Double Feature Review: Birdman & Whiplash.

Another double feature weekend. This weekend was a real treat as I checked out two highly anticipated films that have been getting some real awards buzz, Birdman and Whiplash.

Birdman
D: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
W: Armando Bo, Alexander Dinelas, Jr., Nicolas Giacobone, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
S: Michael Keaton, Zach Galifianakis, Edward Norton, Andrea Riseborough, Amy Ryan, Emma Stone, Naomi Watts

First up is Birdman. No, not the 60s Hanna-Barbera cartoon or Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law. While this movie does involve a superhero character named Birdman, this movie is revolved around a washed up actor named Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) who is attempting to rejuvenate his career by producing, writing, directing, and starring in a Broadway play. As opening night approaches not only does Thomson have to deal with an egotistical actor (Edward Norton), his troubled daughter (Emma Stone), and countless production problems, he also has to battle his own demons and ego.

Right off the bat I must say that the way this movie was filmed was absolutely amazing. I have to give credit to all these actors, directors, producers, and other crew members for this. The movie is essentially shot in a series of single takes. Long, continuous, takes. I heard somewhere that Inarritu wanted to create a feeling that is similar to a stage play and if that was the case it succeeded. Matter of fact, I'd pay good money to see this on stage. Mainly because I'd want to see HOW they do it.

But obviously the real highlight and the one thing that has been drawling a lot of people's attention is the performances, more specifically Michael Keaton. Seeing Keaton again on the big screen in a leading role is an awesome site. To me, this actor, is a truly great actor. Keaton can take on any role and make it his own. Just take a look at his resume, he was Beetlejuice, Batman, provided the voice of Ken in Toy Story 3 (2010, dir. Lee Unkrich), and has even performed Shakespeare on the big screen. Never question his qualifications. He is able to display every emotion that is required of him and more. Frustration, anxious, qualm, quiet, collected, enraged, etc. etc. If Keaton doesn't at the very least get an Oscar nomination, I'll be upset. 

Of course he isn't the only person to give a great performance. Edward Norton fits in almost too well as an egoistical, arrogant, and pretentious actor. Emma Stone as always is wonderful. But one performer who remains unsung with this film is Naomi Watts as Lesley, a first time Broadway actress in the show and we see her battling her own fears and anxiety and her relationship with Norton's character. She is great in the film. 

Now there is one aspect that a couple fellow critics have found troubling and that is Lindsay Duncan's character who is a theater critic. While every character in the film is given some sort of depth and understanding no matter who despicable they can get she is the only character not given something outside of stereotypes of critics. But the more I thought about it, I don't think she's an actual person. No, she's just an amalgamation of Keaton and Norton's character's fears. Both of these characters are so afraid of being called fake or irrelevant that it has gotten to the point where they've created a fake critic. Given how Keaton's character mainly keeps seeing random stuff, mainly a younger version of himself in the Birdman costume, it wouldn't surprise me if this critic character wasn't an actual person. 

I think the only people who given less of a character are the paparazzi and reports like TMZ. Which... yeah go right ahead I don't think anyone is going to be that upset about that. 

This film has a lot going for it and is something that has to be seen on the big screen to be appreciated. 

But now onto the second film, Whiplash

Whiplash

D: Damien Chazelle

W: Damien Chazelle

S: Miles Teller, J.K. Simmons

A young 19-year-old music student named Andrew Neyman (future Mr. Fantastic Miles Teller) is enrolled at the fictional Shaffer Conservatory in New York where he hopes to become the next Buddy Rich. He soon gets to join the studio jazz band as an alternate drummer under the direction of the infamous Terence Fletcher (J.K. Simmons). Why is he infamous? Because this instructor will chew up out, insult you, and even slap you if even do slightly out of tune. This guy can go from comforting and inviting, to being psychotic and furious. This guy would make R. Lee Ermey in Full Metal Jacket (1987, dir. Stanley Kubrick) sweat with fear. 

This guy pushes Andrew so hard and warps his mind to the point where Andrew cuts off social and family ties, and starts living in a practice room where he practices almost none stop. He pushes himself so hard to the point to where his hands bleed. Andrew himself represents the extremes a person will go to when pushing themselves to achieve something, especially in the arts. We see him cry, we see him dripping with sweat, and obvious he bleeds himself. His blood gets all over his hands, all over his sticks, and even on the drums. And while Teller does a decent job in the role, the real highlight performance goes to J.K. Simmons.

Simmons has always been a great presence in movies. Whether it's portraying a psychiatrist in Law &Order, or playing Peter Parker's boss in Spider-Man he is always amazing. With this film, he is amazing and he is truly, TRULY terrifying. I'm still debating as to whether he or Jake Gyllenhaal in Nightcrawler (2014, dir. Dan Gilroy) gets the prize of most terrifying performance of the year. 

I'm sure those of you who have seen the trailer have seen some pretty terrifying behavior from the guy, well that's nothing compared to what's actually seen on screen. Trust me, you'll be terrifying of him in every scene.

One thing this film does that I think will make it last throughout the ages is that this film makes us ask serious question involving art and the pursuit of art: What is the limit to pursuing a dream? If you're going to push someone how far is too far? Is okay to nourish someone? Is it just pandering to say 'good job'? Do the ends justify the means? Is it a good idea to cut ties? 

This is a great film. And I'll say for Simmons what I said about Keaton, if he doesn't get at least an Oscar nomination, I'll be upset. 

Any thoughts? What did you think of the films? Share your thoughts in the comment sections.

Be sure to the like the blog on Facebook

and also follow me on Twitter at DocJohn90. 

Big Hero 6 & Interstellar: A Double Feature Review Part 2

Thanks for checking out part two as I take a look at Disney's latest animated adventure Big Hero 6.

Big Hero 6

D: Don Hall, Chris Williams

W: Robert L. Baird, Dan Gerson, Jordan Roberts

S: Scott Adsit, Ryan Potter, Daniel Henney, T.J. Miller, Jamie Chung, Damon Wayan, Jr., Genesis Rodriguez

Based on the Marvel comic book series of the same name by Man of Action studios, Big Hero 6 tells the story of 14 year old prodigy Hiro Hamada (Ryan Potter) who forms a group of tech based heroes with a group friends and his big balloon buddy Baymax (Scott Adsit). 

Let me get this off my chest, I love Baymax. Much like Groot in Guardians of the Galaxy or Chewbacca in Star Wars, Baymax is someone who we would all want in our life. A charming, funny, and loyal companion who will stick with you to the very end. Baymax got the biggest laughs from me, there's no doubt about that. Seriously, you will love this guy. 

But now onto the plot. I won't lie that this movie does have cliches in it. Without revealing too much there is stuff like the hero's tragic background, the supporting characters kind of fall into archetypes, etc. etc. But the film has enough charm and character that I'm more than willing to forgive it. 

Sometimes the problem with a kid as a main character is that sometimes they'll be either too innocent/wonder struck or they'll be too quirky and "radical". But Hiro comes off as an actual kid. He's starts off as a little arrogant, full of himself, and since he graduated high school at a young age he thinks going to college would be pointless. But after seeing his brother's (Daniel Henney) school and friends he decides he wants to go. 

The one thing I really liked about this film was that it handles mature subject matters in a way that isn't pandering or sugar coats anything. Throughout a good chunk of the film Hiro is going through grief over a loss he has in the movie and Baymax, who was originally designed to be Hiro's own personal healthcare robot by his brother, attempts to help him through his grief. There also isn't some big long monologue about feelings and how friendship is magical and blah, blah, blah. No it lets the emotions come out naturally and gives a proper portrayal of it. Weird how the animated movie with a balloon robot in a fiction city called San Fransokyo has more believable emotions. 

Another thing I loved about the film was one of the messages it conveys; looking at a different angle. Earlier in the film when Hiro is trying to come up with an idea for a contest, his brother tells him to look at it from a different angle. Through the rest of the film the film has Hiro and the others get out their situations by looking at things differently. Whether it is getting out of a tight spot during a fight, or an emotional one. Which makes a big difference when compared to the villain of the film who it turns out his big motivation is revenge, he is blinded by this to the point where he only has a mind set on one thing and one thing only. 

 I'm not going to reveal who the villain is but it is a good twist with plenty of excellent foreshadowing.

So yeah in case you can't tell, I dug the heck out of this film and I highly recommend it. 

Agree? Disagree? Share your thoughts.

And be sure to like the blog on Facebook

Big Hero 6 & Interstellar: A Double Feature Review Part 1

This week I check out Christopher Nolan's latest film, the science fiction epic Interstellar, and I check out Disney's latest animated adventure Big Hero 6. 

Interstellar

D: Christopher Nolan

W: Christopher Nolan, Jonathan Nolan

S: Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Michael Caine, Bill Irwin, Ellen Burstyn

The extremely popular director Christopher Nolan has decided that for his next motion picture to go out into the final frontier, SPACE. In the not to distance future (next Sunday, A.D.) the Earth has basically entered another dust bowl era as the environment makes it harder for people to harvest food and to live on in general. With the danger of extinction staring them in the face, a group of explorers go out beyond our solar system to find a new place for mankind to call home. Will they find it? Will they be able to return home and save the human race?

Now my history with Nolan has been a complicated one. While many find the man bold, innovative, and totally awesome, I have found just okay. Now that's not to say I think he's a "bad" director because he isn't. From a technical aspect he is great. He has a great visual style, he can direct an excellent action scene, and there are great themes of lies, deception, and responsibilities in his films. Of course one can't forget the some of excellent performances he can get in his films, the cliched example being Heath Ledger's creepy performance as The Joker in The Dark Knight. But my problems with him come with his execution of the movie. I feel like his dialogue, while funny and good from time to time, can be forced and almost unnatural. The plotting sometimes can have more holes than Bonnie & Clyde's death car. Then there are times when serious moments come off as rather silly, again the cliched example being Christian Bale's grizzly bear voice in Dark Knight films.

But what about this film? How does Interstellar hold up in my book? Well, from all of his stuff I've seen of his (the stuff he's directed I mean) this is his weakest, at the same level as Dark Knight Rises in my book. 

One of the big problems for me, outside of the extreme length, was that this movie was trying to be a hard science fiction film but then falls into what is called "science fantasy".

Now, this isn't a problem, many films/books/tv shows are technically science fantasy. Star Wars, Doctor Who, the books of Jules Verne, a good chunk of comic books stuff. But with Interstellar it's obvious that Nolan and company wanted to make this a completely serious sci-fi film, along the lines of  2001: A Space Odyssey (a film which Nolan got a lot of influence from),  War of the Worlds, Gravity, and even the Planet of the Apes films. Either one is fine but if you're going to do one make sure you stick to your guns. 

To get a better idea of these concepts check of Nash Bozard of Radio Dead Air's article which tackles the same subject: The Kid’s Table of Sci-Fi

This film starts out fine, it seems like something like this could happen, but as the film progress it then starts to going lop sided. Non-Spoiler Example: When the ship takes off from Earth when see what it take to just get a ship into orbit, something that's not too far off from how it's done in real life. But then every other time the ship takes off it becomes the Millennium Falcon and just blasts off. Now that's not the worst of it, without revealing too much it then starts to go into 'power of love' level type of stuff. You know the kind of stuff that made say to myself, "Really?!" Also they have, and I'm not kidding, a talking robot who has a humor chip installed. So yes, the have a sassy robot sidekick. Sadly he does not say, "bite my shiny metal ass." So it makes it hard to take this as serious or "adult".

 So, okay, the film wants to be more emotional based instead of science based, okay there's nothing wrong with that. I mean that's the whole concept of The Force in Star Wars, so why not? The problem is that the emotions come off as forced, to me at least. A good chunk of the emotional scenes come from the main character, the ship's pilot named Cooper (Matthew McConaughey), and his family. For the most part it's fine if not a little cliched, but then later on when Cooper is in space and after an small exploration of a planet a lot of time has passed as indicated through video messages from his now older son, Tom (Casey Affleck), and one of the crew members (David Gyasi) telling them it has been 23 years. As soon as the messages start playing we see Cooper bawling his eyes out. I have no doubt that a mission like this and getting a message from your now older child would be upsetting, especially since he hasn't been there to see him get married and have a child. But it's just so sudden to the point it comes off like "THIS IS EMOTIONAL! THIS IS A VERY EMOTIONAL MOMENT!" For me Cooper should have seen the messages without being told how much time has passed then slowly he loses control of his emotions. Then come moments that just get bogged down in Nolan's overly expository dialogue such as the ending but I don't want to spoil too much. 

Then comes some storytelling aspects. One of the biggest problems for me is that Nolan tries to put a lot of his usual themes of lies in it when it doesn't make sense. SPOILER WARNING. At one point the teams land on a planet where an explorer from a previous expedition is found, Dr. Mann (Matt Damon) betrays our heroes who have decided to return home instead of continuing the mission. It doesn't work for me because his plot line doesn't add to much the film. Then there's another one involving Michael Caine's character that to me doesn't make any sense. I'll hold off on the reveal for that one.

Now I've been doing a lot of criticizing, but there are still some good stuff in the film. First, some of the performances. Nolan always has an amazing cast in his films.  Not only does he get a lot of popular actors of today he also gets actors who sadly haven't been as mainstream popular as they should be in my book. One performance I enjoyed came from the awesome and underrated John Lithgow as Murph's grandfather. But the best is a three way tie between Mackenzie Foy, Jessica Chastain, and Ellen Burstyn who all respectively play Murph at different parts of her life. 

As I stated earlier Nolan knows how to film a movie. The cinematography and imagery in the film is dazzling and worth a view just on its own. 

So in the end did I personally enjoy it? Not really, I thought this could have been a lot better. But I'm sure if you're a big time fan of Nolan's work then you'll dig the hell out of this film. I'm sure I'm not going to be able to persuade you. 

Since this review went a little longer than I thought I'll make a separate post for my Big Hero 6 review. 

Feel free to share your thoughts in comments, share the review, and like the blog on Facebook.

Also, if you disagree with me please give me more than "you're just a hater" or "you just didn't get it" or just straight up insults. I've seen that comment come up one too many times in negative reviews of Nolan films. 

Halloween (1978): The Scariest Movie Ever Made?

Halloween (1978):

D: John Carpenter

W: John Carpenter, Debra Hill

S: Donald Pleasence, Jamie Lee Curtis, P.J. Soles, Nancy Loomis

When I was fourteen-years-old, I had reached the point where I felt I was officially too old for trick or treating, so I decided to stay in for the night and checked out AMC’s horror movie marathon.

This was the year they stepped up their game. In previous years they had only shown stuff like “The Creature from the Black Lagoon” or “The Wolf Man,” but this year they started showing films like “Friday the 13th,” “Fright Night,” and the 1978 horror classic “Halloween.”

Watching the TV promo for it, I thought, in a typical “wannabe” macho tone, “Oh wow, look a guy in a mask. How scary. Whatever. Bring it on.”

Two hours later I was in my bedroom with all the lights on and my Red Ryder BB Gun in hand. To this day John Carpenter’s “Halloween” remains one of the scariest movies ever made.

It was this movie that helped set the standards for many future movies.  It was also one of the movies that created the slasher genre, but this film did it best. One reason why I think this film works above a lot of others is that it had a low budget.

When people hear about a low budgeted movie, they automatically think of either cheesy B-movies or quirky indie films, but this little motion picture does not fall in either category. Its low budget helps give it an eerie and scary atmosphere, primarily in the night scenes. Then adding in the “blank, pale, emotionless face, and the blackest eyes” of the villain, Michael Myers, and you’ve got a legitimately scary motion picture, maybe the scariest of them all.

What also makes the film work is its setting, a regular suburban neighborhood. A lot of slasher films will take place out in the woods in a cabin or something similar, but this film’s location offers a sense that it could happen anywhere. Also given how it’s Halloween, a night not only chills of but also mischief, obviously, when someone is screaming bloody murder, no one in the film is likely to take it seriously.

There are many other great elements in the movie. The soundtrack, composed by the film’s director John Carpenter, is still haunting and memorable. Also the performances from Donald Pleasance and then-newcomer Jamie Lee Curtis are spectacular.

I could go on about how much I love these characters and this film, but I’ll let you experience it for yourself.

So on All Hallow’s Eve, as the sun is setting, pop some popcorn, turn off the light, settle in and remember, “The boogieman is coming.”

This review can also be found athttp://www.ucba-activist.com/news/view.php/852087/Movies-The-Scariest-Ever-Made

Share your own thoughts on this film or any other film you find to be scary.

Be sure to like the Blog's Facebook page.

Thank you for reading and sharing.

Fury is a brutal look at an untold chapter of World War II

Fury

D: David Ayer

W: David Ayer

S: Brad Pitt, Shia LaBeouf, Logan Lerman, Michael Pena, Jon Bernthal, Jason Isaacs, Scott Eastwood

The director of End of Watch releases his second 2014 film (the other being Sabotage, which I haven't seen). In Fury the audience follows a tank squad during the final days of World War II as they get a new recuite (Logan Lerman) and have to deal with lingering Nazi SS forces and at one point have to make a final stand. 

If you've seen my Top 15 World War II Films article you can gather I'm a big WWII movie fan, especially ones that are a little bit more on the gritty side. In this movie we get a story about an aspect of the war that is very rarely, if ever, covered, the tanks. Usually when tanks are involved in World War II movies they're usually the mechanized cavalry that comes in to rescue the soldiers at the last minute. But in this film the audience gets a detailed, intense, and  brutal look at what these guys have gone through, and what war can do to a person.

The main story involves the leader of the tank squad, Wardaddy (Brad Pitt), as he helps break in their newest member, Norman (Lerman), while at the same time he tries to keep a sense of humanity in him. It's strongly hinted at that before Norman came along that this tank crew, consisting of Wardaddy the C.O., Gordo the driver (Michael Pena), Coon-Ass the loader (Jon Bernthal), and Bible the gunner (Shia LaBeouf), had been with each other since the beginning of the war. So a big chunk of the first half is making sure Norman, who was not trained as a tanker but as a typist, gets how much of a responsibility he has as the co-driver. 

This is emphasized in the film by just how many of the tanks get destroyed. The tanks the Americans had, Shermans, where easy to take out by the German's more advance tank, the Tigers. So it is miraculous that Wardaddy's crew has managed to last as long as they did. One way we can tell Norman's non-soldier like mentality early on is when he and Wardaddy first meet. Wardaddy asks, "What's your name?" To which Norman replies with just his regular name. He can tell Norman hasn't seen any action or done anything involving tank work because he hasn't been given a tank name. 

While members of the squad do fall into typical war movie archetypes they are flesh out enough to where it isn't a problem. They do at times come off as despicable but given how much it is hinted at what they've been through together it is almost understandable. 

As I stated early Wardaddy seems to at some points try to retain any parts of humanity in him and in Norman especially. There's an extensive scene where the Wardaddy and Norman go into a German home and basically try to recreate a home environment. We see Wardaddy has hidden eggs that he wants the two female German residences to fix, and he even gets a shave and washes up. But by the end he does realize that there isn't much of chance of him adapted to the world properly after the war. This is hinted at by him later referring to the tanks as home.

As for Norman, he does have a tough time adapting to the war mentality and he does eventually give in and even get his own tank name, Machine, "He's a drinkin', f**kin', killin' maching!"  And even though he gets more comfortable with his role in the tank he still isn't at the same level as the others and Wardaddy sees that. 

As I stated earlier this is a film by David Ayer who as did the spectacular 2012 film End of Watch. The real highlight of the film was the chemistry between the two main characters, portrayed by Pena and Jake Gyllenhaal. In this film we get the privilege of seeing similar sparkling chemistry between the tank members. Each one gives a great performance with the two highlights being Shia LaBeouf, yes really, and from Jon Bernthal, who you Walking Dead fans would know better as Shane. 

Finally I'd like to talk about the action scenes, we get intense, fast paced, and wonderfully executed fight scenes. The best one was a tank duel between three Sherman and a Tiger tank. We see how intense it is, we see them try to outrun their gun swinging around to kill them, we see the Tiger take out two of the tanks (three actually but one was destroyed early on) and we see why tank battles are so intense. I also have to give props to the sound people with how they handled it the sound design. 

I highly recommend this film. If you have a weak stomach for violence then I understand why you wouldn't want to see it but this has enough character and wit behind it that it should appeal to anyone. This is without a doubt going to be on my best of 2014 list. 

(All photos belong to their respective sources)

Have an opinion about the film? Share it in the comment section.

If you enjoyed this review check out the blog's Facebook page for more movie related posts. 

Thank you for reading. 

The Boxtrolls is a Fun Treat.

The Boxtrolls
D: Graham Annable, Anthony Stacchi
W: Irena Brignull, Adam Pava
S: Isaac Hempstead-Wright, Elle Fanning, Ben Kingsley, Toni Collette, Jared Harris, Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Richard Ayoade, Tracy Morgan

From the studio that brought you ParaNorman (2012, dir. Chris Butler, Sam Fell) and Coraline (2009, dir. Henry Selick) comes another delightful and fun movie, The Boxtrolls. 

When night falls on the town of Cheesebridge a mysterious and mischievous group of creatures, the eponymous Boxtrolls, roam the city at night and collect random bits of garbage to construct random gizmos and thingamabobs. Unfortunately all is not well in Cheesebridge as Archibald Snatcher (Ben Kingsley) wrongly tells the leader of Cheesebridge, Lord Portley-Rind (Jared Harris), that the Boxtrolls have captured and eaten a small child and murdered his father. The reason? So he can rise the social ranks and become a 'White Hat.'  This of course turns out to be false as the baby turns out to be fine and is raised by trolls after his father mysteriously disappears. The boy, named Eggs (Isaac Hempstead-Wright), along with the Lord Portley-Rind's daughter Winnie (Elle Fanning), attempts to right the wrongs and clear the Boxtroll's name.

Like a lot of studio Laika's movies it deals with the theme of outsiders and misfits. In this case not only is the main character a misfit but also the villain, with Snatcher wanting to belong to the higher ups by any means necessary. He even cross dresses as a woman named Madame Frou Frou. Why? I'm guessing because he'll do whatever it takes to belong to the upper society *shudders*.

This movie also ties in the topic of nature vs nurture. With  people assuming the Boxtrolls are evil because they aren't the same nature as the humans so they think their natural way of thinking is more savage. Whereas they think they're are just the good guys without question which is brought up by two of Snatcher's henchmen, Mr. Trout (Nick Frost) and Mr. Pickle (IT Crowd's Richard Ayoade). By the way, these two along with the third henchmen, Mr. Gristle (Tracy Morgan) get a lot of laughs.

Not only is the film great in the story telling department but it's also great from a technical and artistic standpoint. I have nothing but respect for anyone who does stop motion animation, because this style requires a lot of time and patience, there's a great bonus clip during the credits that show how long it takes to get a small scene filmed. They do a great job at building and showing the world of the Boxtrolls in an excellent about detailed design.

If there are any negative aspects about the film is that some character development isn't as strong, mainly the plot line involving Lord Portley-Rind and his daughter's relationship.

The film is wonderful treat with some splendid comedic moments and enough charm to satisfy both kids and adults. Give it a watch. Also, if you haven't seen Corlaine or ParaNorman you totally should!

Rest in Peace Geoffrey Holder (1930-2014)

The world has lost another charismatic actor and another great Bond villain, Trinidad born actor Geoffrey Holder passed away on October 5th at the age of 84. Mr. Holder has had a wide and diverse career from directing stage shows to being a villain in one of the most beloved movie franchises.

My first experience with Mr. Holder was in a now rather obscure movie, Doctor Dolittle (1966, dir. Richard Fleischer) where he played the leader of Sea-Star Island named Willie Shakespeare, yes really. He was able to portray this rather silly character with grace and dignity, which given how he was subjected to casual racism from a co-star's then wife I give him all the more credit.

But without a doubt his most notable role was that of Baron Samedi in Roger Moore's debut Bond film, Live and Let Die (1973, dir. Guy Hamilton). I'll be honest and I remember this guy a lot more than I do the main villain, and that is not me disrespecting Yaphet Kotto. Holder's 6' 6" stance and  memorable laugh will make anyone and everyone stop and stare in amazement. I also wouldn't be surprised if his design helped inspire the design for Dr. Facilier in The Princess and the Frog (2009, dir. Ron Clements, John Musker). 

Holder has also had a remarkable career on the stage as well. He starred as the title character in a modernized version of William Shakespeare's Othello, and was the stage director and costume designer of the 1975 production of The Wiz. He received two Tony Awards for his work in the latter. 

Rest in Peace Mr. Holder, you will be sorely missed.