Showing posts with label Amy Adams. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Amy Adams. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

Her (2013)

Do you like hearing people have awkward phone sex?  How about stories showing people falling in love with inanimate objects?  Do you like movies set in the future, yet everyone dresses like 1970's grandparents?  Well then Her is the movie for you!

Clearly I'm oversimplifying when talking about Her, as it's anything but a simple movie.  Her is one of those unusual films that oscillates from being brilliant to just plain weird.  This probably shouldn't come as a surprise to people familiar with writer/director Spike Jonze previous work, especially where Charlie Kaufman was involved.

Her is about Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix), who is currently going through a divorce with Catherine (Rooney Mara).  They had a long, loving relationship, but drifted apart and Theodore's having trouble letting go.  He buys a new, artificially intelligent operating system, mainly to help organize his life.  The OS introduces itself as Samantha (voiced by Scarlett Johansson), and explains how she's designed to grow and evolve.  As Samantha learns more about the world, they continue to bond and eventually develop an emotional relationship.

Based on the premise of the film, I was worried this was going to be another Lars and the Real Girl, which might as well been called "Entire Town Indulges a Sad Man with Mental Health Issues."  Fortunately, Theodore is more grounded than that.  He's actually a fairly normal guy, just a little introverted.  I still had a bit of an issue with someone falling in love with an AI, but after I thought about it for a bit, is it really all that different from a long distance or exclusively online relationship?  I've watched people have relationships where all the interaction was over the phone or at opposite ends of a keyboard.  Either way there's no physical intimacy.  Is that a requirement for love?  Who's to say that's not the direction we're headed.  Followers of my blog are probably aware of my dislike for online dating.  I share a similar dislike for long distance relationships.  I feel like some of the time it's a way of having an easy relationship where there's not as much at stake.  If things get too difficult, you can just end it without much complication.  This is actually a point brought up during the film, so I appreciated the fact they took this on.

Another interesting point Her made was how all of this technology is actually making us less connected.  In many scenes of the film, you see people walking around, talking into their PDA/phone devices, not even looking up at people immediately around them.  We see this all the time now where people stare into their phones, so zoned out that they bump into people, trip over stuff, or worse.  Recently, I was a bar and noticed that every single person sitting in the bar area was looking into their phone rather than interact with anyone around them.  Don't get me wrong, I've been guilty of this, but it's one of the reasons why I'm trying to move away from stuff like Facebook and Twitter.  It's great to be able to connect with people that live far away or you wouldn't have access to otherwise, but I think our future will be much better off if everyone steps away from their computers, puts down their phones, and works on interacting with those around them a little more.

There were a few little things I found distracting.  One of which was whatever Theodore's job was.  He's some kind of letter writing surrogate, but I never got exactly what he did or what the purpose was.  I didn't feel it was explained all that well, and normally I wouldn't have paid it any mind, but since there are a lot of scenes of him at work and interacting with co-workers (mainly Chris Pratt), it bugged me a bit that it wasn't clear.  Another thing that was too cute was the overall look of the film.  It's very 60's/70's styled with lots of reds and oranges.  People wore awful shirts, had unkempt hairstyles, and had those old man pants with the waistline just below their chest.  They even managed to make Amy Adams look frumpy, but not Olivia Wilde (could anything though?).  It was like hipsters take over in the future, which may be the most terrifying aspect of Her.  Lastly, at just over two hours, the film could have been tightened up a bit.  There were a few scenes that went on too long where the point had been made.  On the other hand, they play hilariously unusual video games and I wish I could have seen more of that.

Joaquin Phoenix was wonderfully nuanced.  As I mentioned earlier, you might want to write Theodore off as a weirdo, and he is kind of a dork, but Phoenix makes him sweet and very sympathetic.  He's searching for the same things we all are.  However, he blows it on a real date with Olivia Wilde's character when she was clearly into him, and that's unforgivable.  I was impressed with Scarlett Johansson's voice work, which had very cute sexiness about it.  I also enjoyed Amy Adams, but I wish she would have been in it more considering she was one of the few real-world friends Theodore had and they had previously dated.  I could have used a little more Rooney Mara, but I think that's due to the fact that I wanted to learn more about their relationship and why it failed.

Her is a smart, thought-provoking film that brings up some interesting ideas regarding love, intimacy and general interaction with people.  I can understand how it might be too strange for some, but I think if you give it a chance and go in with an open mind, you'll find yourself thinking about the film for long after.

4 (out of 5) Death Stars

Friday, December 27, 2013

American Hustle (2013)

There are times when a movie begins, whether it's from the look, the music, or atmosphere, you know you're in for something that's going to transport you to another time and place.  That's the feeling I got when American Hustle started.

We're told, "Some of this actually happened," which felt like a subtle dig at movies that claim to be based on true events, but you can tell are wildly exaggerated or embellished for dramatic purposes.  That's certainly true here, but that craziness is part of the fun.  American Hustle is a fictionalized account of the FBI's Abscam operation during the late 70's.  I don't want to get into the plot as the trailers do a good job of not revealing much, so I'll just give you the broad strokes. Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) is a small-time con man.  He meets Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams), they become lovers and start conning together.  They are caught by FBI agent Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper), who wants to use them to reel in some bigger fish and make a name for himself at the Bureau.  Richie has Irv over a barrel, so he doesn't have any choice but to go along.  Their primary mark is local mayor Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner) who's trying to raise money to renovate Atlantic City now that gambling's been made legal.

American Hustle is as much about the characters as it is the story we're being told.  Everyone's looking to improve their station in life, and most are working an angle as well.  It would seem that everyone's motivations are fairly selfish in nature, but as the story unfolds, some start having conflicted or mixed feelings about what they are doing.  Relationships become strained and people lose control.  In particular, Irv struggles internally while he develops a friendship with Carmine, as he's a family man that seems to have honest intentions of improving his community.

I've heard many people refer to American Hustle as a comedy.  I wouldn't call it an outright comedy, but more like a crime drama that just happens to be extremely funny.  I love when something makes me laugh consistently when that didn't appear to be the goal.  Much of the humor is from watching how people react to the situation they're in.  Sometimes it's a simple look, other times it's an awkward comment from someone that doesn't realize the gravity of the situation.  A few times it's due to someone completely losing their shit.

The dialog is great as well, with more than a few quotable lines.  David O. Russell and Eric Singer really outdid themselves on the screenplay.  There's some hilarious stuff here and it felt very natural, like being a fly on the wall

I know I'm not the first to say this, but David O. Russell did his best Scorsese impression making American Hustle.  This would fit right in with a marathon of Goodfellas or Casino.  It's basically the same setting and feel, same type of narration, and even some mob involvement.  Hustle seemed to be full of impressions, many probably unintentional.  If you close your eyes when listening to Alessandro Nivola (who played one of Richie's bosses) speak, you may hear a young Christopher Walken.  At one point, the way Bradley Cooper was looking at someone and reacting to them, it reminded me of Sean Penn.

I enjoyed American Hustle the most for its dynamic performances.  Cooper is great and I think he's really found a home in these more demanding dramatic roles.  Jeremy Renner is also very good and plays one of the more sympathetic characters in the film.  Jennifer Lawrence's gives her funniest performance to date, but I was surprised at her character's vulnerability.  She continues to impress me with her maturity playing characters that seem much older than her actual age.  I wouldn't guess she was only 23.  There's another small role played by a very well known comedian, but I won't say who because you don't see him in the trailer.  All I'll say is that I found him extremely funny, but that might be due simply to me being a fan.  There's also a nice cameo that fits perfectly.  Who?  I'm not telling on that one either.

As good as the cast is, they're overshadowed a bit by the leads as there's more focus on the relationship between Irv and Sydney.  The ageless wonder, Amy Adams, is fantastic as a sexy manipulator.  Always playing both sides, she's someone that can get anything she wants.  It also doesn't hurt that she has probably the best wardrobe I've seen in a film this year.  I don't know too many guys that would be able to say no to her in some of those outfits.  However, if there's anything I would critique about her performance it's that her accent didn't seem to be consistent.  Her character crafts a persona that speaks with an English accent, and it sounded like it would transition in and out of her natural voice during conversation.  I think this was due to it being a lighter English accent, but it could have been the speakers in the theater for all I know.  My hearing has taken a beating over the years.  Lastly, Christian Bale delivers yet another great performance, possibly my favorite since American Psycho.  The sacrifices he makes to his body for these movies make me a little concerned for his long term health, but I admire the dedication.  When you see him work that epic comb-over (move over Donald Trump), I expect to read somewhere that was his real hair.

On a side note, I can't tell you how many times writing this review I had to correct writing American Psycho instead of American Hustle.  If Christian Bale comes out with another film with "American" in the title, I'm gonna be screwed.

Much funnier than I could have imagined and carried by great performances and direction, American Hustle reminds me why I love movies so much.  Stylish, with a great soundtrack and extremely lively, it's a film I enjoyed on multiple levels and have no issue with calling one of the best of 2013.

5 (out of 5) Death Stars

Friday, June 14, 2013

Man of Steel (2013)

Kneel before him...

I was a little nervous when I heard that Zack Snyder's Man of Steel was going to be based around yet another origin story for Superman.  Even with David S. Goyer's writing and producer Christopher Nolan's involvement, I didn't think it needed to be told again.  Is there really anyone out there that has no familiarity at all with Superman's origin?  Even the recent "All-Star Superman" comic was able to beautifully summarize his origin in a single page.

This might have some minor spoilers, so be warned.  It's a lengthy review, so strap in...

Despite my reservations on another reboot of a well known superhero, I enjoyed the few twists and changes made to the origin told in Man of Steel.  Beginning on Krypton, Jor-El (Russell Crowe) warns Krypton's leaders regarding its destruction.  General Zod (Michael Shannon) stages a coup, and Jor-El uses the opportunity to launch a ship containing Kal-El and Kryptonian data to Earth.  Zod's coup fails, and he and his followers are banished to the Phantom Zone.  Kal-El lands on Earth, and well, you know the rest.

Superman's origin as told in All-Star Superman
Where Man of Steel differs is rather than give you a linear backstory, we catch up with Clark (Henry Cavill) as a 33-year-old wanderer, occasionally using his powers to save those in need before moving on.  We get flashbacks of Clark growing up and dealing with the manifestation of his powers, as well as his relationship with Jonathan and Martha Kent (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane).  Much of the film's emotional depth comes from these flashbacks, not just because they give you more insight into why Clark is who is, but because of the great performances of Costner and Lane.  Jonathan is convinced the world is not ready for Clark to reveal himself, and Clark has been spending much of his life trying to figure out what his purpose is and where he fits in.

Another departure from the Superman mythos was how Lois Lane was handled.  Lois, a journalist for the Daily Planet, is following a related story when she encounters Clark.  She investigates further, and is able to determine his true identity.  If you've ever been bugged by the fact that an investigative journalist never figured out that Clark Kent and Superman were the same person, then I think you'll really enjoy this twist.  She even actively protects his identity once she realizes the threat to him and his family.  Amy Adams was an inspired choice for Lois as well.  She had the right combo of smarts, maturity, toughness and ambition for the role.  The movie shines every time she's on-screen.

Zod eventually catches up to Kal-El and the promise of a super-powered smackdown between multiple Kryptonians is finally realized.  If you're like me and complained that Superman Returns didn't have enough action, Man of Steel makes up for that, and then some.  The last 40 minutes of the movie is all action, and it's the type of spectacle you hope for in an action blockbuster.  There's so much action, that it's a little exhausting to watch, but I still enjoyed every minute of it.  It was a joy to see Superman fly around and punch people at super speed.  The effects are fantastic, and there were only a few times where I thought the characters had too much of a CG appearance to them.  They are really getting the look of this stuff down!

Man of Steel is not perfect though.  I thought some of the things it does with the powers regarding atmosphere were a little odd.  Also, I was kind of bugged that the other Kryptonians seemed to be as powerful as Superman.  Superman has been absorbing solar energy for decades, as opposed to days for the other Kryptonians.  While he does show a greater mastery of his powers, I still think he should have had a bigger advantage as far as overall strength, while the Kryptonians should have had an advantage with combat skills.

Another issue I had was that the dialog isn't particularly good.  There's not a ton of dialog in the first place, but some of the lines are really clunky to the point where you'll hear something said and just go, "Huh?"  It definitely could have used a little punch up, as the film is so serious from beginning to end.  There's really much in the way of humor, but I also appreciated the fact that it wasn't silly.  I'm surprised that David S. Goyer didn't find more of a balance in his screenplay.

As much I loved Michael Shannon as Zod, I was a little disappointed he didn't get to have a great line that can be associated with his performance.  We don't even get a 'kneel' reference.  On the other hand, Zod's henchman, Faora (Antje Traue) was totally badass and sexy.  I wish there would have been a little more depth to her character though.  It was awesome to see someone hold their own against Superman like she did.

I also thought the romance between Clark and Lois wasn't handled well.  It happens way too quick without much in the way of flirtation.  I get them being attracted to each other, but it doesn't seem like there's any reason for them to get together other than convenience.  This is the one angle where the changes to the story didn't work as well.  Rather than see their relationship develop over time in the workspace, they are just kind of thrown together and it didn't feel natural.

I enjoyed Henry Cavill as Superman.  I said after seeing him in Immortals that I thought he had the right stature and commanding presence to play the Man of Steel, and I'm glad to see he proved me right.  First off, credit to Cavill and his trainer.  He clearly bulked up for the role, and physically speaking he's the best we've seen to date in the suit.  He's not playing the Clark Kent we're used to seeing, so there's not much of a true comparison to Christopher Reeve or even Brandon Routh's performances.  It's a different role as far as I'm concerned.  It's like comparing Michael Keaton's Batman to Christian Bale's.

The rest of the cast is strong.  I liked the choice of Laurence Fishburne as Perry White, but he's not in the film much.  They try to shoehorn a moment for him toward the end in an effort to give him something to do, and that felt a little odd.  I'm sure in the sequel he'll have a little more screentime if they spent more time at the Daily Planet.  Christopher Meloni as Colonel Hardy was good, and I also liked Ayelet Zurer as Lara Lor-Van.

Some will complain about all of the city-wide destruction and how Clark doesn't really appear to be too concerned about saving anyone, but that didn't really bother me.  While I would have liked to see him save a few people here and there, most of the time he's fighting multiple, super-powered people at once, and these fights happen at hyperspeed.  Man of Steel doesn't really show Superman as having full mastery of his powers yet, so it may not have been possible for him to avoid damaging his surroundings.  You don't see a lot of the Kryptonians directly threatening humans while he's around, so with the speed of the battles, his immediate surroundings might not have always been on the top of his mind.  Plus, he just put on the suit, so he's still growing into the role while attempting to earn the trust of humanity.  I would suspect we'll get more of that in the sequel.

Another thing I liked, and this will probably bug the Superman purists out there, was the fact that they show him conflicted.  I've read the comics off and on, watched the various cartoons and movies, and sat through all ten seasons of Smallville, and the one thing that's always bugged me about Superman is how much of a humorless, sometimes emotionless, boy scout he is.  I love the idea of seeing him start from a darker place and then eventually becoming that ideal.  Some will argue that I or the movie doesn't understand the character of Superman.  Okay, fine, go watch a different Superman cartoon or movie then.  In case you're wondering, I'm old enough to remember seeing Donner's Superman in the theater, and watch Donner's cut of Superman 2 frequently.  I like them all.

There's nothing post-credits, by the way, despite seeing online that there was supposed to be.  This was probably leaked by the effects crew that just wanted everyone to sit through the credits so we could see their names.  I didn't see it in 3D either, but since it wasn't shot in 3D you can go in knowing that's it's not going to add anything to the movie anyway.

Speaking of the visuals, this is another area where I thought the film excelled.  Man of Steel is gorgeous, and I'm not just talking about how dreamy Henry Cavill is.  Some shots may linger on a little too much, but I thought it was a vibrant film and creative looking.  You can always tell what's going on, even during the faster paced fight scenes.  I think Zack Snyder's style and aesthetic really lent itself to the film, and he even avoided his excessive use of slow motion, which I actually wouldn't have minded if he had thrown a little more of that in.  I'm probably in minority of people that enjoy just about all of Snyder's films.  I even like Sucker Punch on a certain level.  I loved the redesigned Krypton.  It looked suitably alien without being a direct copy or reference to previous films.  Also, the suit looked much better on screen than in photos.  The texture of the suit worked well, and I stopped noticing the lack of red trunks pretty early on.

Oh and I almost forgot to mention Hans Zimmer's score, which is hard to believe since he really outdid himself this time.  The score is practically a character all on it's own.  I've been listening to the full soundtrack on Spotify and I really love it.

While somewhat flawed, Man of Steel delivers on the promise of a Superman movie with more emotional depth, and the super-powered smackdown we've been waiting to see in the modern era.  Zack Snyder and co gave us a Superman that's more relatable and realistic for our time.  It would have benefit from a little more humor, but this is made up for by the cast and their performances.  I anxiously await a sequel.  Full price for me.

4.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

(Note: Was originally a four Death Star rating, but I just got back from seeing again and loved it even more, so I'm bumping it half a point.)

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

On The Road (2012)

I have bongo music stuck in my head now...

I've never read the On the Road, nor have I ever had much of an interest in Jack Kerouac (whom the main character of Sal was based on), but I'm generally willing to give anything a shot.  The only thing I'd heard about On the Road going in was that it often considered to be a unfilmable book, and there had been several attempts to make this over the years (mainly by Francis Ford Coppola).  When I hear unfilmable book, I think of titles like Cloud Atlas or Watchmen, but the the difference with those two is that they were much more ambitious films, with many complex characters and covering longer periods of time.  Maybe something got really lost in this adaptation of On the Road, but I didn't find that to be the case here at all.

On the Road focuses on a small group of twenty-somethings over a few years in their lives from the late 40's to early 50's.  The story primarily follows the characters of Sal Paradise (Sam Riley) and Dean Moriarty (Garrett Hedlund).  Sal is a struggling writer who yearns for more freedom, and Dean (who was already an ex-con when they meet) is a fun loving guy, who's pretty much up for anything, or anyone.  Dean is also quite the ladies man, shacking up with Marylou (Kristen Stewart) and Camille (Kirsten Dunst).  As the title suggests, they spend a lot of time on the road, meeting people, partying and having adventures.

If I was in my early 20's, still in college and trying to figure out what I wanted to do with my life, something like what you see in On the Road would be fun to experience.  However, it's not particularly interesting to watch on screen, especially as you learn more about the characters and find that there's really not much to like about them.  Maybe this is what got lost in the adaptation, but I found all of these characters to be pretty shallow, and in the case of Dean I found him to be kind of a scumbag.  He's married and has a newborn, but he'd rather go out on the road and have more drugs and sex.  His friends seems to idolize him, rather than call him out on his behavior, or maybe suggest he stay home with his family.  Would you support the antics of your friend that's a deadbeat dad?  Instead, they share long embraces each time they meet up, as if years have passed since they all last saw each other, but it's only been a few months at a time.

The lengthy feeling between meetups is likely due to the fact that On the Road is pretty slowly paced.  At one point, I checked my watch thinking the movie must be close to over only to see I was only at the one hour mark.  I still had an hour left to go!  At this point, I felt like the movie was a bit of a repeating loop, because you just see them do the same things over and over again: more driving, more sex, and more partying.  It feels routine and less interesting as it goes on.  Even when there are attempts to show you other sides of their characters you don't come away with a better understanding of them, but rather liking them less for their behavior.

That's pretty much all I got out On the Road, which I realize may be missing the point of the book, but I'm reviewing what I saw on screen, not a book I've never read or a film's faithfulness to it.  I'm just calling it like I see it.

I liked the performances for the most part, but I wonder if I would have had an easier time identifying with the characters if maybe they had gotten more familiar actors.  Kristen Stewart's not exactly a name that gets my butt in the theater.  I actually didn't mind her performance here, and thought she had some life about her for a change.  She's actually not in the movie all that much, which may be why I didn't have much of an issue with her.  I'm only seen Sam Riley in 13, and thought he was adequate.  Despite not liking Dean at all, I thought Garrett Hedlund's performance as him was strong and showed a lot of charisma.  You can see why people would initially be drawn to him.  We also get a very eclectic cast of bigger names playing very small roles.  You'll see people like Amy Adams, Terrence Howard, Elisabeth Moss, and Viggo Mortensen pop-up in random roles throughout.

It's a good looking film with lots of picturesque scenery.  As far as a period piece, it felt accurate and faithful to the time.  There's also a sense of speed when driving that you really feel, and I think that's where Walter Salles direction really came into play.  You also experience all the seasons they go through.  When you see them driving in the hot sun, you can't help but notice how sweaty and dirty they are.  I can only imagine what the inside of that car smelled like.  I hope they stopped to shower on their trips.

I was annoyed by the Beatnik, bongo music I heard throughout.  They say that Beatniks were the original hipsters, and after watching On the Road I can see how there are some similarities, and I dislike their style and music as equally as modern hipsters.  I've heard that Kerouac's book has been very influential and praised for it's style, but I don't think Jose Rivera's screenplay captured any of that.  If there was any energy to Kerouac's writing, that's all been sucked out of the film.

On the Road is a good looking, well-acted film, but for a story about living life, it sure felt lifeless.  There's no passion to it, and I didn't like any of the characters as they were portrayed.  It's way too long for what it is, and would recommend you take the two hours you could spend watching On the Road to go out and start an adventure of your own.

2 (out of 5) Death Stars

Thursday, September 27, 2012

The Master (2012) - Movie Review

No milkshakes were drank during the making of this film.

Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) is a World War II veteran that's suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.  He's an alcoholic, making drinks out of any chemicals he can get his hands on, who's also prone to violent outbursts and cannot hold down a job.  One night, he stows away on a boat owned by Lancaster Dodd (Philipp Seymour Hoffman).  Dodd takes an interest in Freddie at first because he likes the drinks he can make, but also because he sees something in him, like a stray dog he wants to fix.

Lancaster Dodd is the leader of a movement simply called The Cause.  A lot has been made of how this is a movie about, or analogous to, Scientology.  While there are some similarities, they never come right out and say it, and it stays fairly vague throughout the movie.  As someone not all that familiar with Scientology, I can't really comment on how accurate they are being.  Outside of a few lines here and there, I didn't think it was much of an indictment of the belief system shown.  The Master is more about following the characters and their relationships.

Freddie wants to get better, so he buys into The Cause and follows them around.  He also serves as Dodd's unofficial attack dog, assaulting anyone that challenges Dodd and his beliefs.  He even challenges Dodd's own son (Jesse Plemons, who looks like he could actually be the PSH's son), who believes he's making this all up as he goes along.  Between his drinking and his use of violence, many members of the The Cause, including Dodd's wife Peggy (Amy Adams), fear and don't trust Freddie, but Dodd wants him there.

Joaquin Phoenix feels like a damaged, rabid dog throughout the film.  He transforms physically, looking much older, walking with a hunched-over posture, and speaking in a mumbled voice you can't understand at times.  With this way I've described him so far, you probably are wondering if there's anything redeeming about him, but Phoenix gets many chances to show some emotional depth and even a sympathetic side.  It really is a brilliantly insane performance, and I'm sure he'll be at the top of the Oscar short list this year.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman plays "The Master" with more control, and has a charisma that makes it easy to believe that so many people will buy into anything he says.  At the same time, you know there's something just beneath the surface waiting to get out.  He eventually submits to his own outbursts of anger when challenged.  You see that Dodd and Freddie are really just two sides of the same coin, and it felt like that was the real reason why Dodd wanted him around when nobody else did.  It's like that master that can't admit his dog is bad and beyond fixing.

The Master is an interesting film, and it's one that you'll be thinking about well after, even if that thought might be, "What the hell did I just watch?"  Much like There Will Be Blood, the movie is much more character based than story driven.  I hesitate to call it boring, but some of you may think that when watching it.   Even I thought there were more than a few times towards then end where I thought it was going to end, but then it kept going for a few more minutes.  It does kind of meander in that way.  However, it's extremely watchable due to the mesmerizing performances of the cast.  Even Amy Adams at times gives off a creepy vibe, as someone that buys into The Cause fully.  It's a much smaller role for someone of her stature, and the rest of the cast are mostly bit players.  Laura Dern also has a smaller supporting role as one of the followers of the cause.

Paul Thomas Anderson, not to be confused with that Resident Evil hack Paul W.S. Anderson, once again gives us a movie that looks great and has extremely interesting characters.  It's a gorgeous looking film and has the look of something that appears it was actually made in the 50's. Johnny Greenwood of Radiohead provides a swirling and eerie soundtrack.  It was hard not to notice, and the whole movie I wondered if it was Greenwood, as it reminded me of the similarly eerie soundtrack he did for There Will Be Blood.  The look and soundtrack gave this an almost ethereal feeling at times, and I was just meditating watching it.  I think P.T. Anderson is one of the five best directors working today.  He's able to write such interesting characters that have so much depth to them, and then he gets the performances to match.

I will say The Master also gets points for satisfying something I've had a weird issue with lately. Have you ever noticed that nobody farts in a non-comedy?  People fart.  It's a normal thing, and you just don't see it that often in movies outside of comedies.  The Master delivers on a well placed fart.  It's especially bizarre as this happened in the movie just as that thought popped up in my head again.  There's also a surprising amount of nudity in the film, and pretty much the last shot of the film is of a woman's naked breasts.

The Master is a worthy follow-up to There Will Be Blood.  It has great, Oscar-worthy performances, and is a fantastic looking and sounding film.  However, expect that it's not going to be the most entertaining film, and I wouldn't blame you if you thought it was boring or didn't get it.  If you can focus on the characters, and not get fixated on where things are going, then you should be able to enjoy it.  This is rental for most audiences, but if you want to see something that's going to challenge you a bit, I highly recommend seeing this soon.

4 (out of 5) Death Stars

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Trouble with the Curve (2012) - Movie Review

I have a feeling Gus Lobel would love to tell those Moneyball guys to shove it!

Clint Eastwood plays Gus Lobel, a lifelong baseball scout for the Atlanta Braves.  Age is catching up with him and his eyesight is fading fast, but can't admit it or he's out of a job.  The organization is losing faith in him anyway, in favor of scouting players using stats and modern technology.  Gus is a purist that believes you certain things you simply can't know about a player by looking at a bunch of numbers. He prefers to rely on his senses and instincts.  I got a distinct anti-Moneyball sentiment from Trouble with the Curve, and if it comes down to a fight, my money will always be on Dirty Harry.

The upcoming draft has a huge talent the team wants as their No. 1 pick.  Gus goes back out the road to scout this kid and to prove he can still do the job.  His oldest friend, played by John Goodman, urges Gus' daughter Mickey (Amy Adams) to go along with him and make sure he doesn't screw up.

Oh, and Justin Timberlake is in this, too.  I almost forgot as they establish his character in an early scene, but then he doesn't appear again for a good 15-20 minutes, which really made me wonder why he was in the movie.  You learn that he's a former player that Gus once scouted and is now a scout himself for the Red Sox.  He and Gus seemed to have a close, almost father/son, relationship, but it's never really explored, which seemed like a missed opportunity considering the family dynamics of the film.  Naturally, he immediately has the hots for Mickey, and who can blame him, but the way his character came in and out of the film it felt he was thrown in there because they felt the movie needed a love interest.  It didn't help that it seemed that he was a little too immature for Amy Adams, and that's partially due to the fact that I know she's 38 while he's 31.  It didn't seem like the most natural pairing.  This is nothing personally against Justin Timberlake though, and I do think that he and Adams had good chemistry.

I'm getting off track, but I felt the main problem with the movie is that, once again, it's a movie that didn't quite know what it wanted to be, so it felt a little scatter-shot and uneven at times.  Is this a baseball movie?  A family drama?  Is it a romantic comedy?  I would have been fine with a movie about a stubborn, work-driven man and his stubborn, career-driven daughter reconnecting and finding some common ground over baseball.  Instead we got something that felt a little all over the place, and it suffered from having too many ideas going on.  As the movie is almost two hours, it would have benefit from a little more focus.

Another thing that hurts the film is how predictable it is.  You pretty much see where things are going to go from the outset and they constantly foreshadow plot points.  It's a minor complaint as it's not like I was expecting twists, but certain things just felt too obvious.  The conclusion was way too tidy, with every little thing being resolved by the end, and the conclusion was unsatisfying as a result.

Now we get to the strength of the film: the cast and performances.  Clint Eastwood gives a great, emotional performance   When it starts, he's the cranky and crotchety old man we've come to expect, but early on he has a very sweet and emotional scene, and it shows that there's some sadness there and more to him.  His back and forth between Amy Adams is both funny and heartfelt.  They really make you believe that she's a chip off the old block.  Both are overly focused on their work and push people away.  When you have a great actors like this, they are able to pull back just a bit, so that it doesn't feel melodramatic, which was another thing I appreciated.  They could have gone for a manipulative tear jerker, but thankfully didn't.

The rest of the supporting cast is great as well.  John Goodman is always a welcome sight.  Plus, you have a nice performance by Matthew Lillard, as a hot shot exec that you just want to see get his in the end. The T-1000 (Robert Patrick) is in this as well.  Justin Timberlake's performance was fine, even though I felt like he was just playing Justin Timberlake again.

This was a good first effort from director Robert Lorenz and writer Randy Brown.  Lorenz was smart to get out of the way of his actors and let them just do their thing.  Again, I think the main issue here is that he didn't try to reign in Brown's script a bit.  There were too many subplots and most weren't developed quite enough to have the impact they should have, and some felt like they really didn't need to be in the movie.  Another positive is that it's a much funnier movie than I was expecting, even though some of the humor felt a little easy, maybe even a little cheesy at times. The audience seemed to be really enjoying it, so maybe it was just me.

Overall, Trouble with the Curve is a charming movie that should please most audiences.  You have great performances and chemistry from the actors and a good balance of humor and emotional moments.  The drawback is the movie's predictability and lack of focus.  Whether you're a baseball fan or just want to see a nice family drama with some heart, it's an enjoyable film.  It's nothing you need to rush out and see though.  It's a good matinee or rental.

3 (out of 5) Death Stars