Synopsis: Adapted from author Philip Roth’s novel The Dying Animal, director Isabel Coixet’s elegant tale of obsession explores the relationship between a highly respected professor, David (Ben Kingsley), and an impossibly gorgeous grad student, Consuela (Penélope Cruz). As their relationship deepens, the professor finds his ego challenged by the girl’s enchanting beauty.

I’m not sure what it was, but I feel like this movie should have been better than it ultimately was. It was finely shot, had a nice musical score, and solid performances, but the overall film left me feeling underwhelmed nonetheless. There was something missing from all of the above and I’m not 100% sure what it was. I guess I just didn’t find the characters compelling enough to care about.

One theme that was handled well was the idea of jealousy. When Consuela asks David how many women he’s slept with, she asks if the number is over or under 50 and he says over. She brushes this off, but when he asks her how many men she’s slept with she says 5 and he becomes instantly jealous. Who were these men? How old were they? What did they do? I thought it was a great look into the psyche of men and the contradictory feelings men have towards women.

There wasn’t anything in this film that was outright terrible, but there wasn’t anything that gripped from from the start to truly care about this story. And it’s not that I need action or melodrama to keep me actively engaged in a movie, I love movies that are slow burns, but Elegy was just missing something I can’t quite put my finger on.

6/10

Believe it or not I haven’t seen that many Studio Ghibli films. As a film enthusiast it’s a little embarrassing to admit that I’ve only seen Castle in the Sky and Ponyo, but I refuse to hide from the truth lol. 

The Secret World of Arrietty is about a tiny family of “borrowers” who live in a house of normal people (a.k.a. “Beans” in the movie haha). The family has to keep their existence a secret and survive by borrowing little items that humans won’t miss. This isn’t exactly a completely original idea, but it does open up for some fantastic storytelling and intimate little details.

Studio Ghibli always seems to cast the very best voice actors for their American dubs. The actors blend into the characters and their voices are never obvious the way a stunt casted Dreamworks film would be. Need proof? My friend who I saw the film with is a HUGE fan of Arrested Development and he had no idea that Will Arnett voiced the father character. So I have to commend them for their excellent voice acting that fit the characters well.

I love the fact that even though this is a whimsical adventure story for children, the movie never shies away from dealing with weighty themes such as the importance of family and cherishing life. Admittedly, the themes could have been integrated a bit more smoothly, but I’m willing to be a bit more forgiving because the movie as a whole just works so well.

I don’t know about everyone else out there in Tumblr land, but I really miss 2D animation in movies. Maybe I’m biased because I grew up in the era of The Lion King, Mulan, and Aladdin, but I am very fond of 2D animation and Studio Ghibli is one of the last few studios giving us 2D. The textures of the backgrounds and the small details of the characters are so lush and rich. I wish more studios would fund 2D animated movies because I really do miss them.

One minor drawback is that the villain character is not built up well at all and kind of comes out of nowhere. I mean I thought the villain was HILARIOUS, sometimes in completely unintentional ways, but it would’ve been cool if they actually gave the villain even a subtle hint of backstory. Show us what their purpose actually meant to them instead of just blatantly saying it out loud once.

The Secret World of Arrietty is a delightfully charming film that is sure to captivate all who watch it. The world that Studio Ghibli creates and has its characters inhabit is so much fun and a joy to be in. The film also reaches for some nice emotional moments that resonate. I would highly recommend that everyone go see this movie, especially while its still in theaters because it is a great experience.

9/10

Silent House was actually only the second 2012 movie I saw in theaters. Just so you know, I’m not a big fan of horror films in general but the technical aspects of this film drew me to it. The movie has gotten middling reviews from critics and equally poor reviews from audiences, so I was curious as to what the film had to offer besides its one take gimmick.

Supposedly, the entire film was filmed in one continuous take, zero cuts. I figure that they used some clever editing to put the film together with 5 or 6 separate shots. I saw a few potential places where they could’ve used CGI or made a cut to start a new shot. Either way, the film still shines from a technical standpoint because you almost never see a film shown in this way.

When a TV show or a movie uses a long continuous take well, there is a sense of uneasiness that arises in the viewer. Whether we know it consciously or not, we are so used to the editing of TV shows and film and the flow it creates. When a shot goes on for too long, we kind of get the feeling of “okay, something isn’t right here” and Silent House utilizes this to great effect. There were so many moments where I felt uncomfortable because in a regular movie there would be cuts and edits, but everything just kept going.

As far as the acting, I generally liked Elizabeth Olsen as the lead in this movie. I may have been hypnotized by her because she’s one of my celebrity crushes, but I think that she pulled off “frightened girl” quite well here. I do think that she overacts a little bit during the more tense moments, but other than that she was great. The other two leads were more iffy. I feel like because the movie was done largely in one take that they had to keep in certain flat performances.

What I really loved about this movie was the subtlety and lack of explanation. It’s nice to have a movie that isn’t so eager to throw all the details at you in a heavy handed way or through exposition. I came into the movie hearing that the third act was unsatisfying, so maybe it was my low expectations, but I thought the finale was well executed. There were subtle little hints throughout the film as well that led up to it, so it didn’t feel like a completely out of left field final act.

My biggest complaint is that the film felt unengaging at times. There seemed to be a lack of a hook from the start. Also, the characters behave very unrealistically. If there’s anything audiences (and myself) hate, it’s stupid decisions made by the characters that make no logical sense. I’ll go into it with a “read more” break because I don’t want to spoil anything.

Another thing that irked me was the fact that the film obviously employs a single take gimmick to give us a very realistic/natural aesthetic. So can anyone tell me why this movie constantly had a music score playing throughout in the background to amp up the tension? That really bothered me because it totally contradicted the biggest technical achievement of the film.

Overall, Silent House is an effectively creepy horror film that utilizes its unique one take formula well. The movie has several effective sequences of tension and is technically wonderful. Its not a great horror film or anything, but it is different enough that I think it’s worth a look.

7/10

Spoilers for Silent House after the “read more” break!

Read More

My first movie of 2012! *tear* It’s beautiful, so beautiful. Made all the more beautiful by the fact that it was a great first film to start off the 2012 movie year. Can you believe that it’s been damn near a month since the last time I saw a movie in theaters!? The last film I saw was Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. There were quite a few other movies I wanted to catch, but just haven’t had the time due to school. Thanks to Natalie for coming with me to see this movie after I incessantly bugged her LOL.

Chronicle is the story of three teenagers who acquire telekinetic powers after finding a strange substance in the ground, which sounds very familiar in terms of superhero stories. However, Chronicle is not the typical superhero story of 1) finding powers, 2) exploring powers, 3) using powers for good. Something I remember /Film’s Peter Sciretta said about Hancock that I think fits with Chronicle is that it’s nice to go into a superhero story and not know any of the hero’s backstory. We know Peter Parker’s Uncle dies, we know that Joker isn’t going to die, we know the gamma rays are going to mutate Bruce Banner, etc. It was refreshing to go into a superhero story and not know what was going to happen.

The main trio of performances by Dane Dehaan, Alex Russell, and Michael B. Jordan ground the story with a compelling look at the different natures of each character. This might be my bias showing, but I think Michael B. Jordan (who is amazing on The Wire and Friday Night Lights) is clearly the standout among the three. While not exactly having the most original character, Jordan gives a charming, charismatic performance. Dane Dehaan clearly has the meatiest role and is really good for the most part, but I thought his acting at times was a little flat and at others ridiculously over the top. Alex Russell does fine as well, but he doesn’t really shine during the dramatic moments. Once again, it could be my bias, but I’m still hoping that Jordan becomes the star that he should be.

What I loved the most about this movie is how different it feels compared to other found footage films and superhero stories. There are similarities of course, but they throw in some nice little touches here and there that made me appreciate the filmmaking aspects and the ingenuity of the execution. For example, they find a way to keep the film from being shaky cam all the time in a clever way that didn’t feel stupid. The action set pieces are also quite invigorating and really had me clenching my seat in tension.

Admittedly, there were a few aspects of the movie where I was thinking “wait, how does that make sense?” This is a found footage movie, so it doesn’t really make sense to me why the camera would cut in the middle of scenes and keep up with the conversation in perfect time. There were also a few spots where no one is holding the camera and for some reason it basically does a jump cut within the same scene, which makes no sense because the camera should be running at all times until someone turns it off. Plus, the plausibility that someone would keep recording at some of those times requires a lot of suspension of belief.

The CGI is quite shaky at times, but I was more forgiving towards this film because I know that the budget wasn’t very high. I was mostly completely enthralled at the moments in this film that I was totally sucked into the story of it all. The movie is only 84 minutes long, but it feels like you get a lot of bang for your buck and not like the film was trying to skimp on story or action set pieces.

Chronicle features impressive filmmaking backed by solid performances and some breathtaking sequences that’ll knock you off your feet. Found footage films and superhero stories have been in vogue for quite a while, but Chronicle clearly isn’t an attempt to cash in on those two popular subgenres. It does a lot to differentiate itself from other found footage films and superhero stories cut from the same cloth. I’d highly recommend you see this movie in theaters because it is well worth a watch.

8.5/10

(Side note: I’ve had this in my drafts for about a week or two haha)

I was talking about the upcoming Hunger Games film with a friend recently and talking about how I was really happy that Gary Ross won out as director from the short list of people they had lined up to direct. While Ross hasn’t done action before, I thought that he did a great job in bringing out the themes of Pleasantville. There’s a lot of great social commentary and moral grey areas in The Hunger Games, so I thought Ross was the best man for the job.

I’ve had Seabiscuit sitting on my shelf stacked with DVD’s for quite some time now and thought, “Hey! Gary Ross directed that, might as well check it out before The Hunger Games comes out.” Yeah… bad idea…

I thought Seabiscuit was thoroughly mediocre and at many times absolutely terrible. The characters are poor archetypes at best. Name one adjective about Elizabeth Banks’s character that doesn’t have to do with her looks… you can’t! Because there’s nothing there! Jeff Bridges had the only character they could have conceivably done something interesting with in terms of his tragic past and the reversal of opinion on engineering and the future, but nooooooo, we can’t have that! Instead we’ll just make him extremely nice for the remainder of the film.

A lot of the scenes were flat out ridiculous, and this is coming from a guy who had no problems with War Horse. I suppose the difference is that Seabiscuit is supposed to be a biopic and true to life, whereas I always saw War Horse as more so a fairy tale straight out of a children’s book. If it wasn’t for the second half of Seabiscuit, this would seriously be one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen.

There are so many terribly done and unsubtle scenes with parallels and callbacks that are supposed to make you go “ohhhhhh.” The scene where Chris Cooper decides to pair up Seabiscuit with Red is absolutely atrocious. We see Seabiscuit unable to be tamed by the men, Cooper looks at Tobey Maguire fighting off about 4 or 5 guys, cut back to Cooper looking at Seabiscuit, cut to Cooper looking at Maguire, cut back to Seabiscuit one more time, cut back to Tobey Maguire, and then it’s like Cooper goes “I’ll put these two wild things together! I’M A GENIUS!” *facepalm*. And there’s another like 5 minute segment where we get a flashback to Seabiscuit’s past with tedious voice over narration that seriously made me laugh out loud. 

Admittedly the film does pick up a bit in the second half but the movie is just so unengaging. Why am I supposed to care about these people or this horse? They spell it out for you but that doesn’t make me CARE about Seabiscuit. And the movie constantly refers to Seabiscuit as an underdog, but we never really see how he’s outmatched by other “better” horses with more advantageous characteristics.

I am honestly APALLED that this film was nominate for Best Picture at the Oscars in 2003. Admittedly, it wasn’t am AMAZING year for film, but it was still a year that included In America, Matchstick Men, Kill Bill Vol. 1, 21 Grams, and Big Fish. Hell, nominate Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl for all I care, but Seabiscuit? What the hell is going on???

Rewatched Lars and the Real Girl this week and I just had to do a write up on this fantastic movie.

The basic gist of the movie is that a delusional young man creates a relationship with a life sized doll he orders on the internet. That sounds like the start of a terrible comedy, but this movie doesn’t use that premise just to get a bunch of easy, cheap laughs. Amazingly, they find a way to create a dramedy that touches on our relationships with other people.

The cast is absolutely fantastic. Ryan Gosling is Ryan Gosling, no need to explain why he was great in this movie lol. I LOVE Emily Mortimer, Patricia Clarkson, Paul Schneider, and Kelli Garner in this movie too though. Mortimer plays the more understanding side to Schneider’s (at first) more crass nature. Why are the only roles Patricia Clarkson seems to get are the “wacky mom” roles? She’s an AMAZING actress! And Kelli Garner, how adorable is this girl? Pretty funny seeing her be so sweet in this movie because she was 100% BITCH in the movie Thumbsucker hahaha. I love how subtly the film dealt with each of the characters. You find out little details that inform you of each character’s M.O. and how they view the situation.

I just really dig that this movie didn’t take the easy way out and say that Lars was fucking crazy and instead they delved into the psychology of the situation and what would push a man to do the things Lars did.

If you haven’t seen Lars and the Real Girl, I would highly recommend it. To really get into what I want to talk about I have to get into spoilers which I’ll leave after the “read more” break. If you haven’t seen it, go see it and hopefully you’ll come back and read what I have to say about the movie, cheers!

Read More

I was so pumped to see this film you have no idea. I loved Tomas Alfredson’s Let the Right One In (which was given an American remake released last year, Let Me In) and the cast was literally INSANE. The cast list was a who’s who of spectacular character actors, most of whom are highly underappreciated. You’ve got Gary Oldman, John Hurt, Benedict Cumberbatch, Colin Firth, Mark Strong, Tom Hardy, Ciaran Hinds, Toby Jones, Stephen Graham, and the list goes on and on. The trailer looked spectacular, the reviews were excellent, and I was just ready to be blown away by this movie.

The theater I went to see this at is a broken down old theater that nobody except for senior citizens and the film crowd really goes to. The theater had no heater so it was pretty chilly while watching this film, which I actually think greatly improved the dramatic atmosphere of the film lol. 

It seems that there has been a disconnect between International critics and American critics about this movie. Internationally this film has been getting rave reviews, whereas domestically it has been getting more lukewarm reviews. 

I’ve heard people say that this film was cold/austere and they’re pretty much on the money. It is hard to garner an emotional response or connection from the events that transpire when we are given so little reason to care. These characters are merely enigmas with very little insight into their motivations. There’s a scene early on with the brilliant Ciaran Hinds (who was criminally underused in this film) where he basically says “We’re the only people coming between World War III,” but we never see exactly how close they actually are to actually starting a world war.

What is great about this film is how subtle it is and the lack of explanations for certain things. There are several small little visual cues or bits of dialogue that the movie just expects you to understand. This makes you listen and watch the film twice as closely as you would with most regular films. If you’re easily bored or not a patient viewer, this movie will put you off. Take a few minutes or sometimes even a few seconds of your attention off the film and you will have no clue what is going on.  

There were some sequences in this film that had me completely hooked. My eyes were locked onto the screen and completely locked into what was going on. The espionage sequences were just crafted so well. Each little story told felt like its own short film. I especially admired the Tom Hardy and Gary Oldman segments. The opening scene with Mark Strong is so fantastic that I thought I was in for what would easily be one of the best films of the year.

What ultimately prevents this film from being an incredible film is how unengaging most of the characters are. There is a lack of personality and motivation from almost every single character introduced. It is hard to get attached to the proceedings of the film or any character involved when everyone just plays it mysterious. It feels so anticlimactic when the spy is revealed. Maybe that was done intentionally, but it doesn’t make for a satisfying movie going experience and the follow up explanation is so nonchalant and casual that I couldn’t discern what the spy’s ultimate purpose was. Every single character moment feels rushed and unearned. What saves the movie from being a total waste is that every single actor puts in amazing work. You can’t watch this film and NOT be impressed by the acting that’s for sure, but I don’t think you’ll ever garner any real emotional response to the story or characters.

Ultimately, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is not nearly as rewarding or amazing as I hoped it would be, but I did find much to like about this film. While the characters and the payoff may leave much to be desired, the entire cast is firing on all cylinders and Tomas Alfredson provides such cool, guided direction throughout. If you do see this, don’t expect a masterpiece and make sure you pay attention, otherwise you won’t get much out of this film.

7/10