Neighbors (2014) – Review

Review: Neighbors is a funny R-rated comedy, but fails to aspire to anything more ambitious, interesting, or compelling. The film is about Mac and Kelly Radner, a young couple who has recently purchased their first home and had their first child. Life seems good. Everything changes, however, when a fraternity purchases the house next-door, constantly having wild parties and otherwise making life almost unbearable for Mac and Kelly. They have no choice but to engage in an escalating war of pranks in the hopes of getting the frat kicked out of school.

At face value, Neighbors is basically a film about warring generations: young college kids just looking to party and have a good time versus adults in their early to mid thirties (who still think they are young enough to lead the same lifestyle as the college kids, but old enough to have responsibilities and horrible hangovers to know that they are really just adults now and need to grow up). Director Nicholas Stoller tries his hand at a few broad jokes about the generational gap, but really the film does not quite capitalize on all the humor potential apparent in the narrative setup. More so, the film goes out of its way to undertake jokes that reference pop-culture, aim to shock, and of course pratfalls (because who does not like physical comedy – I wish I had not already seen the airbag jokes in the trailer though; they would have played so much better without the trailer spoiling them). Overall, the film is very funny – more or less checking all the boxes for modern R-rated comedy.

That said, the film never really tries to be anything more, which is fine, but the audience never really cares about any of the characters. What works really well about the best comedies is that not only do they make us laugh but we also feel absorbed in the story. Here, the story is an afterthought, merely existing as a way to allow the filmmakers to move from one joke to the next. The plot serves the jokes instead of the jokes supporting the overall narrative. Mac and Kelly are likable characters, and the supporting cast is made up of funny and enjoyable characters, but the narrative is very weak, and Stoller never gives the audiences moments to invest in Mac and Kelly – everything is just a joke, while the plot and characters (for the most part) are very thin. There is no real drama or emotion, which ultimately leaves the film feeling unsatisfying overall, even with the laughs.

The narrative structure too is very weak. The first two acts are actually fairly well done, but what brings down the narrative overall is its third act. Stoller wraps up the film seemingly very suddenly without a sense of real resolution. The film asks the audience to also care about the main frat characters and then leaves them out of the ending. Teddy, the frat president and nemesis of Mac and Kelly, is given a very vague and wholly unsatisfying conclusion as well. The film feels like it just ends in the middle of the third act, the audience left feeling like there is something missing.

The main narrative arc for Mac and Kelly is rather unsubstantial as well. They start out as new parents, not ready to accept their new life as responsible caregivers to their child and give up the fun life they knew before of hanging out with friends and going out at night. After the ordeal with the frat, they have come to terms with their situation and feel satisfied with their new life as parents – basically, before they wanted to go out and party with their friends, but now they do not. This is far from a transformative revelation, likely one that will be see them revert back to the urge to get out and go out in a couple weeks (or even days), as it is only natural. And if not, is it not a little sad to suggest that once we have kids we should be satisfied with a life in which we go to work, come home, never go out, and never interact with other people in social situations? But really none of this matters; the plot is just a jumping-off point. The point of this film is to laugh at jokes, nothing else.

Neighbors is really about Mac and Kelly. It is their narrative, but the film also sort of tries to be a college frat comedy as well, utilizing many of the classic troupes of the genre (hazing pledges, wild parties, students who seem to only care about their fraternity and never go to actual school, kooky members of the frat, and a struggles against a Dean that wants to quick them off campus – it pretty much just tries to throw everything in). Thus, in trying to make his comedy more than it is, Stoller loses his ability to devote time to his characters (which in the end makes this a throwaway comedy); instead, he is just trying to create a comedy genre mash-up to garner laughs for the sake of laughs.

Stoller wants to film to be a frat comedy, a generational war comedy, and an adult coming-of-age comedy, but just sort of scatters elements of all these narrative types without committing to a fully cohesive and engaging story. Neighbors is funny and thus achieves its goal, but the laughs are hollow as the narrative never fully feels compelling or interesting and there are not enough character moments to create characters the audience can invest in or care about.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Nicholas Stoller has a very good comedy track record with the very good comedies Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Get Him to the Greek, and The Five-Year Engagement, but Neighbors is his weakest film to date. Jason Segel provided Stoller with good material for his best films, but here the script and characters are just too thin. Hopefully, Stoller and Segel will work together again in the future, as they collaborate very well together.

Michael Andrews provides a serviceable score, but the film’s use of its soundtrack completely overshadows it. Brandon Trost’s cinematography is fairly straightforward, but there are a few instances that allow him to light in a more interesting manner (mostly involving the party scenes). Julie Berghoff seems to have some fun with her production design, especially in her design for the fraternity.

The cast works fairly well overall. There are a few very funny small roles. Notably Lisa Kudrow, Craig Roberts, Jerrod Carmichael, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Dave Franco, Carla Gallo, and Ike Barinholtz are all good in small supporting roles. Zac Efron is okay as Teddy, but there does not seem to be much to the character. Most of the time, Efron just feels like an excuse to have someone who looks good shirtless. Rose Byrne is very funny as Kelly and is the best part of the film. She feels believable as her character, while bringing enough energy and timing to also bring the biggest laughs. Seth Rogen is funny as well, but he somewhat lazily seems to just be playing himself.

Summary & score: Neighbors is funny, with a few big laughs, but there is not much more to it than that. 6/10

The Place Beyond the Pines (2013) – Review

Review: The Place Beyond the Pines is a moody character drama built on strong performances. The film is broken into three parts. The first deals with a motorcycle stunt rider (Luke) who turns to crime in order to try and provide for his family. Part two involves Avery, a rookie cop who is frustrated by the corruption in his department and his decision to do something about it. And, part three revolves around the children of Luke and Avery (Jason and AJ, respectively) and how their different backgrounds inform their present lives (taken place about fifteen years later) in the wake of the decisions their fathers’ made.

Writer-director Derek Cianfrance seems to want to tell an epic tale of America – as the dramatic scope of this film is quite immense in terms of how many character-centric stories he fits in. There are four different main characters, each with their own dramatic narrative. Yet, scale wise the film is very small. The narratives are all localized to Schenectady, NY, and they each focus on the emotional turmoil and journey of the characters. It has a timeless quality to it as well – and really could have been set at any point in American history.

The film specifically feels like an American tale because, in addition to taking place in a typical American small town, it deals with the aspirations of its characters to seek out a better life for themselves (at least in regards to Luke, Avery, and Jason). Each has a specific want, and they pursue it – Luke wants to have a family (though somewhat naively) and take care of them financially so he begins robbing banks to make money (because he does not know another way); Avery is ambitious and somewhat arrogant in his on self-righteous vanity so he turns to ratting out other cops (which is always deemed a negative, when in some regard he is doing the right thing) so that he can forward his career (not seeing another way); and, Jason wants to know about his father (something that he needs to feel complete).

The character of AJ however is different. There is maybe a spark of ambition in him at the end, but he seems to be a comment on or the embodiment of the new generation of American entitlement – those that think they just deserve respect, money, power, and etcetera just for existing, which is very contradictory to the classic ‘America Dream’ narrative, to which almost all the other characters (good or bad) seem to prescribe (though, certainly there is a bit of this in Avery’s story as well). He is content to just be an ignorant young man, thinking things will just fall into place for him (and they very well might – depending on what his father does for him). This also reflects on the fact that his father is physically and emotional absent from his life. He does not have a role model to help shape his ambition so he turns to pop culture (which for him seems to be hip hop culture) – a poor choice, because by nature it is superficial.

AJ’s character also allows Cianfrance to comment on the class system in America. While Jason and AJ both attend the same high school – economically their parents lead very different lives. Cianfrance seems to identify much more with Jason and his family (his parents having to struggle to lead a decent life), as there is a certain level of detachment and even distain for what AJ’s family has become. Neither parent wants to deal with him, so they just leave him alone in Avery’s big expensive house, causing his feeling of entitlement and reliance on poor role models (them included).

Luke’s story sets in motion Avery’s, and Avery is too busy to raise his son properly. But what makes the film particularly powerful and interesting is that Cianfrance brings the narrative full circle, so to speak. Jason, whose pain is created by growing up without his real father (something Avery plays a role in as a cop), is the force that brings Avery and his son together ultimately – showing them how important they actually are to each other. Jason on the search for his father (who his father was) gives AJ his father. Thus, this really is a story of fathers and sons, and redemption.

Cianfrance aesthetically creates the world of the narrative to feel incredibly organic and real. Everything is steeped in realism – particularly the performances. There is not much action (with really only Luke’s bank-robbing escapades serving as ‘action’ sequences), nor does the narrative involve any grand schemes. Cianfrance just wants to look at these characters, leading fairly average lives – what drives them, what their fears are, what their hopes and dream are. His camera stays with the characters, maintaining a very intimate feel. He also does not rely on any narrative temporal tricks (which are overly commonplace in today’s narrative langue). He instead allows his epic to play out linearly, with faith that the performances and dramatic components will engage the audience throughout.

While for the most part the film does work very well, and is at times quite beautiful and moving, it does feel long as well. Cianfrance wants the film to have a very atmospheric/moody quality, and thus to achieve this it is also slow moving (as the narrative is not efficient in its storytelling). This is not overly detrimental, but certainly will cause some viewers to lose interest. The third part also does not play nearly as well as the first two dramatically (as the revenge narrative feels a bit out of place and exaggerated).

The Place Beyond the Pines is frustrating in a sense, because in moments it is a brilliant character piece that emotional engages its audience, while in others it loses it connection due to its lumbering pace and fumbling drama of part three (though, most of it is very good). However, for those willing to commit to the narrative, it is a fulfilling journey that, when it is at its best, is mesmerizing.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Derek Cianfrance, a few feature films into his career, has shown a great visual eye and sense of grandiose storytelling (whether that is a good thing or not, is a matter of opinion). I look forward to seeing what he does next, as he seems to have the makings of a great talent in American cinema.

Mike Patton’s score for the film, consisting mostly of atmospheric tones, works quite well – but Cianfrance is also overly reliant on it to emphasize the film’s moody tone. Sean Bobbitt’s photography is top notch, and maybe the most impressive aspect of the film. The opening shot especially is fantastic. The visual look, while muted and gritty, imposes a feel of realism. Inbal Weinberg’s production design is not flashy at all, nor was it meant to be – rather, he as well contributes to the overall realistic feel and look of the film.

The performances are paramount to The Place Beyond the Pines working, because Cianfrance has stripped pretty much everything else away. Eva Mendes, Ray Liotta, Rose Byrne, and Ben Mendelsohn are all strong in supporting roles. Mendelsohn is however the standout performer (maybe of the whole film). Emory Cohen (playing AJ) is noticeably the weakest of the four characters that at different times take the lead, but he still is good enough to momentarily carry the film. Dane DeHaan (Jason) is good as he is able to show the internal pain that he has growing up without knowing his real father. Ryan Gosling is also very good as Luke. (While the performance does somewhat remind me of his work in Drive,) his work here is layered. He naively thinks that he can take care of his family, while also having this romantic view of his outlaw lifestyle (which again plays into this feeling like an American tale) – of course he is destined to be a tragic character. He feels emotionally childlike at times (screeching at bank tellers as he carries out a robbery). Bradley Cooper (building off his excellent work in Silver Linings Playbook) is wonderful in this as well playing Avery. He hits all the right emotional moments to make his character one that the audience can both root for and also kind of despise (it is hard to do that).

Summary & score: While The Place Beyond the Pines is flawed, its ambition and brilliant moments carry the day. 8/10

Movie of the Week – Sunshine

This week’s movie is Sunshine (2007).

The sci-fi film, made in the style of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and Andrey Tarkovskiy’s Solaris, is about a crew of eight who sets out to reignite our dying sun. Director Danny Boyle, working again with screenwriter Alex Garland (The Beach and 28 Days Later…), forms the film to be both a thriller and a psychological look at what it is like to look out into oblivion and see nothing looking back (or what it is like to look into the face of God), isolation, and facing death. As far as the thriller aspect goes, it is quite gripping and effective. The psychological drama aspect, however, is much more interesting, and is what makes this one of the great sci-fi films. Plus, the visuals are astounding. Cinematographer Alwin H. Kuchler and production designer Mark Tildesley do phenomenal work (among 2007’s best). The score from John Murphy and Underworld is also fantastic. The cast is very good with Cillian Murphy, Chris Evans, Michelle Yeoh, Rose Byrne, Troy Garity, Hiroyuki Sanada, Benedict Wong, Cliff Curtis, and Mark Strong. Sunshine is a must-see for fans of the genre, as it is one of the best of the last decade (and one of the most underrated film as well). Check out the trailer.

Available on Blu-ray, DVD and Streaming

Bridesmaids (2011) – Review

Bridesmaids is funny (very funny at times), but lacks a strong narrative structure and developed characters. Directed Paul Feig and writer/star Kristen Wiig are able to create a number of hilarious bits on par with the best comedies (male oriented or otherwise). There are a number of scenes (of course depending on your comedy preferences) that will find you laughing, giggling or otherwise occupied with fits of hilarity. There is no questioning this film’s ability to be funny and entertain, because it is and it does. The issues arise more from its pacing, characters and overall narrative structure. The funny scenes are held together by an underdeveloped story centering on Wiig’s Annie (the best friend of the bride who feels threated by another seemingly more successful bridesmaid, as she fears losing her friend). Annie may not be an overly likable character (but comedic protagonists do not have to be likable), but Feig does a good job with her character (she may even be overdeveloped, with a few unnecessary character scenes undermining the forward momentum of the narrative). However, all the other characters for the most part are one-note jokes, caricatures or narrative stereotypes and not fleshed out characters (leaving the audience with only Annie to relate to and connect with). Thus, the stakes of Annie’s journey are not as impactful, leaving only the humor to carry the film (which it does for the most part; though, the best comedies have funny jokes and great characters we can connect with). The film feels hollow without developed characters regardless of how funny some of the scenes and characters are. An even bigger problem is the terrible pacing. The film feels longer than it is, losing momentum (and the audience) a number of times, which directly relates to the weak narrative and trivial characters. As funny and enjoyable as moments of Bridesmaids are, overall it is disappointing given the poor structure.

Technical and acting achievements: Director Paul Feig has an excellent resume for comedy on TV (The Office, Freak and Greeks and many others), but he needs to refine and improve his feature narrative storytelling, as it is by far the weakest part of this film (and really stops it from being something special). He is able to garner very funny work from his actors, and his filmmaking style is suitable for standard comedies (he does not have much of an artistic style, more of a straightforward Hollywood style). Character development among co-starring and supporting characters is also an area that needs improvement for future feature films, but this is also the case for writers Wiig and Annie Mumolo (this being their first feature as well). The score by Michael Andrews, the cinematography by Robert Yeoman and the production design by Jefferson Sage are all good and fitting, but nothing more – the performances taking center stage. The supporting cast features a number of very amusing bit parts, highlight by performances from: Jon Hamm, Ellie Kemper and Rebel Wilson. Jill Clayburgh is quite good as Annie’s mom, both sweet and caring, but strong and challenging. Rose Byrne is good, but Melissa McCarthy steals much of the comedy (and scenes) awarded to the supporting cast and Chris O’Dowd provides a needed break from the exaggerated bit humor, with more personal and heartfelt scenes (and also providing some laughs; if only his character had more development and screen time). Wiig is very funny and proves she is deserving of more leading roles in comedies as she certainly can carry a film and deliver the laughs.

Bridesmaids is funnier than the score may suggest, but as a narrative film it is not quite good enough. 7/10

Get Him to the Greek (2010) – Review

Get Him to the Greek is very funny, a little sweet and enriched with mocking, yet endearing, commentary on the music business. At its heart the film is a road trip comedy focusing on getting a Wildman rock star from London to a gig in LA in 72 hours, but the film is so much more, setting it apart from many similar comedies. There is quite a lot of satire in the film at the expense of the music industry – the film seems to initially completely buy into the mythos of the music business and that of rock stars (as seen in the opening montages for London and New York – playing classic local music, if not absurd in its over use, aka London Calling, and peppering the screen with local music venues, which was also cool, and in the lead character’s (Jonah Hill) excitement and admiration for Aldus Snow), but this fades as the lead character comes to terms with the façade versus the reality of his idol. The film loses the music themed montages and dives deeper into what a shallow and overly superficial lifestyle that many rock stars lead and its affects both on them (looking at why they do it or subscribe to such a lifestyle) and on those around them. True, this is not revolutionary or new territory, but the film’s take on the experience, while prominently to humorous ends also looks into the humanity of the characters, and it is the mixture of these seemingly at-odds devices that makes the film stand out, elevating it above just another raunchy comedy or rock star satire (this is a general theme to much of producer Judd Apatow’s work, looking for comedies that have heart – to put it plainly and clichéd). The film ultimately succeeds both on the performances of its leads and the keen storytelling of director Nicholas Stoller. He is able to give the audience all the out-there wild rock star shenanigans that they expect but still ground the characters and their emotional experiences and journeys in reality allowing the viewers to connect and care about the characters – not an easy task. Jonah Hill and Russell Brand are both hilarious and perfect in their respective roles. Brand especially is just so in tune with his character (and while the character is not too far off his own comedic styling, it is still a wonderfully crafted performance). The other supporting characters are fantastic as well and each contributes good work to the film: Rose Byrne is outrageous, Sean Combs is great (maybe surprisingly), and Elisabeth Moss is funny and very sweet, yet strong in her role (while she is excellent on Mad Men, seeing her here makes me hope she gets more cinematic and comedy work in the future). Colm Meaney, Aziz Ansari and Carla Gallo are also good in smaller roles, along with a number of great bit parts. The crew also provided good work to the film. Cinematographer Robert D. Yeoman and production designer Jan Roelfs’ work complements the world of the rock star well, from the club sets to the musical performances, their work both personifies and pokes fun at the lore of the film. The soundtrack is also filled with funny and ridiculous songs written by Mike Viola, composer Lyle Workman and co-producer Jason Segel. The film is not just a fun companion piece to the brilliant Forgetting Sarah Marshall; it is its own entertaining stand-alone film. 8/10