The Monuments Men (2014)

I heard the working title for The Monuments Men was Monument's Eleven.

Okay, I didn't actually hear that, but that's the vibe I got while watching The Monuments Men. George Clooney assembles a team, albeit an older one, but still happens to include MATT DAMON, to steal back a bunch of stolen art from some asshole. Sound familiar? Same general story, different locale.

In this case the asshole was Hitler, who had the Nazis going around Europe stealing works of art. So, not only was Hitler a genocidal maniac, he was a selfish hoarder. A team led by Lt. Frank Stokes (Clooney) is tasked with finding, recovering and returning these works of art. There's also concern that Hitler will destroy it all when they lose the war (since this is based on true events, we all know it's not going to go well for Hitler). Plus, the Russians are also trying to loot the art for their own collection.

Joining Stokes' team is Bob Balaban, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Hugh Bonneville and Bill Murray. It's a great cast and they play well off each other, but we spend so little time with any of them that it seems like a waste. I can't recall many movies where I felt like Bill Murray was underused, but it happens here. Everyone is off in smaller, two man teams, rarely spending any time together as a full group. We barely learn anything about the Men as a result. Much like I complained in Lone Survivor, I could hardly remember any character's name by the end of the film.

Matt Damon spends most of his time with Cate Blanchett, but can you blame him? I'd much rather spend time with her than a bunch of guys. Blanchett plays a French national working at the Louvre who also wants to recover the art, but doesn't trust Damon and the American's intentions. Like the rest of the cast, Blanchett was underused, and it's a shame to get someone like her and have her do so little. She's not even on the poster, so it's not like she was cast for her star power or box office draw. There's nothing in the role that they couldn't have just gotten a lesser known, French actress. This isn't a knock on Blanchett, but more the lack of development in the characters.  Nobody is really required to do any heavy lifting.

The Monuments Men also runs a tad too long. After many, many scenes series of them driving back and forth, going through various art caches, it gets a little repetitive. Some scenes felt totally unnecessary. The narrative is very scattered as it randomly jumps around without any rhyme or reason.

There's very little tension (again, we know how it's going to turn out), and many of the moments where they attempt to build some suspense are immediately diffused with humor. It's surprisingly light, despite being framed around World War II and people dying around them. There are many times where it tries to pull on the heart strings a little, but fails to connect and comes off as sappy, especially with the overstated score.

I can see how George Clooney was trying to make a statement about the importance of art as their grander purpose, but this gets lost in the inconsistent tone of the film. Of Clooney's directed films, this is the weakest I can recall and felt like more of a pet project where he assembled a few friends to make a film.

The Monuments Men assembles a great cast and is pleasant enough, but substitutes charm for a compelling story or characters. It's ultimately forgettable, but the kind of film you'd probably enjoy if you caught on cable when flipping channels. Nothing you need to rush out and see, but not that bad either.

2.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

Inside Llewyn Davis (2013)

I look forward to Coen Brother's films as much as any other cinephile does, but Inside Llewyn Davis was one of the few I wasn't all that wild about seeing.  It's mainly because I've never been that into folk music.  Was I going to be able to enjoy a film set around an era and style of music I've never been into, and starring an actor I don't think I had heard of?  Well it turns out they managed to make a movie that made me like and care about folk music.  That's the true genius of the Coen Brothers, not their great storytelling and unusual characters and situations, but that they made me care about folk music.  Okay, I'm kidding about that last part, but the Joel and Ethan Coen continue to prove time and time again that they are brilliant filmmakers and storytellers.

One thing you'll notice is that Inside Llewyn Davis isn't quite as quirky or as unusual as other Coen Brothers offerings.  While there are a few funny things here and there, this plays as a pretty straight forward character piece, following a few days in the life of Llewyn Davis.  Llewyn (Oscar Isaac) is a struggling folk musician in New York.  He had a more successful act with his former partner, but he recently committed suicide, forcing Llewyn to try to make it as a solo act.  Effectively homeless, Llewyn crashes on the couches of people that can't say no to him even though he seems to overstay his welcome.  Llewyn isn't exactly the easiest guy to root for, it appears he has a habit of either straining or shitting on relationships.  He's not completely unlikeable though.

As the songs were all performed live in the movie, rather than lip-synched, it really added to the authenticity.  If I wasn't aware of many of the actors outside of the film, I would have thought they were all established folk singers.  Granted it's no surprise Justin Timberlake can sing, but I was impressed with Carey Mulligan's voice.  I am so generally clueless about the folk scene that I didn't even realize that most of these songs have been around for a long time.  I thought they were all originals.  Despite my reservations about the music, I ended up enjoying most of it, either tapping hands and feet along with it, or wanting to join in the singing myself.

I wondered if I actually knew about Oscar Issac from anything else, but then realized he was the best thing about 10 Years  He's actually been in a ton of stuff, but mainly supporting roles and he's one of those guys that seems to blend in.  In addition to being a great singer, he delivers a deep, soulful performance that lets you know he's moving on to bigger things in the acting world.  There's a scene where he's auditioning for Bud Grossman (F. Murray Abraham) that actually gave me the chills, and it's such an honest and vulnerable moment that I was moved to tears.  When Grossman gives his feedback, it's heartbreaking and I was concerned that Llewyn was moving towards a dark outcome, but was relieved when the story circles back.  His final performance also brought chills as it's powerful moment that shows you that Llewyn may be coming out of his funk.

As far as the rest of the performances, Carey Mulligan and Justin Timberlake were funny.  John Goodman's character really stands out as one of most memorable of the film despite his limited time on screen.  He's paired with Garrett Hedlund, who could have been played by a mute for all the dialog he had.  Nothing against Hedlund, mind you, but I think he said like 5 words all film.

I also found an interesting parallel to complaints I heard about modern music.  Llewyn is a talented, frustrated artist that's having a hard time getting his music sold, even heard.  When Bud Grossman tells him, "I don't see a lot of money here," you see that anger and frustration in Llewyn's face.  Meanwhile, a catchier, radio friendly song seems to be headed towards hit status.  When about to perform it, he asks, "Who wrote this?"  It's clear he thinks it's a ridiculous song, and Jim Berkey (Timberlake) looks hurt by the question.

We only hang out with Llewyn Davis for a short period of time, but it's a journey worth taking.  Inside Llewyn Davis is a gloomy tale about a frustrated artist, but still has enough humor and heart that it's not depressing.  Oscar Issac surprised me with one of the better performances of the year, and I can say the same about the Coen's surprising me with the movie.  If anything, it kind of makes me want to get a cat, and I don't even like cats.

5 (out of 5) Death Stars

Monsters University (2013)

What is it with rehashes of Revenge of the Nerds lately?  Monsters University is the second movie I've seen in the past month (The Internship being the other) that borrows heavily from Nerds.

Mike Wazowski (Billy Crystal) was inspired at a young age to become a scarer.  He studied harder than everyone and eventually got accepted to Monsters University.  Despite knowing the ins and outs of scaring, Mike has a lot of doubters that don't believe he has the innate ability to be a good scarer.  Jake Sullivan (John Goodman), on the other hand, comes from a well known scaring family and has all the physical attributes you'd want to have.  Mike and Jake start out at odds, competing to see who's the better scarer.  Sully thinks Mike just doesn't have what it takes, and Mike thinks Sully is just relying on his family's name and natural ability to get by.

Their competition gets the better of them though, and both are eventually kicked out of the scare program by the Dean (Helen Mirren).  Their only chance back in is to win the Scare Games, a series of contests that pit all the various fraternities and sororities against each other.  Mike and Sully are forced to put their differences aside and join the fraternity full of castoffs in order to compete in the Games.  Nobody thinks their fraternity has even the slightest chance, but Mike thinks he can whip them into shape.  Sounds all too familiar, eh?

Even though it follows a familiar format and contains familiar themes, I still enjoyed Monsters University.  This is one of those times where I wasn't bothered by all the reused tropes and plot elements.  I tend to enjoy underdog stories, even though they tend to be predictable.  It's also a prequel that works.  I liked seeing how Mike and Sully started out and eventually became the friends we know from Monsters, Inc.  It also serves to make them both more sympathetic characters when you see the issues they had to overcome.  Although one of the issues with doing a prequel so long after the fact is that many of the characters we spend time getting to know in Monsters University aren't mentioned or seen in Monsters, Inc.  There are a few common characters like Randy (Steve Buscemi) though.  On the other hand, it really won't matter what order you watch either of these films.  There's nothing really spoiled or ruined by watching them in a particular order.

If they ever do decide to do a third film, I'd like to see them do something far in the future.  Maybe base it around Boo as a college student herself, whose long forgotten her adventure with Kitty and and Mike Wazowski.

The humor is pretty standard and definitely geared towards the family.  Most of the families sitting around me all laughed at various points.  I didn't find it particularly funny myself, but not because it was childish.  Just not quite enough bite for my tastes.  However, there's a great sequence at the end that fans of horror films will really appreciate.  I don't know which of the three writers wrote that section (Robert L. Baird, Daniel Gerson, and director Dan Scanlon), but it was a smart sequence that was best part of the film for me.

As you'd expect with a Pixar film, the animation is top notch.  When you compare this with Monsters, Inc. it really is amazing to see how far it's come.  There are times where things are so realistic looking - particularly with the short film before the main feature - that you may think real sets are used with the characters added in after.  It truly is beautiful, and worth watching just for the animation if that's your thing.

Monsters University is one of the rare examples of a prequel that's on par with original, and I actually enjoyed it a little more than Monsters, Inc.  While it's definitely not Pixar's best work, and dives a little too deep into familiar territory, it's still a fun and engaging film that the whole family can enjoy together.  Easy matinee recommendation for this one.

3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

The Internship (2013)

My old, cynical self watched the first 20 minutes or so of The Internship with my arms folded across my chest, without so much as a smile on my face.  It's not that The Internship wasn't funny at all, it was that nearly every laugh during this time were all things I've seen in the trailer.  Then I thought, is that really the movie's fault?  Everyone else is laughing, and I'm betting these people don't see nearly as many movies as I do.  Would I be laughing more if I hadn't seen that trailer like 20 times this year?

After The Internship blows its trailer-wad, I warmed up to it a bit.  Don't get me wrong, it's not a great film, but I found myself chuckling a few times.  The humor's a little one-note though, and some gags are repeated a few too many times.  It's easy to say that the film is really trying to get by on the charm of Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson.  I'm sure that's what Vaughn thought when coming up with the story and co-writing the screenplay (co-wrote with Jared Stern).  The Internship hits all the typical beats, and busts out every underdog, and some rom-com, cliche they could throw at you.  Even the soundtrack has a cheesy, familiar feel to it.  Director Shawn Levy's resume doesn't exactly strike you with the number of huge hits, and he really doesn't take any chances here.  It's all very paint-by-numbers.

The Internship recycles so many plot elements that you'll have the whole movie figured out within that first 20 minutes.  I realized around that point that I was basically watching a retread of any high-school or college comedy where competing cliques or frats go at each other.  It's like a mix of Revenge of the Nerds, only the jocks are just type-A nerds, and Old School, where the dean is replaced by a snooty, disapproving boss (Aasif Mandvi).

Watch salesmen Nick (Wilson) and Billy (Vaughn) find themselves out of work after their owner (John Goodman, who's in everything these days) decides to close up shop without warning.   Unsure what to do next, Billy decides to dream big and takes a chance at getting an internship at Google.  The condition of the internship at Google is that they are grouped up and given a series of challenges.  The team with the best score gets guaranteed jobs.  Nobody wants to get paired with the old dudes, so Nick and Billy end up with a group of cast-offs.  Even the cast-offs aren't wild about being grouped up with fast talking guys with no tech skills.  Do you think the group will eventually come together and rally?  Oh, the suspense...

On a side note, I live fairly close to Google (as well as use their blog software), but I've never heard anything about their actual internships being as cutthroat or competition based as in the movie.  My research shows that while they got the culture part right about Google, the competition is mostly a fabrication likely added for dramatic purposes.  Everyone I've ever talked to has said it truly is the most amazing place to work.

What needs to be said about Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson at this point?  They give you exactly what you expect from them: Vaughn's hypercharged, stream-of-consciousness rants, and Wilson's aw-shucks charm.  They are pretty much playing the same characters they've always played.  At one point there's a reference to the fact that they've known each other since they were kids, and I couldn't help but think that wasn't that also the case in Wedding Crashers.  They might as well have named the characters the same and just called it John and Jeremy go to Google.  The next film can be John and Jeremy join the Army and it can be a retread of Stripes.

The rest of the cast is fine.  The group rounded out with Dylan O'Brien, Tiya Sircar, Josh Brener and Tobit Raphael.  I thought Raphael was funny, in particular.  Max Minghella effectly plays the main antagonist, and you want to just punch his character in the face the whole film.  Rose Byrne also stars as Owen Wilson's main crush.  I could have used a little more Byrne in the film, but that's probably due to my crush on her.

The Internship isn't reinventing the wheel, and for some of you this may feel all too familiar.  I do think that it's a crowd-pleasing film, but a lot of it is going to come down to whether or not you're tired of Vaughn and Wilson's act, or this formula in general.  I warmed it up to it as it went on, and got a few laughs out of it, so I guess I can't quit these guys just yet.  This hasn't been a good year for comedy, but I'm guessing this is going to likely to be the most successful of the Summer due to it's mainstream appeal.  I call it a matinee.

2.5 (out of 5) Death Stars

(Note: Originally I gave this 3 Death Stars, but upon reflecting, I'm knocking this down a bit.)

The Hangover Part III (2013)

Just like real hangovers, the more you have them, the less fun they become...

After the lazy, disappointment that was The Hangover Part II, I heard many reports from people involved in the production of The Hangover Part III that we'd be getting a much different story this time around, as opposed to yet another rehash of the first (which Part II was).  While Part III is finally a different story than either Part I or Part II, that doesn't mean it delivers on the fun or laughs promised.

The Hangover franchise is a perfect example of trying to squeeze blood (money) from a stone. The first Hangover was a perfectly-contained, raunchy comedy.  There simply wasn't a need for a sequel.  There were no unanswered questions that we needed to revisit in later chapters, and we didn't catch up with these guys to see how their lives turned out.  It's one of the reasons why there's not much of a story in either of the sequels.

Case in point, the main plot of Part III has more to do with Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong) than it does with The Wolfpack.  Chow wasn't much more than a side character in the first film.  Hell, the movie doesn't even revolve around the premise of these guys recovering from a hangover and trying to piece together the previous night.  It's more of an attempt to refer back to events of the first film and close the circle.

After the death of his father, Alan's (Zach Galifianakis) friends and family stage an intervention.  He's been off his meds for a while and needs help.  While driving him to a care facility, The Wolfpack is attacked and kidnapped by a mob boss (John Goodman), who wants them to track down Chow.  Chow has stolen a large amount of gold from him, and thinks The Wolfpack are the only ones that can find him.  Why a mob boss would force these doofuses to track Chow down instead of using his own henchmen is beyond me, but whatever.

The Wolfpack spends the rest of the film catching up to Chow.  They don't even end up in Vegas until almost the very end.

The most disappointing aspect of Part III was the lack of humor.  Sure, there are a few chuckles here and there, but otherwise, there just isn't that much to laugh at.  It's more of a action movie, with a few comic elements thrown in.  Many of the biggest laughs in the movie come from longer versions of what you've already seen in the trailer.  So, if you really love that scene where Zach Galifianakis is singing at the funeral, or when he cries at his intervention, you can look forward much longer versions of those.  The giraffe scene played out a little differently than I expected though, and that was probably the biggest laugh of the movie for me.  Unfortunately, that was the opening scene of the film.  I've always said that hallmark of a good comedy is quotability, and this definitely lacks that.  It's actually pretty forgettable.

The rest of the film is Alan saying weird stuff, and Stu (Ed Helms) and Phil (Bradley Cooper) reacting to either him or Chow's antics.  This leads to another big problem I had, which is after three films you can only conclude that Alan really is an awful person.  Granted, he's mentally ill, but there's no reason for these guys to be friends with him.  There's a scene of him involving a kid that I found a little disgusting and not in a raunchy way.  It just illustrated to me what a terrible person Alan is.  Don't get me wrong, awful characters sometimes make for the best comedy, but the schtick has gotten old.

I don't know why director Todd Phillips, who also co-wrote with Part II writer Craig Mazin, didn't bring back the original writers of The Hangover (Jon Lucas and Scott Moore) to give this film the energy it desperately needed.  It's clear they didn't know what to do with these characters, and the script desperately needed some punch up.

Most of original cast returns, along with a few cameos.  Forgotten member of The Wolfpack, Justin Bartha, once again is barely in it.  Poor guy, he never gets to have any of the fun.  Then again, maybe it's better that that nobody will remember his involvement in this series.

There's a short scene after the credits start (which actually was kind of funny and makes you wish the movie would have followed that story more), but nothing else, so there's no need to stay to the end of the credits.

The Wolfpack disappoints again.  The Hangover Part III is yet another uninspired sequel to a film I used to love.  It's not so bad that it made me angry, but it's just not that funny or even entertaining.  It's missing all the energy of Part I or even Part II.  Part III is a movie that I have no desire to ever watch again.  Hopefully, this really is the last of the series. I know you guys probably really want to see this, but save your money and wait for rental.

2 (out of 5) Death Stars

Flight (2012) - Movie Review

You gotta love when a movie starts with an out-of-focus boob shot...

Yes, in opening moments of Flight, the latest movie from Robert Zemeckis, airline pilot Whip Whitaker (Denzel Washington) wakes up in bed with a hot, fully nude flight attendant (Nadine Velazquez).  The thing you learn from this scene is that Whip is a pimp.  Well, that's not all you learn, but we'll get to that.

Shortly after, on a short, routine flight from Florida to Georgia, there's a mechanical failure on the plane.  It's not a spoiler to tell you that Whip is able to miraculously crash-land the plane with a minimum of casualties.  Even though it's only a few minutes, it's another time where I wish the trailer wouldn't have shown as much as it did regarding the crash.  It's still an extremely tense scene though.  I would imagine if you fly a lot, then it's really going to play with your head.

In the aftermath of the crash, the NTSB investigates to find the cause.  This casts a light on Whip, as it was found he had drugs in his system at the time of the crash.  It's not as simple as him just having a few beers the night before or being a little hung over either.  This is a serious offense, and can mean prison time, so a lawyer, played by Don Cheadle, is sent in to help Whip get out of trouble.  That's where the movie takes a different turn from where you think it's going.  Flight is more of a character study about struggling with denial and addition.  Initially, the accident sobers him up, but once he realizes he's under investigation, the stress throws him in a downward spiral.

You get frustrated and angry watching him, and you see that he's not exactly a great guy.  There's a reason he's divorced and hasn't seen his son.  He pushes everyone away that is trying to help him, and just can't get out of his own way.  It's an example of a high-functioning alcoholic that doesn't see a problem with his behavior.  He points out that he just did this amazing thing that nobody else would have been able to do, and that his state has nothing to do with the mechanical failures of the plane.  While he has a point, there's still a certain responsibility he doesn't want to accept.

Despite all of this, Whip still manages to be sympathetic.  This is mainly due to the great performance from Denzel Washington. Is it an Oscar-worthy performance though?  You bet! Seriously though, Denzel is the type of actor where anytime he takes on a serious role he's going to get some consideration.  One thing that's great about his performance is that it's not larger-than-life or too similar to his performance in Training Day.  It's more subtle than that, and there's a sadness that comes through.  It is performance worthy of consideration, but he's going to have some stiff competition, like from John Hawkes in The Sessions.

It's isn't a perfect film though.  The story itself covers familiar territory, sometimes done better in other films.  While the movie is funnier than I expected, sometimes the humor seemed a little out of place.  Additionally, there's a character introduced at the beginning of the film, played by Kelly Reilly, that's also an addict.  As the movie starts you wonder why she's even in the film.  While it makes sense as the movie goes on, it seemed like they focused on her a little too much in the beginning for the amount of time she actually got as the story went on.  It's nothing against Kelly Reilly's performance though, as I also thought she was very good.

The supporting cast is another strength.  John Goodman has a small role and provides some comedy relief.  There's something about him lately where I simply enjoy seeing him on screen. Don Cheadle is strong as well, and it was fun to see him and Denzel square off during the film. Bruce Greenwood is also good as a friend of Whip's, who's just about the only guy left that's in his corner.  Melissa Leo even has a small role towards the end, but I was so focused on Denzel, I didn't realize it was her.  This is the Denzel show though.

Robert Zemeckis has always been a favorite director of mine, and he didn't disappoint me here after taking a long break from live-action films.  As mentioned earlier regarding the humor, the tone of the film can be a little uneven.  I did think it stopped short of being overly melodramatic though, which is a good thing.  There are a few times John Gatins' screenplay did some things that were a little frustrating to me, and could have almost ruined the film, but overall the strengths outweigh the weaknesses.  I always talk about pacing, and while Flight is almost 2 hours and 20 minutes, I felt like it was gone in a flash.  I was stunned when I checked my phone after the movie and saw what time it was.

Flight is a really good, but not perfect film.  If anything, I'm sure it will make you take a really hard look at the pilot the next time you fly somewhere, or maybe yourself the next time you take a drink.  All kidding aside, it's a tense character study that's worth seeing alone for Denzel Washington's brilliant performance (and the opening sequence).  I highly recommend it.

4 (out of 5) Death Stars

Argo (2012) - Movie Review

Argo is one of those stories that sounds so unbelievable that I guess it had to be true, and features a plan so crazy that it had to work.

Set during the Iranian Revolution in 1979, the U.S. Embassy is overrun and most of it's staff are taken hostage.  A small group escapes and hides in the home of the Canadian ambassador.  Due all the chaos and shredding of the records, it's not noticed that six people are unaccounted for.  However, time is running out and if they are found in the ambassador's home, it will be bad for Canada's status in Iran and likely death for the Americans.  One thing that was nice about the opening of the film is that it gives you a quick history lesson about the events leading up to this revolution.  This is a nice touch for those of you not up on your history, or too young to recall the events as they happened.

CIA specialist Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) is brought in to evaluate the existing plans to extract them.  The flaws in all plans are quickly pointed out by Mendez, but can't think of a better plan himself.  He's later inspired when watching a sci-fi movie on TV with his son.  He'll go into Iran posing as a Canadian film crew scouting locations, meet up with Americans, train them, and then fly them all out together.

The plan is only as good as the details, so Mendez contacts a Hollywood make-up specialist John Chambers (John Goodman) to help with the cover story.  Chambers brings in successful producer Lester Siegel (Alan Arkin), who says that nobody will buy the cover unless there's a script and Hollywood actually believes the movie is being made.  You need to generate buzz.  They find a script for a sci-fi called Argo, a Star Wars ripoff.

You'd think they could gloss over this part, but this is practically a movie all to itself.  Storyboards are created, actors are hired, awful costumes are made, Hollywood parties are thrown and script readings are done.  Ads for Argo show up in Variety, and a fake movie is born.  This is also where a lot of the humor and surprising amount of fun comes from.  Alan Arkin and John Goodman are both great in their roles and are clearly having a lot of fun with it.  I finished watching Argo wanting to know more about these two and wishing they could come up with a way to give them a spin-off movie of their own.

The cast is stacked and everyone is so good that it's really hard to say that anyone stands out.  It reminded me of recent Steven Soderbergh films where you have guys that could be the leads in other films (like Bryan Cranston or Kyle Chandler) playing small roles as part of this large ensemble.  Ben Affleck seems to have that same ability to work with actors that Soderbergh has.  There aren't any throwaway characters or performances, and you manage to care about everyone despite not spending very much time with them.

Speaking of Ben Affleck, how does a guy go from being someone that most everyone barely took seriously not even ten years ago, to one of the best directors out there?  He's managed to do this in just three films, with each better than the last.  Argo is his best effort yet.  There's so much attention to detail, and you'll notice this from the outfits, the makeup, and even the overall look of the film.  It looks like something actually made back in the 70's.  Even the old Warner Brothers logo is used as the movie begins.  As the credits roll, you see side-by-side pictures of the real-life person and the actor playing them, and the resemblance between all of them is uncanny. Ironically, the one person that really didn't look at all like his real-life counterpart was Ben Affleck. It's kind of a surprise when he gets the details right in so many other areas that he didn't consider a different actor.  There's nothing wrong with the performance though, and I think he helps having a bigger name in the lead role.  Besides, Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms, yo!

Another impressive thing about the movie is how much tension there is in the film, despite knowing the outcome before the movie even starts.  I was on the edge of my seat as we reached the conclusion and there's a satisfying emotional payoff.  Members of the audience applauded even before the movie ended.

I know it's early in the Oscar season, and I'm sure I'm going to say this a few more times this year, but Argo really is an Oscar worthy film and Affleck should be nominated for his direction as well.

Argo is a truly great film that's nail-biting, exciting and is a blast to watch.  It proves the old saying that truth is stranger than fiction.  Ben Affleck also solidifies himself as one of the best directors working today.  This is one of the best movies of the year and one you shouldn't miss.

5 (out of 5) Death Stars

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

ParaNorman (2012) - Movie Review

On the surface, Norman (Kodi Smit-McPhee) seems like a pretty normal kid.  However, he has odd ability: he can see and communicate with the dead.  This has made him an outcast. He's bullied at school, and even his own family gives him a hard time and wishes he would be 'normal'. His only friend, Neil (Tucker Albrizzi), is just as much of an outsider as he is.

Norman continues to have visions that something terrible is coming, and when the small town you live in has a witch theme and history of witch executions, you know that can't be good.  He's warned by his uncle (John Goodman) that he must perform a ritual by sundown or the dead will rise.  Norman is joined by his sister, Courtney (Anna Kendrick), Neil's older brother, Mitch (Casey Affleck), and Alvin the bully (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) to stop the threat before it's too late.

The first thing you'll notice about this movie is its unique design. Everything from the houses, the cars, and even the character's faces, are a little off-center and asymmetrical.  It's simply a gorgeous movie, and the best stop-motion animation I can recall. I was initially concerned about seeing it as sometimes my eyes have difficulty focusing when the animation stutters, and it didn't help that the theater's projector was way too dim.  Replace your projector bulbs!  My initial concerns about it went away quickly once my eyes adjusted though.  One of the things I really loved about the use of this type of animation was that it gave the film a tangible quality.  The characters and sets had more weight and depth compared to how a CG-animated movie sometimes feels.

I was also surprised at how funny the movie was.  There's lots of referential humor to other horror films and sight gags that made me laugh.  Some of the humor felt directed at older audiences though.  While this is a movie that all ages can enjoy, some parts might be a little too scary for really young kids.  I saw a lot of kids sitting in their parents laps during some tense moments.  It's not bloody and there aren't any jump scares, but use your own discretion as to whether you think your kids can handle it.  Most of the kids in the audience seem to have adapted to the movie about halfway through.

The voice acting by the cast is great.  Outside of a voice or two, one of the things I love about an animated film is when they use recognizable actors, but you still can't quite place who the voice belongs to.  The voices all fit the characters well and you aren't distracted by them.

Sometimes I don't notice the score of a film, but the music of the movie was another aspect of ParaNorman that really stood out to me.  It fit the movie perfectly.  Plus, any movie that manages to squeeze in Dizzee Rascal's "Fix Up, Look Sharp", scores points with me.

It has a very powerful ending. At it's heart there are some poignant messages about acceptance, bullying and being an outcast. The movie doesn't hit you over the head with its message though. The basic story is one that's been told a ton of times, where the oddball/misfit/outcast is the one that has the power to save us, but with ParaNorman it felt fresh and it builds to a satisfying payoff. You have to credit writer and co-director Chris Butler with his work here.

I liked ParaNorman a lot more than I was expecting to. It's a funny and great looking film that everyone can enjoy. The voice acting is top notch and the film gives you a nice message that's important, especially for kids.  This is worth a matinee.

3.5 (out of 5) Death Stars