Prodigy2013

What's a great year in film without a little controversy. Said controversy comes in the form of 'The Wolf of Wall Street'; which reunites master filmmaker Martin Scorsese and actor, Leonardo DiCaprio, after a one film hiatus. It feels so long. Anyway, DiCaprio gives a stellar performance as Jordan Belfort, a real life New York stockbroker who ran a firm that engaged in securities fraud and corruption on Wall Street in the 1990's. There was much talks about the film and the way it glorifies the explosive, hedonistic ways of the wealthy one percent. But despite all the "coolness" we are seeing on the screen, is it indeed a glorification or simply a backhanded representation of these drugged out, sex crazed "fiends". Terrence Winter's expletive laden script, was darkly hilarious! I call this the funniest film of the year. The screenplay was incredibly smart and builds a band of memorable characters; with due credit to Scorsese's direction and the supporting cast's (and ofcourse Leo's) electric performances. However I did take a little issue with the length of the story which wielded a staggering three hour run-time on film. Detailing the meteoric rise and fall of the infamous stock broker was a meteoric accomplishment for Scorsese and his usual editor Thelma Schoonmaker. There collaboration made every minute of those three hours entertaining and memorable; very good work. 'The Wolf of Wall Street' was a lot of things; sharp, crude, funny and possibly even iconic. One thing is certain, it was awesomely entertaining.

The Coen brothers return with 'Inside Llewyn Davis'; a bleak character study that is one of their finest efforts, without trying too hard. The film treks a week in the life of the titular character, Llewyn Davis; a folk musician struggling to make it in the business despite undeniable talent. Llewyn navigates the Greenwich Village folk scene of 1961, and encounters many distasteful characters from his life (not that he's a charmer, himself). Without being able to plan for the future or face his past (such as the suicide of his musical partner) the man lives in the now. With no where to go and nothing to fall back on, his life seems to be headed in a vicious circle; and the Coens smartly structure their movie to resemble this dilemma. The Coens are master screenwriters; and there dense existential screenplay on this picture is a testament to that. Though craft a handsome looking film with the help of Bruno Delbennel's desaturated cinematography, and those authentic costumes and sets. The man a the centre of it all, Oscar Isaac, does a great job at playing Llewyn Davis; a character who we couldn't help but root for despite all his bad qualities. His brooding presence and his delivery of those wonderful folk tunes, was a delight to watch. Unfortunately, similar to the hero of this story, the film is quite underrated; but, I see it shining years from now. Like folk music itself, this gem just feels timeless.

Peter Berg is no stranger to directing tense action sequences, but when it comes to story and characters, he's lost in the fray. 'Lone Survivor' is an Afghanistan-set war film about a special-ops mission, that goes horribly wrong, and it features one of the years finest sound mixes and some gritty scene to get the blood pumping. Where I can give the film applause for these visceral technical aspects, I can't give such praise to the things that matters most. Its funny that a movie so firmly built on comradery, features a hokey group dynamic between these imperiled soldiers. Everything in this relationship felt cliched; without being true and moving. Undeveloped characterizations was the blame for this; but what would you expect when the movie cares more about thrilling audiences with action sequences rather than moving them with depth. I also took issue with the film's heavy-handed delivery of its message of patriotism and courage; and how it paints its Middle Eastern villains with limited shades. They are simply relegated to being "the bad guys". In the end 'Lone Survivor' was a feast for the eye and ears, but has little to offer for the brain.

The acclaimed play; 'August: Osage County', must have been fantastic to watch on the stage; but it's adaptation to the screen was hardly a thrill. Lazily adapted to the screen by play-writer, Tracy Letts; the film is filled with dialogue that hardly translates well to the screen and a plot that doesn't have any room for subtext. Its certainly fitting that the blatant script was followed up with OBVIOUS performances; because the film was excruciatingly overacted. As entertaining as these performances may be on face value, there was really nothing take away from them. Every single nuance is acted in bold strokes; leaving nothing for the viewer to ponder. However, I must give it to Chris Cooper, for giving one of the few sincere performances in this picture. But that really couldn't save this film on a whole. At times entertaining and always easy to digest; the film was ultimately an overwhelming romp.

There's no stopping Woody Allen, At 78 years old he's still making fresh films (on many occasions), that never fail to entertain as well as challenge. His latest picture, 'Blue Jasmine' is just that. Its a striking character study about a wealthy New York socialite named Jasmine, who is forced to move in with her working-class sister, Ginger; when her marriage with a wealthy business man falls apart after he's indicted. Spearheading the delightful cast which includes Sally Hawkins, Louis C.K. and Andrew Dice-Clay; was Cate Blanchett. She gives tour de force performance as the titular character, one of her best! The character's vapid, snobbish behavior, mental fragility and pure malevolence, was excellently conceived by Blanchett; both on a comedic and dramatic level. But as I've said many times, a great performance sometimes isn't possible without a well written screenplay. And gosh, does that apply here; Allen screenplay is a fine piece of work. His back and forth narrative structure which juxtaposes Jasmine's high life in New York with her dissatisfaction in the earthly home of her sister, was a brilliant approach to telling the story. Not only does it allow for neat characterizations; but it was also good way of bleeding the plot, which does take unexpected turns. 'Blue Jasmine' was a splendid study of class and morality, headlined by great performances from the cast.

It feels like a chore mustering up a review for ‘The Secret Life of Walter Mitty’, because there really isn't much to talk to about. Ben Stiller’s attempt to direct, co-produced and star, in a film about a man overcoming adversities to do “awesome stuff” may seem a bit self glorifying. But it is interesting to note that the most (and only) appealing presence in this film was his love interest Cheryl, well played by Kristen Wiig. For a movie that blends romance, adventure, fantasy and comedy-drama, it felt awfully bland… but that should be expected when the main character, the one who the film literally revolves around, is a blank slate. Beyond those flashy dream sequences, Mitty wasn't really saying much; it seems Stiller wasn't apt to directing or playing this subtle character. I found it difficult to root for him and his globe-trotting adventure of “self discovery”, when the man himself was nothing more than vanilla, from start to finish. Not particularly funny, nor creative; Steve Conrad’s impatient script was all over the place. I also found that the dramatic elements of the films were blatantly coerced, as they weren't able to manifest naturally through the (haphazard) rhythms of the story. One thing I did appreciate was Stuart Dryburgh’s gorgeous cinematography that brought the great outdoors and the sleek corporate settings to life. I really wish I could like this whimsical, odd ball story; but it just wasn't doing it for me.

Spike Jonze is a filmmaker who’s built his career around creating quirky, inventive stories; that hardly shies away from commenting on society and the self. From his brilliant, yet sparse filmography, you can tell that he’s in no rush to make something unless he’s completely taken by the material. With ‘Her’, Jonze has hit the jackpot. Never has the man made a more personal and moving picture! The movie focuses on, Theodore Twombly, a lonely writer who develops a relationship with his newly purchased operating system named Samantha. From such a simple premise breathes a vast array of ideas that thoroughly provokes one’s thoughts, for hours… or even days after watching the film. Jonze’s screenplay was a profound piece of work, some may even say prophetic. Set in the near future, where advanced means of technology and communication breeds more isolation; the elaborately layered script begs us to question what it really means to connect and the evolving forms love; one of the most mystifying brands of emotion that all humans desire. In one instance, Theodore asks his friend Amy (played by the always reliable Amy Adams) if he’s a freak for being involved with a piece of software, and she remarks, “anyone who falls in love is a freak”. Such rapport between characters, both recovering from broken relationships and yearning for some form of love, was great insight into man’s unwavering desire for the drug and how the elements of love itself changes over time. Whether it was a way to avoid being in a “real” relationship or to just fully embrace love from someone he genuinely cared about; Theo and Samantha’s peculiar relationship felt real; thanks to excellent performances from Joaquin Phoenix and Scarlett Johansson. Phoenix, just coming from his brilliantly manic role in ‘The Master’, plays an entirely different beast in ‘Her’. With such a warm presence, he makes his character completely relatable, despite being in an unusually unrelatable situation. Close your eyes and “watch” this film; Johansson’s voice only work was a thing of beauty. In addition to the human themes of love and relationships, I could go deeper and comment on how the film flirts with the concept of artificial intelligence and the ever looming possibility of technological singularity (for better or worse); but I will keep this review the way Jonze developed his movie; as intimate as possible. The film’s seamless blend of melancholy, intimacy and often times humor; shows tremendous skill from Jonze as both a screenwriter and director. The way he balances these genres and crafts the exquisitely designed world, of the “not so distant future”, demonstrates vision at its highest caliber. The muted tones of the production design and cinematography were exceptional; and Arcade Fire’s score was splendid. Down to the vaguely futuristic outfits and high waist pants (donned by the men in this timeline), designed by costumer Casey Storm was a neat creative touch. The future of this world was palpable. 2013 has brought us many fantastic films; that may very well resonate for decades to come. Her stands firmly among them as one of the year best; I was moved deeply by it. Its moody subject matter, and the questions it poses on technology and relationships will continue to hit viewers years from now.

‘Dallas Buyers Club’ was a wonderful film about AIDS stricken activist Ron Woodroof, and his heroic attempts to work around the system to help other AIDS patients get the medication they need. Its set the 1980’s, the early days of the AIDS epidemic; which was a time when the ignorant public shunned those with the disease, the US was divided over how to combat the virus and the FDA made selfish decisions on the way the drugs were administered. In its truest form, this film was more of a character study about Woodroof, a homophobic, red-neck, electrician; who teams up with Rayon, a transgendered AIDS patient, to help others in the same predicament as him. Though initially for monetary gains, Woodroof, moved by his newfound friend, Rayon, and the plight of the sufferers, eventually puts a side the money and seek to help those with the disease, first-and-foremost. Matthew McConaughey gives the performance of a life time Woodroof; he not only loses an immense amount of weight for the role,, but he gives a truly powerfully performance about a man enlightened after realizing how short life is. Great work. With recent talks about the socialization of health care in America, this topic still somehow feels relevant to our time, and in no way out-dated. With such a smart screenplay, and directed with a strong balance of sincere emotion and witty humor, ‘Dallas Buyers Club’ easily evades the “movie-of-the-month” feel that it could have become. Sometimes heartbreaking, ‘Dallas Buyers Club’ was a largely entertaining movie that moves at a clip, and manages to make you feel-good by its end.

One of the darkest chapters in American history has never been brought so impeccably to the screen. ‘12 Years a Slave’ tells the story of Solomon Northup, played by Chiwetel Ejiofor; a free black man living in Saratoga Springs, New York in the 1840’s. Residing in a relatively progressive community, the man leads an upstanding life with his wife and two kids; and works as a skilled fiddler and carpenter. Such a privileged life; as this is decades prior to America’s emancipation proclamation, and much of the blacks are still at the whims of white slavers. Upon meeting and celebrating with two men over a business venture; the men drug Solomon and sell him into slavery down South, where he experiences a true American Horror Story. Well; Benedict Cumberbatch as his first master, William Ford, was a very reasonable man; but “still a slave owner”, as one slave rightfully puts it. Being born in the wrong circumstances seemed true where Ford is concerned, as he was indeed a kind man; but the arrival of Michael Fassbender’s Edwin Epps, Northup’s second master; showed that blatant cruelty does exist in the hearts of some men. Evil incarnate, Epps rule over his “property” with an iron fist; and threatens his wife by striking up a complex “affair” with a slave name Patsey, who he deems the ‘Queen of the field’. Fassbeneder gives a ferocious and appropriately complex performance that warrants some serious awards consideration, and special applause must also be given to Lupita Nyong’o who plays Patsey. The brutality of the subject matter is in no way sugar coated, thanks Steve McQueen’s ballsy direction. His unflinching approach to telling the story paints a true portrait of the harshness of the slave system and drew out some staggering performances from his cast. That leads me to star, Chiwitel Ejiofor who’s put through the wringer as Northup. His arc as a naïve free man, to a man scarred by slavery was very well portrayed. Despite my enthusiasm, I was bothered by McQueen’s nonexistent representation of the passage of time in this film… after all the movie is called 12 Years and slave. But for a movie this excellent, all can be forgiven. Production design and costumes were top notch, and Sean Bobbit’s cinematography accentuates the savagery on the screen, with his many single shots. Though unsettling, don’t be discouraged from seeing it… a film this powerful deserves everybody’s attention.

Loosely based on the FBI ABSCAM Operation in the 1970’s, the film follows successful conman Irving Rosenfeld, played by the usually committed Christian Bale, and his deceptive crime partner and mistress “Edith Greensly” played with allure by Amy Adams. To evade prosecution these con artists are forced to serve the FBI by creating an elaborate sting operation to nail corrupt politicians in the U.S of A. Spearheading this FBI operation on the field is Bradley Cooper’s Agent Richie DiMaso, who goes toe-to-toe with the very con artists he enlisted. Among the corrupt politicians being played by all involved; Mayor Carmine Polito (well played by Jeremy Renner) has his heart in the right place but uses the wrong means to go about accomplishing his plans. While all this scamming and “stinging” is going, Jennifer Lawrence’s Rosalyn Rosenfeld, the zany wife of Irving, threatens the whole operation with her jealousy driven antics. I detailed all the major characters, not to fill space or waste time, but to express my appreciation for the characters in this film. A great character is nothing without great performances, and the cast delivers from all angles! If I was to single out any performance it would probably be Bradley Cooper’s eccentric characterization, which was nice comedic work in an already hilarious film. As it stands the ensemble was fantastic, and well guided by director David O. Russell who continues to prove his ability to direct actors. With the multiple narrators to widen the viewer’s perspective, the off-key film editing and the soundtrack, O. Russel may have taken a few too many notes from Scorsese; but it works, it all works well. This approach was a service to the complicated story, which was made into a digestible viewing experience. It also helped in character development; after all, the film was a character study at its heart. With a sound cast and confident direction, this was a wild burst of energy from a filmmaker who is eyeing gold at this year’s awards season.

It feels like just yesterday I was mulling at my disappointment with ‘An Unexpected Journey’ and its fall from the graces of ‘The Lord of the Rings Trilogy’; however has Peter Jackson got back his mojo? Probably not; but I must say this was quite improvement and it seems as if he’s striving to return to the glory of the first trilogy. ‘The Desolation of Smaug’ was an exciting "little" epic and it feels much more purposeful than the first film. The story continues with the band of dwarves on their journey to reclaim the Misty Mountain, which was overrun by the vain and cruel Dragon named, Smaug (perfectly voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch). Of course, along the way, they encounter a great deal of danger which... of course, was engineered to the finest degree. The action sequences did run for too long in many instances, but they were creatively staged; and Jackson and his legions visual effects specialists continue their win streak in this department. One aspect that falls utterly short was the length and enormity of the film; which doesn't match the scope of the relatively small story. A sentiment I also expressed with the first installment, though to a lesser degree, here. This time around the film was filled with too many neat gimmicks (take Legolas’ inclusion as an example) and uninspired subplots, such as the Elven-Dwarf love triangle. Thankfully these stumbles did not do much damage to the main story line, which is setting up dominoes for an epic conclusion, but they do highlight flaws in the screenwriting department. These things aside, ‘The Desolation of Smaug’ was an entertaining, visually appetizing film; that should please fans of the original trilogy and newer followers, if even solely for its pure level of charm.

Taking some bold notes from Hemmingway’s ‘The Old Man and the Sea’, JC Chandor tells a story of a lone sailor’s strife to survive after being stranded at sea due to a series of worsening events. With little to no dialogue, ‘All is Lost’ is filled with subtext and relies on Robert Redford tremendous talents to hold the screen alone. Redford’s unnamed character (titled ‘Our Man’ in the credits), is an ambiguous figure with literally no back-story; but that made him all the more intriguing. There was no scenery chewing in the performance, just plain stoicism as his character steers peril in the eye… all truly felt lost. Chandor is no stranger to the dynamics of the 2008 financial crisis, and it’s very possible that some of these issues are layered between the fine lines of this story. With an abandoned shipping container being the initial cause of Our Man’s high seas accident, one could relate that to the irresponsibility of big corporations and the negative effects it has on the people. However, as you would expect from this metaphorical movie; it’s all up to each viewer’s interpretation. I applaud the rigorous efforts placed in producing this film, but for some reason I thought it was a tough film to fully connect to. It may be due to its stark minimalism or maybe the subtle emotional payoff. In any case, it was one of the year’s most ambitious movies, and I encourage anybody up for a challenge to give it a try.

A refreshing entry in the, troubled, Sports movie genre is ‘Rush’. It’s a true story about the rivalry between formula 1 racers; James Hunt and Niki Lauda. Hunt, well played by Chris Hemsworth, is the English playboy with a true talent for racing; and Lauda played by Daniel Bruhl is the arrogant, yet disciplined Austrian racer, with a knack for tactics. Bruhl does fantastic work in a co-lead performance, by perfectly capturing the physicality of the real life Lauda along with adding a weight of emotion to his character. Peter Morgan deserves some credit for penning these dynamic characters; and guiding the script through a few of its familiar rhythms was Ron Howard. Mr. Howard may not be an auteur but he knows how to make a good movie; and ‘Rush’ was a damn good one. He manages to elevate the film above the trappings that are typical of movies within this genre; and made it a relatively unpredictable ride, with a pair of fleshed-out characters. Speaking of ride, Anthony Dod Mantle’s cinematography and the terrific sound mix placed us right in the heat of those intense car races, with fine detail. I was also particularly impressed with Daniel P. Hanley and Mike Hill’s well paced editing of the film, Hans Zimmer’s bassy score; and the squeamish makeup design and glamorous hairstyles that defined the period. ‘Rush’ was a well oiled machine, that entertains as well as it manages to move the audience.

Just got around to seeing ‘Lee Daniel’s The butler’ and in short; it was a moderately entertaining picture, with a possible identity crisis. The movie arbitrarily shifts from being a history lesson on racism, a teaser with various presidential cameos and a moving family drama. With very good performances from Forest Whitaker, Oprah Winfrey, and David Oyelowo, it finds much success as a dynamic family drama; but the rest was a mixed bag. From the odd casting choices of the presidents to the haphazardly told story of 20th century racism in America, much of it just didn’t quite jell. However, I would like to stress on the quality of those performances, which carries this film up steep slope. That’s what largely made this a decent watch.

Not to go into too much detail, “The Spectacular Now” was a sweet little treat from indie director James Ponsoldt. Though not so much a directorial showcase, screenwriters Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber who penned the highly appreciated “(500) Days of Summer”; do admirable work here. The film’s simple structure hides a heavy story about a popular high school senior and his romance with a ‘less’ popular girl, his interest in finding his estranged father and his struggles with alcoholism. Most of importantly, all these issues faced by our main character Sutter Keely, begs him into reassessing his core philosophy of spontaneity. Such a simple, yet solid film was anchored by Miles Teller and Shailene Woodley (as his love interest); whose chemistry felt absolutely genuine.

With prominent cases of violence due to racial profiling still hitting the headlines in America, the release of 'Fruivale Station' feels like a fitting entry in this impressive year of **** tells the true life story of Oscar Grant III and the day leading up to his demise at the hands of police officers in the titular train station. The moments leading up to this fateful event were morally and emotionally resonant for the man; and along the way we learn about not only the love he has for his family and friends; but also the demons of his past. A hearty round of applause must be given to Michael B. Jordan for bringing both grit and soul, to a character that could easily be seen as being overly sanctimonious. A bit too considerate on the part of director, Ryan Coogler; whose direction may not have been very refined. However, his vision was clear and he does the job well. What job might I ask... telling an emotionally powerful story, about an issue vital to all generations.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder people say. Some may call this erotic French drama; art, others may say it’s pornographic; some may callll its premise an insightful study, others may say it’s a shallow excuse for graphic sex scenes. If you ask me, Blue is the Warmest Colour, like most works of art, is a bit indulgent; but it felt perfect! This was somewhat of a coming-of-age film about a teenage girl named Adele, and the tremendous changes her life incurs after she falls for an artsy, blue haired college woman named Emma. Adèle Exarchopoulos, who (conveniently) stars as Adele, gives a breakout performance. Her odyssey of sexual awakening and emotional maturity; as she comes to understand herself and the complexities of love was a committed performance. The character’s growth takes years; with the film spanning her awkward teenage years all the way through to young adulthood. Exarchopoulos stands firmly, holding our attention for the entire time. Both her and her equally fabulous co-star, Léa Seydoux (as Emma), showed a great deal of bravery in their roles. My hat goes off to them. The final part of this trio was Abdellatif Kechiche, who obviously directed the hell out this movie and its stars. The way his camera stalks and zooms in on Adele at even her most intimate moments could almost be considered predatory. Also the detail he gives to those controversial sex scenes may have been excessive. In the end, it was all in the name of getting this character study across in the most meticulous way possible; and I must commend him for that. With so much commitment and hard work on all the corners of this film, it’s no surprise how persuasive Adele and Emma romance was. I was taken aback by it, and captivated for the film’s entire three hour run time. Blue is the Warmest Colour was a keen study that was thoroughly moving. Beauty was certainly in the eyes of this beholder.

"Maybe in America, maybe in America", says Somalian pirate leader Muse; when Captain Phillips asks if there isn’t more to their lives than fishing and kidnapping people. Such an exchange highlights the desperation of the underdeveloped, but does that make their actions justifiable? Such nuances are key in 'Captain Phillips', Paul Greengrass' new film about a group of Somalian pirates who hijack a container ship off the horn of Africa and hold the ship's captain hostage. I must commend screenwriter, Billy Ray, for not only blueprinting the details of this docu-drama but also creating a great character in Capt. Richard Phillips and giving humanity to the four antagonists; who were far more than just "The Pirates". With this, Tom Hanks is able to give his finest performance in over a decade as the genuine Capt. Phillips; and newcomer Barkhad Abdi is able to stand toe-to-toe with him; as Muse. This movie kept me on the edge of my seat the entire time. Paul Greengrass has built his career around procedural film making; relying on blunt realism and sharp kinetic thrills. He's in very fine form this time around, doing his best work since 'United 93'. Being ripped straight from the headlines; many may already know how it will all end (albeit, not in such grimy details); but that doesn't seem to matter. Greengrass and his usual editor of choice, Christopher Rouse, know how to construct the adrenaline induced action, the poignancy of the drama and the intensity of the thrills to great effect! “Captain Phillips” was a smart, effective and riveting film; and what else can I say, it was very well made.

You may have heard some hype floating around about this “little” movie and its big achievement… believe it! ‘Gravity’ is one of the best films to hit the big screen all year and, through staggering technical accomplishment, it quite easily made its mark as a vital contributor to the visual language of cinema. The screenplay may not be an elaborate piece of work, but it gets the job done. Through Alfonso Cuaron’s accomplished direction the ideas come into fruition and the simplicity of the script is given a grand, new life. Cuaron crafts a staggering tale of survival against seemingly impossible odds, and splices it with spiritual motifs and nods to some classic science fiction films. When a space shuttle is destroyed by debris from a decimated Russian Satellite, the last two survivors of the disaster become stranded in space and are forced to use their wit and will to live in order to return to mother Earth. Sandra Bullock delivers her career best turn as rookie astronaut, Ryan Stone, who faces the brunt of Space’s fury. Her arc as a hero placed in repetitive danger may (or may not) have been a shortcoming of the script, but that question was put to rest by Bullock’s convincing lead presence. Her attempts to overcome one near-death obstacle after another never got boring. George Clooney turns up the charm, and gives his best George Clooney impersonation, as the veteran astronaut who guides our imperiled heroine along the way. This was such a beautifully made film. What Cuaron did to bring this space spectacle to the screen is beyond my understanding; and I’m quite happy just marveling at its wonder. The visual effects are obviously groundbreaking stuff, and if Emmanuel Lubezki doesn’t finally win that elusive Oscar for his arresting cinematography I will lose all hope in humanity. That 20 minute single shot opening scene is enough to earn him the award. Just as elegant as the visuals were the sound designs, sparse musical score and that excellent sound mix that strives for realism. That’s what I appreciated most about this film, Alfonso Cuaron’s attempt at creating a realistic space experience; I was actually caught in the illusion of weightlessness and silence that is definitive of space. In the process he not only created a realistic space experience, but also an astonishing cinematic one.

I’ve been dying to see this for a while; and Noah Baumbach’s infectious ‘Frances Ha’, bubbles with pizzazz. This is a witty character study about Frances Frances Halladay (Greta Gerwig), a 27-year-old dancer who lives with her best friend Sophie. When Sophie decides to move out, leaving Frances low and dry, Frances is forced to figure out how to live her life. Not to take things too personally, but as 20-something year-old I can’t help but relate with some of the difficulties faced by the titular character and that struggle to get started on life. While this is clearly a Noah Baumbach film, I think equal credit should be given to star and co-scribe Greta Gerwig. Her contribution to the indie-film realm these past few years have been felt and her presence here couldn’t be any stronger. The shear level of wit, sincerity and (most of all) charisma that she brings to her character was truly something special; and should not be taken lightly. Drawing from the French New Wave and Woody Allen (mainly during the 70’s) Baumbach crafts a deliciously stylized film that tells the story in an utterly unique fashion. The black and white cinematography does so well at setting the bleak tones that comes with a quarter-life crises, and I could listen to the soundtrack all day long. Sometimes funny and sometimes heartbreaking; I’m really hoping this gem doesn't go unnoticed by year end. The film has such an appeal and deserves all the attention in the world.

I'm a little late with 'The Lone Ranger', but better never than late! Not only did the movie fail to examine themes of greed and racism (issues that were tailored for this kind of material), it failed at telling a good story, period. I thought the story was poorly framed. The constant back and forth between Tonto’s (Johnny Depp's character) retelling of the tale of the Lone Ranger to a precocious boy, always drew us out of the main story line. Johnny Depp's heavy makeup and oddball shtick is getting tired now; and the chemistry with Army Hammer’s Lone Ranger fell flat. As we've seen with the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, Gore Verbinski is no stranger to staging elaborate action sequences; but here, the action feels even more implausible and spans for way too long. This brings to the length of this movie, which has no business being 150 minutes! A leaner runtime and tighter narrative would have definitely lightened my eyelids. The only thing I truly admired about 'The Lone Ranger' was the quality of the production value. The character-centric costumes, production designs and sound designs gave it a top-notch quality that you've come to expect from big budget studio films such as this. Too bad the brain doesn't match the muscles. This dud will only be remembered for being one of 2013's biggest flops.

One of the better entries into this year’s crowded fall season is ‘Prisoners’, and it will leave you on the edge of your seat. When a family man’s daughter and her friend go missing; he takes matters into his own hands while the police methodically pursue multiple leads. It’s a rather conventional story that just happens to be very well told, and never short on legitimately tense and shocking moments. But it should be noted that this is not just gripping thriller, it’s also a dense drama. It’s a drama so dense, that it easily came across as being too self serious; no thanks to those slightly excessive performances and the staggering runtime. In short, the film felt a bit overly dramatic. Hugh Jackman stands out as a devout father who, through his desperation, acts on tense misguided emotions to search for his missing daughter. However, Jake Gyllenhaal, while good, doesn't benefit as much from the subtle excesses of his character. He portrays a tattoo laden, eye twitching, heroic figure (in contrast to Jackman’s anti-heroic turn), who carefully leads the investigation for the missing girls. Director, Denis Villeneuve directs his actors consistently, and excels at constructing the tension that lingers throughout this chilly film. Atmosphere is key when it comes to bleak thrillers such as this; and who better than, cinematographer, Roger Deakins to set the dreadful tone. His lenses which captures the grey days and pitch black nights, offset by the clear rain and white snow, adds nuance and a great degree pedigree to something that could have easily been a pedestrian project. ‘Prisoners’ looked great, and through its faults came some rewards; as the performance heavy approach and the solidity of its crime story kept me invested in the characters and truly engaged with the movie on a whole. And what else can I say; its impressive ending didn't hurt one bit.

All summer long I've been raring for a summer blockbuster that’s not based on some previously established material… enter 'Pacific Rim'; and and it delivers on multiple levels. Guillermo Del Toro gives the Kaiju sub-genre a sloppy wet kiss (in spectacular fashion) in this sci-fi monster movie. From Godzilla to Gundam Wing, the spirit of Japanese monster and mecha fiction flows through this movie like a breath of fresh air (or torrential rains), without it losing its sense of originality. Destructive monsters, known as Kaijus, have emerged from an interdimensional portal on the floor of the Pacific Ocean. In resistance, the humans have developed giant robots, called Jaegers, which are piloted by two or more individuals in order share the mental load of operating such large, complex machinery. This leads to the drift, a brilliant concept, and the means by which the pilots ‘mind meld’ (so to speak) to operate the mechas together, and potentially do more. Set many years into this war, Del Toro constructs a world that feels lived in and the designs for the kaijus and jaegers were truly brilliant. Any attempt he makes to develop his characters (which is for the most part successful in my opinion) is a bonus for this spectacle. And what a spectacle it was… I haven’t been this awestruck by big, loud, action scenes in a while. These sensational battle sequences wouldn't have been possible without the bombastic visual effect and sound mix; and not to mention the exceptionally creative, and dangerous sound designs. Yes, it may have only skimmed the surface of some its dramatic potential, but I went into this for a good time, and I got something inventive and visually spectacular as well. Del Toro is a true crafts man, and he crafts the most entertaining blockbuster to hit the theaters this summer.

Sarah Polley’s poignant documentary: ‘Stories We Tell’; explores layers of myths and memories, through a series of intimate interviews, to uncover absolute truths in her very own family of storytellers. Many family members and friends were interviewed to gain different perspectives on the drama within the family; and as incite is gained the mystery surrounding Sarah’s charismatic mother’s extramarital affairs sparks questions about the identity of her true biological father. “Who the f*** cares about our family?” asks one of Sarah’s sisters in the beginning of the documentary. However, if there’s an interesting story at play (even within the context a seemingly ordinary or a blatantly complicated family) isn’t it worth being told. Words can’t express how happy I am this one was told, because it made for an intriguing and ethereal viewing experience. Polley’s meta approach to directing this doc, whereby the making of the film is as crucial a part of the story as the actual stories it's documenting, was quite inventive. Her use of super 8 footage to resemble home videos was very well spliced with the series of aforementioned interviews, thanks to fine editing by Mike Munn. It’s just a finely tuned and an excellently made documentary.

Neil Blomkamp follows up the outstanding ‘District 9’ with ‘Elysium’; and the result wasn’t as deft. Like many science fiction films, some sweet social themes were at work here. ‘Elysium’ promotes socialized health care, of which I’m an avid supporter; and it also tackles classism in a visually striking manner. With the wealthy 1% living aboard the pristine space station called Elysium where machines cure any disease, and the poverty stricken masses living on the disheveled fringes of the Earth, where they’re left to suffer; this called for some creative efforts from both the writers and the crew. Too bad the writers didn’t quite deliver on their part. The popular beef with this movie seems to be the heavy handedness of the message, and I couldn’t agree more. Being written in bold strokes, very little was left to the imagination of the viewers. I literally felt beaten and bludgeoned by the free health care message which the film so obviously endorses, and that doesn't strike me as a tactfully written piece of work. The characters at the centre of the plot were one dimensional; and this became ever clearer in the films key dramatic moment, which truly fell flat. I call this a disservice to the talented Matt Damon, Jodie Foster and Sharlto Copley; who all gave substandard performances thanks to the substandard material they were given. I didn’t completely dislike the film; the themes at work were great to digest, and the crew did fantastic work on the technical aspects of the movie. Those gritty action sequences and the designs of Earth and Elysium were brought to life through awesome visual effects and a grizzly sound palette. Overall this was a well meaning and fairly entertaining summer blockbuster, with high ambitions but a low delivery.

Swift, satirical and nicely filmed; ‘The Bling Ring’ proved to be quite a treat. The movie follows a group of privileged teens who begin robbing the homes of celebrities to feed their obsession of the celebrity lifestyle, and the glitz and glam that comes along with it. As you would expect these rich teens are as slight as their plot to rob the homes of famous people; and that’s what made this such a fascinating movie to watch. Director Sofia Coppola’s decision to add little depth to the members of the bling ring, made this character study of the shallow privileged, darkly humorous and quite substantial in its own way. The story was smartly structured and moved at a clip, and the soundtrack fit the material well. The ensemble cast did a great job, channeling their best valley girl (and guy) personas to their respective roles. Vapid materialism, reckless, self-centered and extremely irritating; the cast nailed all these characteristics perfectly. Despite the strength of the group, it’s worth noting that Emma Watson’s performance was particularly fantastic, proving that she is a serious talent to watch out for. Coppola is no stranger when it comes to making films about the rich and famous, and ‘The Bling Ring’ fits perfectly in her little collection. It may not be profound, but it’s a timely treat that delivered what was intended.

I finally got a chance to catch up with 'The East' and I have a few quick thoughts. Sophomore filmmaker Zal Batmanglij, makes a solid case with this steering thriller, but I still feel he has some room for improvement; particularly in the way he progresses and paces a story. An undercover agent increasingly questions her allegiances as she becomes close to an Eco-Terrorist group and their magnetic leader. Traditional, yet compelling; this story starts well but feels a little rushed in its second half when the characters have been established and the plot thickens. That certainly made this a tense movie, but it didn't allow for much breathing room, which would have worked well for these complex characters and the talented performers behind them. In any case, I much appreciated the movie and the ecological subject at hand, and I will be revisiting it in the near future.

Hot off the exceptional ‘Drive’, Nicolas Winding Refn’s ‘Only God Forgives’ proved to be a very disappointing follow up. Ryan Gosling plays Julian, the owner of a Thai boxing club (a cover for his drug dealing), who seems unusually uninterested with everything that is happening around him; and that includes his duty to avenge his brother’s murder. Clearly, Gosling watched countless zombie movies as prep work to get into character. In any case, the man behind it all was Winding Refn, whose vision was clear, but poorly conceived. He made a gruelingly violent movie, with very little going on beyond its bloody yet glossy surface. The plot was standard, and the narrative was not very intelligent; in addition, none of the characters are motivated by any real depth or meaning. They only act according to the way they were written; and I must say they were very thinly written. Being art directed and photographed to death, you can just imagine how visual striking this movie was; but even that isn't legitimate reason to waste your time on this lifeless piece of work. If you’re going to watch it for one thing, watch it for Kristin Scott Thomas’ scenery chewing performance as Ryan Gosling’s character’s diabolical mother, who urges him to take revenge. Her campy vampy turn, though cartoonish, was the only memorable thing on the screen, and that’s probably the best thing I can say about this movie. Too bad she didn't have more screen time.

Director J.J. Abrams may have taken a bit too long to release the second installment to his rebooted franchise, but it was worth the wait, as ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ was just as fantastic as its predecessor. All the cast members are back in this Star Trek sequel; and with the main characters already developed, the writers spend much of their time evolving the Kirk-Spock dynamic and introducing the new baddie to the scene. When a member of Star Fleet goes rogue and carries out a series of attacks on the Organization, Kirk is charged with conducting an intergalactic manhunt for the terrorist. However, the deeper he goes the more he discovers the true nature of our terrorist and the true shades of Star Fleet. From its high stakes beginning to its higher stakes end, absolutely no time was wasted in the progression of the story, in fact there was very little time for air. Abrams move from set piece to set piece swiftly; and plot layers, gave way to more plot layers and propulsive action scenes. While this may seem scary in writing, the movie flowed smoothly, and the delightful characters remained central. To be honest, what makes ‘Star Trek into Darkness’ such a solid sci-fi action movie wasn't the plethora of visual effects and action scenes; it was the characters at the center of it. A character-driven movie is always more appealing than an effects-driven one and this movie was arguably more of the former. Initially, I questioned the casting choice of Benedict Cumberbatch, but there’s no denying the strength of his performance as our duplicitous new villain. The Wrath of Fans should probably be at ease. I must admit, filmmakers could have paused and explore some of the thematic ideas of this sci-fi adventure a bit further; but that’s a fairly minor complaint for a summer blockbuster this smart and entertaining.

Its great seeing my favorite literary character brought to the screen by a director I greatly admire, but I can’t say the sum is equal to the e parts. The Great Gatsby was a decent film, there was a lot that I liked and a lot that I just flat out didn’t like; all which stems back to the way it was directed. Like all Baz Luhrmann directed films, Baz Luhrman is the star of the show. His whimsical, almost animated, way of telling a story shines bright in this picture; from those wild camera angles, startling soundtrack, hasty editing, and flamboyant set designs and not to mention the eccentric performances he extracts from his cast. While much of his flare worked well for those party sequences, I felt the film itself was far too off-the-wall for its own good. I am hardly convinced that this was the direction he should have taken, but at no point in time did it leave me bored. Do not fret too much, the visuals did not get in the way of the romantic aspects of the story; as it was delivered to the screen in a respectable manner. What I was really bothered by was the way some of the intricacies of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s exquisite story were taken away, in favor of style and visual intricacies. I believe this hindered the dark social commentary on the wealthy and the nature their moral detachment; which was quite disappointing. But, what can I say… such style! Catherine Martin’s fantastic costumes and sets were characters of their own. Clearly my view on the film and the way it was made is very much mixed; but one thing I appreciated without a doubt was Leonardo DiCaprio’s performance as Gatsby. Gatsby’s bold attempt to reach for that green light and regain his love, Daisy, is noble yet foolish. However, you can’t help but relate to this character, as it’s sometimes easier to hold on to hope than to let go completely. While not perfect, DiCaprio made a fine Gatsby in my opinion.

‘Mud’ was a satisfying film about two fourteen year old boys who help a fugitive evade bounty hunters and reunite with his true love. While the plot stood out, the movie worked more as a rich character study about one of the boys, Ellis, and how his recent predicaments and fractured home teach him a series of valuable lessons that he can take with him for the rest of his life. Whether it be his marginalized father, divorce ready mother, or the well meaning fugitive, Mud; everybody has an input in his development. Matthew McConaughey gives an outstanding performance as the titular character, called Mud, who acts as a mentor for the young boys, while trying to battle his own demons in his life. McConaughey’s portrayal of a hard edged killer with a rather naïve outlook on love, made the character both engrossing and sympathetic. Also of note was Tye Sheridan who convincingly performs the mental growth of our young character, Ellis; as the actions of all the adults in his life mold him into the man he will one day become. This was a rock solid movie that tackles themes of love, embracing change and ultimately accepting the realities of life, even the harsh ones. It was a touching film without being sappy in any way, shape or form.

I am a huge fan of Richard Linklater’s ‘Before’ Films, and the third installment, ‘Before Midnight’, met my high expectations. We saw the inception of Jesse and Celine’s relationship, and have made a few brief visits ever since. While the first two films flirted with certain romanticism, whether it be chance encounter or the existence of a soul mate, this one was much darker in its approach. It does away with some of the fanciful aspects of a relationship and chooses to engage in some of the harsher sides of it. Yes, the relationship is in jeopardy as Jesse’s (well played by Ethan Hawke) desire to be with his son in the States conflicts with Celine’s opportunity to take a job in government. This is only the beginning, as their conflicts lead to more arguments; and all this ultimately leads to insight into the true state of their relationship. The performances were very naturalistic which is probably one the most defining aspects of these films, the collaboration between Linklater and our two stars (who also co-wrote the script) are spot on; and Julie Delpy has never been better as Celine; she channels an even more manic behavior into the character, this time around. To say that this film is about people talking is only telling a third... no, a tenth of the story. The conversations between our characters were witty, absorbing and gives great perspectives into the complexities of love and marriage. Jesse and Celine’s now troubled relationship started from the page, and with that said the screenplay was simply exquisite, and is worthy of at least a nomination next Oscar season. This is a fine film that (possibly) concludes an excellent trilogy.

It’s always good to feast your eyes on a pulp inspired film every now and then; and while Danny Boyle’s ‘Trance’ is much thinner than his morehis more recent outings, it proves to be a trippy good time. The movie stars James McAvoy, as a fine art auctioneer, who attempts to double-cross the thieves he partnered with in a heist, and pilfer the painting himself. However, after a blow to the head he forgets where he hid the painting and the band of thieves, lead by Vincent Cassel, are not very happy. Twisty isn’t it? And like all good pieces of pulp entertainment, you need a sultry femme fatale to foil the plan of both our misguided hero and scheming villain. Enter Rosario Dawson as Elizabeth, the psychiatrist hired by Franck (Cassel) to probe Simon’s (McAvoy) mind through hypnosis, in order to find out where the painting is hidden. Intriguing isn’t it!? While interesting, the plot was quite convoluted; and as the story progresses the water becomes murkier, making it difficult to distinguish hypnosis induced dreams from reality. This was clearly an over indulgent move on the part of the writer, who attempts to add complexity to the puzzle but lost his way in the process. But thankfully he found his way eventually; and one could even argue that in the end everything adds up, even if it was all a bit of a stretch. And as I implied earlier, all this adds a nice dose of intrigue to the plot. Boyle’s direction is stylish as usual, and complements must be given to the dreamy cinematography and most of all, the edgy film editing. Jon Harris’ editing job was incredibly complex, as it was cool. ‘Trance’ may not be a particularly memorable film, but it worked for me. The positives outweighed the negatives (if even slightly so), and I enjoyed every minute of it.

I’m a little late to the party, but better late than never for this clever piece of work. ‘Side Effects’, Steven Soderbergh’s final theatrical release, was a mesmerizing film that works as both a thriller and a social commentary on society's obsession with prescription medication. Without giving anything away; the film follows a woman and her psychiatrist, as their lives begin to change after a drug he prescribed to her yields some undesirable side effects. Rooney Mara and Jude Law did good jobs in their respective roles, but my favorite of the cast was Catherine Zeta-Jones who gave a chilly performance as a rivaling psychiatrist who adds multiple layers to the film's plot. Soderbergh directs this picture as effectively as possible; adding tight thrills and surprises, in tandem with a down tempo atmosphere which gave the film a noirish feel. Thomas Newman's score was also effective, adding a nice touch to the picture. While Soderbergh and his fine cast all did nice work the star of this show was probably Scott Z. Burns for his deliciously deceptive screenplay, which constructs an idea and gradually evolves it into an entirely new beast. His script blue prints all those twists, and successfully draws a band of interesting characters. While the twists and turns is one of the film’s biggest assets; it, ironically, may also be the movie's biggest downfall, as it doesn't allow for great repeat viewing. But fret not. As it stands, Side Effects was a rock solid movie, that most should appreciate quite easily.

Man of Steel is finally here and what can I say… it was as entertaining as it was disappointing. In this film Clarke Kent seeks answers about t his home world, Krypton, and tries to grapple with his responsibilities here on Earth. Of-course, while all this is going on, the evil (and programmed) General Zod threatens Earth’s very existence. The first part of the film is filled with some excellent Clarke Kent and Krypton back stories that were elevated by the performances of Kevin Costner (Jonathon Kent) and Russell Crowe (Jor-El); the two father’s of this film. I must give Henry Cavill a hand for maintaining the win streak of fantastic Superman performances. While Christopher Reeve captured the charm of Superman and Brandon Routh did a slightly brooding interpretation, Cavill excelled at capturing the physicality of the Man of Steel. With all these high marks remaining constant; the beautiful introduction gave way to bloated, explosive action sequences. The action was unhinged and needed some serious taming, because it didn’t afford the filmmakers anytime to develop our other characters or elevate the plot. And the story itself, as effective as it may be, didn’t really cover any new ground. This Zack Snyder is a director who can always create a nice looking film, the world of Krypton in particularly is brought beautifully to the screen. He’s also always able to focus on those minute visual details like those frame-for-frame shots from Watchmen and 300 that were taken straight from the comic book. In this case I-Hop restaurants and other familiar settings litter the background of every scene to make the audience aware of the ‘real world’ setting in which this movie takes place. These are all nice splashes, but ultimately he is never able to look at the big picture: Story, Plot and Character! These are the things that truly determine the strength of a film, everything else is secondary. It’s unfortunate that the action and aesthetics took precedence, but this was decent summer entertainment that should be seen on the big screen.

I saw Iron Man 3 last night, and first of all; it’s really disappointing to see a film series that started out so strongly reach to the unenviable level of mild entertainment, if even so. "A piping hot mess", as Tony Stark would put it. The tonal shifts, absurd plotting and the sheer level of disrespect for the source material (for all the geeks who care) made this summer blockbuster a piping hot mess, indeed. Our new director on board is Shane Black and I must admit he did pretty good job in the way of characterizations in the first half of this flick. Tony's post traumatic stress disorder, from the events of 'The Avengers', was developing well. But, as the second half rolled in, things drastically change from being a character-centric event to a bloated non-stop action fest, which, mind you, wasn't even creatively staged. There seems to be a belief that more plot equals better story, but that bombardment of ineffective plot twists only regressed the story at hand. Being so focused on surprising the audience, I don’t think the writers were ever fully capable of telling a solid story and polishing the muddy motives of our paper thin villain. And I can’t leave here without mentioning those perennial bursts of “humor” which only functioned to pull the audience out of key dramatic moments. Overall the movie relied so heavily on build up but ultimately undid itself in several ways. This really showed how hollow this shiny hunk of metal really was.

With the seemingly aimless direction, heavenly soundtrack and slow development, this is a typical Terrence Malick film. However, unlike his previous efforts, this one felt far more removed. ‘To the Wonder’ is an art film that presents the cycle of romantic relationships; from its beautiful beginnings to its sometime tragic end, and back around to the beautiful new beginnings. I take it that this was meant to be a study rather than something plot driven, and that the overall experience should be the ultimate “pay-off”; however, there seems to be something missing here. Unlike Sean Penn’s grief for the death of his brother in ‘The Tree of Life’ and Collin Farrell’s adoration for Pocahontas in ‘The New World’, we didn't feel the love that the characters in ‘To the Wonder’ presumably shared for each other. We were never able to immerse ourselves in the feelings of these characters; but were simply relegated to being bystanders looking at glimpses of the relationships as it unfolded and dissolved. Sometimes it’s easier to respect the artist than the art on display, and that is the case here. I have to give this film a mediocre grade despite being a huge fan of Malick. This one just wasn't doing it for me; and in the end, it was too emotionally unsatisfying. One thing you’re guaranteed to take away from this film is Emmanuelle Lubezki’s splendid cinematography. His sun kissed lighting and eloquent camera movements were what kept me engaged most of the time.