Deepwater Horizon

            To celebrate Patriot’s Day coming out this weekend, we take a look back at Deepwater Horizon. For those who are unfamiliar, director Peter Berg and actor Mark Wahlberg first collaborated on the widely popular The Lone Survivor, and then proceeded to make the two aforementioned films. All 3 take incredible and devastating real life stories, and put them in gritty films meant to do justice for the real heroes.

            Don’t be confused: above all else, Deepwater Horizon is a disaster film. Unsuspecting characters mingle harmlessly and provide exposition about themselves and their surroundings to allow a second-half non-stop action fest. There are movies that follow the formula conventionally and do a good job at it, others do a poor job at it, and even some others try putting a twist on the formula. This film—for the most part—is successful.

            For a clear disaster film, what works the most is actually the beginning. It takes awhile for the action to start happening, so this means we have to care about the characters so that we’re worried about their fates when death closes in in the second half. The writing is solid and engaging, Wahlberg has chemistry with everyone, and Kurt Russell brings the soul and spirit into the film. John Malkovich plays a rather conventional white collar antagonist, but needless to say, the buildup for the inevitable is really well done.

            If you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade, I’ll quickly explain the point of this film. In 2010 an offshore oil rig exploded and resulted in the worst oil spill in U.S. history. This is the story of the workers on-board when it happened, and how pressure from executives to meet deadlines and cut costs ultimately led to the explosions that tragically killed and injured too many.

            The set for the film is basically the biggest ever used in a film, and it certainly adds to the film. There are plenty of shots of ordinary workers doing their job when mud and oil rumbles and rumbles until it finally blows. And it’s presented without holding back. This is a very strong PG-13 film as you watch workers blown back, saved by their helmets; they desperately try containing the oil that blocks their vision and slips them up. I’m simplifying the action and don’t want to describe everything that goes on, but trust me when I say that this film is engaging from start to finish. The climax was predictable, and therefore lacked some tension, but your heart will race as you root for the characters you spent the first half of the film getting to know.

            The movie won’t revolutionize anything, but that doesn’t have to stop it from being a solid film. It’s a disaster film you will enjoy watching, only amplified by the well-known fallout that took place afterward. It’s a testament to tell the story of real people in an unbelievably traumatizing situation, and for executing it with confidence and poise, I applaud the filmmakers and their efforts.

Blade Runner

Merry Christmas Eve! Now I’m sure you would expect me to do a Christmas movie (I’m thinking of you Die Hard), but with the teaser trailer for the sequel having debuted just a couple days ago, I’m reviewing Blade Runner. For the record, Ridley Scott is only taking producer duties for Blade Runner 2049, but with Harrison Ford returning and adding Ryan Goslng to the cast, it will certainly be interesting. Oh, and Denis Villenueve is directing, and I was a huge fan of Prisoners—not to mention he garnered huge praise for his most recent work Arrival.

            I gotta make sure I throw this disclaimer in near the beginning: Blade Runner is not an action sci-fi flick. Yes, it’s from Alien director Ridley Scott who would later give us movies such as Gladiator and The Martian. But Blade Runner is much different. It certainly has sci-fi appeal and influence-- video games such as Final Fantasy VII and Mass Effect clearly took notes from the film, and directors such as Christopher Nolan have cited this film as inspiration, but it also doesn’t fall into the trippier territory of films such as 2001: A Space Odyssey. Based on the cleverly titled book Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep by Philip K. Dick (he died before the release of the film, but praised what he saw which was about the first 20 minutes), this movie is much more philosophical. Perhaps Blade Jogger would be a more fitting title—the pacing is very deliberate and not at all what I was expecting.

            The movie stars Harrison Ford who was determined to not wear a hat because he was just coming from Raiders of the Lost Ark. The year is 2019 and genetic engineering has advanced so far as to create androids, or replicants, that are superior in intelligence and physicality. Their telltale sign is their responses to questions that are supposed to evoke human emotions. Created to work as slaves, replicants have rebelled in off-world colonies (remember this is 3 years from now) and are declared illegal on Earth and are to be terminated (they use the word retired) if found. This is where Ford comes in when it’s discovered that 6 replicants have returned to Earth. Obviously, this has all the ingredients to be a thrilling action flick. But it takes a much different direction. Replicants are designed with a failsafe that automatically retires them after 4 years. It produces cool, thinking quotes like, “It’s too bad she won’t live. But then again, who does?”

            Ridley Scott liked the idea of Ford being a replicant, but Ford has stated that he despised that idea and said that before filming Scott agreed with him that his character is definitely human. Now I won’t spoil anything, but I will say that it’s a question toiled with during the film. Also, if you watch the movie, watch the director’s cut version (which technically isn’t fully Scott’s cut) because the ending is much much better than the theatrical cut of the film.

            Really, above sci-fi or philosophical or whatever, I’d describe this film as weird. I’m not sure what you’re expecting from the film going in, but it’s not what you’re going to get. There isn’t ever a clear tone established, and this just adds to the difficulty of describing just what the film is. Even the highly-regarded score switches from slow, dark melodies to jazzier moments. I will say, however, probably the most consistent element of the film is the lighting. It’s certainly always on the darker side, but all the ways the light comes through in every scene is skillfully crafted.

            In all honesty I can’t even say I’m much of a fan of this film. I didn’t care for how it was edited, and some of the sub-plots really were weird. The movie succeeds in getting you to think, but it also makes you wonder what you just watched. I’m not sure how many times or how precisely I can say it, but it’s a strange film. Not strange like drug-fueled Trainspotting, and not confusing like Stanley Kubrick, but more cerebral like the very ends of the films 28 Days Later and Sunshine. I can’t say you will enjoy this film (possibly because I can’t say I enjoyed it), but I’m extremely curious about the sequel, and for that alone it might be worth checking this film out. And in case of rain, make sure to grab yourself a light-up umbrella. Those things are so cool.

#1 Skyfall

This is truly the pinnacle of Bond films. Although perhaps not the best opening action sequence overall, it succeeds in introducing the tone of the film-- one that fits perfectly with the narrative. It also introduces Naomie Harris who is a welcome addition to this revamped cast. And maybe the animation sequence doesn't tell the best story, but it's so clever, and when matched with Adele's titular song, it is definitely the best theme.

Early on Daniel Craig briefly sports a scruffy look. He doesn't come close to passing the physical. The psychological examination is clever. All of this and more builds on the approach Sam Mendes beautifully takes this film. And it's all backed behind a stellar cast. Ben Whishaw plays one of my favorite (if not favorite actually) characters in the young and arrogant techno Q, and of course adding Ralph Fiennes into the mix is awesome. This also marks the best narrative given to Judi Dench as the aging M (although give Judi Dench credit because she looks great for however many decades old she is).

If you didn't know it was coming, I had to save Javier Bardem for last. He is a powerhouse actor who became familiar to American audiences with his villainous turn in No Country for Old Men (I'd describe his character as the combination of Joker and Two Face from The Dark Knight). Also shout out to his starring role in Alejandro Inarritu's foreign film Biutiful. And if you need any more evidence of his quality acting, look no further than his malignant and sophisticated role in this film. His introduction and monologue is memorable, his actions are remorseless, and unlike Christoph Waltz's antagonist in the sequel, the execution of his plan is smart and scary. Easily the best villain of this series.

Something I haven't really discussed much from the other films but that is so vital to the success of this film is the cinematography. The film lost out to Life of Pi at the Oscars, but the shots of Shanghai-- in particular the silent action scene in the skyscraper is one of my favorites of any film-- are such a gorgeous combination of colors bursting from the dark surroundings (hmm, even a bit like the tone of the film).

This movie is the perfect blend of old and new Bond. Throw on top a great character-driven story, and not only is this my favorite film of Daniel Craig's series, it's my favorite Bond film (admittedly, I need to re-watch many of the classics, especially with Sean Connery). And not only is it my favorite Bond film, it's just a tremendous film on its own. Multiple scenes always pop out as memorable, and the climax is simply fantastic. Even if you haven't seen Casino Royale, or any Bond film for that matter, I can't stress enough that to anybody and everybody I give a high recommendation to go watch Skyfall.

#2 Casino Royale

I love love love the opening to Casino Royale. It's a perfect blend of infusing classic Bond while showing the world hey, this is the new direction we plan on taking this series. Admittedly, Daniel Craig is an unconventional look, but his charm will win you over. The parkour of the action sequence is really fun to watch (and Johnny English Reborn basically spoofs it and it's hilarious), but it's the opening scene that puts this as the best intro. The theme is a good song, not great, but fits well; the animation is clever and works well, and that's what puts "You Know my Name" as the 2nd best theme.

It doesn't matter who you are, if you prefer blondes over brunettes, or whatever it may be. Eva Green is the best Bond Girl in the Craig franchise. She brings the wit to match the man in the tux at every step. I'm a fan of Mads Mikkelsen, and he would be the best villain if it weren't for the #1 pick. Judi Dench is a solid choice, and she actually is reprising her role as M from the previous series. Jeffrey Wright also brings quality to the film, so I believe we've settled that the cast works well.

As far as story is concerned, there is a lot of good and a little bad. If you have establishing shots of well-known areas, putting title cards to tell you where the characters are currently at is cheap and dubs down the audience; this is something this film avoids even if it's brought into Quantum of Solace solely to make sure that sequel was a disappointment. The point is that you'll almost always see me praise subtlety. That really isn't the case here. I'd probably recommend subtitles actually for this film because details are sometimes given in low voices that's hard to pick up. The plot moves to a new action scene, or the characters suddenly display new motivations; and if you aren't paying attention to everything going on, chances are there will be something confusing. In fact, this was probably around my third viewing of the film and I picked up on new ideas while still being in the dark about others-- there are movies like Inception and The Prestige that work these details and foreshadowing effectively (both obviously Christopher Nolan films), but it's more of an annoyance here. And as we're on the topic of story, the writing and dialogue gets half-credit. The movie is way too choppy, but there are still some great quips:
Bond: Vodka-martini
Bartender: Shaken or stirred?
Bond: Do I look like I give a damn?
And my favorite:
Vesper (Eva Green): Am I going to have a problem with you, Bond?
Bond: No, don't worry. You're not my type.
Vesper: Smart?
Bond: Single.

On a final note for the story, I'm a sucker for well-constructed scenes like the development of the poker hands, and the torture scene is one of the best in any film. The confusion I've been referring to is mainly in the last 30 minutes. I'll say no more than that, but it's kind of hard to put a finger on what the goal was or what went wrong. These closing scenes aren't bad-- the climax is an awesome set-- but I don't believe it works to the degree the movie hopes for. Overall, the cast is all solid, but it's not the film's fault that the #1 pick has a better ensemble; what really brings the film down to the 2 slot is some choppy scenes and a confused plot. And if those are the critiques I have to give it, that should tell you that this really is a good film. It gets my recommendation, and if you're somebody who hasn't seen a Daniel Craig James Bond film, there's no better place to start than here. Tomorrow, you'll hear my reasoning on why one of the sequels surpasses this film, and you are free to disagree with my reasoning.

#3 Spectre

Sam Mendes returned as director for the fourth installment of the Daniel Craig James Bond series. With everything from questions of how long Craig would be doing this to what a huge budget the film had, there's lots to discuss.

Arguably the best place to start, lets talk about the beginning. Production values are imminent from the opening shots. Although there is hardly a cut or a word for the first five minutes, there isn't really anything special that happens. And this ends up taking a toll when the run-time is just under 2 and 1/2 hours. There's some cool helicopter stunts (with some disbelief of reality put aside), but I still consider this action sequence only the third best. And then you also have to talk about Sam Smith's "Writing's on the Wall." His voice is fantastic and the relevance of the animation in accordance with the story is appreciated, but there's some lacking quality that doesn't seem to fit in with a 007 film. And the animation overall didn't strike me as impressive, so I still rank this theme as third best as well.

Spectre attempts to tie in the previous films into this plot. I guess there's points for effort, but it doesn't really have a huge emotional connection to pull it off. And there were multiple instances where a scene could've been tidied up or even cut entirely. But no. This movie just had to make it to 2 1/2 hours. It's just really long and a little draining.

I think I was still fine with the film up until a snowy mountain sequence where Bond ends up driving like this cargo plane. And as problems arise, the sequence goes into the most Pierce Brosnan-esque style of action-- so over-the-top that it's just like c'mon man.

Lea Seydoux adds a nice touch, and Monica Bellucci certainly adds a bit of a surprising element for Bond Girls. Really have no issue there. And then fans of Sherlock will recognize Andrew Scott in the film. Having gained attention as Moriarty, I was intrigued to see him step into a different role... That didn't happen. Pretty sure the producers told him to act almost exactly as Moriarty had. The result is nothing surprising, which is a disappointment and also a little frustrating.

But lets talk about what had the most potential overall for the film: Christoph Waltz. After having Javier Bardem kill it as the villain in the previous film, I think Waltz is an excellent choice to bring new elements. But this is easily the worst aspect of any Daniel Craig Bond film. Which pains me so much to say because there's a good deal of build-up. His introduction has great camerawork and lighting, and it creates a mystical veil around the organization and his role behind it. And this lasts for lets say 8 minutes. Then the movie basically forgets about it for a good hour. He's brought back, and it could still be very interesting despite a drop in fanfare. But what was supposed to be a tense, high-production action set-piece is set back with a surprisingly boring backstory for the villain filled with ideas that say "This is the bad guy and he's bad and he does bad things because he's bad" and unbelievably predictable action. And I guess they make it appear he's dead, but everyone knows that's not the case--even if the run-time is padded already. The climax reminds me of Mission Impossible Rogue Nation if that climax was also filled with cliches. And what I mean by that comparison is that Rogue Nation kind of has their climax setup like a heist, and you don't really feel any tension because you feel like it all is part of the good guys' plans. Spectre is similar to this, and the ignorance and stupidity that leads to the demise of the villain makes me think that the writers just couldn't think of any other logical possibility for a death.

Spectre isn't all bad, like the returns of Ben Whishaw as Q and Ralph Fiennes as M were very welcome, but it's a very flawed film that certainly had potential. If anything, it makes me want Craig to return one last time for an awesome sendoff. As for the two films I ranked higher, I believe there are some differing opinions on which is better, but after re-watching both, the choice is clear to me.

#4 Quantum of Solace

Today is considered to be James Bond's birthday! So to celebrate we're going to rank all 4 Daniel Craig 007 films.

If you haven't guessed by the title, the sequel to Casino Royale ranks last. And honestly, it's not even close. To understand this film, think of it as a trigger-happy Bourne film. And I mean that in one of the worst ways possible. The editing is atrocious. The film takes a Matrix Reloaded approach and stacks action on action; however, it's not even as successful as that film. The opening action sequence has one decent moment, but anyone able to follow the rapid edits deserves an award. What such rapid editing tends to correlate with is weak content to begin with. Some well thought out long shots could've worked effectively, but the truth is that there just isn't anything special about the action set-pieces besides perhaps locale. And don't even mention the parachute opening 10 feet above the ground. You can't walk away from that without an injury.

Although I can appreciate some of what Jack White accomplished with "Another Way to Die," Alicia Keys only takes away from the song-- making it and the corresponding animation the worst theme as well. The Bond Girls are the worst as well. Let's see, what other worsts does it have... Oh yeah! The villain is so uninteresting. And it's so obvious during the climax that there's no way he could even put up a fight against Bond.

Despite going for the darker, remorseless tone, I actually felt that Daniel Craig brought some of his greatest charm in this film. Even though there really isn't any cool dialogue to accompany him, I feel that after already having one round as the famous Brit, Craig was tailored in his approach to the character, and it's one of the aspects that pays off for the film.

But enough praise. The film has annoying characters, and even when trying to fit elements from the previous film, the plot is so basic and not memorable in any way. But when you have an action flick, almost all can be forgiven with quality action. And the film just falls flat. Not only is this the worst Craig Bond film, it just isn't a quality picture. It's a misstep, and that probably contributed to the gap between this film and the next one.

Tomorrow, starting with #3, the other Bond films are certainly entertaining to differing degrees. There's a lot to compare and a lot to talk about. And just as a little something to think about, the producers considered George Clooney to be the new Bond, but he smartly declined due to him obviously not being British (a couple years after this he even starred in The American). As always, comments and suggestions are appreciated and encouraged. Feel free to agree or disagree with this list, and tell me how you would rank them. Signing out for tonight, the name's Gill. Jacob Gill.

The Best Movie Ever Made

We're not talking about the first plan. We're not even talking about plans 2-8. No sir, I am referring to Plan 9 from Outer Space. This gem is written, produced, and directed by Ed Wood, Jr. There's numerous stories of actors doing stupid things-- for example, an actor playing a cop would repeatedly point his gun at himself-- just to see if Mr. Wood would notice (Spoiler, he didn't).

Now, there are really only 2 types of moments in this film: moments that are so bad it's funny, and moments that are just plain bad. I'm talking about an awful narrator who, whenever he mentions a character or setting, there must an awkward edit to show what he's talking about-- in case the audience was confused. The writing is so choppy, for better and definitely for worse, the directing is just... just bad. I don't think there's any other way to say it. And the actors would just get their lines over with because they had better things to do with their lives.

So what is this ninth plan? Well, aliens with much laughably better technology come to Earth in their flying saucers on strings. And in order to make sure Earth creatures don't destroy the shared universe, they must be destroyed. Thus, the best way for the aliens to accomplish this goal is to obviously raise the dead using their electron guns. This diabolical plan ends up raising a total of 3 creatures throughout the movie: a big detective, Dracula, and Vampira. Trust me when I tell you how haunting and scary and gory and... Oh I can't do it. The biggest laughs are watching the 3 walk over to the main characters as the characters just stare and watch in "horror".

This movie isn't always good, but it certainly is always bad. Look it up. There's horror and drama and sci-fi babble with quick edits. Not sure how much more you can ask for. There's even a Johnny Depp film called Ed Wood based on this guy (haven't watched it though). Okay, that's all from me. And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.