The Ides of March

It’s that time of year again. That’s right, today is the day you can stab your Caesar salad with a fork and not feel guilty about it. It’s also the name of the movie George Clooney wrote, directed, and acted in. It’s based off the off-Broadway Farragut North. You may have known that it stars Ryan Gosling, but you might not have known that it was originally set to star Leo Dicaprio; he dropped out, but he remained on as executive producer.

            What seems to be one of the most relevant questions of today is would you take Ryan Reynolds or Ryan Gosling? Especially after Deadpool most say Reynolds in a heartbeat. Personally, I’ve been more of a fan of Gosling ever since Drive. So I was excited about this movie. I also remembered that it would have Philip Seymour Hoffman (who I will abbreviate as PSH) which can only ever be a benefit, and the film was rounded out by the likes of Jeffrey Wright and Paul Giamatti. Right off the back this movie is built to be a dramatic powerhouse aiming at the Oscars.

            Ryan Gosling plays Stephen, a man just under the campaign manager (PSH) for George Clooney’s democratic campaign in the primaries; the political aspect focuses on needing the delegates from Ohio’s primary as the ticket to the White House. Giamatti comes in as the rival campaign manager, and Wright is a representative who has dropped out but has plenty of delegates and support to give to the candidate that promises him a cabinet post. All of this is good, smart stuff that is just asking to have a plot twist happen somewhere. You can just feel that there’s going to be some kind of punch that drives the film through.

            But it totally falls flat. Gosling plays an optimistic staff worker who sees the best in his candidate, but as the movie goes on, he starts seeing the darker side of politics. This eventual darker turn is supposed to work well; however, without giving away any spoilers, the movie has a plot twist about an hour in and sticks with it through the remainder of the film. The problem is how basic the twist is. It feels like such a cop out. There’s a bunch of political intrigue to dive into, but instead the movie takes a clichéd personal route where the characters all relate to each other in some “meaningful” way to tie it all up. And it’s just lame. It’s formulaic, and anyone who watches movies will be neither surprised nor interested in the plot twist.

            Okay, so the story and intensity let me down. “How about the acting?” you may ask. Well, good question, devoted readers. Overall, Gosling’s character is pretty simple. It doesn’t call for him to really do much besides be charismatic in the first half and darker in the second. It’s a good performance, but there isn’t much depth. Clooney limits his own screen time to focus on the directing, but what we do see of his character is pretty interesting. Again, the twist is lame, but that doesn’t take away from his performance. Giamatti and Wright are always strong supporting characters. The real hero is PSH. I swear, this late actor was the actor of our generation. He has a very distinguished style in his acting, but every single character he has in every movie he does he makes his own. They’re all different, interesting, and scene-stealing.  It seriously hurts knowing that he died well before his time was due, but every movie I’ve watched with him is only ever elevated by his performance. The same goes for this movie. He may not carry the same kind of gravitas you see with A list actors, but the subtlety in his expressions and vocals is some of the greatest work I have ever seen. This by far isn't his best film, but it still brings me so much join watching PSH do his work.

            Honestly, I’d say stay away from this film. It’s not a drama that will bore you by any means, but it won’t have any effect on you at all. Except maybe that there’s dirt in every profession, there isn’t really a message to take away, and there was zero intensity necessary to make a true drama work. And it all stems from the plot twist an hour into the film. It’s a shame to see a mistake like that basically ruin a decent film. I knew I should’ve watched Beauty and the Beast instead of this film…

Wick, John

January was a rather slow month for movies. Nevertheless, yesterday marked the release of John Wick Chapter 2, The Lego Batman Movie, and all the shades of everyone’s favorite color. So tonight we take a look at John Wick, the surprising hit of an action flick from a couple years ago.

            Keanu Reeves will always be known for The Matrix, and this movie reunites him with his stunt double from those films who takes a shot in the director's chair. The film basically has 2 directors (and one is scheduled to direct Deadpool 2 so there’s that), and since both come from a background of doing stunts from dozens of your favorite action movies, this film gets boiled down to its essence. They aren’t going to try wowing you with a special plot; no, they’re going to deliver high-octane action. And really it’s quite successful.

            Keanu did some major training for the highly choreographed scenes and performs most of his own stunts, and the result pays off. Expect a high body count, and expect many of them to have some really cool kill shots. This film knows its goal is to entertain with cool, quick action, and that’s exactly what it does.

            I will say, however, one of the best and worst parts comes from the beginning. The film honestly almost takes an Up approach of giving the audience all the exposition it needs in a small time without much dialogue at all. And I love that. But it—along with just a few action moments—gets heavy-handed. Like at one point Keanu is grabbing all his guns and gearing up, and the movie blares a rocking song about guns and killing and it feels a bit too obvious.

            I wasn’t going to talk about the plot because, well, who cares for this film, but it leads to my other critique. The film gets a nice supporting role from Willem Dafoe and gives way too little screen time to John Leguizamo, but the plot gets going after a mob boss’s son steals from John Wick and leaves him for dead. This son, Iosef, is annoyingly stereotypical. He’s brash, arrogant, and above all else, completely inept. He fits the bill of all the stereotypes, and it just makes you wonder how long it will take John Keanu Reeves Wick to hunt him down.

            It’s been awhile since an action film has had this much style to it. It overcomes typical shortcomings by thoroughly delivering in well-executed action scenes. And it really makes me want to go to the theaters and watch the sequel. If you do go to the movies, just please don’t see the darker shades of grey. Like why would you do that to yourself?

Forget it, Jacob. It's Chinatown.

I was trying to find an excuse to review this movie, and the Chinese New Year is close enough for me. What we have here today is truly a powerhouse of a film. Chinatown is a drama about a private investigator Jake (Jack Nicholson) who gets hired by a Mrs. Evelyn Mulwray (Faye Dunaway) because she believes her husband is having an affair. Jake quickly gets to work, but when Mr. Mulwray turns up dead and Evelyn not possibly actually being Evelyn, the movie starts messing with you in the best possible way.

            Before I discuss anything further, I have to talk about the script. It’s truly amazing just how good the writing is. It kills me not to discuss any spoilers, and I won’t, but you learn just the right amount of details from every scene as the depth to the complexity of the story and the characters slowly unwinds in metaphorical wonder. If there aren’t classes that already do this, then scriptwriting classes should always point to this movie when discussing how to essentially write a perfect script. No joke, as experienced of a writer I am, this script is almost as well-written as these reviews.

            Anyways, Roman Polanski directs this film, and one of his most notable contributions is the tone. The dude had a rough past, especially with where they shot the film, and admittedly this is a formula that does not equal out to a rainbow and smiles kind of movie. And this has got to be the most normal character Jack Nicholson has ever played, and the best thing to say is that it’s just a joy to watch an actor take the protagonist and make it his own. The supporting cast shines—I shouldn’t even have to say it, but this obviously includes the brilliantly complex performance from Faye Dunaway.

            Obviously, the most famous line is the one I reference in the title; however, that’s not actually my favorite line of the film. What’s so much fun is that I actually can’t tell you what it is because it’d be too much of a spoiler, so all I will say is that the line is a big reveal I did not by any means expect in the latter half of the movie. It’s some deep subject matter, and I say with a smirk that you have to watch the film to understand what I’m talking about.

            I understand that some movies I review and recommend will not exactly put you in a good mood after watching them… And yeah, this movie isn’t different. But if you’re prepared for a slow-burner that will shock and entertain you (but not put a smile on your face), then watch Chinatown. Well, that’s all from me. Now that you’ve read this review, go out and celebrate with your roosters.

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.