jdkraus Reviews

The Holdovers (2023)

Best Film 0f 2023

[10/10 · 16 December 2023]

Alexander Payne movies have always been a mixed bag for me. I love his work in "The Descendants" and "Nebraska," but could care less for "Election" and "Sideways." What I do admire most about his films is the focus on unique characters and the struggles they're working through. "The Holdovers" is an exceptional example of this story arc.

Payne zeroes in on three people at a boarding school during Christmas of 1970. The main character is a reclusive and arrogant ancient civilization's professor (Paul Giamatti), whose sole purpose is to make his students lives' a living hell. The second main character is a grieving mother (Da'Vine Joy Randolph), who serves as the school's head lunch lady. And finally, there's an intelligent but brash student, who gets left behind by his selfish parents during the holidays (Dominic Sessa). Starting out, we aren't particularly fond of any of the characters. They come off as brazen, rude, and aloof. But as the film progresses, we get to learn about them, layer by layer, who they really are, why they act the way they do, and by the story's climax, evolve into something more and better.

"The Holdovers" is packed with humor, drama, ambivalent characters, snappy dialog, brilliant directing, and a surprisingly fast pace for its' two hours and 13 minutes. The performances are some of the best I've seen this year. Giamatti delivers top-notched work as Paul Hunham. He hits every note with perfection. He's my pick for 2024's Best Actor Oscar. Da'Vine Joy Randolph gives a quiet yet stoic performance as Mary Lamb. She never overacts, nor does she slip into the stereotypes Hollywood often utilizes for grieving mothers. She's a definite frontrunner for the supporting actress category. Dominic Sessa's breakout performance is truly a breath of fresh air. I can see a long, successful career ahead of him.

I went in to see this movie as a pure recommendation from a friend and am glad I saw it. This is now my favorite Alexander Payne movie and it's officially added to my holiday movie rotation. As of now, I will go so far as to say that this is the best movie of 2023, although I do have a lot of catching up to do. See it on the big screen if you can. It's worth watching, even just to see how people react to some of the zaniness that happens in the movie. 10/10.

Napoleon (2023)

Decent but not the masterpiece we deserve...bring on the director's cut!

[7/10 · 26 November 2023]

Ridley Scott has directed many fine films with epic storylines, stunning visuals, and engaging characters. For the last decade, he hasn't made a movie that fits these criteria. "Napoleon" has a lot of promise. The film chronicles the great leader from his ambitious rise through the military ranks to his violent role as king, to his downfall AND his volatile relationship with Josephine.

A lot is crammed in two hours and thirty-eight minutes. While never boring, everything feels rushed, especially the third act. Some scenes feel a bit off-putting and rather silly. There are gratuitous sex scenes added for shock value and some ill-placed comedy that detract from what should be a serious bio-pic. Seeing Joaquin Phoenix going "num-num-num" with Vanessa Kirby doesn't fly.

In contrast, the battle sequences are among the movie's highlights. They depict both Napoleon's strategic wit and sheer brutality. The VFX team mostly do a good job, particularly during the Battle of Austerlitz. It's a heck of a scene to witness on the big screen.

The rest of production values are on par with Scott's other films. Production design, costumes, sound, make up & hairstyling, and cinematography are all on their A game. The acting is decent. You really can't go wrong with Joaquin Phoenix. There are moments where you can see he's channeling his inner Commodus from "Gladiator." He plays the titular role as quiet, enigmatic, cold, conniving, manipulative and a bit delusional. We don't really know much more about the man after the film is over and that's okay. Vanessa Kirby is serviceable and bold as Josephine.

Despite having two exceptional actors, stunning visuals, and an intriguing plot, I still left the theater wanting more. More chemistry between the leads. More plot. More cohesiveness overall. The product Apple TV released is a solid effort but not the masterpiece it could have been. As a huge fan of Ridley Scott, this felt like a letdown compared to the rest of his body work. In some ways, it feels like this movie was directed at arms' length and with little passion. Maybe it's his age? Maybe he's just tired? Or maybe it was meddling studios who wanted a 2.5-hour film? We saw that with Kingdom of Heaven. His 3.5-hour director's cut is one of the best movies ever made. He claims to release his 4-hour director's cut on Apple TV at some point. I'll be waiting for it. And I hope it'll be the masterpiece we truly deserve. 7/10.

What Happens in the Dark (2023)

Bravo!

[6/10 · 3 November 2023]

"What Happens in the Dark" is a solid effort from the Youngstown film community. The cinematography is great. The acting is good (especially by the two lead actors). The locations are nice. And the ending is shockingly powerful and cathartic. The story's concept is neat; the focus is on a man who seemingly has it all but hides a darkness that ends up ruining his facade. There were some subplots that weren't addressed and a missed opportunity (or two) that could have added more tension to the story. One of them involves the main character Trevor accidentally shooting a friend during a botched robbery. It was strange that the police did not show up to ask Trevor questions, see him as a person of interest, or even a bit where he feels guilty over this incident. Any one of these options could have added more flare and excitement to the story. Other scenes could have been cut to tighten up the film's length, specifically the many drone shots of downtown Youngstown and a few moments where characters are shown simply doing day-to-day activities. I understand going for realism and a bit of the "fly on the wall" approach in film-making, but it felt really unnecessary for this kind of movie. Some of the audio could have been sweetened and the music was a bit loud at times. Overall, a decent contribution to the independent film scene. I'm looking forward to seeing what else comes out of the Youngstown area.

Christine (2016)

An important film...

[9/10 · 21 October 2023]

I found this movie very personal. Two of my friends died by suicide. I myself have struggled with depression and suicide ideation. In addition, I work in a newsroom. I read about journalist Christine Chubbuck before seeing this film and her story broke my heart. She struggled with depression, never found any love in her life, and committed suicide on live television in front of her co-workers. "Christine" is a tough watch and an accurate portrayal of someone going on the downward spiral of mental instability. The camera is often locked on actress Rebecca Hall's face, as the viewer gets to see and feel her every emotion. Her transformation into Chubbuck is peerless. She captures her look, voice, and mannerisms. I don't understand why she didn't get a Best Actress nomination in 2017. One scene that stands out is an encounter she has with her mother, where she ends the fight by saying, "Why won't you just listen to me?" As someone who's fought depression, her delivery cut right through me. Another scene I love is when she attends a party with her coworkers. The camera stays with Hall, keeping all the other actors out of focus and not well framed. This emphasizes her isolation from othrs. Again, this realistically captures that feeling of loneliness and disassociation from others. This is not a movie I can picture myself watching again. But it's an exceptional one nonetheless. A 6.9 is too low of a score on IMDB. I guess most people don't understand what it's truly like to experience isolation and helplessness. 9/10.

Infinity Pool (2023)

A hedonistic mess

[1/10 · 7 October 2023]

This might be the worst "horror" movie I've ever seen. The cinematography is terrible, consisting of bad and very cliched angles that attempt to evoke a sense of disorientation. The music is loud and does not create a sense of dread or tension needed for a horror movie. The editing feels like it was cut by someone who was off their ADHD medicine. The acting is at best bland (and that's a shock with actors like Mia Goth and Alexander Skarsgard). And the story concept is a missed opportunity. While I like the idea of a couple going on a retreat, where they discover they can commit acts of violence and debauchery and their "clones" are the ones to the pay the price for the crimes, the film's execution (no pun intended) is extremely poor. Rather than a horror movie, this feels like an avant-garde, hedonistic mess. Director Brandon Cronenberg really needs to study his father's horror movies to truly understand the genre. Tension, character development, fear, the "boo" factor, and great visual storytelling are what make excellent horror films like "The Fly," "Alien," and "The Shining." Infinity Pool is a hard pass. I couldn't even finish it. Worst horror movie I've ever seen and worst movie of 2023.

Dodes'ka-den (1970)

Boring & Uninspiring

[5/10 · 18 August 2023]

Akira Kurosawa has been my favorite filmmaker since I first saw The Seven Samurai almost 20 years ago. After slowly working through all his films, I have actually found one I didn't like. I watched Dodes'ka-den last night, and I never felt so detached and bored with the characters. Kurosawa certainly ventured into unknown territory while making this movie. There is no plot. None of the characters are interesting, nor bear any real redeeming qualities. I found myself reading the film's trivia on my phone more than watching this movie. I can tell Kurosawa's head was not in the game while directing this movie. And sadly, Dodes-ka-den ruined him financially and resulted in his 1971 suicide attempt. I think this could have been a really great movie if the focus was on just one or two characters, versus making an ensemble piece of despicable people. The Autistic kid with the imaginary trolley car is far more interesting than the delusional homeless man with the sick kid or wife-swapping drunks. It was a lost opportunity. 5/10.

Confined (2019)

A fun, independent thriller where the bad guy steals the show

[6/10 · 6 October 2019]

Before I start, I'd like to state that I have a bias towards this film since I know several of the people (both on and off camera). Rather than just saying it's great to support them and their success, I'll try to give a fair analysis. So, here it goes.

Confined is a mystery thriller about Noah Harvey (Chris Dettone), a man hellbent on revenge because his wife was killed in a car accident by Donnie (John French). He kidnaps Donnie's wife Sara (Caitlin Drance) and gives him a week to find her or he'll kill her. The race is on. Desperation and paranoia sets in. New revelations and harsh truths are revealed. And there's an ending you wouldn't expect.

Confined follows many of the tropes you find in any thriller but unlike a lot of them, it works to the film's advantage. I will note that some "twists" feel out of place and unwarranted, particularly the ending. Without giving it away, the final scene feels almost forced and the "set up" for it was not developed enough by the characters. But the movie makes up for this in the characters.

Chris Dettone gives such a humanized portrayal of Noah, that it's hard not to empathize with him. While at times he seems to channel his inner psychopath, he adds a peculiar element that makes him feel like a tragic character of circumstance. John French as Donnie emotes the desperation and paranoia his character experiences very well to the screen. But there's a moment near the end where he seems to lack an added emotional punch. The rest of the cast is good, including DeWayne Pitts as Austin, one of Noah's victims. However, they're never quite at the same level as Dettone and French. After all, this is their movie.

The writing is decent, but some lines felt corny and overly cliche, particularly when Noah tells Donnie that he'll "send his wife to him in pieces." Almost sounds like a line from villain in an old Arnold Schwarzenegger movie. The audio was problem, I had to have subtitles on for some scenes. I wished there were both more shot variety during the dialog scenes. And the lighting could have been much better. There are some scenes, specifically key moments where the actors' faces aren't clearly visible. These are the plagues of many independent features on a shoestring budgets. But for $2,000 it didn't look terrible.

"Confined" is a nice effort to indie film. With bigger budgets and a larger crew, I think director William Chaffin can make some more decent flicks.

3/5

Blue (I) (2018)

A picture that demands our surrender to its' acting, writing, filmmaking and above all its' exploration of an issue that the media and society glaringly overlooks

[9/10 · 10 January 2019]

Blue. A color? A mood? A person's name? The film does not address the title. It is about a Helen (Callie Shuttera), a young woman who has no luck. She loses her job, her ailing grandmother dies, and she faces insurmountable debt. Helen tries to take the easy route via suicide. At first, it seems fate has a cruel sense of humor, allowing her to survive with no family and a mountain high bill pile. As Helen continues her journey, she meets a small group of people who cheer her on toward success: a wealthy but pleasant business named Robert (Shaw Jones), a chirpy nurse (Laura Nicole Harrison), and a cold doctor (Judith Scott). The question we wonder through the film is whether Helen will persevere or relapse. A particularly poignant scene depicts a group therapy session where real live attempted suicide victims share their stories. These moments are gut-wrenching, but also cathartic and a little bit refreshing. They are real, captured with a cinema verite quality. The harsh reality is enough to move any sensible person.

While the themes of suicide and self-injury are prominent factors in "Blue," the film does not fall into the traps of predictable plot devices or clichés (although there is a point in the story that feels rushed). Nor does this movie come off as being overly pretentious. Rather the movie's central focus is on Helen and her relationships with meeting new people. There are several well-written scenes between Helen and Robert, which evoke both subtle brilliance and clever wittiness. Not to spoil too much, but my personal favorite is a moment where the two main characters visit a laser tag, have fun, and then share a joint afterwards. I mean, who hasn't done this?

As a character-driven film, "Blue" relies heavily on the cast's performances. There are no weaknesses here. Callie Shuttera brings a burning passion to the lead character, delivering a strong and heartfelt performance. Shaw Jones offers a gentler performance as the quirky Robert, which works very well for his character. The other performers are superb in their respective roles. Chelsea Lopez as "Crazy" Ruby is a real screen stealer.

For an independent movie, "Blue" looks like a million-dollar picture. The cinematography is beautiful and stunning. The sets are clean and polished. And the editing is crisp and seamless. The score is minimalistic, primarily solo piano with light percussion. However, the Zimmer factor is a bit heavy in one key scene. This is a movie that proves what a group of talented filmmakers can make with a shoe-string budget. Most great movies are about people trying to resolve an issue. "Blue" is one of those films. This is a picture that demands our surrender to its acting, writing, filmmaking and above all its' exploration of an issue that the media and society glaringly overlooks.

Silence (I) (2016)

A powerful meditation on faith and the human spirit

[9/10 · 21 January 2017]

The year is 1640. The Catholic Church has spread all over the world, yet one nation has been labeled a danger. That is Japan. Two Jesuit Priests, Father Rodriguez (Andrew Garfield) and Father Garupe (Adam Driver) receive word that their former master Ferrerira (Liam Neeson) has apostatized. Believing this a lie, the two priests embark on a journey to the foreign land, hoping to discover the truth of their teacher. The Priests' quest proves more burdensome than they had expected, putting their lives in danger and faith to the test.

Dubbed as his passion project, Scorsese explores many deep, philosophical questions in Silence. Is there a God? If so, why does he permit so much suffering? Is it mere arrogance and selfishness to hold onto one's faith at the expense of other people's lives? There is much to meditate and reflect upon in this film. At times, Silence is very hard to watch. While not particularly bloody, unlike some of Scorsese's other movies, the brutal acts depicted feel very real.

Aside from the controversial subject matter, "Silence" is an excellent character study on Father Rodriguez and Garupe. We get to see how they change and ultimately follow two different paths. Andrew Garfield turns in his best work as Father Rodriguez. Adam Driver is equally brilliant. Liam Neeson has minimal screen time, but delivers one of his finest performances. He can convey so much emotion without speaking. There is more to his acting capability than Bryan Mills from Taken. Isse Ogata is evil and manipulative as the Japanese Inquisitor. He can be charming one moment and vile the next, a sort of Doctor Jekyll/Mr. Hyde persona. The rest of the supporting cast are also great in their respective roles.

Like most other movies by Scorsese, the production values are top-notched. Rodrigo Prieto's cinematography is simply stunning. Each shot is a work of exceptional art, whether it is a close-up on an actor's face or a beautiful landscape image. Prieto has a phenomenal eye for composition and lighting, proving himself as one of Hollywood's best DP's. The production and costume designs are exquisite, capturing a lost era. The make-up design accommodates the ugliness and lack of personal hygiene people had centuries ago. We don't see actors with pearly white teeth or unblemished skin.

The use of sound or rather lack thereof is particularly unique. There are moments where it is completely silent. The visuals take priority, allowing the audience a chance to absorb the character's emotions. This technique works very well. The fact Silence does not have a music soundtrack makes it even powerful. So many films rely on music to convey an emotional response in the viewer. The visuals, performances, and story do this for the movie.

The only criticism I have is the pace. The first two hours move steadily but the ending drags a bit. It is almost as if the screenwriters wanted to add more to the story than it needed. In my opinion, a shorter ending would have given the film a much stronger resolution.

With such a huge filmmaking career that Scorsese has developed over the years, it is hard for me to rank this as one of his best. He has made so many excellent movies. Silence is a great one. That's for sure – one of 2016's best.

Arrival (II) (2016)

Visually awe-inspiring with a profound story

[10/10 · 30 November 2016]

While most modern-day sci-fi flicks focus on extravagant CG set pieces and mindless destruction, Denis Villeneuve's film "Arrival" offers the viewer something much more profound and thought-provoking. As twelve canoe-shaped spaceships touch down on earth, linguistics professor Louise Banks (Amy Adams) and scientist Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner) are recruited by the US government to investigate the purpose of the newly arrived extraterrestrials.

The plot focuses on how Banks and Donnelly attempt to communicate with the aliens and understand their mission. Rather than this process being tedious or even boring, screenwriter Eric Heisserer constructs an interesting and well-crafted story, built on mystery, tension and intrigue. As a viewer, I wanted to know about the aliens identity, their mission, and whether humanity will go to war or if a compromise could be made. The tension is astronomically well done. I kept guessing till the end and was pleasantly surprised with the final outcome. The creativity of the alien language and the use of linguistics help make the film even more plausible. Without giving too much away, it is amazing how a simple set of words could easily be misinterpreted or construed. That's one of the several underlying themes of this movie, how people make quick judgments without fully comprehending the meaning of another individual's, or in this case, an aliens' perspective. Language can be a powerful weapon.

The visuals and aesthetics of "Arrival" are simply astounding. The sheer scale of the alien spacecrafts is terrifying and unique. Even though the aliens resemble large cephalopods, they pose as a powerful and foreboding force. Bradford Young's cinematography consists of dimly lit interior rooms, sometimes only lit with computer screens, and overexposed exterior shots. His choice of lighting and camera angles makes the movie feel real, almost like a documentary versus a studio lit scene from a soundstage. But the component I enjoyed the most was the sound design. Some scenes are deathly quiet and then bang, something loud happens. This technique made me feel like I was part of the movie. Johann Johannson's score takes the film's sound to a new level. He conveys something intense, magical, and above out of this world (I hope he wins an Oscar). Max Richter's piece "On the Nature of Daylight" adds an additional layer of emotion to this great film.

The final highlights of what makes "Arrival" an excellent alien contact movie are the performances. Renner is solid as Donnelly, determined to a find scientific way to communicate with the aliens. It is nice to see him take more dramatic roles rather than playing Hawkeye from "Marvel's: The Avenger's." Amy Adams as Dr. Banks could easily receive her sixth Oscar nomination. Her performance is based on subtlety, particularly with her movements and facial expressions. She can express so much emotion without uttering a single word. Instances like these are what can make an actor either really good or bad. Adams is simply wonderful.

2016 still has quite a few movies left to hit the theaters. So far, "Arrival" is the best one I have seen.

The Hateful Eight (2015)

Merely decent

[8/10 · 7 January 2016]

A winter storm sweeps through the mountainous Wyoming valley as eight individuals shelter in a log cabin. Each person seems upfront and friendly, but not all of them are who they claim to be. The characters include John Ruth (Kurt Russell), a bounty hunter bringing in Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh) a crazy little minx, to hang; Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson), also a bounty hunter collecting some reward money, a town sheriff (Walter Goggins), the town's hangman (Tim Roth), a former colonel (Bruce Dern), and the cabin's caretaker (Damien Bicher). In a "who done it" storytelling fashion, the characters figures out the hidden truths and turn on another one.

Writer and director Quentin Tarantino approaches his eighth film like a play. He takes his time unraveling the story as the characters engage in idle conversations through the blustery storm. QT is a master of witty dialog and has a talent where he can have his characters talk endlessly about irrelevant matters to the movie's plot, yet remain entertaining and enthralling. While this worked flawlessly in "Inglourious Basterds" and "Django Unchained," in "The Hateful Eight" it drags the story out longer than necessary. After awhile, the dialog feels very long-winded. If Tarantino wanted to emphasize the boredom of being secluded in a cabin during a storm, he certainly achieves that. There are still some very well written scenes though, such as a reoccurring gag where each character asks John Ruth why he is bringing Daisy in alive when it is just simpler to shoot her in the back. The punch line, "It's too much work to bring 'em in alive" will go down as a classic Tarantino movie line.

Without giving too much more away, the "surprise" twist is very predictable. In Tarantino style, people die gruesomely. Shot, stabbed, hanged, poisoned, bled to death, take your pick. Unlike other QT movies where the violence seems justified, "The Hateful Eight" depicts violence just for the sake of it. The last on-camera death specifically displays a disturbing act of pure sadism. I never really felt uncomfortable watching a Tarantino movie. This one actually bothered me a little.

There are some more worthwhile factors that "The Hateful Eight" offers. Shot in 70mm film, the landscape shots pay homage to the old Westerns. Cinematographer Robert Richardson has once again shown his talent as one of Hollywood's greatest DPs. Ennio Morricone's score is haunting to say the least, but also has the soul he created from the Spaghetti Westerns. Both are probably in luck for some Oscar nominations this year.

To sum up, "The Hateful Eight" is merely decent. The acting is good. The technical skills are phenomenal. But the story is weak, but fortunately has some of the flare QT that audiences have seen before, just not enough to make another masterpiece.

Spotlight (I) (2015)

Powerful and thought provoking

[10/10 · 1 January 2016]

"Spotlight" is about the Boston Globe's investigation into the allegations of child abuse by some of the priests in the Catholic Church. In a similar style to "All the President's Men," we follow the newspaper's team as they uncover awful truths and cover-ups. The story presents a bit more of a personal touch for the main characters as we observe how they are affected, and ultimately impacted from what they discover. In part, this is what makes "Spotlight" such a compelling and thought-provoking film. The scenes where the victims share their stories are powerful and heart rendering.

Even though the investigation keeps the movie's plot moving steadily, it is the performances that make the film memorable. Michael Keaton and Mark Ruffalo stand out in particular. Their characters are opposite ends of the spectrum. Ruffalo is passionate and intense as Mike Rezendes whereas Keaton is more reserved and calm as Will Robby Robinson. Both mold into their roles so well that I failed to see them as actors. The rest of the cast is sublime, even Rachel McAdams as the emotionally attached Sacha Pfeiffer.

"Spotlight" is a great movie. It is engaging, powerful, compelling, and thought provoking. The film will leave you with much to think about, especially if you attend an organized religion.

The Big Short (2015)

One of this year's best movies!

[9/10 · 1 January 2016]

Though marketed as a comedy, "The Big Short" covers some very serious issues. Based off of the book with the same title, the film goes in great depth of the reasons behind the 2008 economic catastrophe. The focus is on a group of individuals that foresee the economic bubble burst and decide to take advantage of it. Among them are a savvy, but socially awkward hedge fund manager (Christian Bale), a short-tempered, no-nonsense trader (Steve Carell), a banker seeking a huge payday (Ryan Gosling) and two young investors that want to make it big (John Margo & Finn Wittrock) — who enlist the help of a retired trader (Brad Pitt).

The plot jumps from one group of characters to another, covering nearly every angle possible of the behind-the-scenes financial industry that most everyday people do not know or understand. Even though the multiple subplots and some of the technical jargon in the dialog may prove confusing or daunting for the viewer, director Adam McKay and screenwriter Charles Randolph break the subject matter down enough so that the audience can follow along. Often times, they blend humor (such as characters breaking the fourth wall with one- liners or using a chef to explain CDOs) to get their explanations across.

The controversial topic that the movie captures is insanely well-written and the actors perform brilliantly in their roles. Christian Bale went so far into his character that he wore the clothing of the man his performance was based on. However, it is Steve Carell who steals the show. With his disheveled hair and East Coast accent, he is unrecognizable. Like with his work in "Foxcatcher," Carell once again shows that he can do drama. His character has a lot of passion as he tries to make sense of the impending economic disaster. In a way, he becomes the voice of the viewer, wondering how capitalism can spin so far out of control.

The only gripe I have with this movie is the heavy-handed message. Like the 2010 documentary "Inside Job," "The Big Short" paints Wall Street and the banks as the main culprits responsible for the economic ruin. As a result, this gives the audience someone to vilify. Besides this personal opinion, "The Big Short" is an exceptional film and one of this year's best. I am probably in the minority here, but I think this is better than the new "Star Wars" movie. It is a film that both entertains and makes you think.

Beasts of No Nation (2015)

Compelling and Powerful but not the best

[8/10 · 12 December 2015]

This is the movie that made me join Netflix. The trailers looked very promising, and the film does not disappoint. The plot is told from the perspective of Agu (Abraham Attah), a child growing up in an unnamed African country. The first fifteen minutes provides a sense of calm and general happiness, emphasizing the childhood innocence of this boy. He has a loving family and a wild imagination. The story takes a dramatic turn when war breaks out in Agu's homeland, resulting in the separation from his family. Agu is forced into the army as a child soldier. While films like "Blood Diamond" and "Lord of War" scratch the surface on child soldiers in Africa, "Beasts of No Nation" takes you down to its core level. It is brutal, dark, and inhumane. As viewers, we watch as Agu transforms from an innocent boy to a brainwashed killer, under the manipulative powers of the Commandant (Idris Elba).

Director Cary Joji Fukunaga does not sugarcoat the barbarity. There are several moments intended to make the viewer uncomfortable, including a harsh scene where a young girl is stomped to death while a group of child soldiers laugh. Despite the graphic violence, Fukunaga does not demonize the children. The director provides us moments where the child soldiers are simply children. They play games and question what their futures will bring. It cannot be said that we necessarily like them, but given their circumstances and the lifestyle that has been forced onto them, they are understandable characters.

While Idris Elba has been receiving nominations (including a Golden Globe & SAG) for his role, it is Abraham Attah's performance that makes the movie. He has a talent that most child actors, and many adult-aged actors lack, the ability to convey powerful emotion without uttering a single word. Though unlikely, I hope he secures an Oscar nom for his performance. Idris Elba is convincing as the manipulative and despicable Commandant, but his British accent breaks through on several occasions, pulling me out of several key scenes.

The technical skills and Fakunaga's direction are nothing short of remarkable. Fakunaga acted as his own cinematographer for this movie and he does an incredible job. In some instances, he seemed to shadow Terrence Malick's work from "The Thin Red Line" with his selection of beautiful landscape shots, close-ups of nature, high saturation and natural lighting. The voice-over by Agu adds another layer to this compelling film as he reflects on his past experiences as a soldier.

While this is a very good movie, it is not without faults. The last act feels drawn out, making it longer than necessary. The conclusion is particularly weak and withholds any catharsis from the character. A more glaring problem was the thick African accents. They made the English dialogue very hard to understand. It would have been more appropriate if all the characters spoke in their native language and then subtitles were added after the fact. The first fifteen minutes were mostly subtitled, as the rest of the film should have been.

2016 has not been the best year of movies. However, December is the month where the greatest films are usually released. "Beasts of No Nation" is a compelling and powerful film, and marks one of this year's best. But I would not rank it as one of the best of all time.

Chappie (2015)

Still not quite there Neill Blomkamp, I know you can make a masterpiece

[7/10 · 6 March 2015]

In the near future, Johannesberg, South Africa has replaced their police squad with Scouts, robots that decimate crime in the poverty-stricken city. The genius behind these machines is Deon Wilson (Dev Patel). His rival, war-mongrel Vincent Moore (Hugh Jackman) wants his own device up and running. And he will do just about anything to discredit Wilson, even if it means foul play. When Scout #22 is damaged from a routine take down, Wilson bestows the idea to upload an experimental program into the robot's neural network. Wilson and Scout #22 are abducted by a group of drug dealers (played by Ninja and Yo-landi from the band Die Antwoord), where he is forced to upload the software into the robot in order to assist them on a $20 million heist. Scout #22 becomes Chappie, the first machine to be able to think on his own and learn new features like a human child.

The core of "Chappie" is the titular character's relationship with others and how they mold him into either doing good or bad actions. Yo-landi takes up the mantle as the nurturing mother figure that wants him to find his own way while Ninja poses as the violent father figure, who only wants to use him for his own unsavory activities. Interestingly, director Neill Blomkamp chose to keep the band members' names as the character names. Both neophyte actors do not deliver bad performances, but they could have been better. Their characters are rather one-dimensional and flat. The same goes for most of the other cast members. Sigourney Weaver as the CEO of the robot company has too little screen time to develop at all. Dev Patel plays the idealistic genius too well to the point that he feels more like a caricature than an actual character. Hugh Jackman is somewhat of an effective antagonist and his motives are clear for wanting to derail Wilson and his pet project, but his over-the-top performance makes him someone not to be taken seriously.

Then there is Chappie, played by Sharlto Copley in a MOCAP suit. From his movements and voice (digitally altered of course), he rivals the prowess of Andy Serkis. He has a natural energy about him that for the whole two hours, I failed to see his character as a man in a dotted suit. By default, much sentimentality is given to Chappie for his innocent and childlike behavior. This never gets in the way for the audience to enjoy the robot with manlike features and bunny eared antennas. The quieter moments, such as him learning new words or how to paint a picture make this a more worthwhile movie over the action and explosions. Sadly though, they are often interrupted by gunfire or mass destruction. Like so many past sci-fi movies like "E.T." or "The Iron Giant," Chappie is another non-human character we can feel sympathy for. The overall pacifist personality he exhibits is a nice touch, too.

Neill Blomkamp never seems to escape his location of home, depicting trash invested regions, criminals that prove to be anti-heroes instead of villains, Afrikaans dialog, and a gratuitous amount of violence. Fortunately no bodies are blown to pieces, though one guy does get ripped in half. Chappie exceeds over its director's previous film "Elysium." It takes a potentially cool idea and charges forward with some avenue of success. "Chappie" is simply a movie too enjoy. Very easily, with some more polish and time geared toward re-written script drafts, this could have been the best science-fiction film of the decade. Blomkamp still has not yet reached the masterpiece level that I know he can. "Chappie" though is still lots of fun and it has some heart.

The Imitation Game (2014)

An exceptional film

[10/10 · 25 January 2015]

"The Imitation Game" is a movie that makes known a part of classified history during World War II and it shows that even then, people 70 years ago were thinking ahead on how technology can impact and eventually alter how wars can be fought. Benedict Cumberbatch plays Alan Turing, a brilliant mathematician who has a mind for the future. At the peak of the Blitz, the British government recruits him to crack the Enigma—a type of code that the Germans used to communicate their naval positions. Discovering that it is humanly impossible to decipher the code, he brainstorms the idea to build a machine that could break the Enigma and save lives. To put it quite plainly, Alan Turing is the man who founded the first computer.

His journey of working with a team to build this game-changing device is only part of the film. The movie also explores the man and his personal struggles of being a homosexual in a society that outlaws such "behavior." This subject matter is handled with tact and is never in the viewer's face in regards to say, showing sexual situations. With Cumberbatch's pro-gay advocacy and him personally seeing Alan Turing as an idol no doubt made him the perfect candidate for the role. Putting aside all of these matters, there is no other British actor who could portray this man and his struggles. Interestingly, the film depicts Turing as a bit of a recluse and exhibiting Asperger's tendencies—he says things bluntly and has no social graces whatsoever. He fires two employees out of merely "slowing everyone else down" and he does not understand or bear the time for diplomatic solutions for his fellow code-breakers.

At first blush, he can be quickly seen as an egotistical jerk. While the film progresses though, we clearly can comprehend his problems, accept his brilliance, and even feel empathy for him as a human being. Cumberbatch has given us a complicated, multi-layered, yet honorable performance. Graham Moore's witty dialog has supplied Ben with plenty of ammunition for his character as well as add flare for both funny and serious moments. Moore makes a front-runner for the Adapted Screenplay category. The remaining actors in the film are merely good and never reach Cumberbatch's level. Keira Knightley though does have some great moments, particularly in a scene where she tries to help a depressed Alan back on his feet again.

"The Imitation Game" is an exceptional film. It has a stellar performance by the lead actor. It is well rounded and explains character and plot in past, present, and future settings. It is supported with an emotionally charged score by Alexandre Desplat and has beautiful set pieces from the production design team. The ending is a little fast, but suitable. It is not a pure Oscar bait film. It is really an award-worthy one.

Foxcatcher (2014)

A great movie falls a little short on the ending

[9/10 · 25 January 2015]

While "Foxcatcher" is inspired by real people and events the film's roots are in a psychological examination of its lonesome and disturbed characters. Channing Tatum plays Mark Schultz, the 1984 Gold Medalist in Men's Wrestling. Going nowhere with employment and training, he receives a chance of a lifetime from being recruited by John E du Pont (Carrel), a reserved and awkward multi-millionaire, who wants America to win the gold again in the 1988 Olympics. At Du Pont's mother's farm, he organizes the new US wrestling team for the International games.

Their relationship becomes the basis of this film and how it rises and then ultimately deflates. From the first five minutes we are introduced to Du Pont, he is presented as a wealthy, charismatic individual with a peculiar way of speaking and an even more peculiar nose. Progressively, we get to see the type of man Mark has befriended as he spirals out of control, engaging in drug abuse, guns, and irrational behavior. Carrel has performed a role at first glance may seem hard to swallow. However, he portrays his character in such a style that it is truly terrifying. Beneath the hours of make-up, he can display absolute nothingness, uncontrollable rage, and even pure narcissism without even speaking. Director Bennett Miller relies heavily on non-verbal scenes, allowing the silence between the actors on camera to create tension and intriguing interactions. This is a tough accomplishment, and he hits it head-on at every point.

The screenwriters supply the actors with straight-to-the-point, yet brilliant dialog, and the cast carry the weight of their characters superbly. Who could have imagined that Channing Tatum or even Steve Carrel could deliver such vulnerable and sophisticated characters? Mark Ruffalo is extremely limited in screen time but he is up to par with his leading co-stars as Mark's caring brother. The only setback "Foxcatcher" has is the ending. The first 100 minutes are electrifying and engaging, but the final 20-30 minutes kind of meander and depict a series of events that feel woven together. Too much of Carrel and Tatum looking depressed make a snail's pace for the final act. I wanted more character interaction and an actual conclusion that ties in with the violent tragedy of Dave Schultz's murder. It merely happens and Du Pont is arrested. No trial. No final face-to-face showdown between Mark and Du Pont. Not even a moment where Mark mourns his brother. Nor is there a clear motive for Du Pont's crime. As a viewer, the ending is quite cold and rather withholding.

"Foxcatcher" is a great movie. I would definitely buy it when the Blu-Ray hits retail stores. Yet I don't think it is as great as some of the other movies released in 2014.

Inherent Vice (2014)

Not quite what I was expecting, but still pretty good

[8/10 · 10 January 2015]

Filmmaker Paul Thomas Anderson and actor Joaquin Phoenix team up again for "Inherent Vice," a somewhat nostalgic look of Los Angeles in the 1970s. Phoenix plays dope-head PI Doc Sportello, who investigates at his ex-lover's request (Katherine Waterson), her boyfriend (Eric Roberts), a married, wealthy man. He quickly learns that he is in more than he bargained for as he encounters a black militant (Michael K Williams), a detective whom he shares a respect/hate relationship with (Josh Brolin), a druggie informant (Owen Wilson), a hedonist dentist (Martin Short), a brothel run by an Asian smuggler group, a cult, and crooked cops. These are only some of the mechanics that Doc discovers. The movie becomes so perplexing and multi-layered that we as viewers become just as dazed as Doc. We merely follow along and try to keep up with the shenanigans and ambiguous subplots.

"Inherent Vice" is a movie that requires multiple viewings. Even then, it may be questionable for someone to put all the pieces together. I cannot help but wonder if Paul Anderson knew what the film was all about in terms of a plot. However, he is anything but a conventional filmmaker. His past films usually somehow tie together in the end. His latest one though just leaves his viewers scratching their heads, wondering what they had watched for 148 minutes. The only information that sort of guides the audience is the narration by Joanna Newsom. Her character though is a druggie and is only seen by Doc. So, is she a reliable character? Or is she a figment of a drug- induced hippie's imagination? We are not entirely sure.

"Inherent Vice" is not by any means a bad movie. It is actually quite good. Like all of Anderson's past works, he pushes his actors to give performances to the best of their abilities, and then some. In my opinion, Joaquin Phoenix is a very underrated actor. Like with his role in "The Master," he embodies an unlikeable, yet unique character. The way he carries his gait. The way he remains silent and allows his face to express emptiness and want is remarkable. Brolin holds to the tough guy, hardass, he plays so well. Only this time, he beats up hippies and violently eats chocolate covered bananas on a stick. New faces Joanna Newsom and Katherine Waterson add flare to the roles they are given. Owen Wilson still displays his general awkwardness and goofy humor, too.

The nostalgia that is shown really sells to the overall fun of the film. Vintage cars, land-line phones, Adam-12, Richard Nixon, Afros, weed, sex, cult paranoia, and Rock 'n Roll are only some things that people who grew up in the era will recognize and get a smile from. I particularly enjoyed how Roger Elswit's cinematography captures the look of a movie from the 1970s. Shots are underexposed at night and never look lit. In result, there is sort of a natural look that almost makes the movie appear like an older film.

"Inherent Vice" is not a film for the average viewer. The humor is crude in nature and there is very little action or suspense. For fellow cinema lovers though, you may very well find a fit here. The trailers that try to advertise this movie as a quirky comedy are far from the truth.

American Sniper (2014)

Cooper's performance is the glue that keeps American Sniper together

[6/10 · 10 January 2015]

"American Sniper" is a movie that can be very easily interpreted as American propaganda. The use of the word "American" in the film's title is enough for some to make this claim. The motto "God, country, and family" rings true to mind in what this film depicts. In actuality though, "American Sniper" is a feature that takes a patriotic individual, hoists him up as a legend and then brings him back down to the harsh level of a haunted soul. Clint Eastwood is a master director who knows how to show the flawed and imperfect nature of humanity. Just watch "Unforgiven," "Mystic River," and "Letters of Iwo Jima."

With US Seal Sniper Chris Kyle, he is portrayed as an unsophisticated character. From youth, we get to see his life grow from a god-fearing hunter who dreams of being a cowboy to the deadliest sniper in American history. In response to 9/11, just like many American men and women, he enlists in the Navy to serve his country. We watch as he endures four tours of active duty in Iraq and tries to readjust in the safe confines of suburban America. Writer Jason Hall molds him as a sympathetic and likable person, whom is determined to eliminate the enemy and protect his home.

It is Bradley Cooper's deeply expressive performance that captures the essence of this simple yet larger-than-life person. As an actor, Cooper has acquired a power to display in both voice and face great emotion. Without him even uttering a word, we can comprehend the thoughts going on in his head. His performance is nothing short of deserving an Oscar nomination. Clint Eastwood smartly keeps the camera on him for the majority of the film, allowing the audience to empathize and understand his character. He also gives us a parched, desolate, desert landscape plagued by violence and cruelty. The amount of dedication in the cinematography and production design give viewers a gritty look of Iraq, which rivals Kathryn Bigelow's "The Hurt Locker." The war sequences are quite brutal and intense. The final action scene alone is truly marvelous as a sandstorm blankets the battle-stricken Baghdad.

"American Sniper" unfortunately falls short on many other aspects, dragging what could have been a great movie down to mediocrity. While the focus is on Kyle, other parts of his life are introduced and then just as quickly dismissed. We get to see his younger brother join up the marines and then we never see him again. Likewise, the relationship between his strict father takes precedent in the first ten-minutes, and yet it goes nowhere afterwards. His war buddies appear, disappear, and then reappear usually for a plot device. As a viewer, we barely get a chance to know them like Kyle. When they are killed off, we really do not feel any emotional engagement or loss. The added subplot of a Middle Eastern sniper targeting US Soldiers feels clichéd and a poor attempt to draw a main antagonist for the lead character. Even the relationship between Kyle and his wife is limited in time. We are left with following a great American patriot consumed with torment. The frequent jumps between war and home grows old very quickly. An entire movie could have been just based upon one of Kyle's tours and it would feel like a more completed film.

In short, this movie left me wanting more than the 132-minutes had to offer. That is the sad problem with most biographical films. They are spread so thin that they actually show too little in too much time. I'm probably in the minority on this one, but "American Sniper" is a slightly above average film, and that is mainly because of Bradley Cooper's performance. I wanted to love this, but I cannot. Regardless, I still appreciate the people who brought Chris Kyle's story back to life.

Unbroken (I) (2014)

Everything looks great but it is still missing something

[7/10 · 30 December 2014]

"Unbroken" is the story of Louis Zamperini. The events of his life are beyond unbelievable and present the vision of a great bio-picture. Growing up in the poor slums of New York as an Italian-American, Louis participated in the 5,000 meter race at the 1936 Munich Olympic Games, fought as a bombardier in World War II, crashed landed in the Pacific Ocean only to be captured by the Japanese navy, where he spent two years as POW under the ruthless supervision of a Corporal Watanabe. There are so many fascinating components of his life that no wonder Angelina Jolie chose to shoot a film about him. The under dog story of his success, his defiance against both death and the brutality of the Japanese are the makings of an Oscar bait bio-pic.

What I really liked about "Unbroken" is how Jolie depicts Louis with the dignity and respect of a newly found iconic figure and war veteran. There are times where he seems to be displayed as almost a perfect, god-like individual. He is but a man, yet the movie makes him more than that. Great legends and stories are often molded from such feats of humanity. Jolie has also surrounded herself with some of the best geniuses in the business. The Coen Brothers wrote the script. Roger Deakins captured the cinematography. Alexandre Desplat composed the musical score. Nothing could potentially weight this movie down with such a great team.

While technically sound and backed with an intriguing character, "Unbroken" fails to engage me on an emotional level. Never do I really feel like applauding or rooting for the hero. I never feel like crying over his hardships or his loss of friends from the war. There is no 'oomph,' nor is there really any soul in the film. It is almost as if simply because we see Louis achieve greatness we are supposed to feel empathy for his character. Though I applaud the real man for how he had triumphed, I cannot do the same with Jack O'Connel in the pivotal role. His acting is quite flat and uninspiring. The other characters feel more like caricatures of the time versus actual people. There's the evil Japanese corporal who has it out for Louis. There is the friend who is weaker in will that relies on Louis to survive. There's the older brother who helped guide his life. There is his dad who wants to keep the family united. There is the mother who does nothing but cry when she is on camera. Get the picture? All one-dimensional personalities.

The story structure does not help much either. The bulk of the plot centers on Louis's World War II experience, with intermittent flashbacks of his childhood and career as an athlete. Any one part of his life can be turned into a solid feature. Cramming it all in together is okay, but it suppresses other details of his life. In fact, the film ends abruptly as he returns home from WWII. His journey back home is just as important as the other parts of his life. Then again, only so much can be covered in a feature film. When it exceeds the 2.5 hour mark, it gets dull. Fortunately, "Unbroken" is not a boring movie by any means. It just takes certain parts of his life precedent over other ones.

I am sad that Louis Zamperini did not live to see the final product. I am sure he would have felt some catharsis and personal self-reflection if he had viewed this film. "Unbroken" is not a bad effort by Jolie and her team. It's just not the masterpiece that it could have been.

The Expendables 3 (2014)

How can making a third Expendables movie be so bad?

[4/10 · 28 December 2014]

The first "Expendables" movie is a good action flick despite its amateur production quality. "Expendables 2" is simply an awesome movie, through and through. "Expendables 3" is the one in the franchise that should not have been made. Predictable plot, cheesy one-liners, gratuitous action violence, unrealistic fun, badass villains, and macho good guys are the components that sell the action-packed genre. The watered down PG-13 rating has nothing to do with ruining the latest installment of "The Expendables." Where to begin could simply take too long of a time. So I'm just going to list some of the many problems that sink this feature into the depths of lowness.

-Harrison Ford's appearance. He is too old. Plain and simple. He does not carry the energy or swagger that he has utilized for years as Han Solo, Indiana Jones, and Jack Ryan. He delivers as an old fossil that should not have been even dug up. (This is sad, because I am a huge Harrison Ford fan). Sometimes, retiring is the best thing an actor can do.

-Mel Gibson as the bad guy. I will always regard him as a great actor with an intense acting style. Here as the new villain, he is given hardly any screen time and never delivers as a true badass. He does get the occasional moment of brilliance, like his line, "How hard can it be to kill 10 people?" But he can never be taken seriously in this role. I wanted to see him do something malicious, perhaps actually kill an expendable, or two, just to show that the good guys aren't invincible. That would have been something to see.

-The editing. This has to be one of the worst edited films ever. Not only is it hard to tell which expendable is killing which henchman during the fights, but even during the low-key scenes, the lack of continuity in between shots is incredibly atrocious. Wesley Snipes is given a very good scene to act in, but the amount of times his body changes positions in between shots is so distracting that I had to turn my head away from watching the television monitor.

-The plot and the film's pacing. Yes. I know. Why blame the plot? It's not supposed to be good anyway since it's a movie about good guys killing armies of bad guys. This Expendable's plot line is drug out much longer than necessary and the story is so obvious, that I could see what was going to happen an hour and a half into the movie. You might as well hit the skip button until you reach the big battle at the end.

-The new faces. None of the newcomers to the expendables' team are any good. They have no element for us to like them, nor do they have any panache or significant attributes added to their characters. Ronda Rousey was particularly bad with her constant MMA skills against male baddies, and how she uttered word the, "Men" with disgusting contempt. Yes, we get you're a man hater. You don't need to say anything. You just broke that guy's neck and dislocated another one's arm!

"Expendables 3" is not entirely a lost cause. There are some decent things about it that work. The appearances of Banderas and Snipes help bring life to the movie, in comparison to the pretty-faced zombies like Glenn Powell & Victor Ortiz. These actors have been in the business a long time and know how to charm audiences, especially Banderas. The final action sequence is pretty good in size and packs in some good moments of unexpected humor. The fight between Stallone and Gibson in the end is exactly how I imagined and what I had hoped for. No martial art moves. No aerobic skills or obvious stunt doubles. Just two, past their prime actors, going at it with their fists until one of them pulls a gun and shoots the other. Bloody marvelous I say!

With combining new upcoming action stars and revitalizing old ones, a viewer would think that "Expendables 3" would do justice to its film predecessors. It does not. It fails miserably. Bad writing to an already corny, crowd-pleasing concept does not equate success. If the producers want to do right for a fourth Expendables, they need to go back to the drawing board and learn from the first two movies.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)

It entertains well, despite its flaws, and there are many.

[7/10 · 26 December 2014]

The final stretch of The Hobbit Trilogy possesses visual awe, energy, and a darker tone to Peter Jackson's vision of Middle-earth. Picking up directly from his previous film, Jackson grips our attention with an intense CG fire-show, as the dragon Smaug sets the fishing port, Laketown ablaze. The sequence is so fun, that one quickly understands why audience members go see the movies. We can now know why Peter Jackson has forced us to hold our breathe for a whole another year for this big showdown. It was well worth the wait and is a witty method to catch the audience's attention for the first ten minutes of the movie.

With the desolation of Smaug being used as an introduction, the remainder of the film centers on its descriptive title, "The Battle of the Five Armies." Elves, dwarfs, men, and orcs on a scale that rivals the grand siege of Minas Tirith from "The Return of the King" face off and battle at the gates of the newly reclaimed city of Erebor. Though there is an abundance of action and subplots that are put to work simultaneously, the essential focus is on Thorin Oakenshield. Richard Armitage in the role as Thorin captures the essence of an individual consumed by greed in a very frightening manner. He becomes paranoid thinking that one of his fellow dwarfs is withholding his precious jewel, the Arkenstone, from him. He barricades the old city from all other races, despite his promise of sharing his wealth with the people of Laketown. He even threatens to kill his own fellow companions if they get in his way. Like the "Lord of the Rings Trilogy" with Sauron's ring, the Arkenstone corrupts the mind of the hero.

Interestingly, Bilbo Baggins takes more of a supporting role. Martin Freeman, who captured so well the transition from a character that was out of his element into a clever protagonist is unfortunately limited in screen time. He is not given a chance to add more depth or significance to the movie. Including 'The Hobbit' in the title is sort of misleading. Only until the end do we think, 'Oh wait! This movie is about Bilbo. Not Thorin.'

For a 144-minute movie, the film is quick, but it feels too short in comparison to the other Hobbit films. The ending is particularly rushed and important details that are introduced earlier in the film are either not concluded or are completely disregarded, which as a viewer, made me scratch my head and think, 'Wait? What happens now to this elf character or this dwarf character, or even this human character?' Whether from the studios, time constraints, or just bad editing, the movie does not come off as entirely finished. Scenes of Ryan Gage as the witless Alfrid could have been replaced with much more substantial material. Hopefully the Extended Edition will help resolve these problems.

The mightiest flaw that "The Battle of the Five Armies" faces is the lack of emotional engagement in the characters. Several important good guys die and while their deaths are unpleasant to watch, they never feel sad. The heightened musical score and slow-motion cinematography during these scenes are dull and a clichéd attempt to drive the viewer into an emotional state. It would be easier and more shocking for an important character to die quickly and suddenly versus being drug out like a dramatic opera performance.

"The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies" is not a dreadful movie by any means. Neither is it epic nor is it memorable. It does serve a purpose. It entertains well, despite its flaws, and there are many.

Interstellar (2014)

Creative. Brilliant. Original. The Best of 2014?

[9/10 · 2 December 2014]

Christopher Nolan's latest film "Interstellar" is set in the near future where earth is facing an apocalypse. Blight has wiped out much of the planet's food supply. Dust storms ravage the landscape like the Depression-era's Dust Bowl. The only hope is a new home for humanity. Nolan and his brother John take an interesting structure on how to reveal their story to the audience. We are first introduced to Cooper (Mathew McConaughey), a widowed, former pilot and engineer turned farmer, who takes care of his two children Tom (Timothée Chalamet) and Murph (Mackenzie Foy) and lives with his father-in-law Donald (John Lithgow). He has a knack for chasing down surveillance drones and idealistic thoughts of space travel. He is a character that thinks very much outside of the box in terms of earth's future. Rather than being a "caretaker" for earth, he dreams of exploring new horizons. The Nolan brothers give us almost an hour's time to digest and comprehend all the characters. The film itself feels very much like a family drama with a gentle hint of science fiction. We are later introduced to NASA and learn that there is a program, which hopes to achieve planet relocation for humanity. The catch is for Cooper to partake in a journey that involves a wormhole and a severe space time continuum that may result in him not being able to return home, much less save earth in time.

The movie shifts gear to space, where three fellow astronauts and a walking, talking computer with sarcastic tendencies accompany Cooper. They explore new worlds, encounter perilous situations, and discover hidden truths that could ultimately determine the fate of humanity's survival. The last twenty-minutes alone is a masterwork that feels like a contemporary version of Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey." For a first time viewer, the ending maybe a bit confusing or deep. Several people in the theater with me began uttering phrases like "What did I just watch?" or "I don't get it. What happened?" Like Nolan's "Inception," this is a film that warrants multiple viewings. This reason may not necessarily be for audiences to help understand the events of the plot better, but rather to find concealed levels of sophistication in this multi-layered film. "Interstellar" is a movie you can watch once and be entertained. It is also one that can be viewed many times as a method to catch all the little details that Nolan has thrown into his film. Like a good, thought-provoking film, every shot and every bit of dialog is important and has a reason.

However, unlike a great intricate movie, there are moments in the plot where elements do not make much sense. Others feel forced and rushed. This may sound odd since it is almost three hours long. There are some moments that deliver as incredibly fast, such as Cooper saying good-bye to his family in one scene and then suddenly appearing in space with three characters that the audience had not been fully introduced. In this way, the movie feels almost like two films in one, the first with his family and the other as an epic space adventure. I can picture what Nolan wanted to achieve with his film—a sci-fi masterpiece with three-dimensional characters and a unique story. Sometimes it takes a long time to tell a story in its, entirety. "Interstellar" never feels long. As an audience member, I could care less if this movie was five hours. There were transitions and scenes that needed explaining.

The film has many great things going for it. McConaughey turns in a truly believable and outstanding performance as Cooper. We can feel the pain he emanates from missing his family and accept that he is a family man. He moved me in this almost as much as he had in "Dallas Buyer's Club." The supporting cast fades in the background compared to McConaughey, but they do all right. Michael Caine, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Casey Affleck, and Matt Damon are among the A-list actors in this movie. They all fit their parts.

The visual effects, cinematography, and production design set a futuristic setting without it looking too much like a traditional sci-fi movie (ex: Star Wars, Star Trek, Aliens, Blade Runner). Rather the look is kind of gritty and it doesn't feel glossy, sharp, or overly polished. The technical attributes are convincing and look photo-realistic, especially the robot TARS. Never did I feel like I was watching a movie surrounded with green screens. The choice of using some practical effects helps in this regard. The musical composition by Hans Zimmer is hypnotizing. It put me in a trancelike state and mesmerized me beyond words. It's his best work since "Time" from "Inception."

"Interstellar" is overall a very good movie, perhaps even a great one. Yet I would not call it the best movie of 2014, nor would I hoist it up in the likes of other science-fiction movies. There is the issue of the sound mixing that is worth addressing. While I could hear the majority of the dialog, the mixer artists put the sound effects at top priority over the dialog in some instances. Though many people complain about this, it is really not a surprising technique that Nolan has chosen for his film. "Inception" and "The Dark Knight Rises" had the SFX and music mixed at a higher level than the dialog. This creates a realistic dynamic range. Just think, when you're flying a spaceship that is crashing and you're trying to yell over the malfunctioning controls and engines, your words would not be heard clearly. It is only bad during one pivotal scene where there is no SFX present. Whether by aesthetic, error, or the director's choice, it is very indiscernible and only frustrates the viewer.

This is a movie worth seeing in the theaters and I can picture myself seeing it several times. Buying it on Blu-ray though, that's debatable.

Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)

Part avant garde. Part black comedy. Part satire. Part super hero fantasy. All excellent.

[10/10 · 16 November 2014]

"Birdman: or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance" follows both the actions and the mind of washed-up movie star Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton), who is famous for his past role as Birdman. He is introduced in perhaps the most avant garde way imaginable. He floats above the floor in deep meditation as a gruff voice talks, reminding of the mess he is in and that the room he has now called home "smells of balls." The voice, like a poisonous Jiminy Cricket, is no other than an extension of Riggan—the Birdman. The line of fantasy and reality is blurred for him. The reality is that he is almost out of cash and his last hope of renewed fame relies on the success of a Broadway play that he's directing, writing, and starring in. His illusions and dreams will always be the fame of the Birdman—which is what he hopes to break away from.

The film shows both him and the audience that reinventing oneself for a comeback is never easy. Right from the start, Riggan loses an actor to a freak accident, which he replaces with an egotistical and unorthodox Method actor (Edward Norton). In every twisted way possible, he causes carnage for both the cast and Riggan. Likewise, his former drug-addicted daughter (Emma Stone) battles him every which way she can. He even has to fight a snobby, stick in the mud play critic (Lindsay Duncan). The only characters that help Riggan are his two female co- stars (Naomi Watts and Andrea Riseborough), his loyal publicist (Zack Galifanakis), and his supportive ex-wife (Amy Ryan), who sort of becomes the voice of reason.

"Birdman" can easily be interrupted as the iconic role of Michael Keaton. After all, he is most popular for his roles as Batman in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Since then, he has more or less vanished from the spotlight. Whether Keaton achieved catharsis or personal reflections in himself as Riggin, none of us can know. However, it is fair to say that this role was meant solely for him. He gives us an honest portrayal of a man who is at wits end to accomplish one last act of remembrance. He brings his flare of humor that has been seen from "Nightshift" and adds a new element of drama that audiences have never seen in him before. The supporting cast shares their moments of greatness, particularly Norton and Stone. Both of their chemistry on screen lights up sparks. But, it is Keaton who keeps the show moving ahead.

Alejandro Inarritu's visual style for this film matches the one Alfred Hitchcock pioneered in the film "Rope," using only 7-8 long takes as the camera moves around from one location of the set to another. This gives the audience an incite of the various actions that happen behind-the- scenes of a stage play and it helps propel the story forward in an interesting way. This method of camera work, meticulously and flawlessly crafted by cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, creates a feeling of real-life performances, where anything can happen spontaneously. The editing between scenes are carefully done with CG and time lapse effects to help master the seamless camera motions between cuts instead of simply shifting from one moment to the next. The set and production design imitate a grungy, old theater that looks real, almost disproving the notion for the viewer that the film was shot on a sound stage. The technical prowess of this film makes you feel like you really are part of the show.

"Birdman: or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance" is an outstanding film. It breaches the conventional story method and pushes the boundaries on how far a movie can go in terms of visuals and acting. Part avant garde. Part black comedy. Part satire. Part super hero fantasy. All excellent.

Gone Girl (2014)

A twisted, crazy, yet nicely executed mystery...

[9/10 · 9 November 2014]

When a director crafts a mystery thriller for the big screen, he not only has to be able to spin a good story from his scriptwriter, and show that story with the editor's prowess, and have it performed to ripeness with his actors, but he also has to carry the capacity to intrigue the audience enough and push them beyond their boundaries of excitement and discomfort. David Fincher is a master of these powers and that makes him an awesome filmmaker. He knows how to make a movie stick with you and he takes his viewers to some of the darkest places of the human mind.

"Gone Girl" is one of those good mystery thrillers that do not rely on suspense, thrills, or even a big twist at the end—all the typical makings of such a genre. In fact, I found myself guessing the remainder of the film's plot 30 minutes in. What kept me focused was the brilliantly written dialog and performances by the ensemble cast. Ben Affleck plays Nick Dunne, a down on his luck writer whose wife Amy (Rosamund Pike) has mysteriously vanished. As time of her disappearance grows longer, he becomes the prime suspect of her possible murder and the center of a media circus that is out for blood. The only solace he obtains is from his hipster twin sister Margo (Carrie Coon) and a well-known attorney (Tyler Perry), who has a $100,000 retainer.

The first hour of the film sets itself up as a realistic mystery, but then switches gears to a psychological drama that borders on horror when the truth behind Amy's disappearance unravels itself. This sudden revelation to a pseudo-film critic may seem like a Brian De Palma/noir femme fatale knockoff, but it actually is a bit of a study on how a terrible marriage can lead to psychopathy. The events that further transpire are messy, twisted, disturbing, gross, and yet exactly what it needs to keep the film going. Without giving much more away, I will mention that ending is quite good and gives the viewer something to think about.

Once again, David Fincher has surrounded himself with a great team. Jeff Cronenweth's cinematography evokes the natural lighting look combined with deep bluish hues to emphasis the bleak atmosphere. Kirk Baxter's editing is sharp and to the point in showing the plot's progression. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross's score adds an eerie atmosphere to the film. Fincher's direction displays his ability to capture exceptional performances from his cast. Rosamund Pike makes the movie as a very complicated, multi-layered character that we think we can understand, but we never really can comprehend. Carrie Coon fits in nicely as the supportive sister of Nick. She ranks as probably the most ordinary and down to earth character in the whole film. Even Ben Affleck delivers a fine performance. I never thought of him as much of an actor, but he plays an individual that is trapped in a horrific situation with plausibility. The sound mixing unfortunately lacks quality, making the dialog difficult to hear at times. It feels very much like a rough cut versus a final product. And while I like the ending, there are certain elements that seem to be overlooked or blatantly ignored if the events in the movie happened in a real scenario.

In short, "Gone Girl" proves itself as another great addition to Fincher's impeccable resume and may make the 2015 Oscar season.