime Movie.
I don't think I have ever been as torn about a bad movie as I am with Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk. We have an incredibly accomplished director in Ang Lee who has found these stories in Brokeback Mountain and Life of Pi and given them exactly what they needed and brought them to life. I expected something similar in this movie but I can't say that Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Life even comes close to those movies. There are strong moments and a few subtle things that I really enjoyed but they seem to be surrounded by things I disliked.
The story is about the Bravo Company squad who fought in Iraqi war and after a severe firefight return to America for a press tour. The tour does not stop there though, they are scheduled to return to Iraq after the game and some in the Company are handling the aftermath better than other. The viewer follows Billy Lynn, one of the soldiers in the company and his specific view of the post war experience. The narrative is split into three different time periods. First is the day leading up to the company participating in the halftime show of the Thanksgiving Day football game halftime show. The second is Billy going home to be with his family in the days leading up to the game and the final period are the events that took place in Iraq that led to the current events.
Overall the performances are fairly underwhelming. There is something being said for casting the roles of the military members should be left to relative unknowns to make them feel grounded and add to the reality of the characters, but they fall short for the most part. I would say Kristen Stewart would be the most surprisingly strong performance but Arturo Castro who plays one of Billy Lynns Company mates "Mango" Montoya was the high point as far as I am concerned. I had never seen him before this and he brought a truth to the movie that I believe it was desperately searching for. As mentioned before Kristen Stewart is probably the best performance here and it is too bad because she does not get much time on screen.
I think that the best thing this movie did was handle the PTSD as the real horror of war and not trying to glorify the combat. As I start to get further away from that idea the rest of the movie seems almost like a low budget movie. The parts in Iraq feel incredibly low budget, and when it came to the actual military scenes they felt quite unreal. Some scenes move far too quickly while others seem to last forever, and while it is only an hour and 50 minutes it feels much longer than that.
There are moments in here that I really enjoyed but overall I don't think its enough to bring my overall opinion of this movie up past a 5 out of 10. There were little things that the soldiers did at the football game that I can see real soldiers doing, but then it seems like moments later we are brought right out of that moment to some thing that you know would never happen. Really the whole movie feels like it is two thirds finished. It was a good attempt and a decent story but really Billy Lynn should have just stayed home for Thanksgiving.
Arrival (2016)
A Must See in 2016
Based on the short story "Story of Your Life" by Ted Chiang, Arrival is an interesting view on the common sci-fi trope of alien life forms landing on planet Earth. It tells the story of Louise Banks(Amy Adams, A linguist who is entrusted with the task of trying to communicate with the visitors, at least the ones located in the United States. Along with theoretical physicist Ian Donnelly(Jeremy Renner) Banks must find a way to decode a language vastly different from ours, and figure out why these "Shells" have come here.
Lets start with the cast. While a bit top heavy those at the top are all such good actors you don't have to worry about the rest. Amy Adams is a true blue leading lady. She commands this role perfectly and turns in one of her most impressive performances. Full ranges of emotions and a real truth in her eyes that truly draw you into her character. Jeremy Renner has become one of the most reliable second leads in the business. His character is strong and opinionated, but really plays off Adams performance well and boosts this movie up. Forrest Whittaker plays Colonel Weber, the head of the team involved with the U.S. branch of the Arrival. While almost playing the spiritual villain in the beginning, he really is just a guy who has orders to fill and Mr. Whittaker is able to both keep you on his side, but also not fully trust him.
The writing of Arrival has ups and downs but really it is mostly ups. The plot is fantastic with several moments I did not expect at all. The way that the heavy science portions are explained helps just enough for you to understand why the characters are doing what they are doing, but not spending a large portion of the movie giving complicated linguistics lesson. The way the world reacts and then deals with the arrival is more realistic than I have ever seen before. It felt as if this could happen tomorrow and Arrival would become almost like a documentary. My only problem with the writing is that at times it could be contrived. Some of the dialogue was not perfect but really overall I can let it slide.
All of these things together make a great movie, but in my opinion it is the director Denis Villeneuve who makes all of these parts into one brilliant movie. His previous two movies Prisoners and Sicario were quite a bit darker, and honestly when I saw Arrival was rated PG13 I got a little scared but this guy continues to show he is one of the most talented Directors out there. The tone he sets with Arrival is so strong and pulls you into this world. The pacing of the movie is great and every scene has something to provide. I can say with full confidence that without Villeneuve this movie would have been a whole lot worse, even with everything it has going for it.
Arrival can be slow at times but it is really in the humanity of this movie that gets you sucked into it. The extraterrestrials add some wonder and fear into Arrival but the way we respond to them and the importance of some of the things we as humans have forgotten. I don't think it is any coincidence that Arrival was released the same week that we had a historic election, and above all the politics and who won or lost Arrival has a statement to make about the way we treat each other. I don't want to give too much away but I implore people who are feeling a strong emotion this week on either side of the ticket to see Arrival. I think humanity is about more than all of these petty disagreements and I believe Arrival properly portrays this sentiment.
Hacksaw Ridge (2016)
Hacksaw Ridge Falls Short of Expectations
I want to start by being honest, I don't really like most war movies and especially the ones that have come out in recent years. Too often do war movies glorify the subject and I think that betrays what war movies inherently should be. War is bad, it is probably one of if not the most difficult things a human can go through and to see it made into something to sell movie tickets aggravates me. Hacksaw Ridge does not necessarily have this problem but it sure is chock full of other problems.
Hacksaw Ridge tells the story of Desmond Doss played by Andrew Garfield, who despite being a conscientious objector becomes an American combat medic in WWII. Doss believes that the Sixth Commandment(Thou shalt not kill) should be observed at all times, but feels that he cannot sit home while his fellow countrymen fight for his country. Doss, no matter the quality of the movie based on him is a true American hero through and through. He is a fantastic display of courage in the face of hell and again no opinion of any movie can change that.
Hacksaw Ridge is probably most popularly known for its director Mel Gibson. It marks his return to directing after a 10 year absence. I don't want so say the poor direction of the movie is because of his long lay off but I know Mel can do better than this. The movie moves slowly and most of the first half of the movie is incredibly cornball. I could count maybe 2 impressive camera shots in this movie but for the overwhelming majority of the movie it is lackluster. The movie obviously has a strong religious message but Mr. Gibson feels the need to shove it in your face every chance he gets.
While the cast is pretty good, there are some serious miscasts here and some performances that just don't make sense. Andrew Garfield is solid in the lead role but that is about as good as it gets for the acting. Hugo Weaving as the father chews scenery and seems to have been missing for a few weeks. To be fair its not all his fault, his character is so poorly handled in the movie, he is shown to be a man going through some serious PTSD but fuels his sons anger. He seems to be a good father until they don't want him to be. Vince Vaughn is severely miscast. I really don't think this movie about such a serious subject needed a comedic actor in it, but then to turn in basically a full on comedic performance is puzzling.
There are so many more things that make this movie almost unwatchable, but at least the combat scenes make up for them somewhat. The tactics used by the soldiers in the movie don't seem exactly authentic but none the less if there was any enjoyment that I got from Hacksaw Ridge it was from them, not because of the bloodshed, but because they seemed to be the only well paced part of the movie. Gibson plays a fine line between blood lust and trying to show the horror or war and I think he falls more on the side of the latter. Even with that I cannot recommend this movie. If you enjoy WWII history or even just American military history you may get some things out of it all in all Hacksaw Ridge falls short of its lofty expectations.
Doctor Strange (2016)
Visually Refreshing, Fundamentally Stale
After the success of Guardians of the Galaxy in 2014, Marvel Studios started looking at all of those comic book characters previously thought to be too niche to be made into movies through a different lens. Now not just the Iron Men and Batmans get their own movies but also the little guys as well. This means we are bound to get come good copy cat movies and some bad ones. I am here to tell you where Doctor Strange falls on this spectrum.
Benedict Cumberbatch at first seemed like a strange(no pun intended) choice to me when it was first announced. Not that Ben would not be able to handle the role but he seems to me like the kind of guy who would feel above such roles. Cumberbatch brings a sort of legitimacy to the table that other than Robert Downey Jr. I don't think we have seen in a Marvel movie. This guy brings it and never feels out of place. He is funny and charming which seems like a must for a Marvel movie at this point but Cumberbatch elevates the playing field here. The rest of the cast is also filled out with studs such as Chiwetel Ejiofor, Mads Mikkelsen, Tilda Swinton and Rachel McAdams. I can't say a bad thing about one of them and this movie is no different. I can appreciate the diversity of the cast, even though Tilda Swintons' character may be a bit white washed.
As shown in trailers and other countless promotional material, director Scott Derrickson uses some pretty impressive visual effects to morph the world of the movie. I originally thought this would become intrusive and headache inducing but it is used well. It seemed that just before I would start getting dizzy the world would snap back to normal. I can also appreciate that even when the world is spinning and the background turns into something out of a Spirograph, that all the action is clearly visible. So many action scenes are ruined by shaking the camera all over the place and I am very much in the camp that likes to see what the hell is going on.
As far as the story goes no new ground is being broken here. It follows the formula that has been cemented into the super hero movie genre. The hero's journey where two thirds into the movie the hero discovered that the villain he has been fighting pales in comparison to the power of the real evil that has been controlling our secondary villain the whole movie. Then it seems like the way to defeat the main villain is solved much quicker than the semi-villain. I know writers were brought in to try to punch up the script pretty late in the project but they were not able to save the ending from being somewhat underwhelming.
With all of the enjoyable things that Doctor Strange does and the small list of thing is does wrong you would think Doctor Strange would be getting a better score from me. My problem lies in the fact that these super hero movies are starting to feel very cookie cutter to me. There are not many risks being taken in these movies and they just want to find a way to keep giving people the same things with different utility belt wrappings. To be fair the other side of the spectrum is DC who can't seem to figure out not only how to make a good movie but just a movie that does not seem to spit in the face of the source material. Doctor Strange is not as good as the Guardians of the Galaxy's and Ant-Mans of the world but it is certainly better than Suicide Squad and Batman Vs. Superman which is good enough for at least some of my approval.
The Accountant (2016)
The Worlds Longest Commercial for Autisim
I have known about The Accountant for what feels like a full year. To be honest I was not anticipating it and was fully expecting not to like it. It had the trappings of a romance movie under the disguise of an action thriller by a director I am not a fan of. Ben Affleck has been great recently but he is due for a bad one, safe to say The Accountant felt like a disaster. This is why you don't judge movies off of trailers and promotional material six months out of release. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that I was mostly wrong. The pieces are here for an amazing movie but there are just a few things that hold it back from being one of the best action thrillers in recent memory.
I can't think of many people making movies right now that are killing it more than Ben Affleck. Yes Batman Vs. Superman was a dud but it was not his fault. I actually like his Bruce Wayne/Batman and would like to see him get put to better use. Between directing and acting in movies over the past 5 or so years Mr. Affleck has turned his career around and has gone from one of the most despised people working in the business to one of the most valuable. New Affleck is perfect for this movie. He is not just the super attractive buff guy who has his shirt off every other scene and making out with every woman in the movie. Here he is subtle and does a great job of making us forget that he was once "Worlds Sexiest Man". It is not his best work and won't win him any awards but with a lesser actor this movie may have been the disaster I believed it would be.
As for the rest of the characters they can be hit or miss. Anna Kendrick is also terrific here and brings a much needed human performance to a movie where everyone feels like a character written into a script. The only shame in her performance is that there is not enough of it. She is scattered into the movie but ultimately is pushed into a very supporting role. Jon Bernthal gets saddled with the difficult task of trying to make the most of his time on screen, but also staying mysterious and in the dark. Unfortunately I think he gives a bit too large of a performance, but given his task I can't blame him too much for it. The rest of the cast is unfortunately either there to drive the plot along and fill holes for the audience or just plain does not get fully rounded out.
The Accountant struggles when it comes to pacing at times. There are some real gripping scenes, for a multitude of reasons, not just shoot em up scenes but some interesting story points in the beginning. unfortunately this falls apart as the movie goes and the middle of the movie drags on far too long. The action scenes were a mix of good and bad. There are times that the action will really mean something and there are other times where you are just waiting to move on to the next scene. I have trouble not comparing movies like this to John Wick, which is not really fair as the action scenes in that movie were some of the best I have ever seen. The Accountant has flashes of John Wick level action scenes but ultimately falls quite short.
Even with plot problems and a few hold ups with characters, The Accountant is actually a pretty solid movie. You don't often get action movies with a message, but The Accountant delivers one that does not feel out of place. The main character suffers from an extreme form of Autism, which makes him a mathematical genius on the level of Will Hunting, but also has it's drawbacks and those are shown as well. The Accountant is able to use Autism to bring some reality to the events, but also does a good job of being understanding and respectful of it as well. The Accountant may not be one of the best movies I have seen this year but it is still worth the time.
Sully (2016)
The Miracle on the Hudson
Given where I live I have a vague memory about the Miracle on the Hudson. That is to say I remember it happening and being on all of the news channels, but I never really cared to follow up on the events past those first few days after it happened. What the movie Sully brings is at best an exhilarating account of bravery displayed by Capitan Sully and at worst a little bit of feel good drama where the drama feels inflated.
Lets start off with Tom Hanks as the titular Captain Sully. Hanks is not only the perfect choice for this role, he is the only choice for this role. No actor working today brings as much trust and inherent compassion better than Hanks can. From the first moment that the NTSB starts questioning him about the events during the emergency water landing I immediately believe Sully. I trust that he did the right thing and that is because of Tom Hanks. He has made a career of being the good guy and this role demands that he be the best good guy he has ever been, and he nails it. Aaron Eckhart is solid in his supporting role because he is able to play off of Sully's personality. He allows the viewer to step into his shoes and play co pilot in our heads. In those 208 seconds he has to trust Sully like we trust Hanks and you feel that in his performance.
Even though I was not really sold on the CGI in Sully, the "water landing" scenes were the highlight of the movie. Even though they showed the same sequence of events more than a couple of times, each time it felt different. Eastwood lets you view it through the different lenses of the people involved, the passengers, the crew and even the people on the ground viewing it from office buildings and homes. While the CGI sometimes broke my immersion when they put you in the plane is when it really shines. I could almost feel the bottom of my seat drop out as if the theater had lost both engines.
Most of the issues I have with Sully are nit picking. The direction by Clint Eastwood is unimaginative, the writing is average but the biggest problem is one that Eastwood suffered from in his last movie American Sniper and that is an unrealistic villain. This time around Eastwood decided that the real opposition to our hero is over zealous government officials and white people problems. For me the real problem for Sully should have been the constant terror of what if. What if he had done something differently that day or what if he had put those people in danger? They allude to this a bit but I think this really should have been the emotional focus. At least thats what gave me the willies the most. Although i did say the writing was average, Sully actually as what most movies miss and that is an earned third act. The writers saved all their really good stuff for that second to third act transition. They even have a few twists for you at the end there which I did not expect at all.
Sully can sometimes be dragged down by the low points and dialogue heavy scenes but when it has to the movie really turns it on. at an hour and 37 minutes the length is just about right, there were a few scenes that kind of felt added in to pad the run time but it was a decently paced movie with as I said before a great third act. I did not expect much from Sully but I am here to say I have been proved wrong. This is a story about a true American hero, but more than that Sully is just a flat out amazing person who deserves for people to really know how great he is.