"Silver Linings Playbook" Review

"Silver Linings Playbook"

Directed by David O. Russell

Starring Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, Robert DeNiro, Chris Tucker, Jacki Weaver

 

RATING

8/10

Hmm, what can I say about romance? Do I think love sucks? Well, yes and no. Does it mean I won't enjoy it when it's done justice in a film like this? Hell no. "Silver Linings Playbook" is an unconventional romance-drama that does plenty right and hits home with it. I heard Jennifer Lawrence was in it, and that pretty much sold me. Since this was the director of "The Fighter", I expected a solid emotional story with some light humor and plenty of great performances. I got that.

 

"Silver Linings Playbook" tells the story of Patt Jr., a former mental asylum patient who rejoices with his family after his marriage abruptly broke down and rendered him bi-polar. He doesn't quite fit in yet because he's still feeling the effects of his divorce, so he wanders aimlessly and quite dangerously around the community until he runs into Tiffany, an inquisitive and heavy-handed girl who gives him the spark back in his life to move on and overcome his traumatic past and syndrome.

 

This was such a great film that deals with it's touchy subject matters professionally. The writing is excellent, and draws you into these characters. They're all on edge emotionally, and whenever that tiny detail comes along, it hits them big. And that's the magic of this film. Bradley Cooper was a stroke of genius in terms of acting talent. He delivered the best performance of his entire career, and really elevated his status as a serious actor in my eyes. He was such a wreck mentally and Cooper potrayed that internal struggle with precision. Jennifer Lawrence plays his love interest, Tiffany, and brings a good chemistry with Cooper. She is always interesting to watch despite her character essentially being more of an emotional wreck than Patt, and that's where the film fires on all cylinders. To see these two bounce off each others mentality makes for an odd romantic pairing, but it works really well. Robert DeNiro plays Patt's father, and I'm glad to see him back in top form. He was insanely good, and whole-heartedly deserves recognition. Perhaps the most surprising face in the entire cast was Chris Tucker playing Patt's best friend, Danny. He brought some heart and humor to the much darker elements of the story. All around, there were fantastic performances in one of the best ensembles of the year.

 

The film is generally quite intense, too, even for a subtle love story. There's more layers to the family than you first encounter, and with Tiffany's presence, it sparks a whole new level of conflict that may seem a bit cliched at first, but was much needed in the progression of the plot, especially the development of Patt. The pay-off is where it takes a few spins, but always manage to keep the viewer still engaged along for the ride. When you think you've predicted the events, it takes a sharp left turn, and that's the workings of a truly memorable and absorbing romance (f*** every terrible Nicolas Sparks movie!). I did feel a bit uneasy at parts, but it was all necessary to show Patt's inner thoughts, and as painful as it becomes to watch, it still sucks you in. And that's an ode to the actor-director relationship at work here, and how much confidence they have with each other.

 

"Silver Linings Playbook" is a funny, often very dark, and always emotionally resonant film that is very well-made and extremely well-acted. It doesn't linger for too long on the cliche, neither does it become too predictable, and always walks a fine line between uncomfortable and hilarious. There's plenty to sink your teeth into, and presents unconventional romanctic story-telling at its finest, but if you're looking for a silly Nicolas Sparks cheesy romance... kindly jump off a cliff.

"Lincoln" Review

"Lincoln"

Directed by Steven Spielberg

Starring Daniel Day-Lewis, Tommy Lee Jones, Sally Field, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, James Spader

 

RATING

9/10

 

For once, I'm actually glad I took history in high school... This period in time couldn't have been more compelling for me. When I first heard "Lincoln" was gonna be directed by Steven Spielberg, I immediately imagined a biographical pic depicting his life story, him being raised as a child and a bunch of overly sentimental moments mixed together with a sappy John Williams score. So, basically, another "War Horse", but the horse is Abraham Lincoln. However, I will confidently say, this movie surprised the hell out of me.

 

"Lincoln" is the story of the president himself shortly into his second term, where he is trying to pass the thirteenth amendment to abolish slavery in America. Meanwhile, the Civil War is still in full effect, and the country is mostly divided on their beliefs and morals. Abraham Lincoln also has some family turmoil when his son returns home and informs his father he does not intend on being a lawyer, but wants to go his own path. So he finds himself at the edge of both his personal and political life as the timer counts down the final months of his life.

 

In all my years as a film buff, I would've never expected a movie about Lincoln to be this compelling and captivating. If anyone can make two and a half hours of talking interesting, it's Spielberg. There's barely any action in the film except for maybe a the first minute or two, but it moves at the pace of a tightly knit thriller with impeccable acting. And by "impeccable", I mean god-like. Daniel Day-Lewis as Lincoln is just superb. He knocks it out of the park with his performance. Throughout the whole movie, I noticed I never once acknowledged I was watching an actor because Day-Lewis embedded Lincoln's persona and behaviour down to the twitching of his eyebrows. He is truly a master-class actor and his portrayal of the president is a walking, breathing piece of perfection. Also in the cast that blew me away was Tommy Lee Jones, a hot-headed politician with a surprisingly genuine story arc. Every time he was on screen, his presence didn't go unnoticed. He was the scene-stealer here, and I hope he wins plenty of awards for this. With every scene he had dialogue, it was just cynical and moving at the same time. He knows how to take the spotlight. Joining them is a slew of other supporting actors that you may have heard of... Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Lincoln's son who returns to join the Civil War, and even though he's not in a lot of scenes, he always shines with the little time he is given. Sally Field plays Lincoln's wife, and she is a really great actress who not only supports her husband, but pushes his buttons when he steps out of line. It's a pretty humanizing thing to show, especially for a man as legendary as Abraham Lincoln. James Spader is also in this, though it took me a while to really guess who he was beneath all the make-up and weight. He is Lincoln's personal right-hand man in the field who would be glad to run a mile through a bomb field for the president. His loyalty could get him killed, and almost does on one occasion, but you're always rooting for him. There are a few familiar faces spotted here and there, especially from Dane DeHaan and Lukas Haas who have very brief roles but it's great to see young talent getting recognized.

 

The film is paced perfectly, and written with such conviction that it never compromises it's historical nature and diction. Even through it's lengthy running time, I never felt like it dragged or got tired of itself like most bio-pics do. This technically isn't a bio-pic either, as it rather documents the final moments of Lincoln's life and his attempts to pass the amendment to abolish slavery. It's a compelling tale granted you're a bit familiar with the situations and characters, but even if you aren't, the film does a good job of giving you enough background details to work with. Like I said, there's very little action and the vast majority of it is talking... either people discussing what to do next, or the constitution debating the amendment in the House of Parliament, and it all is very engrossing. Spielberg does a bang-up job of keeping the viewer into the story even if it does take a few turns for the preachy, but thankfully never lingers in those moments too long before it becomes hard-hitting. And I'm grateful there's a lack of sentimentality at work here. It grounds the film in reality and gives it much needed authenticity.

 

In the end, "Lincoln" might be Spielberg's best work since "Munich". It's absorbing, ridiculously captivating, features an amazing array of great performances including from Daniel Day-Lewis who dominates every inch of his character, and a tight script that always engages with the audience but never leaves them hanging in confusion. I can understand, some might find it too talky, but for those who stick around and pay attention, it's a rich and rewarding experience. And yes, Lincoln dies.

"The Raid: Redemption" Review

"The Raid: Redemption"

Directed by Gareth Evans

Starring Iko Uwais, Joe Taslim, Yayan Ruhain, Donny Alamsyah, Ray Sahetapy

 

RATING

9/10

So I've never had a heart attack watching a film, even in the horror genre, and probably never will. But I applaud this film for bringing me quite close to one. "The Raid: Redemption" is a high-octane martial arts film directed by Gareth Evans... and it kicks ass. The electric and mindblowing Red Band trailer sold me on what was to come. I have never seen an action flick with this much ballsy violence since... well, it's never happened.

 

The films premise is quite straight-forward... a police task force is sent to an apartment complex overrun by gangsters and drugs with one objective in mind; to take out the gang leader, Tama, and cleanse the building of its hoodrats with a swift raid. Unfortunately, things don't go as planned and they are trapped in the building with an army of gangsters and thugs ready to slaughter them. Amongst the task force is a rookie member named Rama, a proud soon-to-be father who has his own hidden agenda for the operation.

 

Straight off the bat, the film is a blast. Maybe the first two minutes set up the character of Rama, but after that, it's essentially one big action sequence. And that is why it's one of the most original and best films of 2012. It's the perfect action film that also has quite a bit of heart. The fight choreography is insanely mindblowing. It almost trumps the fluid motion of "The Matrix" in some aspects of the fights, and delivers wave after wave of innovative and eye-popping action. The outbursts of violence is just astounding to witness, and really makes you appreciate the unapologetic and ballsy nature of the director, who throws in some incredibly heavy violence in between the fights. People get shot in the face up-close, heads are impalled on broken doors, limbs are severed, faces kicked clean into the skull, bodies are twisted and bent in two, and necks are sliced wide open. The scary and awesome thing is, that's not even touching the surface. Another thing that I loved is that there was a surprising lack of shaky-cam. As you know, I'm not a fan of it. I really despise shaky-cam action because it's distracting, cheap and offers no thrills other than sore eyes ("The Bourne Ultimatum" is the only exception here). But "The Raid: Redemption" has none of that, and the camera is very static amidst the mutilation, bullet rain, and fists flying everywhere. The action is focused, therefore the intensity is amplified and the hits delivered are brutally realistic. It goes to show how superior steady-cam is. The characters here are very likable, too, particularly our main protagonist, Rama, and the task force leader, Jaka, who for some reason reminds me of Mike Shinoda from Linkin Park (we'll get to that just now). They're the two guys you're rooting for throughout the film, and it's easy to get on their side because they both fight for a cause that's different and offers a wider range of character development (which, the film thankfully has). The score is also fantastic, which was done by... *drum roll*... Mike Shinoda of Linkin Park. It's hip-hop and urban production is really effective and surprisingly blends into the action like clockwork.

 

However, when the action decides to slow down, it opens up for some interesting character moments... depending on what you want out of the film. Some may find these moments like a speed-bump in the films pace, but I found the emotional connections between Rama and a member of Tama's gang, who happens to be Rama's long lost brother, to be quite fulfilling and necessary for the climax. I can see why people wouldn't like it, but I personally like some meat on my characters regardless of how brilliant the action is. My only gripe is that the action reaches a high point near the ending, and it becomes a bit tiresome. Your brain pretty much goes into neutral mode when the mindblowing fights... well, can't blow any much more of your mind. It's a minor flaw, though it does detract a bit from the experience.

 

Overall, "The Raid: Redemption" is a wildly thrilling, innovative, and balls-to-the-walls action film that never gives up and never lets down its visceral impact. Featuring some solid direction, an abundance of stunning action sequences and violence, and an emotional core, it's a bloody intense, rewarding experience unlike anything you've ever seen in your life.

"The Master" Review

"The Master"

Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson

Starring Joaquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Rami Malek, Amy Adams, Jesse Plemons

 

RATING

7/10

Yeah, yeah... I know my one-a-day review challenge is probably a complete failure by now. I may have underestimated how busy I thought I was gonna be these past Christmas days. So I guess I'll still remain consistent in my review process, and I've got a special one today... Paul Thomas Anderson's anticipated drama, "The Master". It's no secret that I love P.T. Anderson's films. "There Will Be Blood" is a masterpiece, "Magnolia" and "Boogie Nights" are superb ensemble pieces, and "Punch-Drunk Love" is a sweet, unconventional take on the romance genre. Now, with "The Master", I was really looking forward to it because I hoped it would bring the same spark of genius from his previous films. And I left with my jaw dropped. That's a good and bad thing over here.

 

"The Master" tells the story of Freddie Quell, a broken and troubled WWII veteran who lives his life aimlessly and carelessly. After the love of his life leaves for another city, Freddie finds himself alone in the cold world, spiralling down into insanity. However, when he boards a boat owned by Lancaster Dodd, the eccentric leader of a new religion/cult in development, Freddie finds his world take a turn into the strange... That's putting it lightly.

 

Firstly, the technical work in this film is a stroke of genius. P.T. Anderson throws himself into his craft, and perfects every single frame and shot so that the actors have the greatest emotional landings in their lines. He is one of the best directors working today, and this film is a testiment to how devoted and involved he truly is in his projects. Then we have the performances... Holy shit. Everyone in this movie brings a storm of acting abilities, including Joaquin Phoenix, who quite possibly has the best performance I've seen all year. His plays his role as Freddie Quell, the mentally unstable and sexually starving war veteran with such conviction. He drowns himself in the role to the point where you can't even tell its Phoenix, and you believe Freddie Quell to be the real deal. It's unbelievably brilliant. Also in the supporting role is Philip Seymour Hoffman as the cult leader, Lancaster Dodd. His performance is also damn fantastic, and when Phoenix and Hoffman collide in their scenes, it's like an epic battle of acting talent. There's so much fire and passion in their performances, it's like an actors wet dream to witness these guys at work. True masters of their craft. Now, on to the subject everybody will be talking about when they see this, or for those who haven't, will want to know: yes, it's about the beginnings of scientology. And is it as engrossing as you imagined? Well...

 

The film is skillfully made and mindblowingly acted, but the script is where the film takes a bit of a slump. It's a film that is not afraid to get you completely absorbed in the plot, but also completely lost. It's a rare combination that it pulls off like a master (okay, bad pun...). But in that, it loses focus one too many times and will make you disoriented and downright confused. This may have been the first film to ever make me sit there after the credits rolled and just contemplate in my head what the hell I just watched. I mean, I think I understood it... or at least the bulk of it... but some pieces didn't fit together... or maybe it did, but I was too lost to notice... I don't know what the hell just happened... Yeah, I think I about summed up everyone's initial thoughts. So if you're looking for something that will engage you and lose you simultaneously, let "The Master" be your guide (double pun, don't even ask).

 

"The Master" may not rank among the best films of 2012, but it's certainly the best acted and most challenging all year. It will test your patience and endurance for dramas with diabolical undertones and twisted mentality. It's an Oscar-calibur piece of work that fires on all cylinders, and Joaquin Phoenix delivers the best performance of the year (I have not witnessed Day-Lewis in "Lincoln" yet, so I will just set a bar here). For fans of P.T. Anderson, this may be a dream come true. For people who aren't fans, be prepared to drip saliva from the corner of your mouth with your brain in meltdown.

"Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist" Review

 

"Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist"

Directed by Peter Sollett

Starring Michael Cera, Kat Dennings, Aaron Yoo, Ari Graynor, Jay Baruchel

 

RATING

8/10

I can't really tell you that the days of my adolescent youth were filled with many great and wonderous adventures. I didn't go out on a night into the city and chase an elusive rock band, neither did I fall in love with a beautiful girl and kiss her. These were the days of other, more outgoing civilians whose minds weren't tempted by the home vibe. Me? Oh, I was a bit of a recluse. I didn't do anything unexpected or big. I stayed in-doors for the most part, watched a lot of movies and hoped that one day my life would be just as exciting. And then this film came along to remind me why driving into the night in the big city or falling in love wasn't such a bad thing.

 

"Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist" tells the story of Nick, a heartbroken teenager who just got out of a shaky relationship with a bitch of a girlfriend. His friends, also fellow band members, invite him out one night to play a gig and chase an enigmatic band named "Where's Fluffy?" around New York City. At this tiny gig, Nick meets Norah, a (unimaginably attractive) girl with issues of her own concerning Nick's dreaded ex. They hit it off, and take a journey through the night as a series of events unfold that bring them closer and closer together.

 

I've been waiting for a film like this. Yeah, I know newer films have come out and have probably done it better, but this was a much needed breath of fresh air. The sweet serenity of this film is what sucked me in. It's style is pretty much indie, and it's atmosphere very vibrant and alive. It's a film you can fall in love with over and over again and still feel as involved as you were the first time you saw it. Michael Cera's performance as the awkward music lover is very relatable. He's been through a tough relationship, likes indie-rock and strange break-up songs, plays an instrument... yeah, you could say I related. His chemistry with the ever-so stunning Kat Dennings is great and ultimately becomes the strongest point of the film. After all, this is a romantic comedy. Side characters, such as Ari Graynor and Aaron Yoo, add much needed sweetness to the romantic and eccentric vibe. Their characters, though only sub-sided, are extremely easy to like and that's thanks to the strong charisma practically leaking off of these guys. However, apart from the array of likable characters, there are other factors that contribute to this films magic.

 

The cinematography captures the nightlife of New York with such a distinct aura, that it becomes an entire character within itself. It's a living, breathing city that takes you through a labyrinth of wonder and colourful people, including gay musicals, recording studios and sexually aroused hobo's (played hilariously in a memorable cameo by Andy Samberg). I loved how rich the tone of the film is, and the fact that it takes place all in one night adds to a surprisingly durable and insanely fun pace. That's a big reason why so many will instantly fall in love with it: there is never a dull or lagging moment. Everything feels kinetic and busy, so you're enticed by the surroundings and situations. At heart, yes, it's a pretty romantic film that best captures the adolescent romance of teenagers who become close through a series of mishaps and mayhem. The primary lovers, Nick and Norah, are given enough backstory to work with in order for their chemistry to flourish and it's very well written in those cases.

 

"Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist" is one of those films that you can't really point out any bad things about it... well, the puking and the bubble gum scenes are a bit tough to stomach, but otherwise it's a sweet, very entertaining and humble look at one night out into the bright lights. It's a journey that's best seen to be loved, and best loved to be appreciated to its fullest. Proud to call it a personal favorite of mine.

"Eyes Wide Shut" Review

"Eyes Wide Shut"

Directed by Stanley Kubrick

Starring Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman, Sydney Pollack, Madison Eginton, Todd Field

 

RATING

10/10

Shortly before the legendary Stanley Kubrick passed away, he left what was arguably his greatest cinematic work yet. From the visionary director of "The Shining", "Full Metal Jacket", and "A Clockwork Orange" comes a tale so bone-chillingly haunting and psychologically impacting, the title itself strikes the resonance of a thousand paranoid, erotic souls intertwined in this great dance between life, sensuality, and death. And it happened on one cold night...

 

Dr. Bill Harford is a doctor with a gorgeous wife, Alice. They're invited to a party one night held by the prestigious Victor Ziegler. However, with their relationship hanging on the edge, the two are torn apart and confused. If not for their children, the marriage seems to be in peril. Until after a night of intoxication, Dr. Harford has an argument with his wife about her commitment to the marriage, and storms off into the dark streets of New York in the middle of the night, where a journey of wild sexual discoveries and unspeakable evil await him...

 

I'm in the minority here, but "Eyes Wide Shut" is my favorite Kubrick film and I believe his magnum opus. Before anyone attacks me for being pretentious, let me just say that I have seen a bulk of his films, including the three mentioned before, and I loved them all. But this film connected with me in strange ways I can't even begin to describe. Tom Cruise as Dr. Bill Harford is extraordinary, and even though many people would consider his roles in "Magnolia" or "Jerry McGuire" to be his best work, this got my pick for favorite Cruise film. His performance is subtle, but curious enough to lead the viewer down a very dark path, and thanks to his charisma, it makes getting on his side all the more easier. Nicole Kidman is perfect in her role as a conflicted and troubled wife who, you could say, is a total bitch. But she does it so well, it's seemingly natural and at the same time, oddly alluring. That's a very fine line for an actor to be able to portray, and its a solid performance nonetheless. Stanley Kubrick's direction is just impeccable and absolutely riddled with ambiguity and subliminal messaging, that even in your tenth viewing, you'll still be able to pick up little nuances. It may not be his most visually appeasing directing, but it certainly perfected the intensity and horror of each frame to deliver the best visceral impact imaginable. It was Kubrick's most daring, provocative, and scariest film to date... yes, scarier than "The Shining".

 

Even though on the surface, it appears to be a heavy-handed, erotic drama, it runs much deeper than that. There are so many layers to this film, deciphering it would amount to about fifty pages, and that's just the theory and speculation part. What really haunts you about the film isn't its extraordinary divulgence into the erotic lifestyle of the night, but the events and societies that unfold before the protagonists eyes. Dr. Harford tracks a secret party deep within the forests, in a large Elizabethean mansion, where a shocking discovery awaits him.

 

"Eyes Wide Shut" does something that most films wouldn't dare attempt: blending the elemental forces of reality's own dark secret societies and bring them to light in a highly eroticized way, but still maintaining its malevolent conspiracy style. It never for once breaks out of the fact that its merely a film, yet it forces you to consider an outrospective point of view on reality and the world we live in right now. I'd like to believe that only six days after the films theatrical release, Kubrick died of inexplicable and mysterious circumstances despite reportedly having good health and no illnesses. Did the legendary director finally push the wrong buttons? We may never know, but that is the brilliance that lies behind "Eyes Wide Shut". It's Kubrick's most personal film and certainly his most volatile in terms of belief, or the suspension thereof.

 

From a technical point of view, it's immaculately crafted. The cinematography is unbelievably powerful, and the production design is... uh, excuse the pun... orgasmic. Every shot is framed with such unique duality that you're constantly challenging everything you just saw, especially when the film begins to take unexpectedly dark and unthinkable turns in its second half. Be prepared to have your expectations stunted in many ominous ways. It certainly absorbed me, and threw me into a world where even innocence has to run its course, where the good in people are pushed to the boundaries of evil, and where the underworld of societies flourish in the pitch black night.

 

"Eyes Wide Shut" is Kubrick's psychological masterpiece; an enriching experience that will resonate with anyone who has firm beliefs or ideologies about there society, and reaches into your mind to plant some very odd and challenging imagery. It's a highly erotic downward spiral into the world that hides behind a mask.

"Life of Pi" Review

"Life of Pi"

Directed by Ang Lee

Starring Suraj Sharma, Irrfan Khan, Rafe Spall, Adil Hussain, Tabu

 

RATING

9/10

Tom Hanks in "Cast Away" spoke to a volleyball. Suraj Sharma in "Life of Pi" tamed a tiger. I'll let you decide who's the bigger badass... "Life of Pi" was a film I was very anxious to see. I've read the book, and hoped it would be as great as I imagined it in my head. And it exceeded my expectations by a mile. Or many miles. The film was directed by Ang Lee, and I also hoped it wouldn't be created with a "give me some Oscars!" vibe, and thankfully it wasn't. This was a very heartfelt, sincere, and very thrilling adaptation.

 

So, 'Pi', who changed it for obvious and much needed reasons due to his birth name being 'Piscine' (pronounced 'pissing'), is an indian guy who grew up as somewhat of a mathematical genius. The entire film is actually told in flashbacks, so the primary timeline of the film is Pi when he is an elderly man telling the story to an aspiring writer hoping to find inspiration. Pi then boards a ship with his family along with his fathers collection of animals from a zoo he owned to move from India to Canada. However, a freak storm topples the ship, killing everyone on board, and Pi is stranded on a lifeboat with a tiger.

 

And the film was freaking fantastic. The first point I'd very much like to talk about is the visuals, which are breathtaking. The film was made to be seen in 3D, and this might possibly be the best 3D film I have ever seen (suck it, Avatar, you overrated trash). It's a visceral masterpiece with an uncompromising and eye-opening style. There are a few meditative scenes of Pi stranded on a self-made raft with the tiger on the lifeboat marking his territory, and the shots are very wide and distant as to capture the vastness of the ocean. Ang Lee does some stellar camera work organizing these beautiful sequences, and with the 3D it enhances the experience so much more. There's an effortless blend of CGI and practical imagery at work, and I admire that so much. One of my favorite and striking scenes involves a group of glowing jellyfish that surround Pi. Suddenly, a whale begins to swallow the glowing jellyfish, in turn making the whale glow and providing a dazzling effect. I cannot give enough praise to the visual effects department for this. I'm gonna go ahead and say it's in the Top 5 most beautiful-looking films ever made. And it's not just the visuals that carry the story: it's the extraordinary tale.

 

Pi and the tiger, named Richard Parker, and there conflict is the heart and soul of the story. Pi attempts to mark his territory by taming Richard Parker, and his efforts to train the tiger are very thrilling to watch. It leaves you on the edge of your seat and just stunned. The taming also builds this subtle relationship between the two, making for an odd but really effective pairing of buddies. The film also has quite a bit of philosophical ideas that are translated very well across the scope and visuals of the story. Pi is in search of a chance encounter with God, and he gets it in more ways than one through his amazing survival tale. A great and dedicated performance from Suraj Sharma also elevates the films emotional side to incredible and intense heights. The ending almost left me in tears.

 

"Life of Pi" is not only one of the best films to come out this year, it's also a visual masterpiece. With insanely precise and stylish direction, a solid performance from Suraj Sharma (and the tiger), and a moving and gripping story, "Life of Pi" is my favorite Ang Lee film and an experience unlike any other, quite literally. Go see it, please!

"Safety Not Guaranteed" Review

"Safety Not Guaranteed"

Directed by Colin Trevorrow

Starring Aubrey Plaza, Jake Johnson, Mark Duplass, Karan Soni, Mary Lynn Rajskub

 

RATING

7/10

Let's talk about a little indie flick today. "Safety Not Guaranteed" was a small but ambitious film that came out in 2012, and after a solid run at the Sundance Film Festival, entered the hearts of mainstream audiences everywhere with its fantastical tale of loss, friendship, and time travel.

 

The film is about three employees, Darius, Jeff, and Arnau, who work for a magazine that delivers the latest news and trends. Their careers hang in the balance when they have to go out and find a new headline for an article, and one catches their attention: an advertisment in the newspaper about a man looking for a time travel partner to go back in time with him. They decide to travel across the country and meet this mysterious man, only to find out that they're way in over their heads.

 

What really makes "Safety Not Guaranteed" work is the great chemistry between the characters, especially Darius, played by the pug-faced Aubrey Plaza, and Kenneth, the enigmatic time traveller played brilliantly by Mark Duplass, who brings a youthful innocence to his character much needed in the douchebagery surrounding him. The supporting cast, which is essentially a clone of Abed from Community and that guy that was on that one show that everybody forgot about, are fine in being just figures in the background. I like that they attempted to give them a bit of meat and backstory, but ultimately you don't feel as much for them as Darius and Kenneth. It's a well-made indie-flick with a few neat twists, but this isn't a comedy or drama. It walks the line, but isn't really either. There's plenty of subtle references to time travel tripes in older movies that provide some insightfully funny and humble moments. If I could describe this film in one word, it would be "cute". It's a small story with a big concept that never fully pays off, and that's one of the few gripes I had.

 

The story sucks you into believing that time travel is simply a figment of Kenneth's imagination and you actually start to believe it's a simple drama where Kenneth is psychologically disturbed (Mark Duplass is the standout performance and does wonders playing the determined and crazy time travelling loon). And yeah, that would've made for a much compelling film. But then the ending hits, and all the suspended disbelief you had comes ingloriously crashing down on top of you. To not spoil anything, I was very disappointed that the film reverted to practically a sci-fi flick. It was all very convincing and very engaging until the last ten minutes happen, and whatever real emotions and connections you felt for the situations and characters that dragged you through the film is thrown away. In the immensely brilliant set-up for a psychological story of loss and mourning, and acceptance by society... well, that was all for nothing. Just the way I felt.

 

Overall, "Safety Not Guaranteed" is a cute little independent film with big hopes and even though it never quite reaches for them, it still captivates us with good performances, a neat premise and great chemistry between the characters. However, the ending tragically sacrifices everything "real-life" that it builds up for a moment of head-scratching and a bit of disappointment. I would say see it if you're a fan of heartfelt, sweet comedy drama's with a hint of odd science fiction that may make or break the film for you.

"2012" Review

"2012"

Directed by Roland Emmerich

Starring John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Thandie Newton, Woody Harrelson, Chiwetel Ejiofor

 

RATING

5/10

In commemoration of the enormous bullshit conspiracy theory that will strike us in T-minus 48 hours, let's talk about the movie based on this bullshit conspiracy theory. "2012" seemed like your regular apocalyptic fillm from a prolific end-of-the-world director, Roland Emmerich, whose work includes everything destructive from "The Day After Tomorrow" to "Independence Day". However, what separated "2012" from your normal end-of-the-world flick was that it was partially, or rather very imaginatively, based on a true theory. I use that term lightly. The Mayans predicted this downfall, and Hollywood jumped on the cha-ching bandwagon.

 

"2012" tells the tale of a writer, Jackson Curtis, going through a bit of a mid-life crisis. He drives limos for a living, and has a rough relationship with his two kids and ex-wife for some dull, generic reason. Meanwhile, governments and scientists all over the world discover that the plates beneath the Earth's crust are shifting and the mother of all natural disasters is about to reign hell on an unsuspecting, defenseless human race... but in other parts of the world, Jackson and his kids go camping. Yay. They discover a crazy redneck hillbilly in the middle of the woods who gives them a little insight into the situations at hand, tells them the world is gonna end based on the word of the Mayan calender... and now we have our flimsy plot.

 

"2012" was a film I was really interested in seeing. I knew I shouldn't have been so hyped for it, but my thirst for natural disaster movies stems all the way to my early childhood years, so I was hoping that this would be a nostalgic experience with killer visual effects... and boy, was it. The VFX was freaking fantastic, and it certainly quenched my thirst. Everything from enormous volcanos, collapsing cities, mountain-high tsunamis, and hundreds of tornados grouped in one location. It was jaw-dropping seeing the magnum opus destructive force of mother nature in glorious motion. One particular scene that just wowed me was the sequence of large tsunamis roaring 100-storeys high above the cities of the world and across mountains and valleys. I'll even give it the benefit of the doubt and say the visuals and cinematography was near immaculate when it comes to big-budget Hollywood entertainment. I really do mean that. It was very well done. However, when the film slowed down and dedicated time to the characters, that is when the real problems began.

 

The character development is weak, and the script itself is a bit of a jumbled mess. It feels like, with such a massive scope, the plot never really takes off like it should. You have an array of characters across the globe running from point A to point B, arguing, running some more, pause plot for ridiculously cool VFX sequence, continue with more running... that pretty much sums up the pacing and direction of the script. Roland Emmerich never really had a great script in any of his films because it seemed his story took a backseat to the impressive visuals. The acting, too, was outright horrible. Despite John Cusack giving it his best with the character, I never really bought him or got on his side... or any characters side for that matter. In fact, I was more on mother natures side (hell yeah!). I really like John Cusack as an actor, but this was just too thinly written for him to fully flesh out his acting chops other than running and screaming, which he does hilariously well. There's also plenty of big names in the supporting cast, including Woody Harrelson as a redneck hillbilly, but his role is no longer than ten minutes before he... well, literally bites the dust. That's not a spoiler, by the way. It's just a logical tripe for an end-of-the-world concept and a crazy person to meet some sort of demise. The climax of the film was really just eye-opening in a bad way. After everything that happens, the film takes a turn into some really illogical territory and just begins to line up the cliches and overused gimmicks. It settles down with the characters, but you'd be wishing you were rather out there watching how the rest of the world is crumbling. Also, in terms of running length, it does overstay its welcome by about 40-50 minutes and you'd be wishing certain scenes would move much faster. For a film of such epic proportions, it's running time might be justified, but given the poorly written script, it just ends up being too long.

 

"2012" is a fun popcorn flick with plenty of spectacular visual effects and exciting grand-scaled destruction, but for those who would like a little meat on their bones in terms of plot and story, there's not much to really sink your teeth into... or too much to chew for that matter. In the end, it might be the mother of all apocalyptic movies, but don't expect it to go further than visceral thrills.

"Titanic" Review

"Titanic"

Directed by James Cameron

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet, Billy Zane, Bill Paxton, Kathy Bates

 

RATING

9/10

Brace yourselves for some unexpected opinions. As a baby all the way into my young years, my grandparents knew only one way to shut me up: play movies. Among their array of films, which were only three, were "Jurassic Park", "Twister", and of course, "Titanic". Now I didn't quite understand "Titanic" at the mere age of four because I was more amazed at a colossal sinking ship and thought it was one of the coolest pieces of cinema ever. In fact, I still do. But now I have an open heart for the characters and story. This is nostalgia done justice.

 

The film, (mostly) based on a true story, tells the legendary tale of the largest cruise ship ever constructed in history, the Titanic, on its maiden voyage from Italy to America. For anyone who has opened a history text book, you know the ship hits a large iceberg and the cruise ship meets its inevitable doom. But the centralized story here is a fictional romance between two passengers, Jack and Rose, and how their love for each other saved them (sort of) from the sinking ship.

 

Now, I know I've already gotten enough hate from film buffs who crucified me for saying this, but I personally consider it James Cameron's masterpiece. "What about Aliens and Terminator 2?!"... Both great films too, but let me explain my choice. Growing up, I had a morbid fascination with destruction. It's what drew me into apocalyptic films the most. The visuals were awesome and the destruction was cool, but it ultimately felt hollow. Then "Titanic" came along and quenched my thirst for a riveting romance that gave the big destructive pay-off plenty of substance. For the first time in my life, I actually cared about what happened to these characters. I was absorbed by this strange world of rich snobs and poor kind folk which created so much contrast. It added plenty of weight to the emotional side of the story, so the extraordinary visuals were all backed up by a riveting story.

 

Leonardo DiCaprio as Jack does a great job of getting people on his side. Despite his status as a peasant, it makes me wonder how he had such a pretty boy appearance. These were the days when people absolutely resented seeing DiCaprio ever act again. You know, those same people who give him so much praise for his later films. Hypocrisy 101, ladies and gentlemen. But back then, he definitely had the acting chops. It's like people pretended like "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" never existed. Kate Winslet is also in the film, though her performance is passable enough. It's the chemistry between Jack and Rose that becomes the focus. Their romance, though considered cheesy by many today, is believable and features plenty of moments for women (and confused men) to swoon over and shed some tears. Perhaps the most famous scene would be when Jack perches Rose on the front of the ship and tells her to close her eyes, let go and lift her hands into the air. "I'm flying, Jack!", followed by probably the most famous (and duplicated) kiss in the world. Great chemistry drives the film to it's emotional core. The supporting cast are fantastic at playing snobbish, arrogant pricks. It's almost natural. Makes me wonder if James Cameron was just letting them all read his memoirs or something.

 

The visual effects are groundbreaking. Fun fact: half of the entire ship was constructed for the filming. There was plenty of dedication and pin-point perfection that went into making the film as grand and immaculate as possible. The cinematography is downright stunning, boasting some sweeping shots of the ship against a vast, empty ocean. The sinking sequence runs for the second half of the film, but it's slow descent provides time for the plot to up the consequences and stakes of the characters who find themselves in some tricky situations, especially Jack. It's really a shame this guy had to go through so much given his last scene. Cameron's direction is impeccable, and coupled with some incredible VFX shots, the simple sinking of the ship is transformed into the epic fall of a colossus or god. Granted, the film does take it's sweet time setting up the characters, their backgrounds and situations, so those hoping for a fast-paced action thriller would have to take a breather... if only for about 30-50 minutes before it really becomes gripping.

 

"Titanic" is part nostalgia, part visually breathtaking, part emotional, whole-heartedly a James Cameron epic. It's a transcendent experience that will divide many people: those who find true event pics boring or predictable, and those who are thrilled by seeing clockwork cinema in motion. I really do like that Celine Dion song, though.

"Pitch Perfect" Review

"Pitch Perfect"

Directed by Jason Moore

Starring Anna Kendrick, Brittany Snow, Skylar Astin, Rebel Wilson, Alexis Knapp

 

RATING

6/10

So I've been quite busy these past couple of days which explains the lack of a film review yesterday. My one-review-a-day challenge isn't broken because I hope to compensate with three reviews today, starting with "Pitch Perfect". Essentially, what you have here is a hybrid of "Bridesmaids" and "Glee". That already sounds risky, but it damn near surprised me.

 

"Pitch Perfect" tells the story of a rebellious teenager, Beca, who begins a college where the main attraction on campus is, believe it or not, singing groups. It's somewhat of a battle between these singing groups as each represents a different type of person, for example, you have a singing groups comprised only of women, then men, then hippie stoners, etc.... I really wished the latter had more time. So, after joining this stale all-female group called The Bellas, Beca decides to switch up the normal routine and give the group a more edgier sound.

 

Let's just start with Anna Kendrick (as if we could start anywhere else). She is one of the most beautiful women on the planet, and her presence on-screen is always welcome. She gives her role, who is a reclusive punk, a slightly bitchy and rough style. It's a good performance, and she definitely has a great singing voice too. Then we have the very colourful supporting cast consisting of general stereotypes with nice little twists. The fat girl is very conscious of her weight and insists on being called "Fat Amy" to save gossipers the trouble. The loud-mouthed Asian girl in these types of films is now a very (very) soft-spoken and shy girl who says some... odd things. Glad to see some psychological instability for a movie about singing. Lotta depth right there. The large black girl who usually has the booming, soulful voice is a lesbian... yeah. So these characters are vibrant enough to get attached to them and you'll find their strangeness to be one of the strongest points of the film.

 

Watching this film, I knew that I wasn't the demographic audience for it. I'm not that big into musicals unless it's Sweeney Todd or the dwarves in "The Hobbit", and I didn't like "Bridesmaids" all that much. Doesn't help that I only partially like songs from "Glee" either (let's face it, the duet of 'Dream On' with Niel Pattrick Harris and Matthew Morrison is ridiculously awesome). So you could say I had no hopes for seeing a movie I would actually like... and I was proven wrong again. I actually found it quite enjoyable. The musical numbers were pretty good, and I liked the fusion of the different genres incorporated into the moments when Beca decides to mix things up. Hip-hop, RnB and pop all combined was toe-tapping. Forgot to mention Beca is also a DJ, which probably adds to the whole mix-and-match vibe. My favorite part of the film is the throwback to "The Breakfast Club", particularly the song "Don't Forget About Me" by Simple Minds. It ties in to the climax of the film, and I loved how it talked a little about movie endings. That was neat touch for a film buff, but it does instill some sort of mystery about it's own ending which, I gotta say, was pretty disappointing given this conversation about the importance of film endings... So basically, what this is is the acapella version of "Step Up". The competition is still there, you get a love story (which is infinitely better than anything in "Step Up", to be honest), and the same formula.

 

Because of that, the film does become quite predictable and it ultimately pulls you out of the story in many moments. There's also a couple of puking scenes, but not a few trickles... but buckets of it spewing out of one girl's mouth like a waterfall. I still don't know if that was supposed to be funny or disgusting, but it just makes you go "what the f*** am I watching?". The ending is typically predictable too, there really wasn't anything hanging in the balance because you knew the outcome of such a film, but the usage of the Simple Minds' song was really cool. 

 

"Pitch Perfect" is not a perfect movie (see what I did there?), but it is very fun to watch and when a movie comes along and proves me wrong, it's always a plus. However, it does suffer a lot from predictability and a few unnecessary gags despite a charismatic cast and head-bobbing musical numbers. I highly recommend this for the crowds that like a little bite to their cliche competition movies, but even for the guys who despise "Glee"... give this a shot. You might find something in it.

"Wrath of The Titans" Review

 

"Wrath of The Titans"

Directed by Jonathan Liebesman

Starring Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Edgar Ramirez, Rosamund Pike

 

RATING

6/10

We finally have an unwarranted sequel to one of the shittiest movies of the past decade... and it's actually pretty fun. Hear me out, I had little to no expectations seeing this. "Clash of The Titans" was terrible, featured one of the worst 3D post-conversions of all time, and a predictably wooden performance from Sam Worthington... who can't seem to get mask his Australian accent at all. So I didn't have high hopes for "Wrath of The Titans". But what I saw was entertaining. A sequel that tops the original is pretty rare these days.

 

"Wrath of The Titans" tells the (sarcasm alert) ever-so gripping story of Perseus who has now settled down, grown out a mullet, and has a son, Helius. His wife is dead for no apparent reason other than to introduce a new love interest, so let's just buy that. He's living life in the slow lane until the Gods of Olympus visit Hades in the underworld, who plans on harnessing Zeus' power to ressurect the gigantic sleeping Titan, Cronos. Together with Andromeda and a dirty hippie who is apparently Poseidon's son, Perseus ventures to save his father and defeat a Titan.

 

The film was directed by Jonathan Liebesman, who gave us the (sarcasm alert) epic masterpiece that was "Battle: Los Angeles". And to be fair, I think he did a fairly modest job at directing this. It's not irritating or franetic, it's just neutral and pretty standard flare. Nothing great, but it serves its purpose. The acting is... eh. Sam Worthington is better than he was in "Clash of The Titans", but he's still a pretty stiff actor. His mullet does give him some personality, though. The only shining actors at work here are Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes, who are both incredibly believable as badass Gods of Olympus. The rest of the cast sort of withers in the background, especially the dirty hippie, but it doesn't really hurt that Rosamund Pike is very easy on the eyes. Anyway, aside from acting, there are a few good things about this film that really surprised me.

 

The CGI was very well done, and even better than its predecessor. It doesn't feel as hollow or empty, too. The action sequences and visuals are superb. There are plenty of breathtaking shots, which took me by surprise. I didn't think this would be the type of film to have that much beauty. The pacing this time around is also much more fluid, as it doesn't linger on one scene for too long and instead delivers some fast-paced, solid fun. The scenes involving the labyrinth are particularly exciting, and the climax makes for a better pay-off than  the disappointing Kraken from the previous installment. However, the film is still filled with gripes.

 

The acting is wooden and apart from Fiennes and Neeson, not that impressive. The plot hinges on typical video game implausibility as it involves collecting pieces of a weapon to form a huge one in order to take down the last boss. Yeah, it's a cut-and-paste plot straight out of a video game, and it suffers majorly because of unoriginality. These characters aren't too fleshed out either, so there's little to no development going on. Perseus hasn't changed a bit by the end of the film, and life seemingly goes on despite, you know, the world almost ending and everything. I figured seeing a living, breathing Titan would've spun a few heads but it's just so blandly written, it's like people came across gigantic, god-like monsters on a daily basis. This is Greek Mythology, I know, but c'mon... let's be honest about that.

 

In the end, "Wrath of The Titans" is far more superior than its predecessor, and offers much more excitement, better pacing, a bigger pay-off and visceral thrills. However, it still hasn't improved much in the writing and acting department, and is by no means a stellar achievement. It's worth it while it lasts, but it doesn't offer anything new or exciting to Greek Mythology that we haven't seen done before in video games. It's a good movie, just not one you'll be swooning over. Play "God of War" instead.

"Sinister" Review

"Sinister"

Directed by Scott Derrickson

Starring Ethan Hawke, Juliet Rylance, James Ransone, Fred Dalton Thompson, Michael Hall D'Addario

 

RATING

8/10

Ah, yes. The obligatory great horror movie of the year amidst the endless array of cheap horror being churched out has arrived in the form of "Sinister". And I'm just going to level with you guys here and now: This movie scared the shit outta me. And usually I'm not one to be scared easily, having grown up watching every horror movie under the sun. So expectations for this film when the initial reviews were coming out was that this was better than "Insidious", and rightfully was compared to it. But I hate to be the one to mix-and-match movies at all, but at least I had set a bar for myself in terms of the scare factor. And good job, "Sinister". Well played.

 

So it tells the story of Ellison Oswalt, a reknowned true-crime writer who moves into a new house with his family. Already, the movie screams generic, but it gets better. Trust me. Soon, strange things start to happen when he finds a box full of super 8 tapes in his attic, all documenting grizzly murders. Ellison decides to base his next novel off of this new found discovery, but as he dives deeper into these mysteries, he begins to discover an ominous, malevolent presence residing within these tapes that is slowly pushing him to the point of insanity.

 

Right off the bat, from the very first shot of the film, you know you're in for something special. "Sinister" is so well-made and executed, it immediately seperates itself from the regular horror film. There is a vibe throughout the entire movie that is just creepy and off-key, and you really get that brooding, demented feeling. Scott Derrickson, who directed the scare-fest "Exorcism of Emily Rose", does a brilliant job at keeping the suspense and intensity heightened on a tightrope to such an extent, that when it snaps, it catches you off-guard and hits you hard. It's an amazing feat that few modern horror directors are able to capture in essence. The antagonist or "boogeyman" of the film is called Bagul, and I'm gonna forget for a second his oddly striking resemblence to Slipknot guitarist Mick Thompson, but he is unbelievably scary and threatening. His image will be burned into your brain for years to come, trust me.

 

As for the acting, while the supporting cast does a fairly good job, the heart and soul of this film is ultimately Ethan Hawke as the writer who is tormented with some harsh decisions from his past. Hawke is a great, severely underrated actor who rarely attaches himself to bad films, so you knew this was not going to be your typical horror flick. Another thing is, I really hate jump scares, especially when it's a cat or a douchebag boyfriend who grabs someone on the shoulder and the girl is all "oh my gosh, Brad! You scared me!" ... Yeah, I fucking hate that. "Sinister" has plenty of jump scares... but in a very good way. The jump scares are backed up by genuinely frightening imagery and ultimately adds to the overall effect. Whatever causes the jump scare (and most of the time it's that nightmarishly scary Bagul) has weight and grit to it, and I loved that. The score is also fantastic too and serves its purpose of manipulating your senses at the right moments. Also, to not spoil anything, I liked how the film puts a twist on the cliche horror trope of staying in the house when creepy stuff starts to happen or moving into new houses. It's pretty clever and impressive writing.

 

The only flaw I had with the film was that there are a lot of scenes of Ellison walking around the house slowly, looking in empty rooms, walking some more, reacting to strange noises... Even though there's a pretty awesome scene that, in a way, pokes fun at this aspect of horror cliches. However, it kind of falls victim to its own parody. I thought it would just be a once-off thing when I first saw it, but the film does it a few times more and it kind of gets tired after a while.

 

Nonetheless, I really had a thrilling time watching "Sinister". Thanks to a strong lead performance from Ethan Hawke, an abundance of creepy and disturbing imagery, a vividly frightening villain, and great, suspenseful direction, it's one of the better horror movies of the last decade and an extremely well-made one at that.

"The Perks of Being A Wallflower" Review

"The Perks of Being A Wallflower"

Directed by Stephen Chbosky

Starring Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, Ezra Miller, Dylan McDermott, Paul Rudd

 

RATING

9/10

 

"We accept the love we think we deserve."

"The Perks of Being A Wallflower" is an odd film, not because it plays against plenty of Hollywood's silly tropes of the coming-of-age tale, but because it has something that the others do not: a surprising amount of substance. I had no expectations watching this film last night other than the fact that it starred a few familiar faces and was based off a book. And what I got in return was a truly memorable, emotionally drenching film.

 

The film tells the story of Charlie, a socially despondent and shy teenager just starting his freshman year in High School. He has trouble making friends in the beginning, and gets bullied a lot. Then he meets a pair of care-free and exciting step-siblings, Patrick and Sam, and his world is changed forever as he is introduced to the underbelly of society and the perks that come with being the nice guy.

 

First of all, the performances are fantastic. Logan Lerman has come a long way from Percy Jackson, and this just proves how diverse of an actor he really is. I thought I would end up hating his character, Charlie, because I didn't like him in Percy Jackson, but it astounded me at how much I connected with him. Emma Watson as Sam does a good job playing the social good girl with bad choices, and has great chemisty with Charlie. Paul Rudd is also in a few short scenes, playing the English teacher Mr. Anderson, though his presence doesn't go unnoticed as he delivers some of the most memorable lines in the entire film. The standout of the entire film is Ezra Miller as Patrick, the ecstatic and charismatic best friend, who proves his worth from the colourful backstory he is given. It's extraordinary for Miller to go from the totally insane and unapproachable Kevin in his last film, to a happy-go-lucky Patrick in this. If anything, it's proof how much range he has as an actor, and I really do think it's Oscar worthy. The strongest aspect of the film is the script, too. The film was written and directed by the same man, Stephen Chbosky, who also wrote the book, so he knew his source material backwards and understood what needed to be shown and how it needed to be framed. The film is directed beautifully. For some reason, it just has that David Fincher vibe, but not as heavy or dark as his films. And at other times, it felt like a John Hughes movie in that it presented adolescence in a compelling and innocent way.

 

The force of the film that will hook anyone is the array of vibrant characters, from the socially awkward to the homosexual. It caters to plenty of demographics who went through high school and experienced some forms of hardships and a sense of belonging. I resonated so much emotionally with Charlie because I was also the weird, quiet kid in high school who kept to himself and would say or do anything for somebody to recognize me, even if it meant going against my morality. Through his eyes, I felt taken along for the ride just as he did, and went through all the ups and downs of being part of a society, including love and heartache, one of the biggest themes of the film, portrayed so passionately and subtly by Lerman and Watson. It's a clever trick that the script hypnotizes you into believing, and thanks to the brooding direction, it's a very realistic world you can throw yourself into. What's also great about the script and characters is how much substance it has. These characters aren't just one-dimensional and wither away or are instantly forgotten. They are all so fleshed out and have several layers to them. It's what makes the chemistry between the cast work so beautifully together, in the ways they can relate to each other's pain and turmoil because they've felt and been through something similar. Basically, it's the embodiment of a perfect depiction of the adolescent youth, and possibly one of the best films I've ever seen that touches upon it's jarring subject matters.

 

I really can't think of anything really negative to say about this movie. I loved it. "The Perks of Being A Wallflower" is a unique coming-of-age story filled with plenty of philosophy and fluorescent adolescence (come at me, Arctic Monkeys fans). It boasts a strong, charismatic and emotionally layered cast of characters, a heartfelt script, and reminiscent, often quite dark themes. For anyone who likes movies where you can invest yourself completely for 2 hours and be drawn into the life of self-discovery, I recommend you go this, one of the best films of 2012.

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" Review

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey"

Directed by Peter Jackson

Starring Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Ian Holm

 

RATING

8/10

My geek levels were out of control going into this movie. I had no idea what to expect, and if it would be as good as "The Lord of The Rings". I hate to be one to compare it, but since everybody will do it, I figured it would eventually surface in my mind. When Peter Jackson announced "The Hobbit" would be made into a trilogy, I was a bit skeptical. I had no doubts Jackson, above all, would be the man to pull it off, but I often worried about how thin they would stretch a lotta aspects of the book. Pleased to say, it surprised me quite a bit.

 

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" tells the tale of Bilbo Baggins, a young(ish) hobbit who is visited by the wizard, Gandalf, who offers him the opportunity to go on a quest with a bunch of dwarves. The goal? Reclaim their land and their gold from a dreaded dragon named Smaug who seized control over The Lonely Mountain, the dwarves' home. Bilbo must now act as a burglar for them and go on an adventure that would align the events we all know...

 

And boy, was this a great start. Praise goes to Jackson for being able to pull this off, because my skepticism was washed away the second things started rolling and the action picked up. Martin Freeman kills it as Bilbo, even more than Ian Holm. He is extremely likable, and very charismatic which makes getting on his side quite easy. Ian McKellen is also fantastic as Gandalf the Grey, with more badassery we've come to expect from him before (or, er, in the future). Also in this film are a few returning faces, such as Elijah Wood, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, and Hugo Weaving, and even though their roles a very minor, they add plenty of weight to the situations and provide enough geek out moments for fans of the LOTR trilogy. And we gotta talk about the show-stealer everyone will be talking about after this film: Andy Serkis as the schizophrenic ring addict Gollum, whose obsession with one very special item drove him utterly insane. You get plenty of spontaneous insane moments from him, and plenty of what made him very appealing to audiences regardless if you're a fan of LOTR or not. His section in the film, "Riddles In The Dark", is so riveting and compelling, you'll completely forget that you're watching a dialogue-driven scene because it feels so kinetic and captivating mentally. The tension is upped to a ridiculous height when the scene concludes, and it shows how amazing of a motion capture actor Serkis is. Respect goes out to the team who did the motion capture work, because it's freaking mindblowingly realistic with modern technology.

 

My favorite moments in the film is when things start to become really dark and brooding, like the "Misty Mountains" song which is a mesmorizing  and haunting scene, the riddles in the dark, the incredibly epic battle of the rock giants, and the cliffhanger climax (literally, in more ways than one). That said, the visuals are quite possibly the best I've seen all year. Even though its technically a prequel that takes place in the same realm with the same director, it never for one second feels like the LOTR films because it's much more crisp and viscerally stunning. Middle-Earth looks as vibrant and alive as ever before. The songs sung by the dwarves are surprisingly good, and I really hate musical numbers in films. It really sets the more light-hearted and adventurous tone for the film, where I guess the sequels would be a lot more mature and darker. Howard Shore once again did an amazing job with the score, and recycles many themes used in "The Lord of The Rings" films without making them seem like a cheap rehash.

 

As you can tell by now, I loved this movie. Don't go in expecting its predecessors, because the books are much more light-hearted and not so heavy-handed like the other Middle-Earth adventure. However, the film doesn't go by without a couple flaws. The pacing is very brisky. For people who have seen and enjoyed the extended editions of LOTR, they won't have a problem with this at all. But for newcomers or people who didn't like LOTR (screw you), it may seem a bit tedious at times. Granted, some moments in the book are stretched too thin and you feel like they prolonged certain scenes for timesake. The film also tends to rely on CGI at times, but not to the point where you hate it. In fact, it's barely noticeable once you're enticed by the action.

 

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is a great beginning to what appears to be a promising trilogy. The return to Middle-Earth is exciting, the characters are hilarious and likable, the action is fast-paced and absorbing, and the visuals would make even James Cameron teary-eyed. Despite it's sluggish pacing, it's overall a very fun beginning to a journey that can only get bigger for such a tiny fellow.

"The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King" Review

 

"The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King"

Directed by Peter Jackson

Starring Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen, Ian McKellen, Sean Astin, Andy Serkis

 

RATING

10/10

 

'Home is behind, the world ahead

And there are many paths to tread

Through shadow to the edge of night

Until the stars are all alight

Mist and shadow, cloud and shade

All shall fade

All shall fade'

 

- Billy Boyd & Howard Shore, "The Steward of Gondor"

"The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King", the final chapter in this massive trilogy. Everything that you've seen before in the previous films, from the sheer scope, magnitude, and scale of events have built up to this, and peaks very high with it too. I cannot give the filmmakers enough praise and credit for crafting this absolutely mesmorizing work of art. Where do I begin?

 

"The Return of The King" picks up where "The Two Towers" left off: Frodo and Sam are still being lead down a treacherous path by the scheming Smeagol who wants the ring for himself, Merry and Pippin enjoy the fall of Isengard under the command of Treebeard, and Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas, together now with the ressurected white wizard, Gandalf, are regrouping and preparing for the final war of Middle-Earth about to begin. Things are so close to the edge right now, and everyone is holding onto their swords while quivering. Something big is about to happen, revolution of good or evil is coming, and everyone knows it. The fate of Middle-Earth rests in the hands of Frodo... quite literally.

 

Peter Jackson, the big guy behind the camera, is the visionary who brought everything together. His vision of Middle-Earth in all of the films is impeccable, and you are so absorbed by this world that even the galaxy far, far away seems empty and cold. The direction is flawless, and the framing of each shot is immaculate. It's basically an aspiring filmmakers wet dream. Howard Shore also brings his A-game with the score, booming and echoing through the scenarios as it becomes a vital element to the story. All the actors also give it all they've got, and I admire the dedication they have to the source material. This is entirely Viggo Mortensen's film as he  simply embodies the character of Aragorn perfectly, and portrays his rise to kingdom whole-heartedly. This is, after all, the return of the king. Another standout of the cast is Andy Serkis as Smeagol, who from the opening scene of film, we get an idea of just how insane and obsessive he really is. Like in "The Two Towers", he is also a scene-stealer here. His methodical madness is both frightening and intriguing as he snakes his way between Frodo and Sam's friendship. I'll say it again: the Oscars seriously need to reconsider motion capture work in their field. Two characters whom I feel I never quite touched on much before are Legolas and Gimli, the elf and dward whose immense hatred for each other in "The Fellowship of The Ring" blossomed into a pretty humorous and heartfelt friendship. In the battle of Helms Deep in "The Two Towers" and especially here, they treat the war as a game as they pick off the orcs by keeping a tab. It's a small detail that brings plenty of comedy to the more dark and ominous battles. Ian McKellen as Gandalf is just as awesome as ever before, providing the more magical elements to the film. His presence in all of the hard times is always re-assuring, to both the characters and viewer as he is somewhat of a spark of hope. And finally, Elijah Wood as Frodo, who I feel is quite underrated in the entire trilogy despite him being the primary protagonist. Wood does a superb job of creating this seemingly weak and vulnerable exterior, but also having a twisted and ambiguous mindset. It's a difficult balancing act for an actor to perform, and Wood nails it. Sean Astin's heroic portrayal of Frodo's guardian, Samwise Gamgee, is already a certified classic buddy character with the heart of stone and the will of a raging lion. He wants nothing more than to rid the ring, even moreso than Frodo, and his Astin's devotion to this character trait is phenomenal. He is the epitomy of a best friend willing to do anything for peace, even if it means carrying Frodo all the way up the smoking Mount Doom.

 

My most favorite aspect of the entire trilogy has always been the Nazgul. I don't even know where to begin with these guys... They're the vile, malevolent, utterly badass embodiments of Sauron's dark soul, mentally demonic and hellbent on the slaughter of every living creature in Middle-Earth. In essence, they're the most evil group of sons of a bitches ever put on celluloid. And I adore them. The leader of the Nazgul, the Witch-king of Angmar, takes up the appearance of Sauron too, spiked crown and all. He becomes what non-Tolkien film geeks everywhere have been hoping for: a physical incarnation of the Dark Lord himself. Though his downfall is a bit odd, his ascendance to big general badass motherf***er is nightmarishly spectacular to witness in motion.

 

The action in the past films is perfected here in "The Return of The King". The great war for Middle-Earth that takes place on the planes of Gondor is just as equal, if not bigger and more exciting, than the Helms Deep battle. It's viscerally heart-pounding as the grand scale and magnitude of such a war has never been done before on film. Even Spielberg would be shedding tears of awe and bewilderment. The force that gets the viewers behind the side of the good guys (if you haven't already, shame on you... yeah, I know I just spoke about how awesome the Nazgul were... I'm such a hypocrite...) is not the desire to make it through alive, but what is at stake. Tokien didn't waste time beating around the bush by giving us miniscule battles to develop a huge one with a disappointing pay-off... he went balls out and gave us the grandest battle he could imagine. God bless you. Peter Jackson, as I mentioned before, frames and shoots these scenes with "big" in mind, and he outdoes himself. Well-deserved Oscar for Best Director, I reckon.

 

When the climax of the film arrives, you feel as if the world literally hangs in the balance. Frodo, who has made his way into Mount Doom, hangs the ring over the edge of the cliff about to drop it into the fire and all you can think about is, "THIS IS IT!" while spontaneously having a spaz attack (Tolkien geeks, I'm talking to you). Then, the arrival of Smeagol puts a dent in the plan and everything, if even for a few minutes, throws the entire film and audience off-guard and into vulnerability. Aragorn, who gathers the remaining few still alive from Gondor's mayhem, storms the gates of Mordor with the determination of a king, like he should be, all for the sake of giving Frodo adequate time and space to make it through. This is such a humanizing moment that I loved. When the dust settles and the smoke is clear, we do have about half an hour still left before the film concludes, but you feel like you're losing a best friend. The journey through the films was all I could've ever hoped for in such a breathtaking journey.

 

"The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King" is the timeless epic we desired, we needed, and we deserved. A true cinematic masterpiece.