Every Dark Cloud

   Often times films are portrayed in trailers as one thing and when you see the film it turns out to be something completely different. I expected Silver Linings Playbook to be just another crazy romantic comedy.  Nothing could be further from the truth and the end result is a film that is so enjoyable to watch I came away feeling joyful.  No small feat for a film that deals with bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and being widowed at a very young age.  Serious subject matter to be sure but rather than glossing over these issues they are obstacles the charcaters navigate towards a wonderful conclusion.  Kudos to director David O. Russell.

     Playbook has received much critical acclaim since its' release in November and deservedly so.  It has been nominated for Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Actor (Bradley Cooper), Best Actress (Jennifer Lawrence), Best Supporting Actor (Robert De Niro), Best Supporting Actress (Jacki Weaver), and Director and adapted screenplay (David Russell).  The nomination of all four actors is quite rare and a first since Warren Beaty's "Reds" in 1981.  

     The story is set in Philadelphia circa 2008 and starts with the lead being released from a Baltimore mental institution where he has been for the previous 8 months.  Pat Solitano, played by Bradley Cooper, is suffering from bipolar condition and seems to be on the edge of losing control.  Yet his character is extremely sympathetic and I found myself constantly rooting for him.  Cooper had a very troubled and complex character to play and I feel he pulled it off beautifully.  In flashbacks the film shows Pat coming home early from work one day and finding his wife having a affair with another man.  He almost beats the other man to death and this is the incident that get's him institutionalized in the first place.  Understandable in the situation but not good.  Obviously he has control issues which may have been learned from his father who has been banned from Philadelphia Eagles games for fighting with other fans.  The movie shows Pat struggling to regain control of his life and holding on to the fantasy that he will somehow regain the respect of his estranged wife and be happily married once again.  Pats' parents are trying to help their son with much patience and unexpressed love but are really out of their depth.  Since Pat refuses to take medication he is always on the edge of losing control and sometimes goes too far.  A great character in the film is a police officer who continually is called to their home to quell disturbances, always reminding Pat that he can be sent back to the institution.  
     Enter Tiffany Maxwell, played by Jennifer Lawrence, who has plenty of issues of her own.  Through narrative it is learned that she suffered the loss of her husband and has resorted to sex as a means of dealing with the loss.  As a matter of fact she tells of having sex with everyone at her office which eventually gets her fired.  
     While there are many wryly funny moments in Playbook up until this point, when Tiffany arrives on the scene the movie really takes off.  Pat seems like a sad, lost soul but with Tiffany annoying him he becomes less self-absorbed.  These two damaged people dance around each other, both figuratively and literally.  Suddenly this becomes a very sweet movie.  Playbook is not your usual fare and swings back and forth between drama and comedy.  A dramady if you will.  And yet the romantic undertones,  perhaps not even recognized by Pat and Tiffany themselves, is what propels this movie to it's ultimate, yet predictable conclusion.  
     The supporting cast are what really lifts this movie to another level. Pat Sr., played by De Niro, suffers from OCD and has recently lost his job.  What does he do?  He resorts to bookmaking to make ends meet.  He is a rabid Eagles fan who is filled with all sorts of superstitions that he is convinced determines the outcomes of games.  But it is the heartfelt and emotional scenes with Pat Jr. that really gives De Niro opportunity to stretch his acting chops.  A few minutes is all it takes to remind us of what an acting giant he is and worthy of perhaps an Oscar come spring.  And lastly there is Dolores, the matriarch of the Solantino clan, played by Jacki Weaver.  She is the one person that seems to be the most well adjusted of the bunch.  Long suffering and silent in most of her scenes, she makes crabby snacks on game day and supports her men all along the way. Of course when things get too nutty she speaks up but by that time who is listening with all the yelling going on?  Yet the warmth and love that she expresses in her facial expressions is really what holds this family together.  She is Mom, all the way.  The ending becomes predictable but who cares?  When I left the theater I believed that every dark cloud has a silver lining.  

Les Miz

     Opening on Christmas day 2012 was the film version of the much beloved stage musical Les Miserables.  Directed by Tom Hooper and starring Hollywood heavyweights Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, and Anne Hathaway.  The stage production of the musical has been seen by more people than any other musical worldwide and is touted as the most popular musical of all time.  The stage production first opened in 1980 and while initially was panned by the critics audiences were very receptive.  What do critics know anyway?  Our job is to be critical.  To me the star of the show is the music itself.  The score is sweeping in scope,  emotionally charged, and moving in nature. This is the challenge facing any actor wishing to perform in this musical.  Of course the stage productions cast the absolute best singers in the roles and since, have become legendary in their portrayals.  

     This work is based on the classic novel first published in 1862 and written by Victor Hugo who also authored "The Hunchback of Notre Dame".  At more the 2,500 pages the novel is anything but an easy read.  However it is considered one of the classic novels of all time.  The story is set in early 1800's pre-revolution France.  The story begins in 1815  and follows the trials and tribulations of Jean Valjean, using him to expose the conditions of the day and social injustice.  The story opens with Valjean being paroled from prison after serving a total of 19 years for stealing a loaf of bread and failed escape attempts.  He ends up breaking his parole and assuming a fake identity after being given a second chance at life by a priest from whom he tried to steal.  He becomes the mayor of a town, owner of a factory, and a man driven by ideals.  The antagonist in the story is Javert, a fanatical policeman who pursues Valjean over the decades this story covers.  Many other characters move in and out of the story which creates a lush tableau for a classic tale of social injustice, intrigue, love, and redemption.

     So now on to the film version which is pertinent since after all this is a movie review.  I have seen the stage production several times and as a musician and singer I am in awe of the actors who play these parts.  The film version not so much so.  When converting a stage musical to film the director has two choices in casting.  Go for great singers who can act or movie stars who can sing.  Hooper chose the latter with what I feel are mixed results.  Jackman and Hathaway have received much critical acclaim for their singing and acting but I am not on board.  Both recently won Golden Globe awards for their portrayals which, seems to me, make the Golden Globes nothing more that a love fest for Hollywood insiders.  Very often Jackman's nasality was a distraction to the beautiful score.  When Hathaway sings quietly she has the chops to carry off the demanding song "I dreamed a dream".  But when she ups the volume level and tries to push it to soaring levels she becomes melodramatic and falls flat.  Much criticism has been leveled at Crowe for his singing which I am also in disagreement with.  As Javert, the relentless pursuer of Jean Valjean (Jackman), Crowe sings the show stopping "Stars" in this musical filled with show stoppers.  He stays within  his limitations and as such it plays extremely well.  There are some stellar performances by people who come with the stage cred to carry it off.  Leading off that list is Samantha Banks who plays the tragic Eponine and Amanda Seyfried as the grown up Cosette.  Banks, nearly steals the show with the number "On my own".  A song that can melt the heart of anyone.  And Seyfried's voice is that of an angel.  These two women are the wow factor in this film.  Even an untrained ear can tell the difference between trained singers and the movie stars who are often out of their depth.  Another worthy mention is Eddie Redmayne as Marius, the love interest of Cosette.  His vocals are heartfelt and moving.  The score and orchestrations are in a word, fantastic.  I know this is delving into the music portion of the film in a lot of detail and to some may seem nitpickey.  But this IS a musical after all.  I also read that instead of prerecording the vocals and then shooting the film with the actors lip sinking to the sound track Hooper elected to film the actors sing to the musical score live while shooting.  I think this was a mistake.  

     Now on to the film itself.  Contrary to what you may be thinking I liked this movie.  It really expands on a story that is already known by millions and gives it a narrative that only film can do.  The opening scene has eye popping special effects, the make up and costuming is flawless, and the pacing keeps this 2 hour and 38 minute film interesting throughout.  Some of the editing or set design looks as though they just filmed a stage presentation.  This doesn't happen very often and I don't think detracts from this film in the final analysis.  I really enjoyed this film and would recommend it to anyone who likes musicals.  If you haven't seen the stage production you should love this film, and if you have you still will.  Just not as much.  There is a lot of tragedy in the telling of this story so if you take a date have a crying towel at the ready.

I give this film a B+

...bin Laden Hunting.

     The much lauded film Zero Dark Thirty opened in the Seattle/Tacoma area January 11th so I attended a late night viewing to see what all the buzz is about.  Nominated for five academy awards including best film and best actress I figured this would be an exciting film to see.  Not hardly.  In the trailers for the film most of the footage shown is of the raid on the Abbottabad compound where Osama bin Laden was killed.  Leading me to believe that a good portion of the film would focus on the operation and the special forces who conducted it.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  With a running time of 2 hours 37 minutes perhaps 30  minutes is devoted to the operation that brought bin Laden to justice.  So little time is spent on the characters of the special forces unit that they come off as stereotypical and cartoonish. The focus on the "hunt for bin Laden"  is entirely on the character of Maya, a young woman CIA agent/operative?  It is hard to tell what she is what because so much of the film goes unexplained. 
     I just don't understand why this film would focus on such a small aspect of the investigation.  Is it so surprising that women would now play pivotal roles in the CIA?  Countless women have served in Iran and Afghanistan and many have been killed in that service.  A more moving and compelling story which I hope a director will tell one day. 
     Yet with little to no narrative a film that aims at artistic expression instead becomes confusing.  Don't get me wrong, Zero Dark Thirty is a good film but I can't understand all the accolades this film is receiving.  Film critic after film critic is declaring this the best film of 2012.  Really?  The film begins with the use of torturing detainees in the gathering of information.  Much controversy had been paid to how torture is portrayed in this film and how it is presented as an effective tool in gathering accurate information.  I don't want to get to get into moral issues, after all this is a movie review.  But I do feel that if a director presents torture as an interrogation tool then they have a responsibility to present the good, bad and the ugly.  I think the good and ugly are shown but as investigations into "enhanced interrogation techniques" have shown, a mountain of misinformation was given by people who were mercilessly tortured.  That is the bad because it is not only counterproductive to what is trying to be accomplished it removes any moral high ground that the United States can claim.  Sorry, I got off track for a moment there. 
     Now back to the movie.  After bit of information is gathered the film shows Maya trying to follow each lead and tidbit in her relentless pursuit of bin Laden.  Maya has been recruited by the CIA right out of high school and this is her only job.  It takes years to make contacts, cross check information and run down leads.  I felt like I was watching the process in real time.  So much of this movie takes place in offices with people sitting in front of computer screens or arguing in hallways.  BORING  That kind of behavior can be observed in almost any work place.  Granted these people are acting in the national interest, but there is nothing here that makes working for the CIA appear romantic, interesting, or even the least bit fun.  The rest of the film for me plodded along while trying to build tension along the way.  For me it failed in this aspect.  I felt a lot more tension and enjoyed Argo twice as much.  For me Zero Dark Thirty is a good film but the best film of the year?  No way.
I would give this film a grade of B

It's pronounced Jango, The D is silent!

 

 

     Quentin Tarantino, is viewed by many as the finest director of his generation.  I think his latest installment, Django Unchained,  will go a long way in solidifying his position among the great American film makers. Tarantino, the former video store employee, has never made it a secret that he is is a huge fan of

B movies especially spaghetti westerns and kung fu films.  So much of his body of work pays homage to these two genres, often times mixing these two together with uncanny effect.  For the baby boomer, which I am one, I always find a wry smile creeping across my face or a little chuckle welling up under my breath when I am confronted with one of Tarantino's references to movies from days gone by.  There is nothing like nostalgia to warm the heart of a film goer.  And so, to begin with, does the name Django, ring a bell?  With more than sixty films having a character with the name Django, since the first one in 1966, it rightly should.  Yet the details are elusive.  Such are the elements of a B movie.  A really cool title with a forgettable storyline.  So you tell me what could be cooler that Django?  (the D is silent).  I digress, so for now, let's get on with the review.

     The film pays homage to spaghetti westerns of the sixties and seventies in awesome detail.  Especially the opening credits and theme song, which could easily have been lifted right from the era.  It totally created an unbelievable  sense of excitement for me.  I found I could hardly wait to see what was next for these two protagonists.  Let me tell you, for a jaded old cinemaphile such as myself, that is saying a lot. 

     The pacing of the film I must say is perfect.  The unfolding of the story in such a logical and straight forward fashion not all that common in a Tarantino film.  The title role of Django is played by Jamie Fox, who gives one of his best performances to date with a great balance of drama and humor.  It was such a perfect match for this film.  Even more astonishing was the performance of Christpher Waltz, a one time Dentist, and now, presently, a bounty hunter.  As with any film by Tarantino, the story takes more twists and turns than Lombard street in San Francisco.  Suffice it to say things never become predictable or boring.  Instead I found myself loving just about every minute of this joyride. 

     So to quickly sum up the plot, if that is even possible.  Dr. King, played by Waltz, saves Django by purchasing him from his cruel slavers in order to have Django identify three particular fugitives that King needs to get, dead or alive, for the bounty each has on his head.  I think that dead is the preferable state he wants them in.  It  HAS to be, after all this IS a Tarantino film, is it not?  And Dr. King, is it possible his name is a mere coincidence?  I think not!  When the job is finally done, he pays Django his share of the reward, and offers him this proposition.  That they partner up in the bounty hunting business through the winter.  Come spring he will help Django locate his wife and also buy her freedom.  I mean what self respecting slave, or any man for that matter, would turn down a deal like that?  So what seemingly begins as a western in actuality becomes a buddy picture.  Waltz and Fox have real on screen chemistry, a Bromance if you will.  There is nothing like two men bringing death and mayhem upon some of the most deserving people in movie history to get one's adrenaline pumping.  Yet the gore and violence seem a bit restrained for a Tarantino film.  Just as well, because in the final reel all hell breaks loose  and so does the blood and gore.  But it all is justified and never seems out of place.  Over the top for sure but not even close to the goriest scenes from Scarface. (the Al Pachino version)  This film has it all and then some.  As I write this review I realize that I like this film even more in retrospect than while I was actually viewing it.  I could go on about the plot and different devices but why ruin the ride for you?  I will say that Leonardo Di Caprio is deliciously evil as Calvin J. Candie, owner of the plantation Candyland.  One of his more curious passions is to engage his more athletic slaves in death match fights with other slaves from neighboring plantations.  All on a wager, of course.  The lengths the wealthy of the antebellum south will go to for entertainment.  Kind of like MMA without the killing.  If viewed too literally this film could seem silly.  But then these kinds of films were always for pure entertainment and this is where Django Unchained succeeds.  Can you say the Legend of Billy Jack?  If you have a cool girl friend then this would be a good date movie.  If you want to get rid of your chick flick watching girlfriend then this is a good date movie. 

I give this move a grade of A-,  mark downs for songs on the soundtrack that just don't' belong.  Oh c'mon Quentin,  Jim Croce?

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

     The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey opens today, December 14th, at theaters all around the country.  Set sixty years prior to the beginning of the Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit chronicles the initial story of how Bilbo Baggins came in possession of the "precious" ring, central to the Lord of the Rings trilogy.  Directed by Peter Jackson, The Hobbit proves once again that he's got "it".  Spielberg, used to have "it" and so did George Lucas.  Now it's Jackson who has the ability to present films that have beautiful locations, eye popping special effects, and a story that creates a mythology all it's own.  Of course working with classic stories that are written by J.R. Tolkien helps too. 
     Jackson has a hard act to follow with his Lord of the Rings trilogy which is considered by many, including myself, to be the best fantasy series ever committed to film.  With his final film, The Return of the King, taking the Oscar for Best Picture for 2003.  Being the only sci fi/fantasy film ever to do so.  But does anyone actually expect him to surpass Lord of the Rings?  I would think that a foolhardy proposition and yet I keep seeing this film being compared to his previous work. Of course it is going to fall short!  However, judged on it's own merits, The Hobbit, is a great movie.  And as I was watching that is exactly what I kept saying to myself.  "Wow this is a great movie."  Although I can't understand why Jackson is turning The Hobbit into a trilogy.  Can't the guy tell a story in one outing?  At 2 hours 45 minutes the film is runs little long in the tooth.  This film suffers from one too many battle sequences or chase scenes that go on for much too long.  So yes,  perhaps less is more but for me the film never gets draggy.  I also feel the 3D effects filmed at 48 frames per second gives the picture a crisp, clean look.  Perhaps the best 3D film I have ever seen.  I do recommend that this film be viewed in the 3D / 48 fps process.  It adds a great deal to the composition and scope of the film which I would liken to the difference between mono and stereo audio recording.  Martin Freeman is perfect as the young Bilbo Baggins and Ian McKellan reprises his role as Gandalf the Grey.  Of course this prequal takes place sixty years before The Lord of the Rings, so a younger Gandalf is running around kicking butt all on his own.  It's really fun to see.  I don't know what more I can say regarding this film.  It would be a good date film if both people like fantasy/sci fi/ action films.  The Hobbit has a beauty all it's own.  Just don't go expecting the Lord of the Rings.  For those of us who love the mythology surrounding Middle Earth, The Hobbit will not disappoint.  It is by far one of the most enjoyable films I have seen in 2012. 
I give The Hobbit a grade of: A-

Ben Affleck delivers with Argo.

     Ben Affleck finally delivers an Oscar contender with Argo, a true life story about six Americans hiding in the Canadian embassy during the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979.  It is hard to describe to someone too young to remember the era but I will try to very briefly and succinctly.  The seventies could be compared to the roaring twenties some fifty years before hand (ninety now).  Instead of flappers dancing the Charleston we had chicks in mini skirts disco dancing.  It was a decade long party that bordered on the hedonistic.  In my view the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979, along with double digit inflation, interest rates over 10 % and an economy in free fall were the factors that ended the party.  Of course nothing that our President, Jimmy Carter tried,  seemed to help.  In all fairness to Jimmy, after we suffered two oil embargo's, it became painfully clear that economics in this country depend on gas prices.  I don't want to sound like a old fart but I can remember gas prices of 35 cents a gallon.  Can you possibly imagine how strong our economy would be if gas prices were that low right now?
     OK, enough of the history lesson, now on to the movie.  Released on October 12 Argo has what they call in the industry as "legs". In an age where films stay in theaters only a month at best, Argo still seems to be going strong after nearly two months.  Kind of like a certain bunny.  And for good reason.  Argo is a tight historical thriller that occurred not so long ago. 
     In 1979, my attention, along with the rest of the nation, was focused on the 52 hostages being held in the U.S. embassy.  Little did we know, six Americans escaped capture, and eventually made their way to the Canadian embassy.  There they hid out while somehow trying to figure out what the next move would be.  Of course the wrong move would mean certain execution.  Literally.  Ben Affleck the actor portrays the CIA operative given the mission of coming up with a plan the rescue the six.  The plan that was finally used was to "pretend" a film crew, scouting out locations, would go to Iran and exit the country with the six would be hostages posing as the film crew.  Affleck, the director, uses tension tempered with sporadic interjections of humor in a way which is reminiscent of, dare I say, Alfred Hitchcock.  Bold praise to be sure but well earned in my estimation.  The acting is very natural in it's execution to the point of being almost banal.  My son commented that the people seemed kind of boring and I had to remind him that Argo is based on real people and real events.  Let's face it, most real people are kind of boring.  Since Argo is only based on real events,  interesting characters had to be invented and interjected to make the film more interesting.  After all this is Hollywood.  The funniest and most interesting non-real character is Lester Siegel, played by Alan Arkin.  He is a light touch in what is a very dark movie, and having this character provides the film much needed balance.  Partnered with the irascible John Goodman, playing real life make up artist John Chamber, the pair provide the film with many chuckles.  I predict that Arkin will earn an Oscar nomination for best supporting actor, and may even win, with sympathy votes so common in the category.  As long as I am in a predicting mood I think Argo will also be nominated for Best Picture, Director, and Screenplay.  I'm not going to predict any winners at this point.  Too many more films to come out yet. 
     Back to the review.  The unfolding of the story takes a natural pace, which almost feels like you are watching things as they happen.  Any person who was an adult during then remembers how dangerous Iran was at the time, especially if you were an American.  Of course to ratchet up the tension, extra devices are used to keep us on the edge of our seats, but are totally unnecessary.  Especially a foot chase through an airport.  I mean how many times have we seen that?  Still Argo is a very, very good film.  I recommend it and think that it would make a good date movie or maybe take a break from holiday shopping and take in a matinee.  If nothing else rent the dvd when it comes out.  It is really worthwhile.
It will remind you of all the blessings you enjoy.
I give this movie a grade of: solid A

A Bond for the 21st Century

                 

     This latest installment in the James Bond franchise marks the 23rd film since Dr. No debuted fifty years ago in 1962.  And right from the get go we were riveted by the suave British spy with a licence to kill who always got the girl.  Let's face it....any girl.  Introducing American audiences to a potent mix of international intrigue, heart pounding action sequences, and a plethora of sexy women with sexually suggestive names (who will ever forget Pussy Galore?), Bond became an instant icon to millions of Boomer generation boys throughout the sixties.  It was an age where sex had to be suggested more covertly and Bond films perfected the technique. 
     So how does Skyfall stack up and more importantly, Daniel Craig as James Bond?  Very favorably I do say.  There have been five actors to take on the James Bond mantle and with Craig being number six comparisons are inevitable.  Most go with Sean Connery as the best of the bunch in the role that he originated.  But if he is number one then Craig gets my vote as number two and may actually be the best of all.  I think he brings a lot more depth to the character.  Instead of being the wise cracking spy, dropping one liners, he is a man that is haunted.  He has been affected by the stresses of his job: in which he can go from hunter to hunted at any given moment. In Casino Royale he showed us that having a licence to kill is not all it's cracked up to be.  Especially when you actually have to use it.
     Skyfall takes Bond to another level and updates and freshens the franchise for the new millennia.  This film begins with an exhilarating action sequence filmed in Istanbul.  When I go to a Bond film and see exotic locations, mixed with dangerous situations I feel a certain comfort level that seems very familiar.  As in You Only Live Twice, Bond is presumed dead  after he is shot, falls off a train trestle about a mile over a rushing river; body MIA.  Cue music, and Adele sings the beautiful theme to Skyfall which I think tops all the themes songs for all the Bond films.  I predict it will win her an academy award next year.  I could go on and on about the film and plot, but why would I ruin the experience for you?  I will just say all the usual players are being updated.  The humor is there in just the right amounts and nods to past films give the movie an air of nostalgia.  Even the Aston Martin DB5 from Goldfinger turns up in the film.  Of course what really makes a good Bond film is the villain.  Blofeld and Jaws were memorable antagonists for Bond to battle. Now we have another top notch villain in cyberterrorist Raul Silva played by academy award winner Javiar Bardem of No Country for Old Men fame.  I mean cyberterrorism?  The bad guys used to just want an atom bomb or a laser in outer space.  Cyberterrorism can be devastating and all you need is a lap top.  I guess this really is a new century.  Skyfall is a great film.  I highly recommend it and would say this would also make a good date movie. 
I give Skyfall a solid grade of A-, not quite perfect, but close to it.