Review – The Revenant

Movie Title: The Revenant

Director: Alejandro G. Iñárritu

Date Released: January 8th, 2016

Date Seen: January 16th, 2016

Seen With: Daniel

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

I went into this movie not really expecting anything other than a great acting feat.  This movie delivered on that front.  But it also delivered a surprisingly interesting story that kept me hooked, had my heart pounding at times, and that I thoroughly enjoyed.  I liked this movie much more than anticipated, and for a variety of reasons.

We’ll get this out of the way – the acting in the movie is fantastic.  Yes, we know Leonardo DiCaprio can act.  A lot of this movie is him in more compromised positions and taking a lot of a beating.  There’s a lot of teeth gritting and whining and revenge seeking, and he’s wounded for a lot of the movie. Sometimes I have a hard time separating Leonardo DiCaprio the actor from the character he’s playing and this movie I didn’t have that problem. Is it my favorite Leonardo DiCaprio acting piece? No. But he still does a damn good job.  Tom Hardy plays a role that reminded me a lot of his role as Alfie Solomons in the Netflix show Peaky Blinders. I thought he did a good job but it wasn’t anything shocking.  Donhnall Gleeson surprised me as Captain Andrew Henry, probably just because I have his recent Star Wars: The Force Awakens role in my mind.  But again, unsurprisingly he did a great job.  The real treat was Will Poulter as Bridger, one of the younger fur trappers on the team with the aforementioned characters.  You might recognize him from the comedy “We Are the Millers”?  Well, seeing him pop up in the movie I was worried but he was the stand out performance in this movie.  He did a phenomenal job.  I can’t wait to see him in more serious acting roles after this.

The other great thing about this movie is the colors. It’s mostly filmed in blue and grey tones, so whenever there is red for fire or blood it really stands out and makes an even more significant impact.  There are a lot of panning landscape shots that are gorgeous to look at, even when the shots are filled with the remains of a battle.  For a good portion of the movie, Iñárritu uses a film technique similar to what he did in Birdman, with the camera following one person closely and then moving to another person to focus on a different area.  This was great in battle scenes, and actually made them feel more realistic than the usual cut to pieces fight scenes.  However, it didn’t work well during the close camp scenes and was annoying and out of place at times.

The plot also was great.  I didn’t know much about the movie going into it (the trailers didn’t tell you a ton), but it surprised me.  There was so much going on, and the different story lines you see through the course of the movie were all important and connected. I will say, I had heard about the bear fight before I went into the movie.  I heard it was intense and it certainly was.  My heart was pounding during it and it was a bit rough to watch.  Even though it’s a CGI bear (duh) it felt very real.

Overall I enjoyed this movie much more than expected, and would recommend it.

 

Part 2 – In Depth Spoiler Ridden Review

The one thing I couldn’t really get behind was the Captain’s allegiance towards Glass.  Once it’s revealed that Fitzgerald left Glass for dead and killed Hawk, AND stole all the money, it makes sense that he’s angry.  But even before that Glass seems very very adamant about helping Glass stay alive and carrying him along with them while trying to make it back to the fort.  Could be because of things that had happened in the past with the fur trapping group, not sure, but it just seemed like he was always 100% on the side of Glass, even when it might not have benefited the company (like carrying his near-dying body for miles over mountains). Yes, there wouldn’t have been some of a plot without it, but I would have liked some explanation there.

Overall – 8/10

A grotesquely beautiful movie, with impressive acting, mildly annoying camera techniques, but an overall great movie.

Review – In the Heart of The Sea

Movie Title: In the Heart of the Sea

Director: Ron Howard

Date Released: December 11th, 2015

Date Seen: December 2th, 2015 – Screening Event

Seen With: Daniel

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Review

I got free tickets to go see this movie, and it was one that I was semi-interested in seeing. It was the idea of the plot I was ok. I loved Rush, also directed by Ron Howard, and his movies are generally very well acted and gorgeous so figured why not.

The plot surprised me, I knew it was a frame story, with Herman Melville being played by Ben Whishaw, hearing the fantastic tale of the Essex from one of the crew many years after the events.  The story would become that of Moby Dick.  So despite having a general idea of what would happen in the story (oh, you know, giant evil whale blah blah), it still managed to keep me on my toes.  This was in part due to the extremely well written characters.  Even the jerk/asshole characters you understood for the most part where they were coming from and they were a necessary part of the story.  This was also helped out by the phenomenal acting in this movie.  Chris Hemsworth plays Owen Chase, first mate on the Essex, and is one of the main characters.  He goes through a physical transformation that is frightening to see – especially if you think of his physique in Thor.  But he does a fantastic job.  Tom Holland plays Thomas Nickerson, a young deck hand on the boat.  He was a nice surprise, considering that thus far he hasn’t been in a large amount of acting roles (though he is going to be Peter Parker in Captain America: Civil War). The other standouts are Cillian Murphy playing Matthew Joy, a long time friend of Owen Chase, and Benjamin Walker as George Pollard, the captain of the Essex.  Walker definitely took a step up from Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.

I was correct in that this movie would be gorgeous.  From the scenes just looking at a boat on the water, or close up action shots on the boat, everything had something beautiful to look at.  The colors were fantastic, going between scenes of deep blues and greens typically when there was ocean turmoil to the oranges, yellows, and golds, later on in the movie.  It kept the movie looking pretty even when there were horrors going on screen.  The sounds in the movie were also fantastic, and they added a nice level of realism to the movie that sometimes is lost.  There’s a scene early on when they’re boarding the ship, and the amount of different sounds going on in the shipyard, the conversations, the water sounds, the boat sounds, the people, etc. really makes you feel like you’re there.  It also continues throughout the movie.

All in all I was expecting to like this movie, but come out very impressed and happy that I saw the movie.  I thought it was a great movie that I would definitely go see again.  See it on the big screen if you can, it’s definitely worth the money.

 

Part 2 – Spoilers Review

I can’t think of anything spoilery I’d like to say at the moment.

 

Overall – 8/10

Beautifully shot and acted, good pace of the movie, while managing to keep you on your toes despite having an idea of where the story is headed.

Review – Ida / Siostra milosierdzia

Movie Title: Ida / Siostra milosierdzia

Director: Pawel Pawlikowski

Language/Country of Origin: Polish/Poland

Date Released: August 13th, 2013 (Telluride Film Festival)

Date Seen: February 20th, 2015

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

One of the best foreign feature nominations for the Oscars this year (and best cinematography), and it was on Netflix so I decided to give it a watch.  I thought it was beautifully shot, well-acted, and a nice piece of art.  It’s not a movie I’d recommend to everyone, but if you like artsy stuff it is a very beautiful film.  It’s a slow moving drama in 1960s Poland, about Anna (Agata Trzebuchowska), a woman grown up as an orphan in a convent, a week away from taking her vows.  Her mother superior makes her visit her only living relative, an aunt, Wanda (Agata Kulesza).  From her aunt she discovers her Jewish heritage and what happened to her family during the war.

The best part of the movie, in my opinion, was the cinematography.  It was shot on 35mm film, with an aspect ratio of 1.37:1 and in black and white, gives the movie a nice cozy “old” cinema feeling to it.  I can see why this was nominated for best cinematography.  The set direction is also beautiful. There is a repetitiveness in the type of shots that are used, but it fits in with Anna’s generally repetitive and boring life from the convent, so it’s fitting for the movie.

The acting was well done.  The main actors are just the two women that play Anna and Wanda.  Agata Kulesza as Wanda was a standout.  I thought she was the best part of the movie.  Agata Trzebuchowska has her first role in this movie, and does a good job.  A lot of the movie relies on her blankly staring at something though, so I don’t feel like I have a good sense of how she is as an actress.  She did good, nevertheless.

I think this movie should be watched for the art quality of it as opposed to the plot.  The plot was alright, it’s slow moving, and decently developed, but didn’t get me sucked in nor do I really care about what happens at the end.

 

Part 2 – In Depth Spoiler Ridden Review

I really liked how this movie was shot, I mentioned that before.  One of my favorite things was how the entire movie was shot from still, non-moving camera angles.  Entire scenes took place without the camera moving once, or if it did, to a completely different non-stationary point.  That is, until the very end.  Anna goes back to her aunt’s house and basically has a night out as her aunt.  This includes getting dressed up, going out for a night on the town, drinking, smoking, and even having sex with the super cute saxophone player from earlier in the movie.   In the morning we see Anna putting back on her nun-in-training clothes, and walk strongly towards the camera, with now the camera moving with her and with a hand-held feeling.  Do we know what Anna is planning now? Is she going back to the convent? Is she going to retake her vows?  We cannot be sure.  But we do know that the girl Anna was leaving the convent, staring down at her feet, unsure of things, such as in the movie poster above, is no longer there.  She is changed.  The style of the movie has changed.  We are looking at a very different person now and the director wanted to make it that much more obvious.  While it can be kind of gimmicky – it worked well in this movie and I appreciated it.

 

Overall: 7/10

Very artistically well done, fantastically shot, good acting, but no rewatchability and a meh plot bring it down for me.  Watch it for the style.

2015 Oscar Nominations

Best Picture

• American Sniper – Clint Eastwood, Robert Lorenz, Andrew Lazar, Bradley Cooper, and Peter Morgan
• Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) – Alejandro G. Iñárritu, John Lesher, and James W. Skotchdopole
• Boyhood – Richard Linklater and Cathleen Sutherland
• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Wes Anderson, Scoot Rudin, Steven Rales, and Jeremy Dawson
• The Imitation Game – Nora Grossman, Ido Ostrowsky, and Teddy Schwarzman
• Selma – Christian Colson, Oprah Winfrey, Dede Gardner, and Jeremy Kleiner
• The Theory of Everything – Tim Bevan, Eric Fellner, Lisa Bruce, and Anthony McCarten
• Whiplash – Jason Blum, Helen Estabrook, and David Lancaster

Want to Win: Theory of Everything, because it was my absolute favorite of those movies.  Imitation Game being a close second.

Will Probably Win: I’m slightly leaning towards Birdman, with Boyhood being the obvious second. Odds are one of the two of them will get it.  I think Imitation Game is the dark horse that if there was a surprise, that would be it.

Actual Winner: Birdman

Actor in a Leading Role

• Steve Carell in “Foxcatcher”
• Bradley Cooper in “American Sniper”
• Benedict Cumberbatch in “The Imitation Game“
• Michael Keaton in “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)“
• Eddie Redmayne in “Theory of Everything“

Want to Win: Eddie Redmayne

Will Probably Win: Eddie Redmayne

Actual Winner: Eddie Redmayne

Actress in a Leading Role

• Marion Cotillard in “Two Days, One Night”
• Felicity Jones in “The Theory of Everything“
• Julianne Moore in “Still Alice”
• Rosamund Pike in “Gone Girl”
• Reese Witherspoon in “Wild”

Want to Win: I don’t have any strong feelings in this category, but I did very much enjoy Rosamund Pike in Gone Girl.  So we’ll go with that.

Will Probably Win: Julianne Moore

Actual Winner: Julianne Moore

Actor in a Supporting Role

• Robert Duvall in “The Judge”
• Ethan Hawke in “Boyhood“
• Edward Norton in “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)“
• Mark Ruffalo in “Foxcatcher”
• J.K. Simmons in “Whiplash”

Want to Win: Edward Norton

Will Probably Win: Probably J.K. Simmons with Edward Norton being a close second.

Actual Winner: J. K. Simmons

Actress in a Supporting Role

• Patricia Arquette in “Boyhood“
• Laura Dern in “Wild”
• Keira Knightley in “The Imitation Game“
• Emma Stone in “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)“
• Meryl Streep in “Into the Woods”

Want to Win: Emma Stone was awesome in Birdman, and I would choose her if it wasn’t for Patricia Arquette who should win this and would absolutely deserve it.

Will Probably Win: Patricia Arquette

Actual Winner: Patricia Arquette

Animated Feature Film

• Big Hero 6 – Don Hall, Chris Williams, and Roy Conli
• The Boxtrolls – Anthony Stacchi, Graham Annable, and Travis Knight
• How to Train Your Dragon 2 – Dean DeBlois and Bonnie Arnold
• Song of the Sea – Tomm Moore and Paul Young
• The Tale of Princess Kaguya – Isao Takahata and Yoshiaki Nishimura

Want to Win: It doesn’t have a chance, but I’d love it if Boxtrolls won.  I loved going back to the claymation styling, and thus would love it if it won so that we’d maybe see more of these types of movies start to come back again.

Will Probably Win: How To Train Your Dragon 2 (which I thought was great, so I have no issues with it winning, either).

Actual Winner: Big Hero 6 (not going to lie, I was surprised, everything seemed to point at HTTYD2).

Cinematography

• Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) – Emmanuel Lubezki
• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Robert Yeoman
• Ida – Lukasz Zal and Ryszard Lenczewski
• Mr. Turner – Dick Pope
• Unbroken – Roger Deakins

Want to Win: Birdman – I think the cinematography is part of the reason the movie was so cool to watch, so I think it should get it, but I also admit I haven’t seen the last three movies in the category.

Will Probably Win: Birdman

Actual Winner: Birdman

Costume Design

• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Milena Canonero
• Inherent Vice – Mark Bridges
• Into the Woods – Colleen Atwood
• Maleficent – Anna B. Sheppard
• Mr. Turner – Jacqueline Durran

Want to Win: Lolz Maleficent just to watch people be confused as to what the hell happened.

Will Probably Win: Grand Budapest Hotel, but equally as likely as Into the Woods.  I just think Into the Woods has so much inspiration from the stage show already, and there aren’t many costume changes between the main characters, that meh.  I don’t care for it to win.

Actual Winner: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Directing

• Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) – Alejandro G. Iñárritu
• Boyhood – Robert Linklater
• Foxcatcher – Bennett Miller
• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Wes Anderson
• The Imitation Game – Morten Tyldum

Want to Win: Boyhood

Will Probably Win: Boyhood

Actual Winner: Birdman (again, the other one I was surprised with, obviously)

Documentary Feature

• CitizenFour – Laura Poitras, Mathilde Bonnefoy, and Dirk Wilutzky
• Finding Vivian Maier – John Maloof and Charlie Siskel
• Last Days in Vietnam – Rory Kennedy and Keven McAlester
• The Salt of the Earth – Wim Wenders, Juliano Ribeiero Salgado, and David Rosier
• Virunga – Orlando von Einsiedel and Joanna Natasegara

I haven’t seen any of these :(.  I fail.

Actual Winner: CitizenFour

Documentary Short Subject

• Crisis Hotline: Veterans Press 1 – Ellen Goosenberg Kent and Dana Perry
• Joanna – Aneta Kopacz
• Our Curse – Tomasz Śliwiński and Maciej Ślesicki
• The Reaper (La Parka) – Gabriel Serra Arguello
• White Earth – J. Christian Jensen

I haven’t seen any of these either, I fail again!

Actual Winner: Crisis Hotline: Veterans Press 1

Film Editing

• American Sniper – Joel Cox and Gary D. Roach
• Boyhood – Sandra Adair
• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Barney Pilling
• The Imitation Game – William Goldenberg
• Whiplash – Tom Cross

Want to Win: No strong feelings on what I want to win here.  I think Boyhood is kind of a cop out because they had *so* long to work on it.  Yes, that doesn’t mean that their work wasn’t great, just you had 12 years to edit your movie when others had one or two.

Will Probably Win: Boyhood

Actual Winner: Whiplash

Foreign Language Film

• Ida – Poland, Pawel Pawlikowski
• Leviathan – Russia, Andrey Zvyagintsev
• Tangerines – Estonia, Zaza Urushadze
• Timbuktu – Mauritania, Abderrahmane Sissako
• Wild Tales – Damián Szifron

The only one I’ve seen is Ida, so I can’t make a very good decision on this category.

Actual Winner: Ida

Makeup and Hairstyling

• Foxcatcher – Bill Corso and Dennis Liddiard
• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Frances Hannon and Mark Coulier
• Guardians of the Galaxy – Elizabeth Yianni-Georgiou and David White

Want to Win: Guardians of the Galaxy.  Because aliens.

Will Probably Win: Not sure, so I’ll just stick with Guardians of the Galaxy.

Actual Winner: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Music – Original Score

• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Alexandre Desplat
• The Imitation Game – Alexandre Desplat
• Interstellar – Hans Zimmer
• Mr. Turner – Gary Yershon
• The Theory of Everything – Jóhann Jóhannsson

Want to Win: One of the few categories I’ve seen the majority of the movies!  The only one I remember “diskling” the music was Interstellar, just becuase it was so obvious normal Hans Zimmer stuff that it actually distracted me from the movie.  I just saw Imitation Game, and thought the music was great at times.  I also remember the music in Grand Budapest Hotel standing out to me in a positive way.  So basically, I just want one of Alexandre Desplat’s to win.

Will Probably Win: I don’t know.  Grand Budapest Hotel? Let’s go with it.

Actual Winner: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Music – Original Song

• “Everything Is Awesome” from The Lego Movie – Shawn Patterson
• “Glory” from Selma – John Stephens and Lonnie Lynn
• “Grateful” from Beyond the Lights – Diane Warren
• “I’m Not Gonna Miss You” from Glen Campbell… I’ll be me – Glen Campbell and Julian Raymond
• “Lost Stars” from Begin Again – Gregg Alexander and Danielle Brisebois

Want to Win: EEEVERYTHING IS AWESOMEEEEEEEE EVERYING IS COOOL WHEN YOU’RE PART OF A TEEEAMMMMMM

Will Probably Win: I have legitimately no idea.  Let’s give our prediction to “Glory” from Selma, since they have to let it win something.

Actual Winner: “Glory” from Selma

Production Design

• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Adam Stockhausen (Production Design); Anna Pinnock (Set Decoration)
• The Imitation Game – Maria Djurkovic (Production Design); Tatiana Macdonald (Set Decoration)
• Interstellar – Nathan Crowley (Production Design); Gary Fettis (Set Decoration)
• Into the Woods – Dennis Gassner (Production Design); Anna Pinnock (Set Decoration)
• Mr. Turner – Suzie Davies (Production Design); Charlotte Watts (Set Decoration)

Want to Win: I watched a feature on the set design of Grand Budapest, so I’m slightly biased towards it.  However, I love how realistic the world of the Imitation Game felt.  Into the Woods I still always felt like I was on a “stage”, and I didn’t really like that.  So not that one.

Will Probably Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Actual Winner: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Short Film – Animated

• The Bigger Picture – Daisy Jacons and Christopher Hees
• The Dam Keeper – Robert Kondo and Dice Tsutsumi
• Feast – Patrick Osborne and Kristina Reed
• Me and My Moulton – Torill Kove
• A Single Life – Joris Oprins

Guess which category I failed at?

Actual Winner: Feast

Short Film – Live Action

• Aya – Oded Binnun and Mihal Brezis
• Boogaloo and Graham – Michael Lennox and Ronan Blaney
• Butter Lamp (La Lampe au Buerre de Yak) – Hu Wei and Julien Féret
• Parvaneh – Talkhon Hamzavi and Stefan Eichenberger
• The Phone Call – Mat Kirkby and James Lucas

Oh hey this is the last one I suck at, I swear.

Actual Winner: The Phone Call

Sound Editing

• American Sniper – Alan Robert Murray and Bub Asman
• Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) – Martin Hernández and Aaron Glascock
• The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies – Brent Burge and Jason Canovas
• Interstellar – Richard King
• Unbroken – Becky Sullivan and Andrew DeCristofaro

Want to Win: Interstellar, because I feel like a lot of the space sounds you have to really work at creating and figuring out what kind of sounds you need, that might not already be “out there”.  Like the Hobbit, we have cool battles, but we’ve had cool orc battles for 5 other movies.  With American Sniper, there have been countless war movies.

Will Probably Win: I’m not sure, honestly. I’ll stick with Interstellar, because I don’t have a better reason why one of the others should win.

Actual Winner: American Sniper

Sound Mixing

• American Sniper – John Reitz, Gregg Rudloff and Walt Martin
• Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) – Jon Taylor, Frank A. Montaño and Thomas Varga
• Interstellar – Gary A. Rizzo, Gregg Landaker and Mark Weingarten
• Unbroken – Jon Taylor, Frank A. Montaño and David Lee
• Whiplash – Craig Mann, Ben Wilkins and Thomas Curley

Want to Win: Whiplash

Will Probably Win: Whiplash

Actual Winner: Whiplash

Visual Effects

• Captain America: The Winter Soldier – Dan DeLeeuw, Russell Earl, Bryan Grill and Dan Sudick
• Dawn of the Planet of the Apes – Joe Letteri, Dan Lemmon, Daniel Barrett and Erik Winquist
• Guardians of the Galaxy – Stephane Ceretti, Nicolas Aithadi, Jonathan Fawkner and Paul Corbould
• Interstellar – Paul Franklin, Andrew Lockley, Ian Hunter and Scott Fisher
• X-Men: Days of Future Past – Richard Stammers, Lou Pecora, Tim Crosbie and Cameron Waldbauer

Want to Win: X-Men, because I’m an X-Men whore and will always pick X-Men for anything.

Will Probably Win: Interstellar

Actual Winner: Interstellar

Writing – Adapted Screenplay

• American Sniper – Jason Hall
• The Imitation Game – Graham Moore
• Inherent Vice – Paul Thomas Anderson
• The Theory of Everything – Anthony McCarten
• Whiplash – Damien Chazelle

Want to Win: The Theory of Everything or The Imitation Game

Will Probably Win: The Imitation Game

Actual Winner: The Imitation Game

Writing – Original Screenplay

• Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) – Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. and Armando Bo
• Boyhood – Richard Linklater
• Foxcatcher – E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman
• The Grand Budapest Hotel – Screenplay by Wes Anderson; Story by Wes Anderson & Hugo Guinness
• Nightcrawler – Dan Gilroy

Want to Win:  Here’s where, despite the fact that I didn’t much care for Birdman, I think it’s the most deserving to win in this category.  So I’m choosing it, over Boyhood, which they had 12+ years to write/rewrite/rework, etc.  So no fair to them.

Will Probably Win: Birdman or Boyhood.

Actual Winner: Birdman

Review – The Grand Budapest Hotel

Movie Title: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Director: Wes Anderson

Date Released: March 28th, 2014

Date Seen: July 30th, 2014

Seen With: Dad, on plane back from Germany

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

Let me preface this review with – I watched this on a plane, probably from hours 4 – 6 on the plane ride, and am not generally a Wes Anderson fan.  So, maybe it was the delerium from the plane ride – but I very much enjoyed this movie!  I was honestly kind of surprised.  I never have strongly disliked a Wes Anderson film, they just annoy me or I get tired of them.  The movie still did the things that typically annoy me, but was good enough to keep watching.  Also, this review will suck more than usual because, like I said – I saw this on a PLANE months ago.

The movie is really a framed frame story, with each layer getting slightly more “fantatsical” than the previous.  I liked that, because it shows how a story changes as it goes from person to person or thorugh time.  We mainly focus on Gustave H (Ralph Fiennes), a legendary concierge in the Grand Budapest Hotel, and his interactions with Zero (Tony Revolori), an up and coming lobby boy in the hotel.  We get some theft, some romance, some drama, some comedy, and a little bit of everything.  There’s very in your face humor at times, while others there’s very subtle humor that is nice.

While there is a lot of great acting in this movie, I feel like Wes Anderson just called up a lot of big name actors and said “heyyyyyyyyyy wanna be in my movieeeeeeeee k thx bye”.  It’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it can be a bit distracting.  Instead of focusing on the characters, you just look at “oh hey, they got Owen Wilson in this too? Oh and Jason Schawrtsman? Oh is that Tilda Swinton?” Just stop.

One thing I like about this movie is also a thing that I hate about the movie.  The movie is stylistically gorgeous.  All the scenes are very pretty, interesting, with every single little detail well thought out.  This pretty usually comes from the symmetry of the shots – which is the thing that annoys me.  The shots use the same technique over and over and over so you just get bored with it.  It makes for incredible stills of the movie, but watching an entire movie of basically the exact same shot style on repeat just drives me crazy.

I do think in the Oscars this year, this movie will do fantastic in the techincal categories – a majority of which it is nominated for.  I like this movie more for the technical aspects than I do for the plot or acting or anything, and I do think it’s a fanstastic piece of art, but not a movie I’d get out and watch on the regular.

 

Part 2 – In Depth Spoiler Ridden Review

I can’t think of anything I’d like to say here.  Oops. Bad Maria.

 

Overall: 7/10

I’m not a fan of Wes Anderson films for the most part, but the acting was great, the plot was very entertaining, and it was less annoying than his other films, so give it a watch, especially if you are a fan of Anderson’s stuff.

Review – The Imitation Game

Movie Title: The Imitation Game

Director: Morten Tyldum

Date Released: December 25th, 2014

Date Seen: January 29th, 2015

Seen with: Kim

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

This movie follows the story of Alan Turing trying to crack the WWII enigma code, while also showing us a bit of Turing’s personal life, as well.  All in all, it’s a great movie.  Despite the fact that you know the ending, you find yourself just as stressed out as Turing and his partners trying to figure out how to break this code.  Each time that they fail to crack the code, or each time that a new discovery is made – you get just as nervous or excited at what’s going to happen now.  I love when a movie based upon some history can manage to keep the viewer that engaged, despite already knowing the ending.

The acting was great.  Benedict Cumberbatch was fantastic as Alan Turing.  He fully deserves the best actor nominations he has received thus far for this performance (Oscars, Golden Globes, BAFTA, SAG, etc.).  It’s not like it comes as much of a shock though that Cumberbatch can play such a logical and direct character – considering how well he does in the BBC show Sherlock.  But we do get to see a much more emotional side of Cumberbatch, that was very well done.  I was surprised by Keira Knightley as Joan Clarke.  I’m sometimes not a big fan of hers, but I thought she was great in this.  There’s one scene where Joan and Alan are trying to convince Joan’s parents to let her go work at the “radio factory”, that was one of my favorite scenes between the two of them.  Also, there’s a couple of rather emotional scenes between the two that I won’t ruin but were very well done.  The side characters are also very well acted.  Charles Dance maybe overdoes it a bit as Commander Denniston.  Mark Strong as Stewart Menzies has the most hilarious combover, but does a fine job in the part.  Alex Lawther as a young Alan Turing did a fantastic job – especially if you notice that he’s really only been in a couple of things before this (mostly shorts and a tv show episode).  I hope he keeps acting because he did a fantastic job.

I liked that this movie focused on both the obvious, cracking of the code, as well as Turing’s life.  We get to see Turing’s early years (with the abovementioned Alex Lawther) and how he got into cryptography.  We also meet someone very important to him in his early years.  We see the year before Turing’s death, and what actions led to his death.  The movie ends with a strong message of how tragic it was that Turing died so young, seemingly due to his hormone therapy to “treat” his “disease” of homosexuality.  It also mentions how many other people unfortunately went through this same “treatment”.  It leaves you thinking about something – and I liked that.  I also liked that this movie had a *bit* more science/math in it.  It still wasn’t much, but compared to the pretty much complete lack of science in Theory of Everything, it was a bit more.  Also though, I am a PhD in math, so perhaps not the best person to judge about whether there’s enough math/science in a movie (answer: never).

All in all, I very much enjoyed this movie.  It keeps you engaged, despite the fact that you “know” the ending.  It manages to take you through some funny moments, some very sad moments, some exciting/inspirational moments, and it was all around good to watch.  It has rewatchability, was well shot, well-acted, and well-written.

 

Part 2 – In Depth/Spoiler Ridden Review

One minor annoyance – I didn’t mind the “Sometimes it is the people who no one imagines anything of, who do the things no one can imagine” quote the first time.  Hell, I didn’t mind it the second time either – it was a great time for it to pop back up.  But, the last time it was said, by Joan to Alan, it was just kind of like “alright, really, freaking again?”  I don’t think it really added anything to be said there, nor did it really need to be said to Turing.  I just thought it was kind of cheesy.

 

Overall: 8.5/10

Well acted, well shot, well written, moving story about the life of Alan Turing cracking the enigma code.

Review – Boyhood

Movie Title: Boyhood

Director: Richard Linklater

Date Released: August 15th, 2014

Date Seen: January 22nd, 2015

Seen with: Kim

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

I decided to see this because of all I’ve heard about it and being nominated for the best picture Oscar.  I’m glad I saw it.  I can’t figure out exactly why I liked it so much, but I did.

We follow a boy, Mason (Ellar Coltrane) throughout his childhood, all the way up to age 18.  The movie could just as easily have been called “parenthood” or “life” or something as similar.  We just mainly see everything through Mason’s eyes in some way or another.  The movie was filmed over 12 years, using the same actors for all the characters.  While it is a bit “gimicky”, it would not be the same movie without this.  You literally see Mason grow up right in front of your eyes.  It makes the movie so much cooler.  It feels like the scenes we see are all a sequence of moments that defined Mason.  When you think back upon your life, you don’t remember every single moment that happened.  You don’t even remember necessarily only “big” events.  It’s just some events that defined you or changed you in some way.

So while the movie focuses on Mason, I found the story of the parents far more interesting – and of course the acting was eons better (though Ellar Coltrane did pretty great). We see Mom (Patricia Arquette) go through a number of husbands, schooling, all while raising her kids.  We see Dad (Ethan Hawke) go from a dead-beat dad playing in a band to a hard working family man.  Since we see the parents over the 12 years, it’s interesting to see the subtle changes in them each year.

Overall, the movie was pretty good, but again, I can’t pinpoint exactly why.  My main problem with the movie is that there is almost no rewatchability.  I can’t really think of a time I’d just pull out the movie to watch, other than to maybe show someone the movie I know would like it.  To me, that is a problem.  However, it’s still a very good movie and a nice piece of art with great directing.

 

Part 2 – In Depth Spoiler Ridden Review

There was one thing I think that either the director got VERY lucky, or was a freaking genius about – and that was the pop culture references.  At the time, you couldn’t be certain Harry Potter would blow up like it it did – so was it an exceedingly lucky move to have them reading Harry Potter in bed one night? What was the scene you DID have in mind instead of the Harry Potter midnight premiere then? It just seems very lucky that some stuff worked out like that.  I also wonder how much stuff landed on the cutting room floor.

 

Overall: 8/10

It’s so good.  You can’t really figure out why, it’s just a good honest movie that is oddly satisfying.  However, there is limited rewatchability in the movie, which brings the score down a little bit for me.

 

Review – The Theory of Everything

Movie Title: The Theory of Everything

Director: James Marsh

Date Released: November 26th, 2014

Date Seen: December 11th, 2014

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

A fantatsic movie based on Jane Hawking’s memoirs.   We follow Jane (Felicity Jones) and Stephen (Eddie Redmayne) from their first meeting at a party all the way up to meeting the Queen of England.  We get to see their relationship go through all the usual highs and lows, plus the added stress of a diagnosis of ALS.  We see the change in Stephen, both physically and emotionally, as the disease progresses. We also see how this diagnosis affects everyone around him, from Jane, quite obviously, to even his friends and collegues at school.

The best part about this movie is the phenomenal acting on all fronts.  Eddie Redmayne undergoes a shocking physical transformation, so much so that you’d swear you were looking at Stephen Hawking at times.  The little details he does are phenomenal.  Just watching how his gait changes, and starting to get tripped up on his own legs is incredible.  Then we add in the point where he’s paralyzed, and we only have his eyes to go off of for emotion – and he still manages to get it across.  His performance is exceptional.  I hope he wins the Best Actor Oscar, because he very very much deserves it.  The movie would not be the same without his performance. The other performances were all equally great.  Felicity Jones as Jane Hawking goes through a similar “change” in the movie, but it’s much subtler and slower.  She did a great job as well.  One of the reasons I liked this movie is that there’s not a person you dislike.  You love all of the characters.  They feel so strongly towards Stephen and his family that you can’t help but adore everyone in his life.  My favorite supporting character was Charlie Cox as Jonathan Hellyer Jones.

Another great thing about this movie (in my mind) is the roller coaster of emotions you go through.  You can go from crying one scene, to estaticly happy the next – and you’re ok with that.  Sometimes there’s not even always sad crying going on, there’s some happy crying.  You really connected with all of the characters and wanted to see them happy and do well.  And even though you “know” the story, that Stephen Hawking is diagnosed with ALS and eventually loses the ability to speak, is paralyzed, etc., you are never bored.  Because the movie is about the effect this has on everyone.  This means that you stay interested in the entire movie.

I’ve seen some complaints online that the movie didn’t delve so deep into Stephen Hawking’s academic achievements.  We see them, yes, but we don’t get a lot of meat.  I’m ok with that – what do we know Stephen Hawking the most for, his academic achievements.  It’s nice to see a story of the man (and his family) behind the academic achievements.  The story shown in this movie is the story that I didn’t know, and it’s good to see that.  Yes, there are surely things that are not really “true”, but considering that both Jane Hawking and Stephen Hawking approved of the movie, that makes me feel good about it.

I loved this movie, which is saying a lot coming from someone who doesn’t really do “romance” movies.  It isn’t really that, it’s more the story of a family and how they manage to adapt their lives to a disease.  One of them just happens to be the smartest man alive, whatever.  It’s a great movie, definitely go see it.

 

Part 2 – In Depth Spoiler Ridden Review

Nothing I really want to say down here. I do want to mention something I loved (without spoiling it for anyone because it was a nice surprise).  I loved seeing Hawking interact with his kids at different stages of the disease.  Yes, some moments were very sad, such as knowing “this is probably the last time he’ll be able to (do whatever) with his kids”, or even just simple things like hold his kids in his own arms without help.  But others are extremely happy and fun – like when they play with the wheelchair and chase each other around.  There’s even the hilarious Dr. Who joke at one part.  The moments helped remind you that this is a real person, with a real life, and real experiences, and we are just getting a little glimpse into that amazing life.

 

Overall: 8.5/10

Loved this movie, fantastic acting, all around great. Go see it.  I can’t say enough about it.

Review – Birdman

Movie Title: Birdman (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Director: Alejandro González Iñárritu

Date Released: November 14th, 2014

Date Seen: January 18th, 2015

Seen with: Anna (sister – aged 21)

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

Birdman follows Riggan (Michael Keaton), a washed up actor known for his roles as Birdman (cough Batman cough), trying to start a Broadway show.  Doesn’t sound too terribly interesting does it? Well, it’s interesting at times and boring at other times. Some background on how I feel about Iñárritu – I’m 50/50 on his stuff.  I either LOVE them (e.g. Babel) or I hate them (e.g. Biutiful). So going into this movie I was hoping for a “Babel” but I got a “Biutiful”.

This isn’t to say that the movie isn’t good.  It’s well directed, exceedingly well shot, and well-acted.  A lot happens and goes on in this movie, but I didn’t care about it.  That’s the problem I had with the movie. Playing the age card, I’m only 24.  Watching a man go through this crazy mid-life/mid-career crisis is not something that I can identify with.  I don’t have to identify with a character all the time, of course not, but it would have helped.  I had no desire to get emotionally involved in Riggan and his play, thus, I didn’t care for the movie.  I was much more invested in Sam (Emma Stone) than I was in Riggan.  I would have rather watched the movie from her point of view and have her opinions on what was going on with her dad.  However, the 60+ old white men in the theater with us LOVED this movie.

As I said, the acting was incredible.  There wasn’t a performance I found bad or even “ok”.  Emma Stone as Sam and Edward Norton as Mike were my personal favorites.  One of the most interesting parts of the movie is watching Riggan and Mike practice a scene, but then edit the dialogue or the way it was said.  Those parts I found much more interesting than a majority of the rest of the movie.  The cinematography is also great.  The movie was shot to look like one continuous shot, for the most part.  It’s very interesting to watch.  The editing done in the film is to hide the cuts, but even still, it’s fairly obvious when they do occur.

I can appreciate this movie for the great acting, directing, and cinematography, however it was one I just didn’t care for.  I would not see it again, but I can see how people enjoy it and why they think it’s good.  It just wasn’t for me (dear god, this is American Hustle all over again!).

 

Part 2 – In Depth/Spoiler Ridden Review

Really just more of a thought I had – There’s some nice commentary in the movie about how all audiences want nowadays is stuff like “Birdman”, where there’s guns, and explosions, and fighting, and basically just a Michael Bay movie.  The audiences don’t want any of this talking stuff or plot.  I feel like that was partly directed at my generation, and so I felt a bit guilty about not being happy with Birdman.  But, it’s not because I wanted something with guns and explosions and shots of Scarlett Johanssons ass, it’s just because I wanted to be entertained and excited to be watching the movie.  Birdman was not doing that for me.

 

Overall: 7/10

Great acting, great cinematography, great directing, just wasn’t my kind of movie.

Review – Interstellar

Movie Title: Interstellar

Director: Christopher Nolan

Date Released: November 7th, 2014

Date Seen: November 7th, 2014

Seen With: Dad

 

Part 1 – Spoiler Free Quickie Review

The enwest Christopher Nolan film that we have been excited and waiting months for!  It’s finally here! Interstellar, the story of a man who leaves his family behind in hopes to save the entire human race by going on an Interstellar journey.  Shocking, I know.  I bet you didn’t see that Interstellar journey part coming.  Overall this movie is GOREGOUS to look at.  That is far and away the best part of the movie.  Every little detail from scenes on earth to scenes out in Space are incredible.  I could sit and watch them travel through the galaxy for days on end and be completely content.  They were fantastic.  Nolan’s goal to “wow” or amaze the audience, and the movie does that from the visuals alone.

The plot, overall, is very good.  There are of course the usual plot holes (I mention some in part 2 of the review to not spoil anything) and annoyances, but overall it’s very well done. A lot of time is spent on the space plot line, which at times leaves the Earth plot line underdeveloped.  It was one of my major issues with the movie.  They focus a lot on how certain decisions really impact Cooper (like going on the trip), or how it affects the family, but then skip over some important development parts of that. The movie is very long, because it is a very long and complicated plot line, but didn’t feel long until the end of the movie.  It rushed a little bit at the end, which I would have liked to have seen time taken elsewhere to do just a little bit more explaining.  That’s my personal preference, however.  The movie, being a Christopher Nolan film, does of course have the usual “mind-fuck” as I like to call it.  It’s a slow and subtle mindfuck however, and I liked it.  You think you know what is going on, then it’ll throw you for a little loop.  Or you think you will have figured out plot line A, for plot line B to go crazy, so you forget about plot line A, which then comes back to mindfuck you all over again.  It was a nice ride.

The acting is incredible.  Mackenzie Foy (young Murph) was just great.  Anne Hathaway as Brand and Matthew McConaughey as Cooper were both amazing, but that’s to be expected.  I also really liked seeing David Gyasi, who plays one of my favorite characters in Cloud Atlas, Autua. One of my favorite characters is TARS (voiced by Bill Irwin), a robot who takes the journey with the team.  He was not only a nice addition to the team, but also made some plot points easier to explain away.  It kind of seemed like “oh hey, if we had a robot, we could do this. YEAH WE NEED A ROBOT”.  And if that’s how we got TARS, I’m OK with that.

This film does have a very limited rewatchability.  I think after 2-3 viewings, it’s not a movie I would ever pick up and watch again.  The first watch was a very fun one, and I’d like to go back and watch it again to see if there’s little hints at what is to come that I might have missed before.  Beyond that though, I don’t think I’d ever watch it again.  I know what happens.  It’s pretty.  It was cool.  End of story.  It’s a very well made piece of art, but to me, not what I want in a movie, and that brings the score down for me a bit.

 

Part 2 – In Depth Spoiler Ridden Review

One thing I loved was the limited detail on what happened to Earth.  There wasn’t really a time frame of when the Earth started going to shit, what this new government was like.  It keeps the movie a little less dated that way. We knew the important details (crops failing, soon there will be no more food, nor air, must save Earth), and that’s about it.

Some of the parts I thought were VERY underdeveloped were the Earth scenes.   It could partially be because of the above reasons, the limited knowledge they give you about what is going on there.  But these were some big issues I had.  For a 2 hour 48 minute movie, certian plot lines SHOULD be well thought out or explained.  These issues start fairly quickly. Take for example when Cooper accepts the mission.  He accepts pretty quickly, in my mind, this huge responsibility of saving the world and possibly never seeing his children again.  This is right after he throws a huge hissy fit about Murph being in the other room, and then throughout the movie hes affected by his choice to go.  Seems like the decsion to go shouldn’t have been a quick scene.    The other Earth scenes that are very underdeveloped mostly focus with older Tom and Murph.  Why is it so crucial that Tom’s family leave RIGHT THIS VERY SECOND.  Why is Tom so anti-them leaving if it’s for their health? Why was Topher Grace even in this movie (what, who said that, not me!)?

Another thing, that could be considered a plot hole, or it’s just something that I’m looking too much into.  Professor Brand had already solved his part of the equation a long time ago. But didn’t tell anyone – because it was lacking the gravity part, which he wouldn’t be able to solve without knowing what the inside of the black hole looked like.  Why didn’t he just tell people that? I guess to give them *hope* now that  Ithink about it, but still seems dumb to me.

I very much enjoyed the visuals inside of the black hole.  However, I wasn’t very into the whole idea of “gravity” being the 5th dimension.  It wasn’t very well explained as to why/how it was another dimension.  It seemed more of a force that could act through the other dimensions (of time and space), but wasn’t really one in my mind.  They kind of explained this away by saying “oh, ‘they’ made this into a 3dimensional representation that your brain could understand”.  In other wrods, “JUST TRUST US ITS GRAVITY MMMKKKAYYY???”.  We could also talk about time travel-y, grandfather paradox-y, etc. type of stuff, but I don’t really care too.  I think it’s what Christopher Nolan was trying to avoid by adding in the 5th dimension stuff.  Again, “JUST TRUST US ITS GRAVITY MMMMKAAYYY??”

 

Overall: 7.5/10

Visually stunning, but a background plot line, that is rushed and underdeveloped at times, but still being a good, semi-surprising, sci-fi flick.