Stars to Watch: Part 5 – Movies Spotlight – June 2011

Cinema constantly has new talent each and every year, making good films and opening audiences’ eyes to new characters, stories and worlds. June offers three fantastic female performers to watch.

Jennifer Lawrence

What She’s Been In:

Jennifer Lawrence, 20, started acting in church plays deciding that she wanted to pursue it as a career – graduating early from high school and begging her parents to take her to New York to find a talent agent. She appeared in a few TV series and TV movies before getting her break becoming a series regular on The Bill Engvall Show on TBS in 2007. The show lasted three years and was not a favorite among critics, but it got Lawrence’s name, face and talent out there for producers and directors to see. She got small roles in the feature films Garden Party and The Poker House before landing her first notable role in Guillermo Arriaga’s (writer of Babel and 21 Grams) The Burning Plain. In the film she plays opposite Charlize Theron and Kim Basinger, winning an award for best young emerging actor/actress at the 2008 Venice Film Festival.  In early 2011, she had a supporting role in Jodie Foster’s strange dramedy The Beaver starring Mel Gibson as a depressed man who copes by talking through a puppet beaver.

Breakthrough:

Lawrence’s breakthrough role came in 2010 with her leading performance in Debra Granik’s Winter’s Bone. The film won Best Picture at the Sundance Film Festival in 2010 and was nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Lawrence also received an Oscar nomination for Best Leading Actress. The film is about a young girl, Ree Dolly, in the rural Ozark Mountains of Missouri who must hold her family together when she learns that her good-for-nothing father has put her family’s house and land up as a bond for a court appearance. So, she sets out to find him and save the house. In a very difficult role, Lawrence is brilliant, making imagining anyone else in the role unimaginable (it was among my favorite performances of 2010).

June Film:

In June, Lawrence stars in X-Men: First Class opposite James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender (also a star to watch) in the role of Raven (who later becomes known as Mystique). The film is excellent and she has a major role and character arc in it, again showing off her acting talent in somewhat of a challenging part – mixing teenage angst and self-discovery with the isolation and self-deprecating loathing that comes with being different and an outsider. She captures the essence of the role very well. It is about the origins of the X-Men, focusing primarily on Raven, Charles Xavier and Eric Lehnsherr. Directed by Matthew Vaughn, it is a must see for genre fans. Here is the trailer.

Upcoming:

Now a hot commodity in Hollywood (after getting an Oscar nod for essentially her first real leading performance and film), Lawrence has a whole slew of films upcoming. In late 2011, she co-stars with Felicity Jones (who was great in Cemetery Junction) and Anton Yelchin (who she played against in The Beaver) in Like Crazy, which won the 2011 Sundance Film Festival Grand Jury Prize (Lawrence is a Sundance good-luck charm it seems). The film is about a British student who falls for a boy in America, only to be separated from him when she is banned from the U.S. for overstaying her visa. In 2012, she stars with Elisabeth Shue in the horror film House at the End of the Street about a mother and daughter who move to a new town to discover that their neighbors were murdered by their daughter. And, she won the very coveted role as Katniss Everdeen in The Hunger Games. Scheduled to be released in March, the film is about a young girl who joins a survival contest in order to save her community. The story is being done by writer-director Gary Ross (Pleasantville). Additionally (and hopefully), she will reprise her role as Mystique in future X-Men: First Class sequels. She definitely has a bright future.

Career Highlights:

1)      The Burning Plain (2009) – supporting [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

2)      Winter’s Bone (2010) – leading* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

3)      X-Men: First Class (2011) – leading* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

*Editor’s Picks

Elle Fanning

What She’s Been In:

Elle Fanning, 13, is the younger sister of notable child actress (and now actress) Dakota Fanning. Elle got her start playing the younger version of her sister in both I Am Sam and the Taken mini-series (sort of similar to Rory Culkin). In 2003, she finally got her first role independent to her sister in Daddy Day Care. In addition to doing a number of TV episode appearances, Fanning started making a ton of supporting performances in films: The Door in the Floor, Because of Winn-Dixie, Babel, Deja Vu, and The Nines. In 2007, she got her first leading role in Reservation Road, co-starring with Joaquin Phoenix, Mark Ruffalo and Jennifer Connelly in a film about a terrible accident and the two families that it affects. She followed up her wonderful performance starring in Phoebe in Wonderland about a young girl who seeks guidance from her strange drama teacher, as she does not quite fit in the world that surrounds her. Fanning again shined in the role. Next, she won a supporting role in David Fincher’s amazing The Curious Case of Benjamin Button playing a younger version of Cate Blanchett’s character (she also played Blanchett’s daughter in Babel). She brilliantly acts in the small role against Brad Pitt. She also got a small voice-acting role in Astro Boy.

Breakthrough:

While Fanning is good in Phoebe in Wonderland and Reservation Road, she blossoms into a wonderful actress and future star in Sofia Coppola’s 2010 drama Somewhere, which she won the Young Hollywood Award for Actress of the Year for her performance (the film won the 2010 Golden Lion for Best Film at the Venice Film Festival). In the film, she plays the daughter of a hard-living actor played by Stephen Dorff. It is a challenging role because the film is primarily just Fanning and Dorff playing out everyday life, only twisted by the strangeness of celebrity. The film and her performance are both beautiful and kind of sad. While it did not make my list of best performances of 2010, it was on the shortlist.

June Film:

In June, Fanning stars with newcomer Joel Courtney and Kyle Chandler in J.J. Abrams’s Super 8. The sci-fi mystery is about a group of friends in the summer of 1979 who are making a film together when they begin to notice strange happenings around their small town and decide to investigate. Fanning plays a member of the group of friends and the crush of Courtney’s character. She is steals a number of her scenes beguiling both the other characters and the audience, playing both the drama and comedy given to her character marvelously. It is a must see for sci-fi and adventure fans, and has a great nostalgic/homage feel and tone to it. Here is the trailer.

Upcoming:

With great performances in Somewhere and Super 8 and a strong resume of supporting performances, Fanning is set to become a big star in Hollywood in her teens. In 2011 (though the second two could be pushed to 2012), she is set to star in three great films. Working first with Cameron Crowe in his new dramedy We Bought a Zoo, she co-stars with Matt Damon and Scarlett Johansson. Scheduled for a December release, the film is about a father who moves his young family to Southern California to renovate and re-open a struggling countryside zoo. Then, moving on to her next role with an excellent director, she has a supporting part in Francis Ford Coppola’s Twixt Now and Sunrise, which stars Val Kilmer. The film has been described as a gothic thriller that concerns Edgar Allen Poe. Production was finished last year, but it still has no release date. Lastly, she is set to co-star with Alfred Molina, Neve Campbell, Claire Foy, Sebastian Koch, and Max Irons in Vivaldi, a biography of Antonio Vivaldi – a priest who became a music teacher to illegitimate daughters of Venice’s courtesans. All three have great potential. As she continues to develop her talent and take on new roles and characters, expect big things.

Career Highlights:

1)      Reservation Road (2007) – leading [DVD/Rent]

2)      Phoebe in Wonderland (2008) – leading [DVD/Rent]

3)      The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008) – supporting* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

4)      Somewhere (2010) – leading* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

5)      Super 8 (2011) – leading* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

*Editor’s Picks

Melanie Laurent

What She’s Been In:

Melanie Laurent, 28,  began her film career in 1999 with The Bridge, after Gerard Depardieu discovered her on the set of Asterix et Obelix contre Cesar. She was there with a friend, who was watching her father work on the set. Depardieu liked her and got her a role in his next film. Laurent continued to take small roles in many French films and TV movies including the excellent films The Beat That My Heart Skipped (which she is very good in, despite having a tiny role) and Days of Glory. Then in 2006, she got the lead in Don’t Worry, I’m Fine, which was well received by critics leading to her winning the Cesar Award for Most Promising Newcomer. She also co-starred with a number of good French actors (like Romain Duris, Juliette Binoche and Fabrice Luchini) in Cedric Klapisch’s Paris, which she was quite good in. Another well received film in the States was The Concert, she plays a violin virtuoso. She has also directed two short films, and has plans to continue directing both film and in the theatre.

Breakthrough:

While Laurent has starred in a number of good French films, she was completely unknown in the States when Quentin Tarantino cast her in his WWII snuff fantasy Inglourious Basterds. Laurent plays the lead role of Shosanna, a Jewish girl whose family is murdered by Nazis in front of her. She moves to Paris and takes over the operation of a theatre. When the opportunity comes to kill Hitler and other high ranking Nazi officials, she puts a plan in motion. Laurent is fantastic in the film, in what is truly a star-making performance (and one of my favorites of the year).

June Film:

In June, Laurent stars in her second American film – the indie Beginners opposite Ewan McGregor, Christopher Plummer and a very cute Jack Russell terrier. It is directed by writer-director Mike Mills and is about a man whose life is jolted when he finds out that his father is gay and has terminal cancer. He has also failed to find a deeply meaningful relationship, and then he meets Anna (played by Laurent). The film has received good reviews from critics in advanced screenings and will hopefully win Laurent more praise allowing her to appear in more films in the States. Here is the trailer.

Upcoming:

Laurent has a few projects due in 2011 in France. In the States, her WWII film about the 1942 Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup called The Round Up (La Rafle in French), which co-stars Jean Reno and Gad Elmaleh, may get a limited release. It has received mostly positive and mixed reviews. She is also rumored to be up for a role in Quentin Tarantino’s new film Django Unchained (due in December 2012) a western about a freed slave who looks for revenge on his former master (Leonard DiCaprio is also rumored to be starring in the film as the villain).

Career Highlights:

1)      The Beat That My Heart Skipped (2005) – supporting* [DVD/Rent]

2)      Days of Glory (2006) – supporting* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

3)      Don’t Worry, I’m Fine (2006) – leading [Not available in the U.S.]

4)      Paris (2008) – supporting* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

5)      Inglourious Basterds (2009) – leading* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

6)      The Concert (2010) – supporting [DVD/Rent]

7)      Beginners (2011) – supporting* [Blu-ray/DVD/Rent]

*Editor’s Picks

Super 8 (2011) – Review

Review: Super 8 is a throwback to the great sci-fi and adventure films of the late 70s and 80s, but with a bit more action. More specifically, it feels very nostalgic (especially for viewers that grew up with films like The Goonies, Stand by Me and E.T.: The Extraterrestrial, three films that seemed to have influenced this one greatly) both visually and tonally. Writer-director J.J. Abrams certainly drew inspiration from the films of Steven Spielberg (who also served as the film’s producer), Richard Donner, Rob Reiner, and other filmmakers working during the late 70s and 80s. The film takes place in the late 70s, featuring some great music cues and references (as well as nice horror genre references, and homage, especially to the work of George Romero). Abrams also exhibits his own passion for filmmaking, which comes out in the scenes featuring the group of friends making their zombie movie (which is awesomely shown during the ending credits), and has stated that many of those scenes are based on his own experiences making films as a kid (and these scenes appealed to me on a nostalgic level as well, having made films with my friends growing up and in film school). His love of the genre, its great films and filmmaking in general give this film charm and his characters sort of an innocence (sort of like looking back to a better time – Abrams’s Golden Age, if you will – taking an idea from Woody Allen’s own summer film Midnight in Paris). The fact that the principal characters are a group of middle school kids in a small Ohio town also contributes to the sense of innocence to the characters. They come off as good-hearted, and the begins of a romance between Joe and Alice is very sweet and harkens back to our own first loves or crushes, which immediately makes these two relatable for the audience. The comradeship, jokes, and dialog between them are really what make the film work so well. Abrams is brilliant at developing good characters, which he again illustrates with these giving each their moments and drama so that the viewer feels connected and understands them (which is so important), while at the same time keeping the story and action moving forward at a rapid pace – the narrative structure is very tight, the viewer engaged throughout. Abrams puts his characters before anything else, which is rare for a big summer movie (many of which focus on the special effects and the action and then seemingly add characters as an afterthought). (As much as I loved the film) viewers that are not fans of this genre (and the pre-mentioned films from the 70s and 80s) will probably find the film too interested in the friendship of the characters and the film they are trying to make (as the action and sci-fi aspects are really the backdrop until the two story elements collide), but I think that is what makes it great. Abrams loves his characters. But do not worry, the action is also good. There are many thrilling and well shot sequences (especially the train crash). But again, without the great character work done, these action scenes would not have the same impact as they do, because the viewers would not care about the characters to the extent that they do. The film definitely puts a lot of effort into paying homage and having a nostalgic aspect to it (maybe too much for some), but it works well in setting the tone (though, I wonder how it plays for younger viewers who may not be familiar with the films it is referencing, as to some extent it seems to have been made for those like Abrams who grew up with and love these films, and filmmaking). All in all, Super 8 is a wonderful addition to its genre and will hopefully influence and be adored by a new group of fans (and filmmakers), as the films that inspired it were to their fans.

Technical & acting achievements: J.J. Abrams is very accomplished in the realm of television, but this is his first original feature film (his first two being Mission: Impossible III and Star Trek). He also oversaw most of the marketing, keeping the story elements (especially surrounding what escapes from the train) a secret (something that I wish more films would do, nothing worse than having the trailers spoil the film, and nice to see Paramount Pictures trust their filmmaker). With Super 8, Abrams has again shown that he is a top director when it comes to making films that are suspenseful and high on action but also have great characters and drama. I think it is safe to say that he is an auteur filmmaker. Working on his ninth project with Abrams, composer Michael Giacchino does great work (as usual). His score captures both the excitement of the action and the wonder of the young group of friends. Cinematographer Larry Fong and relative newcomer production designer Martin Whist (this being his biggest film to date) both have also worked on Abrams’s projects in the past. Fong’s work is very good. He has a lot of experience shooting action (working with Zack Snyder in the past, including this year’s Sucker Punch), which he again does a great job with, but it is the overall look of the film that works so well (being both homagy and nostalgic, and having a quicker more modern style to it). This also has a lot to do with Whist’s great sets and design work as well. While the 70s certainly shine through, his work as has sort of a timeless and wholesome quality to it, which fits the film extremely well. As stated above, the younger members of the cast really make the film special. Supporting work from Kyle Chandler and Noah Emmerich is good, but overshadowed by the funny and addictive friendship shown by Zach Mills, Ryan Lee, Gabriel Basso, and especially Riley Griffiths. Elle Fanning does not start as part of the group, but she quickly finds a place. She is remarkable in the film, winning the hearts of the characters and the audience. Joel Courtney makes is film debut and is excellent. He is able to carry the film, do the dramatic work and be funny. He has a bright future ahead of him.

Summary & score: Sure there is a big nostalgic aspect to the film, but really this is just an outstanding sci-fi adventure with marvelous characters that pulls you in and great action to keep you on the edge of your seat as the mystery unravels. 9/10

Movie of the Week - Sideways

This week’s movie is Sideways (2004).

The dramedy is about two men, and best friends, reaching middle age without much to show for their lives but disappointment. They drive up to California’s wine country for a week to celebrate before one of them gets married. The film is by writer-director Alexander Payne, who is known for his sharp wit, wonderful dialog and almost sinister ability to critique and almost mock establishments and social structure harshly, but have it still play as comedy. While he has made a number of good films (Citizen Ruth, Election, About Schmidt), this is his best (and a great film) – Payne and co-writer Jim Taylor winning a screenplay Oscar in 2005. It has a very laidback indie aesthetic to it, letting the performances dictate the tone and feel. But, composer Rolfe Kent’s score is quite good and memorable and the visual work of cinematographer Phedon Papamichael and production designer Jane Ann Stewart fits well with Payne’s narrative aesthetic. The performances are brilliant in the film. Sandra Oh is good, but the work of the other two supporting actors, Thomas Haden Church (whose great work and Oscar nod got him hired by Sony on Spider-Man 3) and Virginia Madsen, is phenomenal and would be scene and film stealing if not for Paul Giamatti. He is exceptional, playing such emotional ups and downs. There are jovial moments, but there is always a creeping sense of depression and self-loathing that comes to the surface, but even in the happy moments it is there just below. It is probably one of the twenty five best performances of the decade. Sideways is a must see for fans of excellent writing and aspiring screenwriters, as this is how to write great and deep characters (plus you also need wonderful actors to play them, but it starts with the writing). Check out the trailer.

Available on Blu-ray, DVD and to Rent

Maybach Music Group – Self Made, Vol. 1 (2011) – Review

Maybach Music Group – Self Made, Vol. 1

The group is made up of label head Rick Ross’s three newest high profile signings: Wale, Meek Mill and Pill. Each has had their successes and failures before Ross brought them in (for example Wale released his debut album in 2009 Attention Deficit, which was one of the best hip hop albums of the year, but did not sell very well). This album is essentially a glorified mixtape, a little more polished sonically, but lacking great production throughout (though there are a few fantastic beats on it). That being said, it does serve as a great introduction to these artists and their rhyming skills – each with their own unique sound (personally I am a big fan of Wale, but Meek Mill has caught my interest due to this album). During the first listen-through, the album just sounds like a series of street-bangers in the mold of Ross’s own Lux Luger produced hits B.M.F. and MC Hammer, and certainly Ross played a major role in shaping the sound of this album and lends his voice to most of the songs in some capacity (after all he is the biggest name in MMG). However having gone through the album many times now, it offers a few chill and laidback grooves as well (reminiscent of a number of the track off Ross’s own Deeper Than Rap) that give the album a nice break.  It does not feature too many well-known producers, but Just Blaze and Lux Leger (producing the un-Lex Luger sounding That Way) each laydown a track. It also features a good list of hip hop’s hot MCs like Curren$y, J. Cole and CyHi Da Prynce lending verses. Some complain that Ross is trying too hard to get his MCs to do songs that sound just like his, but this is an MMG album, not a Pill, Meek Mill or Wale solo album (we will have to wait for their solo releases scheduled for 2011/12 to see how much Ross has indeed influenced them sonically). However, lyrically all three MCs touch on the material they are known for. While the album lacks great songs (though an argument can be made for Tupac Back and 600 Benz), it is solid throughout with really no bad songs or moments. For fans of the MCs, it should hold them over until the solo releases drop. 3/5

Editor’s Song Picks:

1)      Tupac Back – Meek Mill featuring Rick Ross, produced by Mike Will of Eardrummers

2)      600 Benz – Wale featuring Rick Ross and Jadakiss, produced by Cardiak

3)      Rise – Pill & Wale featuring Teedra Moses, Cyhi Da Prynce & Curren$y, produced by Cardiak

Available on CD and Digital Download

The Tree of Life (2011) – Review

Review: The Tree of Life is a beautiful film, each shot crafted to both impart and evoke meaning in the viewer. However, it plays off the juxtaposition of images more so than the standard progression of scenes, which one would find in a typical narrative film. There are scenes, but most of the film is built around the impact of one shot cut against the next or the power of each imagine and how it affects its viewer. Writer-director Terrence Malick must have shot a ton of footage (something he often does) to find just the right moments to put together. Even though the film lacks the typical narrative structure found in most modern films (as it feels a lot more like the early and more experimental films in cinema history, reminding me a little of D.W. Griffith’s Intolerance), there is enough story that comes out of the images, scenes and performances to engage the audience on a narrative level. But Malick is not so much interested in the story, he purely wants to create a piece that challenges its audience emotionally (and he succeeds wonderfully). Malick is interested in the themes of innocence, love and how life, religion and human interaction impact and warp how we perceive the world and each other. Each character has an innocent quality to them and love within them, but as the film plays we see this aspects morph and change due to internal and external forces that shape them, and allow them to grow. The loss of innocence within these characters is heartbreaking, as we feel the loss within ourselves as time corrupts us all. That is the power that Malick has with this film. He is able to touch the viewer in a much more personal way than most films can, or hope to. There is a struggle within the film and its viewer because the film is very striking with radiant and sublime aesthetics drawing the viewer in only for the content to revel in the tragedy and pain that the film elicits in its characters and awakens in its viewers. It plays on both a grand scale with the creation of the world and evolution of our planet over time only to focus on one family and primarily one part in their lives, seemingly suggesting the magnitude of what surrounds us and how fragile and small we are in its comparison, but also how personal and meaningful our existence is to us (as short and delicate as it is). As seemingly sad as this film is (seeing the heartbreak and corruption of the characters), Malick does not leave the narrative void of all hope – life is ever evolving with new experiences, people and feelings each present the chance for happiness and substance amidst the tragedy of the passage of time. While the film is very impactful on an emotional level, viewers looking for something with a more cut-and-dry narrative structure (like a typical Hollywood film) are probably not going to like this at all and find it boring, as Malick makes no real attempt to make that type of film. There is not much dialog, as most of the story and meaning are directly derived from the viewer’s interpretation of the images Malick places before them. The Tree of Life is not for everyone, but for those that give in to its allure and participate, opening up to its emotional advances, it is a very profound, mesmerizing and unique cinema experience.

Technical & acting achievements: With each film, Terrence Malick seems to get more interested in the meaning of his images and what they can bring out in the viewer than in telling a fluid story, as this is by far the furthest away from a Hollywood narrative of any of his previous films. However, his brilliance as a filmmaker is seemingly even more evident, as he crafts such excellent shots and powerful scenes – garnering fantastic performances. Malick’s collaboration with cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki produces some of the best work (not only of this year, but of the last few decades). They work so well together giving the film such an angelic, truthful and superb look and feel. Lubezki is able to capture and use light maybe better than anyone else working today. Production designer Jack Fisk has a difficult job, designing sets that are minimalistic, but also warm in the 1950s scenes, and cold and stylistically modern sets in the present, while also working with Malick to find locations that fit the atmosphere and feel of the narrative and intended emotional impact – and he does so expertly. The soul of the piece is its performances, but also the score by composer Alexandre Desplat both confronts and comforts the characters on screen, while serving as our emotional gateway to what we are seeing on screen. Back to the performances, Brad Pitt is very good as a man that wants to be a good person and father, but like us all is carried away by selfish ambitions. Hunter McCracken is excellent in his debut, and I look forward to more great work from him in the future. Jessica Chastain, however, steals the film. She has so much strength, but is on the brink of losing herself. It is a marvelous performance, and one I will not forget.

Summary & score: Love it or hate it, The Tree of Life will certainly be among the most interesting, emotionally engaging and powerful (or boring, if you hated it) films of the year (and probably decade). 9/10

Midnight in Paris (2011) – Review

Review: Midnight in Paris is a funny, sweet and intellectually engaging comedy. Writer-director Woody Allen looks both at the psychology of nostalgia (looking back to a Golden Age) and picking the right person to love. The narrative’s protagonist, Gil, feels as though he is living in the wrong period, looking back to Paris in the 1920s as the perfect time and place to have lived (as it was populated by many of his influences). This overwhelming nostalgic feeling makes the present appear mundane – he is not able to appreciate his life, always looking back. This seems to be a common theme to many people’s lives – holding onto the past and not living for the present. Allen structures his film almost as a parable. Gil is so fixated on his Golden Age, he floats through his present seemingly unaware or just apathetic (to a degree) about how his life is developing – having an urge to change it, but maybe not quite the commitment to do it, as it is a fantasy, he can never really go back to that time and live then. But, Allen then uses time-travel to allow Gil to live out his dream, which enables him to find a truth about his life. What is interesting about the film (and I thought it worked well) is that Allen inserts the time-travel fantasy aspect into the narrative without really making a big deal about it, or even having his protagonist question it to a large extent (which leaves the audience wondering if these scenes are actually happening or just imagined, though it seems that there is a magical property in the world of the film and that the events actually do happen). The journey Allen creates for Gil reveals that while nostalgia can serve as an influence on a person’s life, that person still should live for the present and in the present. Many of Allen’s films are about relationships (probably all of them really). Here, Allen looks at a man in the wrong relationship, which he figures out as he comes to terms with his ‘life lesson’ learned as the parable plays out. Interestingly, Allen also introduces what seems like the right woman for Gil to both juxtapose his fiancé (who is not) and make the point of the parable. The film works very well on different layers of reality and relationships and has a nice charm to it – almost a sense of playful wonder like a small child’s imagination, which gave the film such an enchanting allure. Allen is also not afraid to engage his viewers on an intellectual level, with countless references to painters, poets, novelist, and other artists (many well known to all, and others that are not as well known to the average viewer). Allen does not feel the need to teach the audience about who these artists are or why they are important, rather he includes them as part of the fantasy (and really sort of like an in-joke or winking eye for those who know who they are). The film also seems to comment of art. Allen suggests through his characters, particularly the pompous Paul (who thinks he knows everything about everything, and just comes off very poorly), that art is not so much about what someone says is good or tells you to feel about it, but about how you feel about it solely and how you alone experience it and how it affects you (taking a jab at the profession of criticism and the canonization of art). Midnight in Paris, at its heart, is a story about being happy in your life as it is, not picking a relationship because it seems like that is the person you are supposed to be with as deemed by society and not reminiscing too much in the past, because you might miss the present.

Technical and acting achievements: Woody Allen makes a film every year (which is amazing). He writes such great dialog and characters that his films are entertaining even when maybe they do not work all that well as a whole. Recently, he has been making many films in Europe (and I think to great success). For this film Allen chose Paris, which is such a beautiful city. Allen definitely approaches it from a touristic perspective, which is immediately apparent in the opening montage (made up of mostly famous sites in and around the Tour Eiffel, Champs-Elysees and Louvre). But, the characters are tourists, so it makes sense. However, Allen, cinematographer Darius Khondji and production designer Anne Seibel create such a wonderful aesthetic (mixing the fog of fantasy with the period décor and look of the 1920s and early 1900s/late 1890s) for Paris of the past, populated by bars, apartments and other locations that are not touristic, making for a nice juxtaposition between tourist and immersed in the culture (reminding me a bit of Audrey Hepburn in Funny Face, when she seeks out the beatnik culture in Paris). It is great just how out of place Gil looks in the scenes in when he goes back in time. Both Khondji and Seibel do phenomenal work on the film. The cast, filled with great performances in almost cameo roles, is excellent. Adrien Brody, Gad Elmaleh and Alison Pill are all brilliant and funny in small roles. Marion Cotillard is just so alluring and transfixing. She plays her role perfectly. Corey Stoll is genius in the film. His Hemingway commands the screen and pretty much steals every scene he is in. Michael Sheen plays his role so well, that it is almost impossible not to hate his character Paul. Rachel McAdams does a good job playing a woman who is beautiful and driven, and sort of the bad guy, as she is not right at all of Gil. Owen Wilson brings the right about of enthusiasm and wonder to the role of Gil to make it work.

Summary & score: Midnight it Paris is a lovely film, with both a bewitching aesthetic and narrative. 8/10

X-Men: First Class (2011) – Review

Review: X-Men: First Class is the X-Men movie we have all been waiting for – full of great action, wonderful performances and direction that both gets the characters and how to make a fantastic genre film. Writer-director Matthew Vaughn seems to get better with each film he makes. Here, he took on the daunting task of making a sequel/reboot (it is sort of both) to a franchise that was all but dead thanks to the last two films (X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine) being complete disappointments for fans (and the first two done by Bryan Singer, the main producer on this film, only being ok but nowhere near as good as the great comic book films like Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight). This is among the best comic book films (and probably the second best Marvel movie made to date, behind Spider-Man 2). Setting the film in the 60’s is a stroke of brilliance, as it opens the world of the X-Men up to cool stylistic changes and to a period ripe with social and cultural chaos and change (the Cold War specifically, but also civil rights). Vaughn definitely pulls from period influences as some of the early sequences involving Erik Lehnsherr feel like excerpts from a Sean Connery James Bond film and Sebastian Shaw (minus the powers) could easily slip right in as a perfect nemesis to Bond. Critics to the film will say that it is overstuffed and really serves no point (since we already know where the story is heading, given the other four films in the franchise), but this film feels very much like a reboot (and sure, it does nod to the other films, but it does not fit story wise or in the timeline precisely). The characters have all been reimagined in the brilliant performances this fantastic cast gives them. In terms of the film being overstuffed, there is a lot going on in the film – a lot of story, a lot of characters (and origins), as the film needed to serve as both the beginning of a new trilogy (should one happen, and I really hope it does) and a prequel to the other films (should no more X-Men films be made with these actors), making it a very difficult narrative for Vaughn and screenwriter Jane Goldman to form. They do the job almost perfectly. Each character has their dramatic moments, which allows the audience to connect to them, even with very limited screen time. A slight issue does arise during the third act, as the relationship between Lehnsherr and Charles Xavier beings to deteriorate. The actor’s chemistry is so good that the audience is far more interested in their story and their relationship, that the villain, Shaw, and his evil plan do not seem as important. Plus (at least for me) when the film ended, there is such an expectation for more that the ending is unwelcome (especially with potential sequels yet to be confirmed). Vaughn also infused great humor into the film (something that had been in the previous films, but had never quite worked and came off really cheesy and just sort of bad). The humor works great in breaking up the dramatic tension and action and letting the audience release (an important element in creating a narrative that has good pacing). Vaughn does not shy away from the politics and social realities of the period either, as there is a strong sense of women being second class citizens among men in the film (something Vaughn apparently had to fight Fox to keep in the film), which plays off the whole mutants being scared and mistrusted in ‘normal’ human society (a theme prevalent in all X-Men media). Some have also complained about Vaughn and the writers rewriting history by inserting the X-Men into the Cuban Missile Crisis, but that is a fairly poor argument, as taking the film at face value and accepting the world in which mutants exist means accepting that it is different from our own, with its own history. X-Men: First Class may not appeal to all viewers, as it is made for genre fans specifically, but those that appreciate comic book films (and I would argue good cinema in general) will really enjoy what this film has to offer (as I stated above: this is the X-Men film I have wanted to see since I first became a fan).

Technical and acting achievements: Writer-director Matthew Vaughn has developed such a talent for interweaving violence, humor, drama, and action that his narratives not only entertain but also fully engage their audiences. He also brings out such great work from his actors. I (for one) really would like to see Fox continue the trilogy with Vaughn and Goldman directing and scripting the future installments with this cast, as I think they can only get better (and that is saying something given how good this film is), and a credit to producer Bryan Singer as well for coming up with the basic story idea and placing the series in the 60’s (and for bringing on Vaughn to direct). Composer Henry Jackman’s (who also scored a portion of Vaughn’s Kick-Ass) score is very interesting playing off the time period and Bond influences, while also infusing a powerful electronic undertone. It sounds very different from most superhero movie scores, which is refreshing (here is an example). However, he is still able to capture the action and scope of the film well. John Mathieson’s cinematography is very good and he worked well with Vaughn’s stylistic shooting style. His work along with editor Lee Smith’s gives the film a very comic book panel feel, which is really cool and worked well in the transition of the narrative. Mathieson’s lighting also went very well with Chris Seagers’s amazing production design (I pretty much loved all the sets) giving the film a great and unique look in the genre. The international aspect of the film, with many locations, also showcased the brilliant work of Mathieson and Seagers. The cast is phenomenal, with many wonderful performances and great bit part casting. Kevin Bacon (whose performances I am not always a fan of) is very good as the film’s villain. He is a tad zany, but plays the role just like a Bond villain (which I said before), and it works great (Vaughn was able to get just the right performance from him, much like with Nicholas Cage in Kick-Ass). Jennifer Lawrence has a difficult role in the film, with her character’s transformation and acceptance of herself. She plays it very well, reminding us of the great actress we saw emerge in last year’s Winter’s Bone. Even with all the good supporting work, the film completely belonged to James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender. They were perfect in their portrayals of Xavier and Lehnsherr. Their relationship and chemistry is a big reason for the film working as well as it does.

Summary & score: With exciting action, funny wit, engaging drama, and beautiful aesthetics, X-Men: First Class has established itself as a premier comic book film (and piece of cinema in general). 9/10

Movie of the Week - Rebecca

This week’s movie is Rebecca (1940).

The drama is about a young girl who meets a rich troubled widower in the south of France. They fall in love with each other and are married. But when he brings her back to his family home, she is haunted by his former wife’s memory and grip over the household. The film is a cinematic masterpiece with brilliant directing, performances and some of the best photography in film history. It is Alfred Hitchcock’s first film he made in America, working with producer David O. Selznick (though, while this was indeed his first film made in Hollywood, his first truly American film in feel is Shadow of a Doubt). The score by composer Franz Waxman is very good and moody, fitting the gothic themes at play visually and in the narrative. Art director Lyle R. Wheeler’s sets and design work are also wonderful and fitting. Everything is big, almost swallowing up Mrs. de Winter. However, cinematographer George Barnes (maybe the best D.P. of all-time) does the standout work of the picture. Joan Fontaine looks lovely in the film, while his use of shadows takes full advantage of the black-and-white format. From a cinematography standpoint, this is a masterwork (and he won the Best Cinematography Oscar for his work). Both stars Fontaine and Laurence Olivier are fantastic, and there is also excellent supporting work from George Sanders, C. Aubrey Smith and especially Judith Anderson. The film won the 1941 Oscar’s Best Picture (the only film directed by Hitchcock to win Best Picture). It is aesthetically one of the best examples of the wonderful work being done during the Golden Age of Hollywood. Hitchcock has a filmography that boasts many classics, but Rebecca is probably the best of his early career (and I also really like The 39 Steps, Notorious, Suspicion, and Shadow of a Doubt too). This is a must see for all cinema fans. Check out the trailer.

Available on Criterion Collection DVD, DVD and to Rent

Fast Five (2011) – Review

Review: Fast Five is exciting and well done – full of great action sequences, fast cars and good looking women. It is the pinnacle of what the franchise is about and the film that all future installments in the series should aspire to, as it is easily the best of the series (and will probably be among the best action films of the summer). Going in the audience expects three things: to be entertained, to not have to overly think and for the film to be flashy (both with hot cars and girls). Director Justin Lin (who also directed Tokyo Drift and Fast & Furious, which was fairly terrible) does his best work of the series (and his career, unless you count the Community episode Modern Warfare). The story is pretty boilerplate and the returning characters have all had previous films for the audience to get to know them – both these things actually help the film. Usually, recycling a tried and true narrative just makes for a tired film, but here Lin is able to take the narrative that everyone knows and tweak it just enough to make it fresh. He also knows what his audience wants and delivers very good action scenes that push the boundaries of reality a little but are wholly satisfying and entertaining. Lin also keeps the narrative moving forward and does not dwell too long on anything (which is essential with somewhat shallowly drawn characters and story). And while the characters are not given a ton of dramatic work (save maybe Dom, Brian and Mia), especially the new characters (specifically Elena who is fairly cliché, but it still works fine), it does not really matter because the audience already knows the returning characters and Lin has given them each just enough to remind the audiences as well. He has also catered the roles to fit the actors making the characters more transparent and thus not needing too much dramatic work as they are essentially who is playing them (of course with some differences). What also works well in the film is Lin and cinematographer Stephen Windon’s shooting style – it is gritty and kinetic enough to derive the intended impact, but is still clean and crisp enough to adhere to the series’ sleek and sexy tone and style. The action scenes in this film work better, far better, than in any of the previous films. Lin could have gone too far over-the-top with them, and almost does in some cases, but he is able to get right to the edge of what is believable in the series and deliver great stuff. All that being said, the film is still not great (unless compared against its series predecessors). It is an action film that does not try to be anything more (which is fine). Fast Five is fun and thrilling, not because of great character work but because of great pacing and action set pieces.

Technical and acting achievements: Director Justin Lin seems to have taken a page out of J.J. Abrams book with this film – as long as the film moves forward constantly and the action is well done, the film will be good and entertaining (though, I would save that Abram’s MI III has better developed characters due to Abram’s being a better filmmaker and storyteller). As stated above, (I think) this is his best work, turning a completely overdone series suddenly into one that is compelling and has enthusiastically anticipated future stories (all the more impressive considering he directed the two previous not installments, neither very good). The work of production designer Peter Wenham and D.P. Windon give the film a great look, upholding the series’ style while creating a deeper sense of urgency to the action drawing the audience in. Composer Brian Tyler’s score is loud and accompanies the action well. The cast is good, each playing to their strengths. Tyrese Gibson, Ludacris, Sung Kang, and Gal Gadot (who probably made herself into an it-girl if not a star with her look in the film) highlight the supporting players, while Dwayne Johnson is wonderfully himself in his embodiment of his character. Paul Walker, Jordana Brewster and Vin Diesel are all good in the leads (with Diesel doing the best work among the group).

Summary & score: Fantastic action, beautiful woman and awesome cars make Fast Five a triumphant film (in a series that has yielded maybe one ok film in four tries, previously). 7/10

The Hangover Part II (2011) – Review

Review: The Hangover Part II is funny enough, and maybe would be a better film if The Hangover did not already exist, but it does – so this is not. Director Todd Phillips and Warner Bros. seem to be more interested in making money than a compelling narrative (when with a compelling narrative this still would have made the same money, if not more). The story and narrative structure are almost exactly the same as the first film, but Phillips has little regard for the characters and their growth – rather he is mostly concerned with exaggerated jokes that go over-the-top to make this seem even crazier than the first (and I guess we all saw this coming, but forgave it for the potential of another very funny and well done comedy). Sure there are moments of hilarity, but without the character work and strong narrative those moments do not really mean anything and exist on a plane outside narrative filmmaking, falling more under pure spectacle (and this film plays that way, which hurts it gravely). The first was so successful because it was innovative and had relatable and memorable characters. In part II the characters are mere caricatures of themselves (something that sadly seems to be common in sequels) driven by the expectations of fans of the first (with the “dance for me monkey” mentality, and there a monkey in the film!). They no longer feel like real people and thus the audience does not relate to them, and almost regardless of how funny the comedy is and how crazy the misadventures are the film will not be good without the connection with the audience. Phillip’s narrative is also sloppy and built around gags rather than character arcs. It is wholly unsatisfying and even mildly insulting to its audience, especially the third act. Phillips had the opportunity to make another great comedy, working with very funny people, which makes it all the more disappointing that the goal seemingly was to throw something together as close to the first as possible with the aim for dollars and not quality (and the average moviegoer would lap it up anyway, which they have). It almost plays a bit like a parody of itself, which could work given the right tone and crafting, but here it is more the result of shoddy filmmaking than seemingly a conscious effort. In a vacuum (the first film not existing), this would be a mediocre comedy with some really funny parts. As is, The Hangover Part II is just really disappointing and not very good.

Technical and acting achievements: Director Todd Phillips has an up and down track record. He has done some very funny stuff like Old School and The Hangover, but often he gets carried away with gags and jokes and forgets that the most important ingredient to any film is the characters (and secondly the narrative, both of which are weak here, but somewhat saved from sheer terribleness due to some funny stuff and performances).  Christopher Beck’s score is good and fits the tone of the film. Though, his work is somewhat overshadowed by the found-music pieces that fit very well. The cinematography by Lawrence Sher and the production design by Bill Brzeski are probably the best part of the whole film. Both do very good work (especially for a Hollywood comedy). The cast is a little iffier, in terms of good work. The main three actors (Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Zach Galifianakis) are good and all are funny (if only their characters where actually given better material and growth), but due to the tired narrative they seemed to be going through the motions a bit (both in performance and their characters confronting the situations). Justin Baratha is not really given anything to do. The same goes for Jeffrey Tambor and Jamie Chung. Ken Jeong plays Mr. Chow as a cartoon version of himself (which you would think would be hard given how crazy he is in the first) and Paul Giamatti is completely uninterested in his performance (probably due to it being poorly written) and it shows as he just phones it in.

Summary & score: All in all The Hangover Part II is a failure (unless you are Warner Bros. and have a big hit on your hands without much effort). Hopefully the third will be better (but I am not holding my breath). 5/10

At the Movies – June 2011 – Part 3: Must See Films

Must See of the Month:

Super 8 (J.J. Abrams) – Sci-Fi – Jun 10

Summary: The film is about a group of friends making a film together in the summer of 1979. However, after seeing bizarre and creepy footage mistakenly caught of a mysterious train crash, they begin to investigate strange phenomenon happening in their small town. Filmmakers: Known for his many TV series (especially Lost and Fringe), this marks writer-director J.J. Abrams’s third feature film, and first to be derived from original material (his first two film being MI III and Star Trek). Steven Spielberg is producing the film with Abrams (cementing the feeling I get from watching the trailer: that it reminds me a lot of Spielberg early work, specifically Close Encounters of the Third Kind and E.T.). Composer Michael Giacchino (Let Me In), cinematographer Larry Fong (Sucker Punch) and production designer Martin Whist (Cloverfield) make up an awesome crew. Cast: Abrams has put together a lesser known cast, but a really good one none-the-less. Elle Fanning (who is wonderful in Somewhere), Kyle Chandler (who many will recognize from Friday Night Lights) and Joel Courtney (making his debut) star, with Amanda Michalka and Noah Emmerich in supporting roles. Expectations: The film looks like it is going to be really good, playing off my nostalgic love of childhood sci-fi and adventure films (like the Spielberg film listed above and The Goonies, which the trailer also reminds me a lot of). Abrams has a talent for making action films that never stop and yet still develop their characters well and connect with the audience. This is the must see of the month because the trailer looks great and Abrams almost always does amazing work (Undercovers being his only critical and commercial flop to date). Check out the trailer. Review.

Worth Checking Out:

X-Men: First Class (Matthew Vaughn) – Action/Adventure – Jun 3

Summary: A prequel to the first three X-Men films (though, the beginning of a new trilogy, assuming it does well), the film is about the beginnings of the relationship between (then friends) Charles Xavier and Erik Lensherr, and the early days of the forming of the X-Men. Filmmakers: Writer-director Matthew Vaughn originally was going to direct X-Men: The Last Stand, but left the project due to creative and scheduling conflicts with Fox (and then they brought in Brett Ratner to make a passable, but ultimately weak action film). Instead, he made Stardust, which a fun fantasy adventure establishing him as director to watch, only to follow it up with Kick-Ass (one of the top 10 best superhero films). With those films under his belt, Vaughn is a fantastic choice to direct this film, especially since it is also a period film (taking place mostly in 1963). Upon joining the project, Vaughn reworked the script with writing partner Jane Goldman (which is a good thing). Vaughn has a great crew with composer Henry Jackman (who worked on Kick-Ass), cinematographer John Mathieson (Gladiator), production designer Chris Seagers (Unstoppable), and editor Lee Smith (who does all Chris Nolan’s films). Bryan Singer (who directed the first two in the series) is producing. Cast: Vaughn put together a stellar and fresh group of actors (which along with him being attached to direct actually got me interested and excited for this after the first three X-Men films were disappointing). James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender star, with Jennifer Lawrence, Rose Byrne, Nicholas Hoult, Kevin Bacon, and January Jones co-staring. Jason Flemyng, Zoe Kravitz, Lucas Till, Oliver Platt, Edi Gathegi, Ray Wise, Caleb Landry Jones, and Alex Gonzalez feature in supporting roles. Expectations: Despite Fox’s best intentions to market the film horribly with the whole “Before he was Magneto, he was Erik” thing, the latest trailers look really great. The Cold War angle puts an interesting twist on the X-Men, as it was a period of people hiding their beliefs and being afraid (which are common themes in X-Men comics, TV and films). It will also be fun to see a period superhero film (and we get two this year with Capitan America: The First Avenger being set during WWII). Vaughn and crew plus the wonderful cast give me very high expectations (probably too high, given the crazy rushed schedule to get this out on time). Check out the trailer. Review.