Skyfall

By Ken Whitney III

James Bond 007 (Daniel Craig)

When do we become obsolete? At what point do you feel that who you are has not (or never has) been in your control?

We welcome back the best secret agent in the business, celebrating 50 years of saving the world in style, with SKYFALL – and BOY is it a doozy of a birthday celebration.

James Bond (played consistently and better with every film by Daniel Craig) is on the hunt for a hard drive containing a list of all undercover operatives in terrorist cells around the world. Things begin to spiral out of control and M (returning Dame Judi Dench) has Bond’s field partner (Naomi Harris) take a shot that ends up hitting Bond and sends him to a watery grave… or so it seems (like you needed me to tell you that).

Months later a cyber-terrorist begins to bring the list out into the open, endangering the lives of countless agents; all the while Taunting M by pushing and prodding her with clues and messages that do nothing but shame MI6 and call into question the efficiency of British Intelligence. 007 is pulled back into the crosshairs of a mission he honestly may not be ready to take on, against a villain with nothing to lose and an uncanny ability to stay ahead of them all.

THE PROS: 23 Movies. Seriously? Let’s give the Bond franchise a nice round of applause *clapping*! The longest running franchise in film history has created one of the most thrilling, relevant, and rejuvenating chapters in it’s canon and it does so not only by looking forward to the future, but respecting the source of it’s origins. Sam Mendes enters the directing chair for the first time with Bond (his second though, with Craig *cough* Road To Perdition *cough*) and he owns it. Not just driving the sense of action and suspense needed to be on par with the best of 007’s films, Mendes brings the locations and scenery to life in the most breathtaking ways. From the bustling markets of Turkey to the cascading, desolate hills of Scotland, the camera finds its mark perfectly and gives us cinematic ‘eye candy’ we can’t get enough of.

Daniel Craig started out as a risk for the studios to replace Pierce Brosnan, but after Casino Royale audiences were convinced he held the Walther PPK rather nicely. Now on his third film, it is safe to say that Craig has made it into the arguable class of ‘best Bond behind Connery’. Craig encompasses every part of Bond we love most and rides it all the way home. From cold-hearted killing to delicate seduction, from simple one-liners and witty banter to a sense of genuine vulnerability, 007 hasn’t felt this fresh since Goldfinger. The script is strong and current, reflecting on the concept we’ve all been feeling since Tomorrow Never Dies: Is Bond outdated? Should we finally ‘put him out to pasture’? As M once put it; 007 is a ‘relic of The Cold War’, secret missions and shadowy ‘hits’ have become a thing of the past. We live in a world where being honest and frank about the world and it’s dangers is not only common, it’s expected by the people that are being protected. Even when it’s things we’d rather not know.

The supporting cast is top-notch as well. Judi Dench returns as M and the ‘mother’ figure-type role is expanded even further between herself and Bond. Ralph Fiennes adds his wonderful talent as Gareth Mallory, another high-ranking member of British Intelligence working to fix what’s gone wrong under M’s watch. A great treat we’ve all been wanting to come back has finally arrived: Q Branch is in. Played wonderfully tepid and to-the-point by Ben Whishaw, Q is Bond’s overdue access to his gadgets and a welcome, younger perspective in the discussion of how hard the ‘young man’s game’ of espionage and covert operations really is. And our Bond Girl is a treat of exotic mystery and distress. Severine (pronounced ‘Sev-er-eene’ and played very well by Berenice Marlohe) is the tempting and tainted link to Bond’s greatest enemy yet.

The real treat of Skyfall definitely comes to rest in the hands of none other than Javier Bardem. The Oscar-winning actor continues to add strange, twisted, new roles to his resume and this one is no different (and perhaps, one of his best). Bardem is Raoul Silva; the cyberterrorist that threatens not only the lives of countless agents but their leader as well. He is everything we love about Bond Villains. Wonderfully warped; he is a pleasure and horror to watch work, Silva encompasses revenge in all it’s morbid beauty. He chuckles and heartily laughs at the ineptitude of British Intelligence and Bond’s ‘misguided’ devotion to M. When all signs no longer look in his favor, that is when he is the most cunning and terrifying (that’s really all I can say without giving away the assured awesomeness of it all).

Bond (Craig) & Silva (Bardem)

CONS: The only real drag to the film is an odd sense of pacing that occurs in the middle half. Though still pushing forward, there is a sense of uneven storytelling that exposits without necessarily giving us reason to want and rest in the moment. The speed in which we begin almost moves us into gear too soon; causing Skyfall to stall slightly and slowly accelerate to a thrilling and lasting pace.

Q (Whishaw) & Bond (Craig)

THE BOTTOM LINE: Bond has never felt more alive! Doing what he does best with all that we know and love about him, Bond is stirred even more with Craig adding his own sense of style to the mix. Skyfall is an exercise in refreshing storytelling of a classic medium. The old with the new and all the unexpected in between. 007 revels in the mystery of his inner self and untold past. The mystery is what helps us claim him as our favorite in our own, personal way. After 5 decades, you begin to wonder if the romance is still there. Can we learn to love this secret agent with a heart of ice again? Skyfall shows us that we can.

GRADE: A

 

The Dark Knight Rises

By Ken Whitney III

Before we begin this review, I want to say truly that our prayers are with the people of Aurora, Colorado. Echoing the sentiment of Christopher Nolan; to know that the movie theatre – a place of safety in imagination, creativity and beauty – was violated in such a way as at the cost of people’s lives is a heartbreaking act. Nothing can overshadow the horror of what’s happened but we strive to move forward and let a film shine in it’s own light.

The Dark Knight Rises

“Why do we fall…?”

Everything must eventually come to an end. Whether we wanted it to or not, Christopher Nolan’s ‘Dark Knight’ series was always meant to have a conclusion (it’s just how the guy rolls); and as we all know with Nolan – he doesn’t disappoint.

It’s been eight years since that fateful night. When Harvey Dent’s vengeful heart went on a rampage through Gotham, killing five people in it’s wake. On the night of it’s end, The Batman sacrificed more than he had to – and in a way – more than he should have. Taking the blame for Harvey’s ‘two faced’ justice; Gotham City branded him a killer and a fugitive. Commissioner Gordon is entrusted with the truth and together, he and The Dark Knight conspired to bring hope to a city waining.

Now. Gotham is in a state of peace. Crime is at an all-time low. The city can finally breathe. Bruce Wayne has become a recluse; finding the walls of the newly-rebuilt Wayne Manor a safer comfort than the contact of any person aside from his only guardian and protector since his parent’s death, Alfred. All is far too… quiet. And a cycle is finally renewed. Through a series of events, the city has a new name to question and fear: Bane. A mysterious figure arriving in Gotham and making his claim on the city. Not all is clear in Bane’s motives but his brand of terrorism may finally bring about the return of Gotham’s Caped Crusader…

THE PROS: This film is on par with The Dark Knight. There. I said it. I’ll attempt to tell you why. The story may seem convoluted with countless new characters and a story that feels… thicker than what we’re comfortable with. But the same should definitely be said of ‘The Dark Knight’ on the heels of ‘Batman Begins’. Look at the films side by side and you’ll actually find that ‘TDK’ & ‘TDKR’ are actually mirror images in character and content. So often when it comes to sequels (especially when it is the concluding third chapter of a trilogy), there is a seemingly inescapable tendency to compare. There is no exception in this case and that should not be. Though we look at a continuing storyline in a series that is meant to move fluidly; the chapters are each independent in their quality. From an origin story to pure chaos, we are brought ever deeper into the mind of a man who, at the end of all hope, aspires to bring a symbol to his home that will shine as a beacon of justice and right, even in the dark. That being said, as the final in a superb trilogy brings a ‘closure’ of sorts, the only comparison we can possibly justly have is in the continuation and conclusion of Bruce Wayne’s journey from his parent’s death to his, and Batman’s, end.

When it comes to direction, there’s no one quite like Christopher Nolan. Every director has their own quality and style and Nolan is no different. What sets him apart is his eye for realism in a state of far-fetched fiction. On top of that is his desire in telling a very good story artfully while entertaining; and he doesn’t care how long his movie will be to get both points across. Nolan’s direction carries the weight of a good book. He takes the time to set things up. TDKR spends the first 35 minutes or so really building a reason for the following 2 hours and 10 minutes to be needed in the first place. Introducing new characters like Selina Kyle, Miranda Tait, John Blake, and Bane is no easy feat and we cannot be expected to accept them into the story without reason. The Nolan brothers’ script is solid in execution and, though slightly cheesy in moments, brings with it the heart of the comics we cherish so much. The growth of the choreography and cinematography through each film is unquestionable. From a more mysterious view (and, let’s be honest, a timidity on Nolan’s part for taking his first crack at a true action film), ‘Batman Begins’ swirls and cuts in sharp ways to hide the detail of action we want. When ‘TDK’ rolls in, there is a comfortable place the camera, and Nolan, finds in a stable and pronounced shot; showcasing the choreography that brings the fights and battles to a more meaningful place that our eyes can appreciate. Now, ‘TDKR’ gets bold. setting cameras up on the ‘sidelines’ of the battle arena, we see complex, multi-character fights that truly show the skills of the characters being portrayed.

Gosh, I love these characters. From Bruce Wayne to John Blake, we see flushed out characters grown through their origins to their final stands on the streets of Gotham. Bale’s performance in this film is, to me, the best of his portrayals of Wayne himself. With the pains and anguish that he endures over the years in the last two films, we see the final construction of a man left to make the final, hard choices that echo the man he is at his core. Alfred, all the more Wayne’s conscious, shines through Michael Caine’s humanized dialogue and performance. Even Gary Oldman’s Gordon breaks the mold of ‘resilient cop’ and ‘Batman groupie’ to stand out as the leader of Gotham’s finest. He leads his men more confidently than ever before; relying on his own decisions and their consequences rather than following in the footsteps of the Bat.

The new characters only have this one film to make their mark and they do so with style. Anne Hathaway’s Selina Kyle is a thing of lethal beauty. After the ‘risk’ Nolan took with Ledger portraying the Joker, I’ve learned since then to trust Nolan’s judgement in casting. Hathaway is sexy and cunning. She has no hinderances in pulling the trigger to save her own skin. She steals to look out for her own and the inclusion of her younger partner Jen humanizes her intentions (plus – it’s a great comic reference!). John Blake is the civilian perspective to Gotham’s madness. Though not a civilian himself, he takes away the masks and shows us the people behind the grand gestures. Gordon-Levitt nails the east coast accent and inspires us in ways Bruce Wayne always hoped one day someone would. No movie can move forward without a love interest (for some reason) but, that being said, Marion Cotillard is the perfect mixture of mature and romantically sexy that helps move the story forward and help give context to her relationship with characters and presence throughout the film. And then there’s Bane. Tom Hardy. *sigh*. The man is a powerhouse of performance. He embodies the attributes I love in the character. The icy cold voice of calm and deadly confidence. The accent. The physicality that struts and strikes in seamless transition. He is intelligent and unforgiving. A lethal combination and more than a worthy villain for Bale’s Batman.

The technological aspect is the other noteworthy element of this, and any, Nolan Batman film. The superhero that founded the ‘no powers’ point of view to being ‘super’, Batman’s gadgets are what allow him to seem… supernatural, in a sense. And in this film, the set up of the technology is key for the realism Nolan goes for. From an electromagnetic pulse gun to ‘The Bat’, a HIGHLY maneuverable hele-pod, to my favorite – the performance-enhancing leg brace that shows Bruce’s age while helping us believe that he can don the cape and cowl almost a decade after ‘TDK’, I believe that, not only is Bruce Wayne capable of standing toe-to-toe (or as best he can) with the mountain that is Bane, but I believe that every punch he throws, every physical excursion he makes, is a painful one. The technology humanizes Batman. And that is just darn cool.

Batman (Christian Bale)

 THE CONS: With all the great major performances the minor ones can feel shallow and thin. Some cops and lackeys throughout the film drop the ball occasionally but not necessarily enough to take you out of it. Some may feel the length of the film is burdensome but, as I mentioned earlier, it is very needed for set up and, if you’re truly invested in the film, time flies.

Batman (Christian Bale) & Bane (Tom Hardy)

THE BOTTOM LINE: The most anticipated film of the year does not fall short of challenging our ability to follow complex plot lines and wow us with realistic action and grand gestures as Nolan weaves the final threads in his Dark Knight Trilogy. A story that comes full circle in every sense; Batman is a hero for the ages. An example for us all. Through trials and adversity we make the choice to lay down and die or stand up and defend the helpless who cannot help themselves. Bruce Wayne’s sacrifice to live this life is not just the burden he put on himself but, in a way, the destiny by which Gotham survives. His aspirations were clear from the beginning: To be the dramatic example that shakes Gotham out of apathy. To be an incorruptible symbol. To be everlasting.

Well done, Mr. Wayne. Well done.

GRADE: A

The Dark Knight Rises: A Second Take

By Jon Olsen

Bravo, Dr. Whitney. You’ve given us a well-written and eloquent review that I barely need to add to. I agree with Ken completely, and if you know us and our love for Nolan’s Batman trilogy, then you already know what my grade for this wonderful piece of cinema is going to be. Nevertheless, allow me to tell you why I’m giving it that grade.

PROS: Chris Nolan just knocks it out of the park here. Truly. The writing, the cinematography, the layer and layer of subtext in every scene; when you buy a ticket to a Nolan film, you know you’re getting your money’s worth, and that has never been more true than with TDKR. This film is the best third film of a trilogy I’ve ever seen. No exaggeration. What Nolan, Goyer and the whole team at Syncopy have done is created a superhero trilogy that transcends every other. The themes dealt with in TDKR are heart-wrenching, inspiring, and evoke emotions that most didn’t believe a movie could conjure. Your thoughts don’t stay in Gotham or with it’s host of characters as you watch this film; they move into your own life. Could I sacrifice this much? Do I believe in anything as much as Bruce believes in his mission? Is his trust and hope in the inherent goodness of people, all the while surrounded by people’s ugliness and cruelty, anywhere near where mine could be? These are the questions you may find yourself asking walking out of this film. Just as Batman is more than a man, this trilogy is more than just a collection of three films. It is one of the greatest sagas in motion picture history, and will forever be regarded as such.

CONS: Screen time is given to superfluous characters that don’t add anything to the plot, and it could have been focused on a smaller ensemble in some instances. That’s it.

THE BOTTOM LINE: This film simply needs to be experienced by anyone who appreciates movies, on any level. No trilogy in history has ever reached the storytelling heights of the Dark Knight Saga. It truly stands alone in my mind. Watch and be amazed.

GRADE: A

 

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

By Ken Whitney III

Rooney mara & Daniel Craig

I feel more and more every year that it’s getting harder and harder to actually look forward to a movie release. It’s the same dribble, isn’t it? It’s either some poorly-constructed remake or an ever poorer-written original work. Independent films shine hazy and clouded light in a cave of forgotten treasures but even they bring about a hesitance from their intended audiences- content, story, credibility and grounded tales are what people look for and sometimes those nuggets of gold can’t quite meet the ‘need’ of it’s intended crowd (whether that be because of the filmmaker or the budget, only the viewer could say for themselves). So when a movie like THIS comes along; both an adapted work plus being made and released on the heels of an already created work- and it’s GOOD? The light comes through a little brighter, I’d say.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is a… complicated tale. Humiliated and disgraced leftist journalist Mikael Blomkvist (played plainly and smartly by Daniel Craig) takes a job researching and uncovering the truth behind the murder of a young girl 40 years in a sleepy cut-off town’s past. He is aided by a gifted and even more volatile young woman named Lisbeth Salander (chillingly and powerfully portrayed by a powerful young Rooney Mara). A savage computer hacker, Lisbeth has a past all her own and who she is in this story is just as important as the truth behind the mystery that brings her and Mikael together.

THE PROS: Ladies & gentlemen: meet Rooney Mara. Only 26 years old, she exudes a dangerous authority on camera that should not be taken lightly. Mara brings something really dangerous to the role of Lisbeth: Believability. The talented and mysterious Ms. Salander was played previously by Noomi Rapace in the Tattoo Trilogy of the original Swiss text. A solid achievement on it’s own ground, The Swedish version pales in comparison to the Americanized one (and do not be confused, this is not a ‘remake’, this is a reTELLING). This depiction steps into Salander’s world in ways that were not delved into in the original. Mara brings vulnerability and sharp teeth to a complex character that she has, as of now, only scratched the surface of. Like any role such as this, both Rapace and Mara dove into the character of Lisbeth and became different people. But while Rapace brought a dangerous side to the role, Mara brings added texture and depth. Mara’s Salander hints at the desires of her heart and yet leaves us out in the cold like all the rest. When given the opportunity to trust she recoils and remains guarded. By the end of the film you don’t pity Lisbeth… you want to stand at her side and face her demons along side her. Credit goes where credit is due. Rooney Mara has given us one of the strongest female characters (and performances) in 25 years.

Behind every great film there is an even greater storyteller. Nothing truer could be said of David Fincher. Weaving together a story as detailed and layered as this one is difficult enough in itself. But to encompass the darkness, the hopelessness of so many scenes and moments, the emotions of characters without overplaying who they are and how they feel and/or react; Fincher has a gift. The ‘coldness’ of his execution behind the camera has been a blessed factor for many films such as Se7en, Fight Club, The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button & The Social Network to name a few. The thing is, though – that coldness sometimes isn’t evident at all. In films like Button, Fincher brings a romantic sheen to the screen and convinces us of the love we all share in the fantasical. Still in others, we see the visceral angst and psychological strain of this generation’s male populace spilled onto the pavement in Fight Club. With Dragon Tattoo, It’s about 2 things: the mystery and the girl. Fincher brings a mechanical drive to Blomkvist’s case, keeping things urgent and never letting a detail go unnoticed by the audience. Providing chilling and chillier settings thanks to his cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth, Fincher Lets you feel the conditions of his characters and you can’t help but shake in the cold winter alongside Lisbeth and Mikael. When facing the life of Lisbeth, there is a subtle and yet faintly evident difference. He wants you in her head, behind her eyes, walking in her skin; and when the horrible happens (and it happens, I assure you) you feel as if it’s happening to you. Without your permission and without hesitation. The awful things that happen in this film (which I feel the need to defend as not to let anyone think that I found them unneeded to the film’s final cut) serve as a lens in which we understand the characters that endure them. I’m not one who enjoys or looks forward to the graphicness of sexuality or violence; but the inclusion of them in this film serve to express who characters are at their core that cannot be explained through simple words or narrative. You feel sick, beaten, and wanting to leave. But you can’t. Fincher and Mara have you by the neck. They won’t let you turn away. That is a dangerous and powerful tool for a filmmaker and actor to wield.

Fincher teams up once again with the musical duo of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross (first working together on The Social Network and earning an Oscar for original score to boot) and it is corrosive, audible magic. Reznor’s skills behind the sound board provide minimal music that wraps itself around a dark story. Not wanting to overpower a scene with a score that overrides its intended purpose, Reznor and Ross keep the story at the forefront of their musical writings and allow the sounds they produce to simple settle in your spine and tingle the back of your neck; never letting you grow comfortable and never allowing you think it’s alright to BE alright with what you see and hear.

The script was another gem I couldn’t help but give praise to.  The task of condensing such a dark and detailed book is not an easy one (plus, it’s not like they let the current state of audience-desired film formats deter them from their final product; this film runs only minutes shy of 2 1/2 hours), Steven Zaillian does a fine job adapting Stieg Larsson’s novel. Both unflinching and unapologetic, Zaillian’s screenplay does not let word’s go silently into the night. Dialogue is used only when necessary and beyond that, Fincher takes the wheel to move the story forward. Zaillian also made the decision (along with Fincher’s desire to do so) to tweak the ending and give some closure to Dragon Tattoo’s final few minutes.I found it a pleasant change in that Fincher is able to leave his mark on a fantastic story and feel he’s completed the journey should he not desire to return to the expected sequels.

Daniel Craig

THE CONS: Almost none, I feel. Daniel Craig’s Mikael Blomkvist is only hindered, I thought, by Craig’s flippancy with bringing a Swedish accent (or any accent other than his own) to the table. Daniel Craig has a well-known style to him and when not enough care is taken with his change from one character to the next it can feel… clunky to the feel of the piece.

Rooney Mara

THE BOTTOM LINE: Far and away one of the best films of 2011. Telling a story like this takes a lot of guts and a tortured mind to get the words on paper. Larsson’s death in 2004 may have forever taken the only chance we have to understand a literary mind such as his. Thankfully, The Millenium Trilogy books bring us a little closer to seeing through his eyes and finding truth in a darker world than many of us will ever know. Fincher & Mara have crafted together a vision that would make Mr. Larsson proud of what’s become of his unfinished tale centered around a journalist, a girl, and the tattoo she carries like a scar.

GRADE: A 

 

The Descendants

By Ken Whitney III

George Clooney, Shailene Woodley & Amara Miller

“Paradise? Paradise can go f*** itself.”

This movie has definitely altered the view of my future honeymoon.

Alexander Payne is a director that supposedly goes against type in Hollywood. He doesn’t make big, box office smashes. There are no CG-heavy action sequences or explosions. High-speed chases and erotic, sexual sequences between gorgeous individuals are a foreign premise. He makes movies about people. Real people. And for some reason? I find that to be the most normal and wonderful thing.

Meet Matt King. A normal, everyday kind of guy. He’s married. Has 2 daughters. Oh, he happens to open like Half of Hawaii… but that’s not important. King (played with new emotional gravitas by the simply wonderful George Clooney) is having a rocky time. His youngest daughter is the outsider of her age group. His eldest has some… ‘authority’ issues. He’s in charge of the biggest land deal in the history of Hawaii that could either make him and his family rich or could leave them with nothing (which is where they are to begin with, weirdly enough). To top things off- His wife had a boating accident a little more than 3 weeks ago, fell into a coma, and they’re not sure if she’ll come out of it.

Feeling like i’ve told you too much? That’s the thing: What happens AFTER you find all this out is the thing that drives this little ‘slice of life’ drama.

THE PROS: George Clooney. George Clooney. George Clooney. Holy Crap. Clooney’s King semi-narrates this film and from the opening monologue to the closing shot you’re hooked by this broken man. Clooney has hit the stride of all strides in these past few years. From an upswing in his acting abilities (which were always there; he’s only just now found the many films that showcase his skill), to writing provocative and timely scripts to helming the projects himself as a director that actually brings something to the table every time, George is reminding us why he’s more than just that ‘sexiest man alive’ he got back in ’06. King isn’t just a narrative anchor for us, he IS us. Struggling to maintain some normalcy for his family considering their ever-looming opportunity for fortune, Matt does what any man does when it’s all on him – he forgets to prioritize the family he’s looking out for. Being the dad that’s never there is hard enough. Being the dad that’s never EXPECTED to be there is another crap-shute altogether. When our film’s revelatory twist comes along, Matt King becomes something else. He embodies the proverbial ‘man on a mission’. Not in that action-y kind of way though. He realizes what he needs to do and doesn’t let anything stop him. Attempting to bring his family together in the wake of the unfortunate incident surrounding his wife, Clooney helps King physically realize his inability to be a father again by simply snapping two fingers. From grief and sorrow to frustration and rage to humorous conundrum; Clooney shapes a man that is exactly what he’s supposed to be: normal. In all his painful (and humorous) glory.

One cannot forget the players that make up the supporting cast of this great film. Patricia Hastie, Robert Forster and Beau Bridges are just a few of the small and truly important pieces of this oddly fortunate and inevitable journey. Everyone has a part to play and successfully emulates the feelings we want to feel for each moment they’re up there on screen. The most notable though has to be Shailene Woodley. As the aggressively defiant eldest King daughter, Woodley isn’t just angry. She’s troubled. And she should be. As anyone from a torn or troubled household would know, the most unfortunate thing that can be thrust upon a child caught in the middle of a family divided is the responsibility to grow up faster than they should. Woodley’s Alexandra hates so much. Her parents. Her exile to ‘boarding school’. The way her life has turned out. Behind that true and honest exterior though is an even truer pain of realizing you’re just like your parents and wishing you could understand them and why they are the way they are. Woodley brings Alexandra to life in a brilliant way. She doesn’t try and make her cute or slutty. Just honestly messed-up and with a little bit of charm.

Alexander Payne cannot be left off this lengthy explanation of pros. It’s just impossible. Payne doesn’t let his best scripts fall in the wrong hands. He keeps them in his. Nothing needs to be showcased more in his stories than the characters and the writing. Election brought us the humor. Sideways brought us the heartache. Descendants brings it all together. His best work to date, Payne finds the time in an already deep and complex script of many characters to find humor in the weirdest and yet, most appropriate places. One of them being Matt King himself. Yes, he’s going through a very difficult time and nothing will lessen that truth. But no one can deny that sometimes, the way a person brings out that pain can be pretty silly to watch (keep your eyes open for Matt’s ‘furious run’; it’s cinematic gold and Clooney pulls it off). The writing is straight forward and Payne is all over it. I think the thing that finally and really works for his writing in these last few outings has been his use of language. It really fits into the circumstances they are deployed into. You’ll find the language in this film coarse and constant but what you won’t find is any of it being used inappropriately. As an outlet for frustration, it works it’s way into places that it couldn’t fit better into. As a grieving husband laments the mistakes of a marriage he attempts to cling to, as a daughter unable to understand the gravity of the situation surrounding her attempts to force herself into adulthood, and as confrontation’s pleasure and pain collide into a mess of words and honesty never expected but hoped for, the lines of this sorted tale ring true.

Shailene Woodley

THE CONS: The one thing I wish could have been more carved out was the youngest daughter, Scottie (Amara Miller). Hers is the voice of circumstances like these that is always unheard or misunderstood. Payne was on a roll when he got this story going and he finished it with class, but Scottie was the one element in his telling that didn’t get the proper attention I felt she rightfully deserved. Her reactions and choices in the film are understandable and funny, but you get the feeling that Scottie has something more to say and every time she makes her way on screen you’re hoping for a tidbit of her take on it all.

George Clooney

THE BOTTOM LINE: See this film. For the sake of seeing one of the best films of the year hands down, Make the choice to see a film that understands you. I know we see movies to escape or see the side of something we think we never would, but let this be a time for a movie that gets us and wants to share in your pain, your frustration and your inability to keep from laughing at it all. The one thing I left off the list of Pros that I wanted to make sure was heard: This film does everything you want it to. Every decision that is made, every word spoken and every action taken is what you want to happen. It’s a beautiful kind of adventure that feels like you have a choice in it’s direction. And I know the subject matter and language are a thing to be weary of for younger viewers, but this is a film about family. Whenever you feel the family is ready to hear what this film has to say, watch it with them. I don’t think you’ll regret the discussions and laughter that follow.

GRADE: A

 

 

The Adventures Of Tin Tin

By Ken Whitney III

Tin Tin & Snowy

Spielberg decides to team-up with another filmmaker on his very fist venture into digital animation; some guy who directed some films about a ring and some dwarves, I think?

Peter Jackson, Director of The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy and the upcoming Hobbit films takes on a producing role behind Spielberg; telling the story of a young british detective journalist named Tin Tin and his adventures to uncover mysteries of all kinds. For those of you uneducated in graphic novels or never seeing the wonderfully cute cartoons of the 90’s, Tin Tin is a character created by Belgian cartoonist Herge (real name Georges Remi). Tin Tin’s adventures are some of the greatest cartoon works of all time; translated into over 50 languages and famous in every country (except for the United States…?). The very first in a supposed installment of three (the two agreed that Spielberg would take the reigns on the first film, Jackson would helm the second, and as of now no one has been confirmed for the final chapter), our story begins with Tin Tin buying an old model ship which turns out being more than that. Soon he finds his apartment broken into, people shooting at him and trying to kidnap him as he discovers that the ship he is in possession of could lead to a historic treasure hundreds of years old.

THE PROS: It’s about TIME Spielberg took charge of an animated film! With his experience of telling stories as magical and grand in scale as he has, Mr. S has the opportunity to tear down any directorial wall that might impede him from telling the story exactly how he wants. The camera is able to sweep under cars, wrap around characters with speed and smoothness, shots are able to transition seamlessly from one location to the next and the feel of the book is always there. With an appreciation for every detail and an eye for the angle many of us can’t see until he shows it to us, Spielberg creates a magical portal for us to view an adventure so large that the third dimension is a format that would logically follow suit (this is also Spielberg’s first full length 3D film).

The story is a fun one, to say the least. Taking us from England to the high seas, the scorching deserts to Morocco and back again, Tin Tin, along with his humorously intelligent and witty-in-his-own-way pup Snowy, have the best perspectives in this adventure. ‘The Raiders Of The Lost Ark‘ feel of this film is not lost on this writer, either. And it benefits the narrative. The quest for the unseen and the tales from the past brought into stark, visual narrative by Captain Haddock bring some of the best visuals and humor midway to this tale. With motion-capture technology being the weapon-of-choice for our storytellers, it only makes sense that Andy Serkis (Gollum from Lord Of The Rings, Ceasar in Rise of the Planet of the Apes) would be somewhere in the thick of it all. And thankfully for us all he is being given his due as a central character (Cpt. Haddock) that moves the story along at a jaunty pace. Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot, Jumper, King Kong, The Eagle) also joins the fray playing the title character, and he gives just the right amount of urgency and intrigue to the role to keep him from being over-played.

Captain Haddock, Snowy & Tin Tin

THE CONS: I think one of the most overlooked points in many animated films is the script. Sure, light-hearted, childish fare can survive off of silly potty jokes and 5-year-old intelligent dialogue. But when you’re attempting to bridge the gap between age groups and (especially in the case of Tin Tin) tell a mature, adult subject that meets the needs of audience members looking hard to appreciate every detail, you have to treat the story with maturity. And honestly? Tin Tin falls flat. From the get-go, the dialogue serves only to make sure you haven’t missed what’s already being PLAINLY told to you on the screen. And this goes on for over half the film. 10 minutes into the film, I thought to myself, ‘boy, for a renowned and awarded investigative journalist he sure can’t keep his internal monologue internal.’ That alone makes the film sluggish and amateur.

Another flaw that can’t be ignored is Captain Haddock’s antics. Because of elements in the story that build throughout the film, Haddock has a drinking problem. A serious one. The problem is that he can’t keep it in check. Really. The guy should have died or been captured about 5 different times throughout the film. Now don’t get me wrong, a clean and fun adventure having to do with escape and racing against the clock benefits from some humorous happenstance. But scenes where the CAPTAIN OF A SHIP LIGHTS A FIRE INSIDE OF A DINGY BOAT just can’t be ignored. His drinking is not only a crutch, it’s a knife; stabbing the film’s progress right in the pacing.

The final note, and this only became apparent about an hour in, was the movement of the film. A story like this makes for great transitions and even greater crosscuts to move the story along. Sadly, though, I felt this worked against the telling of this venture. I cannot remember one transition that wasn’t a simple straight cut. Spielberg takes advantage of the animated format to weave each scene together without pause to breathe. There’s a point where a girl needs a breather between dates to think about whether or not she’s even having a good time, ya know? The audience isn’t given the opportunity to soak in scenes as the next location or act comes barreling at you non-stop. The whole time you’re watching, you feel the need to lean back and it’s then that you realize how much your eyes hurt because you haven’t had a chance to blink them.

Captain Haddock & Tin Tin

THE BOTTOM LINE: With a wonderfully, timeless tale and actors truly enveloping the characters they inhabit, Tin Tin makes for a wonderfully cheerful time. Sadly, the construction itself becomes apparently weak the deeper and deeper we are taken along the journey. Spielberg and Jackson have there hearts in the right places, and for that, I truly commend them. Bringing about this animated classic is no easy feat (let alone bringing it to the States where Tin Tin is off the pop culture radar). I just hope the further they delve into this piece of fandom lore the more they come back with enough loot for us all… without the whole thing falling on their heads.

GRADE: C+

 

 

War Horse

By Ken Whitney III

Jeremy Irvine

The next two days’ reviews are dedicated to unarguably one of the greatest filmmakers and directors of all cinema history. Mr. Steven Spielberg decided to run double duty this year and produce and direct two much-anticipated films this year. Both with Oscar buzz, solid reviews and great word-of-mouth, Spielberg’s films carry with them an anticipation and show he is still great at what he does and loving every minute of it.

War Horse is an adaptation from a book and play by the same name following the story of a horse named Joey and the caring young man named Albert who raises him and searches for him when he is bought by a soldier in the beginning days of World War I. Joey travels across Europe and becomes the lens in which we the audience are able to see not just a conflict of people but the survival of life in all it’s perspective.

THE PROS: I just want to personally say how happy I am that a WWI film has finally been made on this scale. The first great struggle across the globe has always been a topic few have dared tackle and who better than the man who has made the best WWII epic to date (Saving Private Ryan, for those born in the mid to late 90’s). Spielberg’s handling of weighty and honestly dark material can rarely be matched. His use of emotional and human characters in situations that call for the dehumanization of all is the ‘trick’ that can be over/misused. From the villages of rural England to the fields of France, from the graveyards of ‘No Man’s Land’ on the frontline to back home again, you can expect nothing less than great cinematic beauty, lush (and appropriately muted) colors, strong performances and camera work that brings the charm we have come to appreciate in Spielberg’s repertoire. Lush landscape notwithstanding, Spielberg’s real weapon of choice is the early-film-era stage settings he uses for close-ups and familial drama that bookends this grand story. with heavy colors cascading along a background as actors are lit by luminescent colors from lights off camera we’re transported back to those films of yesteryear that have become staples of times such as these. From All Quiet On The Western Front to Gone With The Wind, it’s evident where Spielberg gets his inspiration and desires to take us.

The center of this film, of course, is Joey the thoroughbred. from his infancy on those same rolling hills as young Albert, Joey is able to connect with us in the true nature of want and need. His desire to remain with his mother becomes a weight and reminder throughout as he finds comfort and care in Albert and a companion in another horse of war named Topthorn met early on in his journey. The strongest points War Horse has to offer, as I mentioned earlier, is it’s perspective. Joey’s journey takes him across a land ripped by the trials and choices of war and as it costs many their lives, our central steed is moved from one owner to the next. As a battle takes a turn for the worst, Joey is brought to the hands of young German private who tends to the horses left from the skirmish as well as his younger, enlisted brother who he promised to look after. A young French girl carries the baton around the middle of the story and she and her grandfather bring a ‘caught in the crossfire’ sight to the War that can so easily get overlooked when dealing with this kind of material. Then, back in German hands, Joey and others like him are forced to pull artillery on the frontline until the end of the war or their expected deaths. When things start to reconnect and come round, it’s there that we finally get our true view of the frontline and the massacre of forces too numerous to count. barb wire & trenches, blood and rain, bodies and bombs litter the ground where once lay grass and trees, greens and fields too beautiful to survive. When a German and English soldier are at a crossroads in the battlefield we gain a pure and honorable perspective of the nature of conflict and it helps illustrate a war we never really take the time to understand.

Benedict Cumberbatch, Patrick Kennedy & Tom Hiddleston

THE CONS: At the same time that a film can be beautiful and tell a story that is vastly overlooked, it can also be left a little short in it’s full ability to be the film it could. At a runtime of 2 1/2 hours, War Horse takes the time to tell perspective of people from all walks of life… too much time, at times. Albert being the obvious necessity of backstory, almost 40 minutes of the opening is brought to a snail’s pace to tell of a drunk war-vet father who’s relationship with his son is lukewarm at best. Joey’s value to this farmland family, while evident through his learning of the plow and strength to do what those around him underestimate is commendable, it takes too long to get there. The timeline in which we watch a family grow to appreciate Joey’s qualities is muddled in a way that time is unspecified and unreadable. To watch Albert truly grow up alongside Joey in some way would have given greater weight to there relationship.

And as the battle rages on, the glimpses we get of the first great war are only backdrops to the human dramas that never truly flourish to begin with. Two brothers cannot be understood through the exchange of 80 seconds of dialogue about there lives before the war. Nor can a hardship of disease be understood for a girl that shows no signs of sickness. A grandfather’s love is easy enough to show but his need to overprotect what he has been charged with needs more than just a small bottle and some vague references to parents lost in the struggle of times past. The value of such characters are really brought in the connections of those around them (as mentioned before, Saving Private Ryan does the commendable job of, while giving us little to understand in the past of our characters, educates us in the bonds of war) and War Horse misses the mark on that one.

Jeremy Irvine & Steven Spielberg

THE BOTTOM LINE: Through my constant and undying love of the works of Mr. Spielberg; Spanning from The Color Purple to Indiana Jones and Schindler’s List to Jurassic Park and Minority Report, His works will continue to have a place in my cinematic heart (old and soon to come). However, love set aside, One can always come alongside with words of constructive criticism to help a fellow along. In that Spielberg can never set aside his passion to direct he must also try not to set aside the creative realities he places in every one of his tales. The scope of gritty realism that helps illustrate the stories he takes on helps Spielberg make films into more than just great movies but great adventures. Though War Horse, beautiful in its gestures and grand in its approach, falls a little flat at times, I will be waiting eagerly and patiently for what he has in store next.

GRADE: B

 

The Artist

Jean Dujardin & Berenice Bejo

By Ken Whitney III

 

Well. You don’t see THAT every day.

It’s simple: We are at the peak of cinema. The silent kind. It’s 1927 and George Valentin (played with suave sincerity and restrained emotion by Jean Dujardin) is the superstar the world wants to see every weekend on the big screen. When a chance encounter with a beautiful young girl (a mesmerizing Berenice Bejo) at a premiere brings her to the spotlight, Valentin couldn’t be happier or more supportive. But when she becomes the new face for something called ‘talkies’ (movies with sound – it’s the FUTURE, people!) George begins to see his world fall apart as he is left behind clinging to a lost and wonderful art the world once loved.

THE PROS: What ISN’T awesome about this film? Dujardin and Bejo are charming and simply mesmerizing as two people from opposite ends of the Hollywood spectrum slowly sliding to the other while subtly attempting to hold onto the friendship they form during the transition. The beauty of silent film in itself is it’s basic nature of storytelling: in order to help a story transcend the screen it’s on, the actor must communicate even beyond the physical and into the emotional without pandering. In that, and so many other ways, the film succeeds. Dujardin plays a happy-go-lucky man of art and passion but doesn’t overdo it. He isn’t ear to ear smiling in every shot. His laughter doesn’t cause a convulsion of the body that can’t be ignored. In each decision to express himself, Dujardin makes it honest. Bejo is no different. Though emotionally more relatable to an audience by taking her journey alongside; Bejo is careful not to overact and over RE-act to the elements she interacts with. Her pure and innocent dream of being a part of a world of glamour and big-screen escapades takes believable steps and the result is a thing of beauty.

Let’s not forget the gaggle of actors that pepper this already vibrant and entertaining piece. John Goodman, James Cromwell, Penelope Ann Miller & malcolm McDowell are wonderful in every way. Though we know them from so many colorful and louder-than-life roles, the silent form of their skills highlights what we also love about them but forget to remember. Above all though, this film brings to the table an international cast in a way that is universal. With no words spoken, no one is categorized by ethnicity but by skill. Skill to tell the story, entertain the audience and remain true to the character.

Michel Hazanavicius should not be left off the list of responsible parties either. Hazanavicius takes the time to put his own touch into this work while respecting the source in which he pulls his references (similar to his work on OSS 117). From bright staged sets to dark, smoky rooms of brooding revelation, every shot is important whether we wish to recognize it or not. To have it absent from the story would be a crime to the audience. The Artist itself is one big homage; from Ford to Wilder, Hazanavicius doesn’t apologize for his references but embraces his decision to include them and that, in itself, brings that much greater amount of light to a film celebrating the beauty of a simpler time. A simpler desire. To entertain. With that, the story is incredible. From it’s main plot points to the sidebars of Valentin’s dwindling marriage and friendship to a lovable dog to an allegiance to steadfast driver and a hearty producer who’s just trying to make a living, The Artist is as full as any dialogue-heavy cinematic tale.

Berenice Bejo

THE CONS: It’s beautiful to say the least, but, like the story it tells, it resonates a truer statement to where we are in viewing film. Sound bounces through our ears, colors tantalize our eyes, special effects bring our imaginations to life. To take things back to where it all started is to slow things down. Way down. For those who aren’t prepared for the time jump, the story can seem slow and simple. This takes away from what the film presents so be weary. Drink some coffee or come to this film fresh and ready to absorb.

Jean Dujardin

THE BOTTOM LINE: Everything has become so loud. So much. To bring us back to the basics helps us remember where it all began. To the smile of a dashing lead to the unsuspecting beauty across the room to the dramatic turn our hero can take when faced with the reality of his or her situation. We can’t forget how important story really us. How important the performance is. Dujardin, Bejo and hazanavicius take us to places we thought long forgotten. I couldn’t help but feel as if I’d been transported to a classic nickelodeon; seeing something so new that I have to see it again and again. Reliving the adventure of a talent that has inhabited my mind and shown me a journey I never thought I’d ever experience. If the artist cannot convince us… then what’s it all about?

GRADE: A

 

Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows

By Ken Whitney III

Robert Downey Jr., Noomi Rapace & Jude Law

‘Are you sure you want to play this game?’

It’s a funny thing. Our desire to be led on (or take) a journey can be driven by so many things: Love. Power. Even Knowledge. For Sherlock Holmes it isn’t any of those things. It’s a test. An exercise of his intellect that he can’t turn off. And the things and people that are close to him feel the pain of that gift (and burden) firsthand.

‘A Game Of Shadows’ picks up relatively where we left off at the end of the newly-invented 2009 original box office smash. Holmes (played with charm, drive and boldness by Downey Jr.) is on the case of all cases: To stop the mastermind Professor James Moriarty (coldly portrayed by Jared Harris… and the ‘cold’ part? that’s a compliment). Mapping clues from crimes seemingly unrelated, Holmes is able to deduce a grander scheme that could very well lead to a war larger than one even Sherlock himself could anticipate. His ever-faithful brother-in-arms Watson (Jude Law) at his side (though, as per this storyline, reluctantly) and the aide of a gypsy named Simza (The Dragon Tattoo Trilogy’s Noomi Rapace in her first major American role) round out the team that runs through London, bouncing from Brighton to Paris to Switzerland and back on the trail of one of literature’s most pronounced villains.

 

THE PROS: The most ardent and iron-clad thing of any Sherlock Holmes adventure is the story. The writing. The interweaving of the case and the deductive mind solving it. Thankfully that isn’t lacking for this sequel. The stakes are seamingly higher and the challenge (though hard to believe, I’m sure) is even greater for our deducting hero. Moriarty is Holmes’ greatest nemesis not because of his contacts or his strength – his intellect is a weapon of double-edged sharpness. And unlike Holmes who attempts to bring justice and the answer to every puzzle to light, Moriarty seeks only control of the chaos that is his own making. Where Holmes finds the greatest challenge is not where they are similar but where they are different: Our evil professor has no qualms of ending the lives of however many is needed to seek his own ends.

The look of ‘Shadows’ remains stylistically dated properly but is given it’s familiar contemporary style by director Guy Ritchie. Many found his first outing with the great detective an offense to the original material but I personally beg to differ. Author Arthur Conan Doyle described Holmes extremely well from page to page of his classic series. The one thing he lacked as a writer (and this is not meant as a slight to his immense talent) was his ability to bring action to life in his words. Holmes was a tormented genius. His skills were not only mental. A cadre of combat skills had been recorded over his years honing body and mind. But with gift comes addiction; written ever-so slightly (and sometimes ever-so bluntly) was Holmes’ addiction to opium and other drugs that, in his opinion, brought order to the chaos of his ever-observant mind. Ritchie’s style in storytelling simply brings the facts and depth of the character Doyle created in his bodies of literary works to life on the big screen in a way that entrances the audience of today to sit in wonder. Showing us the world of yesteryear through the eyes of a man who sees everything in it’s smallest and largest context is exciting and addicting in itself. You want to understand Sherlock and how he sees things and the ‘slight of hand’ with Ritchie behind the lens doesn’t disappoint.

The action is beautifully orchestrated. Paced in such a way that brings meat with the grand flavor of adventure, ‘Shadows’ doesn’t slow down even when simply organizing the illegal crossing of borders and infiltrating weapons factories. Robert Downey Jr.’s portrayal is given a burst of force in this chapter and Downey doesn’t let off the gas. Law keeps Downey’s Holmes’ weighted to the ground in a way that allows us to keep up. His friendship with this brash and unapologetic genius is one that straddles an impressive line of narcissism and brotherhood. Pushing the limits of their friendship seems to be Holmes’ true personal hobby and Watson seems to allow it; almost in a way that helps Sherlock get a taste of the humanity that he would otherwise deny (all the more evident in the gambling rooms of London’s nightlife the night before Watson’s wedding day and the nuptials that transpire the next morning).

Jared Harris

THE CONS: As a story as complex as this one moves, it runs the risk of moving too fast; sometimes pushing us when we’d like to cherish the moment. This one moves like a freight train at times it seems. Just as we are able to connect with where we are at with our characters, we’re thrust into another location, another exchange of quick-witted and lengthy dialogue or an action sequences that moves so fast we have difficulty keeping up for all our efforts. The iconic nature of Holmes’ mind through the eyes of Ritchie are brought back and it’s become a staple of the series. The use of it in excess, though, hurts the feel of the movie, if ever so slightly. To see Holmes’ mind structure his plan of attack is both enthralling and wonderful. Bringing that same visual to an escape through a war-torn forest, however visually thrilling and vibrant, felt a bit out of place.

Rapace’s Simza is left a bit thinner than you’d expect as well. From her mysterious entrance into the story to her dolled-up appearance at a summit on a wintery slope, Rapace seems unsuited for the elements she’s led into. Stephen Fry is also brought cleverly into the adventure but for who his character turns out being, a lack of history between his character and Holmes becomes a much-desired snippet that we are never offered or given the opportunity to enjoy.

Also, and this doesn’t spoil anything but should be noted: the ending, though smartly undertaken, takes a turn that is… out of character for the way Doyle had left it all in his novels. Where we seek to find closure and an end we are in a way left with a mixed bag.

Robert Downey Jr.

 

THE BOTTOM LINE: I feel a sequel such as this is a welcomed treat among so many droll remakes and sequels that have come and bombed the past few years. Seeing Downey take the reigns of such an entrancing character is not only a compliment to the wonderful actor we all know him to be, but also to us as an audience who desire to see the actors we not only love but stand in the corner and defend get the roles they outright deserve to inhabit. You almost want a taste of what Holmes sees and is able to deduce but can understand the effects of such a talent and are grateful for the wonderful seat you have to his life and obsessions. Though not a part of the world he is always burdened with seeing for what it is, we can take solace in knowing Holmes’ is just right for a civilization he inhabits; on the cusp of the 20th century coming to terms with it’s growth and faults. That burden may be the detective’s to bear; but we as viewers are better for it I think.

GRADE: B+

 

Moneyball

By Ken Whitney III

Brad Pitt

The expression ‘put your money where your mouth is’ has never been a fully realized statement in many cases. Whether we take a chance on a bet, an investment (and when thinking about both- what’s the difference?) or a group of people. The New York Yankees have been considered by many (don’t worry; I’m not one of the ‘many’) to be one of the greatest baseball teams in the history of the sport. Never more evident was that argument than over this past decade. Winning title after title, many thought them to be an unstoppable juggernaut of a sports team. Then something happened. They started losing. And, interestingly enough? not by the teams you’d think.

A new game arrived. Enter Mr. Billy Beane. After another defeat on the cusp of the pennant in 2001, Beane (portrayed with subtle style, timidness and force by Brad Pitt) goes to his Oakland A’s owner asking for more money to make his team a fighting force next year. With only a $38 million dollar budget (compared to NY’s $112 million), Beane was out of luck to afford players to fill the gap of the ones he’d lost. On a hunt for iconic and skilled blood from other cities, Billy happens upon Peter Brand (Jonah Hill). This young intellectual is an avid fan of the game and he believes in a mathematical equation penned by a nobody in the 80’s that calculates that the next great team can be made; and at a hugely affordable price.

THE PROS: When you think ‘sports movie’ what do you see? strong, athletic individuals bringing their talents to put on a show of overcoming the odds in epic, inspiring and sometimes hysterical ways. This is one of the greatest sports films I’ve ever had the pleasure of seeing. Better yet? It doesn’t have the aforementioned elements of it’s predecessors in it’s bloodstream save a few choice moments. Where the heck have you been over the past 5 years, Bennett Miller?? Entering his sophomore seat behind the camera (his first major film being ‘Capote’), the elegance of his direction is inspiring in that it shows baseball as what it is known by so many avid fans to be: a work of art. From the dugout to the office, Miller controls every scene with the lens perfectly and without pride. With Brad Pitt leading the pack, he never had much to worry about. Pitt has been in his element for years, I believe. If you’ve caught his extensive interview with Entertainment Weekly you’ll notice a self-conscious man constantly wanting better of himself. I can’t help but admire that quality. But his body of work (from Se7en, Fight Club & The Ocean’s trilogy to The Curious Case of Benjamin Button & Inglorious Basterds) says otherwise. He knows what he wants from his characters whether he realizes it or not. Not drawing on overly-sentimental and moving emotions, Pitt hunkers into the skin of man questioning his every decision, worrying about the outcome of every choice and promising himself he’d never make it about the money.

The script is also a wonder. Helmed by Steven Zaillian & Aaron Sorkin, the flow feels comfortable and yet suspenseful. Driven yet not too aggressive. While so many other baseball films lay it on thick with sexual humor and over-the-top antics, Moneyball keeps itself grounded in the hard truth. Set in Oakland, You almost feel the sun hitting your face off 880 and can sense the love between a father and daughter that would otherwise be drowned out by the intensity of a bat swing. Better yet, it makes the process in which teams are now picked, allowing cursed clubs like the Red Sox to win the fabled trophy, make complete sense. And it does so without mocking you. It trusts that you’re in your seat wanting to see how our pastime works. To put the icing on an already wonderfully layered confection; it’s funny. Just where it needs to be. It just works. It makes the goings-on of the minds behind the field engaging, conductive and fascinating. You couldn’t hope for a better story.

THE CONS:  Aside from a slightly lengthy ending I’ve honestly got no qualms against it. Seriously.

Brad Pitt & Jonah Hill

THE BOTTOM LINE: I’m so happy to be seeing the best of the best this year. As a man who bleeds celluloid, I can attest to the belief that we’ve been polluted by so many repeats, re-hashings and atrocities for the sake of expectations in our cinemas. Coming out of this, I felt a wave of contentment, not in the belief of greater things, but that simple will to do things the way they SHOULD be done will see it’s way through. That’s the theme of so many classics and, in that sense, this is a masterpiece. It’s a breeze through a convoluted house of mirrors and it’s wonderful to have talent brought together to show the way.

I’ve said this before, but it’s worth saying twice. We live in hard times. Money is tight, jobs are few and hope is hard-found. To know that the things we love can be made  without wasting what doesn’t need to be spent, is, by itself, uplifting. But better yet, to see a larger-than-life personality fill the shoes of an average guy just trying to play the game for everyone is where it grabs you and doesn’t let go. ‘We’ll have changed the game forever’ Beane laments to Brand in a warm moment as it all dies down. A decade later, I think it’s safe to say they did just that.

GRADE: A

 

Warrior

By Ken Whitney III

 

Tom Hardy, Josh Rosenthal & Joel Edgerton

“Growing up, we all want to know who the toughest kid in the neighborhood is, right? Well I wanna know who the toughest man on the planet is.”

Tommy Riordan (played by Tom Hardy with an intensity you cannot ignore) comes home to Pittsburgh, seemingly out of nowhere, to the doorstep of his recovering alcoholic father & ex-boxer Paddy Conlon (Nick Nolte) to find supposed new footing after the passing of his mother. Seeking to win the largest prize in MMA (mixed martial arts) history, Tommy enlists his father to train him for the event. As Tommy rips through any obstacle (and fighter) that stands in his way, his brother, Brendan Conlon (Joel Edgerton) is struggling to keep his family afloat. Their house on it’s way to being seized by the bank and both he and his wife (Jennifer Morrison) working jobs back to back in a hopeless attempt to keep them in the black; Brendan & Tess agree to have Brendan enter back into MMA to make the money they need. Whether they realize it or not, Tommy and Brendan begin a journey that takes them through arenas of pain both physically & emotionally and will bring them face to face with a confrontation no one can prepare for.

 

THE PROS: America is a country devout to the holy scripture of the ‘inspirational film’. from Rocky to Slumdog Millionaire; we desire the story that will bring us to our feet wanting to see the best in people. I believe Warrior will stand among the greats as one of the most inspirational films of our time. It works on levels that other films have tried and failed at. First off: It stays in the present. Never needing to give us backstory through emotional flashbacks and recollections of hard times, Warrior brings the anguish of a family ‘on the brink’ to us in real time. Gavin O’ Conner (who directed Pride & Glory and Miracle) brings a hands-on feel to this story. With hand-held camera work, the direction feels fluid and natural with the story it inhabits. The script doesn’t overplay emotional sappiness with predicable and memorable dialogue. Thankfully that doesn’t hurt this film. It’s real enough because of a cast that sells it to us. Tom Hardy & Joel Edgerton are completely believable as estranged brothers brought back together from a tragic past only to bring their fists together to prove something to each other and themselves. Nick Nolte (a treasure of an actor for his style) is heartbreaking as the father trying to make right by his boys. The pain inflicted on their family is, without a doubt, because of a violent alcoholic that didn’t know how to use anything but his anger. Trying to make amends is an uphill battle to say the least; and it isn’t pretty either.

The fights are some of the most crushing and intense scenes I’ve ever seen when it comes to hand-to-hand combat. Not trying to be flashy with spurts of blood, compound fractures and missing teeth, Warrior makes you feel every blow and makes you cringe without feeling like you’ll bring up your dinner (and I can admit, my stomach was tight from every blow, throw and takedown). The tension is incredible and, though the final scene is known from the get-go; the pace at which we travel with this family doesn’t seem to drag. The tension in every moment is palpable and you crave more, wanting to fight your way to the outcome of every round.

As a final note, I find it humorous the comments made about the ‘clichés’ that are said to be found throughout this film. Though the film takes us upon familiar ground with the foundation of ‘the family man’ dynamic and the ‘good-for-nothing father’ routine abounds; Warrior brings with it a sense of realism that doesn’t come around very often in boxing/fighting films. Recalling our favorite ‘Italian Stallion’ once again, you really do care for these characters in that you want to know more about them. You don’t hate them; no matter the mistakes that are presented to you. Now don’t get me wrong. The sad and harsh way Tommy treats Pappy, his father, is gut-wrenching in it’s subtle ways that make you want to reach out and hold Tommy’s tongue. But you’re given a REASON for the actions of these characters; not some trumped-up ‘this is Brooklyn’ type of attitude but lives that have been lived and a reason to want to be in their corner.

Nick Nolte

 

THE CONS: One of the only true drawbacks of this film is that it treads across overrun ground. With fight films abounding over the last decade; from Stallone’s return in ‘Rocky Balboa’ to the overbloated ‘Fighter’, we’ve seen the underdog story. We’ve experienced the comeback saga. We’ve rejoiced in the sweeping emotion of the triumphant end. It is easy to compare these types of films (I am guilty of it myself!) and with that tendency comes the instinct to categorize it with others before it.

Also, a no-no I find inexcusable in feature films is the cropped montage. It’s one thing to showcase the time taken to build oneself into the force needed to take on the mountain ahead, but the needless cropping and overlaying panel display of shots was disorienting, confusing, distracting and felt very ‘tv’ quality.

Tom Hardy

 

THE BOTTOM LINE: It takes a lot to make you care for someone you don’t know. To someone you don’t feel you relate to. It’s hard to care. Warrior gives you a reason. Even more, it gives you more than one. Seeing two (or three if you’re really getting into it) stories converging to the physical, emotional (and even metaphorical) head-on collision of confrontation you’ve been holding your breath for is something to behold; and to add an even greater task to an already daunting one such as this? You really aren’t sure who you should be rooting for. Now that’s an achievement.

GRADE: A-