Underrated and Under Seen (So Far) in 2015 – Movies Spotlight – June 2015

A lot of great films have come out in 2015 so far. Blockbusters like Avengers: Age of Ultron, Mad Max: FuryRoad and Pixar’s Inside Out, as well as a bunch of really good indie films like Ex Machina, Clouds of Sils Maria, It Follows, Love & Mercy, Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, Slow West, What We Do in the Shadows, Far from the Madding Crowd, Dope, While We’re Young, and ‘71. It is easy to say that all these independent films are under seen (because they are), but that is a function of availability and the economics of film distribution. One might also say that Mad Max: Fury Road is under seen relative to other big blockbusters like Jurassic World and Furious 7, both of which have greatly out-performed Mad Max at the box office but are not on the same level of critical praise (or even close – personally, I think Furious 7 is 2015’s most overrated film so far). Thus, I am going to look at two Hollywood films that had all the right elements to be hits but failed commercially and critically; when really, they are both very good films.

Film: Blackhat

Director: Michael Mann

Stars: Chris Hemsworth, Wei Tang, Viola Davis, Leehom Wang, Ritchie Coster, John Ortiz, and Yorick van Wageningen

Plot Summary: When a hacker’s malware triggers the meltdown of a Chinese power plant, the Chinese and American governments turn to their own computer experts to find and stop this new hacker threat.

Why You Should Give It a Chance: Writer-director Michael Mann makes dynamic dramas and sprawling crime epics. His films feature beautiful aesthetics and a gripping realism. For most of his career, his films were greeted with critical acclaim and strong box office numbers (films like Thief, The Last of the Mohicans, Heat, The Insider, and Collateral). His recent efforts, however, seem to have failed to reach their audiences (although, Miami Vice, Public Enemies and now Blackhat are all very good crime drama/thrillers that I think time and perspective will reinstate as canonized quality films). Blackhat benefits from good leading performances from Chris Hemsworth and Wei Tang, as well as Mann, cinematographer Stuart Dryburgh and production designer Guy Hendrix Dyas’s wonderful and vital aesthetics. Blachhat is a topically relevant crime thriller, playing on the scary idea of the future (or present) of cyber terrorism, but more than that it is a captivating film, not just in terms of its use of tension, but in its ability to immerse its viewer in its world and vision.

Trailer: Here

Available on: Blu-ray and Video On-Demand

Film: Tomorrowland

Director: Brad Bird

Stars: Britt Robertson, George Clooney, Raffey Cassidy, and Hugh Laurie

Plot Summary: With ambitions to make tomorrow better than today, a bright teen with scientific talent and curiosity (Casey) teams up with a jaded former wunderkind inventor (Frank) to make those ambitions a reality by finding ‘Tomorrowland’.

Why You Should Give It a Chance: Let me start with the cast. Britt Robertson and Raffey Cassidy are fantastic in the film, delivering great and strong performances (continuing 2015’s seeming attempt to promote feminism in cinema, Mad Max: Fury Road’s Imperator Furiosa as the poster-woman). George Clooney is good as well. Writer-director Brad Bird’s films generally provide a good mix of comedy, resonating drama and brilliant action (his other work includes: The Iron Giant, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol). Tomorrowland is no different; however, what I think sets it apart and makes it something special and worthwhile is its cinematic/dramatic aspiration. Not just to enthrall, excite and entertain, it does those things too, but to inspire its viewers to once again dream. Much like last year’s Interstellar, Tomorrowland is a call to its viewers to once again look ahead with wonder and hope and not just settle for the doom and gloom malaise that seems to have overcome us as a people. We do not like to think about the future, because now the future does not seem as bright as today. But our dreams, imagination, ingenuity, and work effort can change that. This is what is at the heart of Tomorrowland.

Trailer: Here

Available on: Blu-ray and Video On-Demand

At the Movies – February 2014 – Part 3: Most Anticipated Films

Must-See of the Month:

The Monuments Men (George Clooney) – War Drama – Feb 7

Plot Summary: As WWII was coming to a close in Europe, the Nazi army retreating on all fronts, a team of specialists is assembled to try and save the art masterpieces that the Nazis had stolen during the war with the plans of destroying them. It will be a difficult mission, as these men are not really soldiers, but to find the art they will need to go right up to the front. Filmmakers: This is writer-director George Clooney’s fifth feature film, coming off his best to date The Ides of March (some like Good Night, and Good Luck. too but I think it is very overrated, and Confessions of a Dangerous Mind has its moments, while Leatherheads is just plain bad). He is working again with writing partner Grant Heslov, composer Alexandre Desplat, cinematographer Phedon Papamichael, and production designer James Bissell. Cast: Clooney also stars in the film with a great ensemble supporting him: Matt Damon, Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Hugh Bonneville, and Bob Balaban. Expectations: Originally, The Monuments Men was slated as a strong competitor in the race for Best Picture, but 2013 proved to be too strong a year and thus Columbia Pictures pushed it to 2014. I also have the sneaking suspicion that it is also not the amazing film that the cast, crew, and expectation might dictate it be. February is a very weak month for movies (just ahead of January – unless you consider carryover expansion-releases from December, then it is weaker than January), and thus what would probably not be a must-see in any other month ends up being the film with the most potential. It is not necessarily a must for theater-viewing, but I think it is a strong candidate for rental. The cast alone makes it worth a look. Trailer: Here.

Gravity (2013), in 3D – Review

Review: Gravity is a remarkable cinematic experience, treating the audience to a thrilling journey of human perseverance and striking beauty. The film is about the mission of the Space Shuttle Explorer, tasked with installing new equipment on the Hubble Space Telescope. However, the mission goes awry when the Russians accidently launch a missile into Space destroying one of their communication satellites sending debris into orbit around Earth causing a catastrophic chain-reaction. The debris, moving at incredibly high speeds, is on a collision course with Explorer, having already destroyed multiple satellites (creating even more debris). The crew of Explorer is not able to act fast enough and is caught in the cloud of piercing debris leaving two members of the crew adrift in Space, Mission Specialist Dr. Ryan Stone and veteran astronaut Mission Commander Matt Kowalski. Now, Stone and Kowalski must do everything they can to survive.

Writer-director Alfonso Cuaron’s story is a simple one (leaving behind almost everything sci-fi films are known for). The film is at its heart about the triumphant will of the human spirit to persevere against all odds. And structurally, the narrative is built on the characters facing mounting obstacles in a very classical sense (with a clear three-act structure). Cuaron does a fantastic job managing the pacing and tone. He keeps the audience in a tight suspenseful grip, never letting the tension fully dissipate, but allowing the audience to catch their breath (which is essential when making a great thriller) and take in the sheer brilliance of the stunning visuals. The experience is intense, but ultimately rewarding.

Cuaron keeps the audience intimately attached to the characters (particularly Stone, who is the lead), which creates a bond between the audience and the characters (as to some extent they both go through the ordeal of being alone in Space, seemingly without hope, together). A lot of the film sees Cuaron’s camera very close to Stone’s face or from her perspective. And, if the camera is away from her, the sound design emphasizes her breathing. The audience is always in touch with her emotions (whether she is scared, excited, nervous, etc.). Cuaron is so successful in his ability to connect the audience to Stone that she becomes a vessel for each audience member. The struggle that she engages in, the audience also engages in – her emotions become the audience’s emotions.

The magnificent visuals (created digitally to look as photo-realistic as possible) also do a lot to bring the audience into the film. The vastness of Space is eerie and bleak, while the lush and colorful Earth seems comforting. Space is unforgiving and impossible to sustain life in (as stated in the opening moments of the film), and yet as comforting as Earth may appear it feels so far away, only escalating the terrifying reality that these characters are alone. Additionally, everything feels and looks very real in the environment, which is a credit to Cuaron and his skilled team of technicians. Realistic or not in reality, the film appears to be and feels completely honest in its portrayal of every aspect. The emotional journey of the characters pulls the audience into the narrative, but the stunning visuals set the stage wonderfully.

The visuals are also notable in regards to the use of 3D technology in the film. The amazing depth that it adds is beguiling (and a necessary component to feel the full experience). Avatar reintroduced the cinema world to what 3D, when done well, could offer as a cinematic event experience. But, since Avatar’s release at the end of 2009, there have only been two films that use 3D justifiably (amidst the absolute plethora of 3D releases and rereleases): Life of Pi and Gravity. This film sets a new standard for the medium (in a sense shamming everything that has come before it, aside from Life of Pi – though, Gravity is in completely different category of excellence). The 3D in Gravity is so much better than anything audiences have seen before that it is staggering. Cuaron (who is very critical of 3D’s use in film) spent years in post-production refining the look of this film (and the 3D) until it was perfect – much to the benefit of the audience. I am not a fan of 3D. It almost always looks terrible and actually takes away from the film in almost all cases, but like Avatar and Life of Pi I would implore those wishing to see Gravity to see it in 3D – it is just a transcendent experience unlike any other in cinema this year.

The theme of rebirth is heavily featured throughout the narrative. There is a scene in particular in which Stone resembles a fetus floating in a womb (when she gets to the International Space Station and takes off her Space suit). Throughout, Stone is tested with obstacle after obstacle, each more challenging and mentally and emotionally demanding. Cuaron makes it clear in the first act that she is a novice in Space. Thus, in order to survive, alone, she must come to terms with her own fear and find within herself the will to live and let go of her dread. In a sense, she must be reborn. Stone lost her daughter in a freak accident and seems to have not fully come to terms with that loss, leaving her sort of floating through life without a true will to stubbornly keep going in spite of the hardships she has faced. Thus, for Stone to overcome her predicament she must find her internal fight. This is something very relatable to us all – to face tragedy and find a way to keep moving forward. Stone’s journey in some ways ultimately becomes about her acceptance of her daughter’s death more so than her struggle to survive. She must want to survive and to do that, again, she must let go of what is holding her back. This is very powerful emotionally and thematically, as it taps into some very basic and human: the want/need to be alive.

In many ways Gravity is ‘pure cinema’ in that it offers a simple story set in an extraordinary environment that completely engages and captivates its audience. The film provides gripping intense suspense, deeply resonating emotional character drama, and even lighter moments of effective brevity. Cuaron has made a film with everything narratively, but Gravity will probably be remembered for its devastatingly spectacular visuals. They are unlike anything audiences have seen in cinema – a new crowning achievement.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Alfonso Cuaron has now made seven feature films. With each film, he exhibits both an innate ability to capture emotional truth and brilliantly design his narratives, particularly from a directing standpoint. His films are always highly compelling to watch artistically – his use of long-take shots is legendary (Gravity opens with a shot that is almost thirteen minutes long before the first edit – essentially the whole first act). He is among cinema’s greatest active auteurs (and personally, I love his films Love in the Time of Hysteria, Y Tu Mama Tambien, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Children of Men, and now Gravity).

Composer Steven Price’s score is captivating. It does not just serve the role of accompaniment to the drama on screen; rather it engages the audience on an emotional level as well. It heightens the panic and fear, enraptures the film’s beauty, and transports the viewer’s imagination. Here is a sampling. Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki is one of Cuaron’s most fruitful collaborators. They have known each other since childhood and have made six films together. On Gravity, Lubezki faced an incredible challenge: lighting the actors’ faces to match an environment that was created entirely digitally. Lubezki uses what he calls an LED box (which was invented for the film) to light the actors’ to match the VFX scenery. His work looks phenomenal and is even more impressive given the immense degree of difficulty (plus the number of long-takes in the film only amplified the degree of difficulty). Lubezki again separates himself as one of cinema’s most talented D.P.s with his work on the film. It is staggeringly good (here is an interesting interview with Lubezki regarding his work on the film). Andy Nicholson is relatively new to production design, but comes from a background of doing fantastic work as an art director. On Gravity, his design work is wonderfully beautiful (with credit also going to Lubezki, Cuaron, and VFX supervisor Tim Webber) as well as very realistic. As stunning as the film looks (the shots of Earth and the rising sun are breathtaking), an essential component to creating a fully immersive experience was creating a world that looked as authentic as possible, and this is where Nicholson’s work truly shines. The audience never questions whether the characters are really in Space (intuitively knowing that the actors are not), and that is a remarkable accomplishment.

Gravity exists chiefly as a consuming thriller and momentous visual experience, but underneath it is in many ways a character drama built on excellent performances. In a fun nod to Apollo 13, Ed Harris features in a small voice role as Mission Control. George Clooney is very good as Matt Kowalski, playing the astronaut as being very confident (a seasoned veteran) and yet still very human. His charm and charisma not only soothes Stone but also the audience in what could be (and still is) a very traumatic moment (Explorer being overrun by debris sending Stone tumbling into oblivion). Sandra Bullock gives the performance of her career as Dr. Ryan Stone (yes, it completely overshadows the caricature that somehow won her an Oscar). Bullock gives a very physical performance, and one that must have been very demanding (with the aid of puppeteers – who also did the stage production of War Horse). For large portions of the film, Bullock must convey everything just with her eyes, face, voice, and breathing and she is utterly enthralling throughout. Her emotional journey becomes the audience’s journey as well, and that could only be accomplished by her brilliant work.

Summary & score: As a film about the fascination and/or terror of Space, Gravity ascends to the same heights as 2001: A Space Odyssey and Alien in terms of creating pure astonishment and dread. But as a visually jarring experience about letting go and finding a way, against all odds, to persevere, the film is simply wondrous (maybe even overwhelmingly so). 10/10

Movie of the Week – Michael Clayton

This week’s movie is Michael Clayton (2007).

The drama is about Michael Clayton, a prominent New York law firm’s fixer. Clayton finds himself immersed in a dangerous conspiracy when his friend and lead console on the firm’s biggest case has a sudden nervous breakdown. The film is written and directed by Tony Gilroy (his directorial debut), who is best known for writing the screenplays for all four films in the Jason Bourne series (he is also directing The Bourne Legacy). Gilroy worked with fantastic people on the film including composer James Newton Howard, cinematographer Robert Elswit and production designer Kevin Thompson. George Clooney stars, giving one of the best performances of his career, solidifying him as a great dramatic leading man. The supporting cast is phenomenal with brilliant work from Tilda Swinton and especially Tom Wilkinson (who gives one of the great supporting performances of the decade). Denis O’Hare, Michael O’Keefe and Sydney Pollack are good in small roles. Gilroy’s directing allows the actors to really dive deeply into their characters, much to the benefit of the film, which plays as a great character piece with tones of mystery and crime drama in addition to its main genre of thriller/drama. It was nominated for seven Oscars (winning one for Swinton) including Best Picture. I would not quite call it a modern classic, but it is among the ten best of 2007 with The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Atonement, The Darjeeling Limited, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Juno, Knocked Up, No Country for Old Men, Sunshine, and There Will Be Blood (one of the stronger years of the 2000s). It is worth checking out for fans of Clooney and political-style thrillers/dramas. Check out the trailer.

Available on Blu-ray, DVD and Streaming

LeapBackBlog 2011 Film Awards – Part 4: Leading Performances

Film in 2011 saw many very good films. Deciding what made the lists and what did not was very difficult this year, and there are more than a few great films, performances and technical achievements that I had to leave off. The LeapBackBlog Film Awards are comprised of what I think were the best and most interesting films, the strongest performances (taking into consideration who the actor is and what else they have done, and 2011 again features a lot of amazing breakthrough performances), the narrative style that drew me in (best directing), and exquisite craftsmanship (best technical achievements). But really, these are lists of my favorites from the year.

Part 1: Technical Achievements

Part 2: Supporting Performances

Part 3: Directors

Part 5: Films

Leading Performances:

George Clooney – The Descendants

The Descendants is built on its fantastic performances headlined by standout work from newcomer Shailene Woodley and George Clooney. He had a very good 2011 with this film and co-starring, co-writing and directing The Ides of March. In the last few years, Clooney has been making a name for himself as an acting heavyweight with performances in Syriana, Michael Clayton, Up in the Air, and The American. However with The Descendants, he does the best work of his career. There is still signs of his swagger that he brings to his work, but he is also very vulnerable and seems completely at a lose and out of his depth, which is perfect for his character Matt King a parent having to take sole responsibility for his two daughters for the first time while also being saddled with unwanted outside family pressures.

Viola Davis – The Help

Viola Davis is a pillar of strength in The Help. It is easy to say the film is about perseverance and that her character Aibileen embodies all the qualities that come which the heroine of such a narrative, as that is true. But, The Help and Aibileen strive for more. Davis triumphs because of the depth and humanity she brings to the role. Yes, she is a strong woman as her character, but there is also a real fear as well. Without this fear, her story and actions would not resonate and mean as much as they do. The Help is one of the year’s best films because of the work of Davis and the other great actresses. Otherwise, it might have turned out to be another thinly veiled morally self-aggrandizing hollow film like Crash (one of the most overrated films of the last decade).

Kirsten Dunst – Melancholia

Winning the 2011 Cannes Film Festival Best Actress award for her performance in Melancholia, Kirsten Dunst does the best work of her career. Her character Justine has such an interesting arc – going from seemingly happy in the opening moments to being completely incapacitated by depression, only to find strength and purpose within herself when the world is about to end. She does not fear it, unlike all the other characters in the film. The range that the performance demands would be difficult for even great actresses, but Dunst seems to make it her own bringing such beauty and sadness to Justine. It is such a nuanced and subtle piece of work that I can only expect great thing from her in the future (as this is probably my favorite female performance of the year).

Michael Fassbender – Shame

No one had a better 2011 than Michael Fassbender. He starred in four films (Jane Eyre, X-Men: First Class, A Dangerous Method, and Shame), giving brilliant performances in each (all of which could have probably made this list). However, it is with Shame that he does his most interesting work. As sex addict Brandon, Fassbender gives a haunting performance in which he seems to degrade himself into something subhuman. He completely gives himself over to the character (which must have been hard to deal with when the cameras were not rolling – the pain, anger and bleakness of it). Carey Mulligan gives another great supporting performance (in addition to Drive) and Fassbender plays off her very well. It is phenomenal work and one of the bravest performances of the 2011.

Rooney Mara – The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

What is so incredible about Rooney Mara’s work in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is that her role was played ironically by Noomi Rapace in 2009 (2010 for U.S. audiences), and yet Mara brings so much to the role and is just as iconic (different, but equally as good, if not better). For those that have not seen her in Tanner Hall or the brilliant small supporting part she plays in The Social Network, her work here is the breakout performance of the year, as Mara is now a star and one of Hollywood’s most sought-after actresses. Mara plays Lisbeth Salander to be confident in troubling situations, but awkward and vulnerable when it comes to more personal relationships. She is mesmerizing, the audience misses her when she is not onscreen and anticipates her return (which can be said of the best performances).

Gary Oldman – Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

In what is one of the most subtly and subdued performances of the year, Gary Oldman is absolutely phenomenal as George Smiley in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Smiley is such a difficult role to portray cinematically, as he is so boxed up emotionally. But, Oldman is able to give the audience just enough to make Smiley relatable allowing the audience to feel what he feels, while still being true to the character. He is one of the best character actors working today. I am not sure a lesser actor could have pulled this performance off. It is not flashy, but easily one of the most intricate and best performances of 2011. Oldman also has a very good small part in the Deathly Hallows: Part 2.

Elizabeth Olsen – Martha Marcy May Marlene

Elizabeth Olsen’s performance in Martha Marcy May Marlene is another of 2011’s many wonderful breakthroughs. Martha is also yet another difficult character to play, as so much of it needed to be shown subtlety so that her episodes dealing with constant fear and dread can come off feeling real (whether it actually is or not). The narrative structure of the film juxtaposes Martha on the compound with after she escapes and is staying with her sister (seemingly now a wreck). Olsen’s complete change in demeanor in each is remarkable. She also plays off fantastic character actor John Hawkes, who plays the cult leader, very well – and this being her first real dramatic performance.

Brad Pitt – Moneyball

Like good friend George Clooney, Brad Pitt has established himself as one of the best actors working right now (with recent performances in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, among others). Pitt had a good 2011 as an actor as well with very good work in The Tree of Life and Moneyball. In Moneyball, Pitt plays maverick baseball GM Billy Beane – struggling to produce a good team without any money and also struggling with his own sense of self worth. Pitt plays it as if Beane is a loner, outside the system – a bit like a stoic cowboy out on the range. He has become a fabulous actor and I look forward to his future work.

Saoirse Ronan – Hanna

With the role of Hanna in Hanna, I cannot imagine anyone else playing it (let alone as well) other than Saoirse Ronan. Physically, this is an extremely challenging role, as Ronan needed to both hit all the right dramatic notes in the coming-of-age story and all the action beats in the thriller aspect. She is completely believable as an action star, handling the fight sequences with grace and confidence. But, she is an even better dramatic actress. Hanna is a character completely virgin to the world, raised in solitude, and Ronan brings wonder be it guarded to the role. Building on her excellent breakthrough performance in Atonement, Ronan is one of the best young actresses right now.

Michael Shannon – Take Shelter

Ever since Michael Shannon’s performance in Revolutionary Road, he has been an actor to watch. With his performance as Curtis in Take Shelter, Shannon captures the sheer panic of someone who feels like they are losing their mind. He does a lot of the dramatic work with his face and eyes, gradually letting the feelings of desperation, alarm and agitation take hold. This seems to be one of the forgotten performances of 2011, but it is certainly one of the best. Almost the whole narrative is predicated on Shannon’s work, and he is brilliant.

The Descendants (2011) – Review

Review: The Descendants is both a very good character drama and quite funny. The film centers on Matt King, a father who now must be the primary parent for his two daughters after his wife is seriously injured in a boating accident. At the same time, he has the added pressure of being the sole trustee of a major parcel of land that his family wants him to sell (and a minority want him to keep) – and thus he has a decision to make. Writer-director Alexander Payne crafts the film to accentuate the performances. He is not overly interested in having the camera constantly moving or particularly creative or interesting blocking – however, all his efforts have gone into getting the best performances possible from his actors and letting them play to their highest potential on the screen in an organic way. And in this, the film is a huge success (and features two of my favorite performances of the year).That is not to say that the film does not have a good aesthetic style – because it does. Payne pays homage to the beauty of Hawaii in the film, and there is certainly a warmth and tenderness to how the state, it people and the land is regarded and spoken about. To an extent, one might even read it as having a feeling of nostalgic sadness for nature in the view of commercialization and civilization polluting it. Hawaii, its heritage and culture play a role in the film, though more so in setting the tone than directly influencing the narrative and characters (in that, this film could have taken place anywhere and worked, but Hawaii makes for a great backdrop). The relationship between Matt and his daughter Alexandra is the highlight of the film (both actors giving phenomenal performances). Payne does a great job with their dynamic – where it starts to where it ends. It feels like a very natural progression, but at the same time it is fresh, engaging and utterly enjoyable. There is a certain spark when they are in scenes together and yet (again) they feel very real – not as if the actors are acting or trying to be more than they should. They are low-key but hit all the dramatic points perfectly. The other thing that Payne does very well is have all the ancillary characters actually both serve a purpose and exist in a real space – they are not there just to take up space or chew up time. This is something that is actually not often the case, and it comes down to having a strong script to build on and a fluid narrative with all the choices contributing to the journey of the main characters. And in this, Payne has made a wonderful film. If there is one criticism, the pacing is a tad slow at the beginning and the voiceover narration does not feel as organic in the beginning, but it is used to get a lot of the character and plot exposition out of the way without taking up time and scenes. It feels as though we have all this information forced on us, instead of letting it play out. But given the narrative, it is for the best to have it all frontloaded so the narrative can move on to the meatier drama and story.  The great performances, dialogue and overall narrative all contribute to The Descendants being one of the better character pieces of the year.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Alexander Payne has made five features. (And along with Sideways) The Descendants might be his best to date. He has established himself as one of the best auteur filmmakers to emerge out of the 2000s, particularly when it comes to dramedy and garnering great comedic but sad performances. The Descendants is a beautiful film visually, taking place in Hawaii with its landscapes, but also the cinematography of Phedon Papamichael does not hurt (he is one of the best working today). His photography of the state and its wonders wins over the viewer in regards to the decision Matt King makes in the end. Payne’s choice of Hawaiian guitar music is also very good given the setting and tone. Jane Ann Stewart’s production design fits the film very well – the viewer really gets a sense of the culture and lifestyle just from her sets and overall design work. But really, this is an actors’ film – and they are all very good. Judy Greer and Robert Forster are the standouts among the many small supporting roles, while newcomers Nick Krause and Amara Miller give mini-breakthrough performances. Graduating from ABC Family (and the show The Secret Life of the American Teenager) Shailene Woodley gives one of the best performances of the year (let alone breakthrough or supporting). She is full of spunk and attitude, but also has tenderness and warmth behind the façade. She plays off George Clooney very well. I cannot wait to see what she does next. Clooney (having a good year, also directing and acting in the very good The Ides of March) is perfect in the role of Matt King. He seems so out of his depth as the character that it works enormously well. He still has some of that swagger that he is known for but brings a lot of vulnerability to the role as well.

Summary & score: The Descendants is a fantastic character drama, built upon brilliant performances, beautiful scenery and sharp writing. 9/10

The Ides of March (2011) – Review

Review: The Ides of March is a good and very well-made political drama, performance and aesthetically speaking, but it lacks any real sense of emotional connect to the audience. It plays more as a drama, in terms of the audience watching it to find out what happens, than a thriller. Even though all the performances are very good, the audience does not care about the characters, and this is due to director (and co-writer) George Clooney’s inability to create characters that are relatable to the audience, or at least present them as such. As is, the film is presented much more as a tale to be followed, completely plot driven. While there are emotional scenes for the main character Stephen and great moments between characters, they all serve the plot and not the character(s). The viewer never feels invested in Stephen, and thus the drama and mild thriller aspects of the narrative do not engage the audience on a higher emotional level. However despite this shortcoming, Clooney (et al.) still makes a very good film (that could have been great). This is due to fantastic aesthetics, wonderfully written scenes and great performances. It sounds odd that a film can have great performances but not connect with the audience, but it is a matter of how the characters are presented to the audience – whether the viewer is merely supposed to follow them on their journey or actively participate (plot driven versus character driven). However, there are very good plot driven films that still have character moments that allow for a meaningful connection with the audience, so they can be invested, and this is simply lacking in The Ides of March (which I think would otherwise be a great film instead of just a good one). The film’s aesthetics are however quite brilliant and many of the scenes are among my favorites of the year (specifically one between Stephen and Tom Duffy near the end of the second act), elevating the film considerably. An aspect of the film that is also interesting is the portray of American politics as a soul-crushing profession that eats up virtue and spits out emptiness. The characters have goals of making the country better and on the outside seem to be honest, but once the film digs into the backchannels and behind the scenes of their campaigns there is something rotten at the center (and it sure seems like this is probably the case in real life as well). If there is any character drama in the film at all, it is the transition in Stephen’s expression and overall body language from the beginning to the end. All in all, The Ides of March has a lot to like about it (on one viewing, though I question how much it holds up on multiple viewings), but Clooney seems more interested in the style, performances and look of the film than its emotional core.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: George Clooney has directed four features now, and The Ides of March is probably his best (though, many would argue Good Night, and Good Luck. is a better film – but I think it is vastly overrated). Each of his films show off his love for style and the aesthetics of filmmaking, and this is no different. The film is beautifully shot. Cinematographer Phedon Papamichael’s lighting is brilliant and among the best of the year, while Sharon Seymour’s production design and sets fit the tone and style of the film perfectly. As much as I liked Papmichael’s work, Alexandre Desplat’s score is maybe even more marvelous. The Ides of March also features really good acting throughout. Jeffrey Wright seems to be having some fun with his character, and it works well. Evan Rachel Wood, Paul Giamatti and Philip Seymour Hoffman are fantastic in their supporting roles, stealing most of the scenes they are in. Clooney is his typical stoic self, but with hints of cracks (but really this is the same type of performance he always gives). The lead Ryan Gosling is very good as well (with Crazy, Stupid, Love. and Drive, he might be having the best year of any actor), but his performance is slightly overshadowed by the lack of any connection with the audience – and thus we do not care about his character aside from wanting to see how things play out.

Summary & score: Otherwise very well made, The Ides of March is missing its soul, but even so is a good political drama. 8/10

At the Movies – October 2011 – Part 3: This Month’s Best Films

Must-See of the Month:

The Ides of March (George Clooney) – Political Drama – Oct 7

Summary: Rumored to be a veiled commentary on the Howard Dean campaign (at least Beau Willimon’s play is, for which the film is based), the film is about an idealistic campaigner staffer, Stephen Myers, who gets a crash course on dirty politics while working on Presidential hopeful Governor Mike Morris’s campaign. Filmmakers: Actor George Clooney is back in the director’s chair for his fourth feature and is also producing. He is working with (the hardest working man in the movie-business, he has scored eight movies this year alone) composter Alexandre Desplat (The Tree of Life), cinematographer Phedon Papamichael (Sideways), production designer Sharon Seymour (The Town), and executive producer Leonardo DiCaprio. Cast: The film stars Ryan Gosling and features a great supporting group with Clooney, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Evan Rachel Wood, Marisa Tomei, Jeffrey Wright, Max Minghella, and Jennifer Ehle. Expectations: Advanced reviews have been oddly mixed. I say this because on one hand this is among the ten likely Best Picture nominees for 2012’s Oscars in most expects’ predictions but on the other hand the buzz out of the Toronto Film Festival has been not great. I have not been a big fan of any of the films Clooney has directed to date, as well. So then why is this the must-see of the month you ask? Well, it has a great cast, crew and potential – plus, this is a weak month, movie wise. All that said, it will probably be a good to decent political drama. Check out the trailer. Review.

Worth Checking Out:

Like Crazy (Drake Doremus) – Romance – Oct 28 [limited]

Summary: The film is about an American who falls in love with a British girl. Her visa expires but she stays in the States for him. She is found out and deported. Now, they must deal with being in a long-distance relationship, while also coming to terms with meeting new people and maybe not being together. Filmmakers: Writer-director Drake Doremus has made three indie features and some shorts prior to Like Crazy, but none have received the same acceptance and gotten the same traction as this. He is working with an indie crew including pianist and composer Dustin O’Halloran, cinematographer John Guleserian and production designer Katie Byron (the latter two have worked with him before, while all three are again working with him on his next feature). Cast: The cast features excellent young actors Anton Yelchin, Felicity Jones (a star to watch) and Jennifer Lawrence, as well as Charlie Bewley and Chris Messina. Expectations: The film won the Grand Jury Prize at this year’s Sundance Film Festival (and Jones won the Special Jury Best Actress Prize). It looks like a very good romance, more on the dramatic side of the things than comedy, but critics have loved it during its festival run – though, average moviegoers not as much. Check out the trailer. Review.

The American (2010) – Review

The American is slow, methodical and building in its storytelling – yet thrilling as well. The thrills sneak up, as if the viewer is lulled by mundane human relationships and quiet only to have stark immediacy thrust back into focus. Director Anton Corbijn plays a dangerous game with his narrative. The pacing is deliberately slow, scenes sparse, minute details are everything to understanding his characters, as he does not give the viewer much – though despite the quiet, there is an definite undercurrent of dread – dread of what must happen, of what will happen and of what may happen. Corbijn gives the viewer a film about a man trying to find his place in a world that has become foreign and mostly lost to him, but he yearns to find his way back. The juxtaposition of this gentle story against the violence of his profession, past and future creates this expectation of dread in the viewer, and Corbijn manages it quite well – for those willing to partake. He is able to elicit emotional physical reactions from the audience, not because of cheap cinema tricks, but because he is able to steer the emotional journey of the audience. They care about this man and his redeveloping humanity, but also understand the narrative journey and what must happen. The danger however with Corbijn’s narrative structure and tone is that he will lose viewers not committed to the film. The pacing is too slow for those looking merely for entertainment and not for a piece to be fully engaged in (though, one might say the best films are both utterly entertaining and engaging). This film will play as boring and long to many, being conditioned by the fast-paced high action, low substance films that generally populate premises such as: assassin in hiding fights to stay alive. And that is what is so interesting about this film, like Let the Right One In, it relies more on the characters than it does on the action, thus the action is enhanced due to the emotional connection between viewer and characters. With The American, Corbijn has successfully created a thriller that has the audience on the edge of their seats, but derives tension through drama and character relationships mixed with narrative anticipation rather than the usual (dime-a-dozen) cinematic illusion that appeal to kneejerk reactions rather than true engagement.

On the technical side – director Corbijn and cinematographer Martin Ruhe have made a beautifully shot film, in which each frame is aesthetically pleasing. It is some of the finest work this year. The contrast of color from scene to scene and the overall use of color to link the emotional state of the characters to the viewer amplify the viewer’s core emotional connection to the film. Production designer Mark Digby and costume designer Suttirat Anne Larlarb add to the beauty of the film through their work. German rock musician Herbert Gronemeyer composes an absorbing score that is both subtle and poignant working quite well with the narrative structure and tone in which Corbijn plays the film. The actors in the film were not given much dialog by Corbijn and screenwriter Rowan Joffe, their performances needed to be deep and yet subtle. George Clooney (serving as a producer too) gives a very fine performance as the lead. He is tempered and in control of his emotions, but to the skill of Clooney, he allows his performance to waver, leaking out minuscule hints of sadness, heartbreak, hope, and love, which play a huge role in the success of the film. Thekla Reuten and Violante Placido both give important and well played performances, both being essential to the success of Clooney’s performance (and I hope they both get more work in British/American cinema in the future), as they dictate much of his emotional state.

The American works best as a character study with thriller overtones, as the film is clearly about the characters and not the details of their lives; but do not be fooled as this film also has wonderfully well done instances of action that will keep the audience in suspense. 8/10

Up in the Air (2009) – Review

Up in the Air is funny, insightful and a film for the times, yet ultimately depressing (but still good, not everything needs to leave the viewer happy). The most striking aspect of the film is how well it fits today’s American psyche. The film does have a sense of hope to it, yet lives in the tough times, both personal to the characters but also for America and Americans as a whole. While the film can be appreciated by any audience, it feels like an American film. It is almost a deconstruction of the American Dream or promise, shown remarkably through what appears to be real life videos of employees initially dealing with being terminated. The journey taken by George Clooney’s character is transformative, yet appears to be tried and true terrain of a character set in their ways, not believing in love, who falls in love and that changes everything – yet this film approachs the world as if it were real, and in the real world people are complex and things do not always work out – this leaves Clooney with a choice, and the result up for interpretation by the audience. Leaving an ending up to the audience to determine is a tricky device that often leaves the film feeling incomplete, but a credit to director Jason Reitman Up in the Air’s ending works quite well. It does not let the Clooney character off the hook, but there is a sense of optimism for the future (which again plays into the need for Americans to feel like it is getting better) aided by the employee videos explaining how the change (aka being let go) ended up resulting in something good for them. Technically the film is sound, Reitman makes a few odd decisions, but overall he has made a fine looking film. Most notably odd is his choice to film the wedding scene almost like a home video while the rest of the film is not done in that style, it will not bother most, but just seemed strange and unnecessary. The narrative structure of the film also lags at times in the first half of the film, but once the main story picks up, and the Anna Kendrick character comes into the film it really flows. Rolfe Kent’s score felt a bit underwhelming as well. However, Reitman succeeds at garnering great performances throughout. Clooney sort of glides through the movie playing his typical sort of character/role, but it worked perfectly for what the character and film needed. Vera Farmiga is also quite good. The surprise standout though is Kendrick. She is pitch perfect in her role (I look forward to see how she develops the rest of her career, Twilight films aside). The film also has a number of comedians like Zach Galifianakis, Jason Bateman and Danny McBride, yet it is only Galifianakis that is given any comical work to do (his opening bit is fun). Up in the Air is an American film just at the right time. 8/10

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009) – Review

Fantastic Mr. Fox is a wondrous film, composed of adventure, artistic aesthetic sensibility and wry wit. The film is outwardly quirky and yet has a certain charm to it, much like the other works of director Wes Anderson. It is ambitious and tedious in its presentation, in that it spares no detail in its visual composite, every shot, every article of clothing, prop, gesture, camera movement, everything was meticulously designed and executed. Much like Hitchcock, Anderson uses his camera actively and knows exactly how the film will look and play before shooting even commences, and to this degree he is surely one of the prominent auteurs working today. So what does this mean for the film? Anderson and animation director Mark Gustafson have created an astounding piece of art. The film is completely analog with all animation done manually through stop-motion. It is something to behold on a purely aesthetic level. At first, the film seems completely surreal, the animation almost feels foreign, but that fades rapidly, helped along by the well-known voice work, leaving very real characters. The animation becomes warm and inviting and the style meshes quite well with the subject matter. This film is not like anything else seen in Hollywood in some time. As for the narrative structure of the film, it is put together much like the films of the silent era and classic animation, starting with a book opening to the first page and titles that track to progression of the story. The structure works well, but for a film that is just an hour and a half, there are still a few moments where the film does drag a bit. Thus, the storytelling is not as tight as it need be. Maybe that is due to the changing expectations of audiences, most films now have a high number of action beats versus past periods; but like many other aspects of this film, it feels like a classic and not a new release. The story takes its time. It allows for characters to have moments and is not caught up in action for action’s sake. Rather action plays as the story dictates. Anderson has also created a very referential film here. There are a number of allusions to past works and genres. The use of genre in the film is also remarkable. While having an overall feel of adventure and comedy, the film employs other genres to connect to its audience. For example, there is a scene in which the whole town, guns in hand, is waiting for the animals to emerge from their hole. Through shot selection and music cues this scene very much feels like it is straight out of a western, even though it takes place in England and is between townsfolk and anamorphic animals. The ability to use genres effectively by the filmmakers allows the film to bring the audience into the moment without much exposition. It is not often that a director can mesh multiple genres effectively, but Anderson has done so here. The film at its core is about being yourself, accepting who you are and loving and ultimately empowering yourself, as told through a number of diverse characters. Roald Dahl’s work holds up and comes to life, but the adaptation by Anderson and Noah Baumbach gets more to the heart of the story they wanted to tell, which can be seen in the addition of Ash and Kristofferson. Anderson and Baumbach also employ a fair amount of dry humor, possibly spotlighted in the argument between Mr. Fox and his lawyer, Badger. The humor adds another level of enjoyment that adult viewers will appreciate. The voice acting is perfect for the wit and dryness that Anderson wanted to achieve, highlighted by George Clooney, Meryl Streep and Jason Schwartzman work. Anderson’s brother Eric Chase Anderson is also very good voicing Kristofferson. Music selection is trademark of Anderson’s style, and here the selections are unexpected but work quite well. Alexandre Desplat, continuing his trend of late, provides a rich score that works well with the visuals of the film to create an overall atmosphere of adventure and playfulness, but the score is also able to capture the dramatic scenes. If the audience can buy into the animation, to the world of Fantastic Mr. Fox, they are in for a treat of a film. 9/10