Her (2013)

5/5

Spike Jonze's Her is an expertly-crafted and beautifully-told love story. Although it is set in the future, it is a love story through and through. After a painful breakup with his girlfriend (Mara), Theodore Twombly (Phoenix) finds himself unexpectedly falling for his personal assistant, Samantha (Johansson). Their mutual attraction blossoms into a tender romance that some view with prejudice and others with acceptance. Despite the occasional false steps and fights, their relationship feels promising. But that is when the specter of doubt begins to rear its ugly head.

The movie's conceit is that Samantha is a piece of software, an operating system with an artificial intelligence that rivals and perhaps surpasses human intelligence. In fact, the film is advertised that way, banking on its strangeness to be the talk of the town. But it is so much more than a simple gimmick.

As far as storytelling goes, Her is a masterpiece. It is Annie Hall for the tech generation, and I do not say that lightly. It embodies the ups and downs of love, the sidesteps and detours of life, the frailty and imperfections of people. Her is somehow all those things delivered in a crisply-shot and sharply-written film. It is ferociously funny and manipulatively tender. It matches an unparalleled ebullience with a debilitating dread. It pulls at just the right heartstrings at just the right times.

From the subtle use of grain and POV to the story's fundamental architecture, Jonze directs masterfully. He elicits nuance out of the actors, whether it's the flicker of their facial muscles or the timbre of their voice, that elevates their performance well past our expectations. He uses flashbacks to tell the backstory so simply, so effortlessly, so precisely, that I cannot believe they are fictional at all. I cannot imagine that someone has not had those exact emotions before. They are silent reveries, uncontrollable daydreams, pure nostalgia.

The movie is not unassailable. For the life of me, I cannot fathom the thought process behind the movie's absurd fashion choices. I sincerely hope we don't dress like that at any point in the near or distant future. But even if this movie is eerily accurate about what we wear in the future, what's the point? It only serves to distract. It is the elephant in the room instead of the painting in the background. Is the movie supposed to be about love or is it supposed to be about navel-hugging belt-less tweed pants pulled up as high as possible around multiple layers of collared shirts?

Perhaps Her bites off a bit more than it can chew, but it is easily one of the best movies of the year. It has already taken hold of our culture, as evidenced by the innumerable parodies floating around online, and tickled something inside all of us. It is a magnificent film and a magical film. It is unique but universal. Watching Her is an experience everyone should get to enjoy.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/

Despicable Me 2 (2013)

4/5

Despicable Me 2 is the sequel to the endearing animated family film Despicable Me. While trying to raise his three adopted daughters (Cosgrove, Fischer, Gaier), ex-supervillain Gru (Carrell) is contracted by Lucy (Wiig) to locate and eliminate a new supervillain. Along the way he unexpectedly falls in love with Lucy, but higher forces conspire to pull them apart. From a technical standpoint, this movie is better than the first. Beautiful animation and first-rate voice-acting give it a brilliant polish and shine. The movie has plenty of good jokes--I was laughing the whole way through--but they did not have the same oomph that the first one had.

Something about Despicable Me 2 just feels staid, old, and contrived instead of feeling fresh, unexpected, and new. It is more childish, or maybe just more child-oriented, than the first one was. While many animated movies have parts for kids and adults, it seems that Despicable Me 2 uses adult humor (e.g., sexual double entendres) to placate the 20+ crowd instead of delivering mature, thoughtful themes (e.g., on parenting). While there's certainly nothing wrong with making a movie focused predominantly on kids, it definitely loses something that the first one had. It loses a certain gravitas, an opportunity to stand the test of time, a chance to be a classic. It's a terrifically entertaining movie, but it's also just a little disappointing.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1690953/

Elysium (2013)

4/5

Neill Blomkamp's Elysium will, of course, draw comparisons to the director's previous work, District 9, since both are sci-fi action movies employing hyper-realistic special effects, cinema verité-style camerawork, and plots that play like morality tales about the maltreatment and subjugation of a population's citizens. While the combination of all those things felt exhilarating and unprecedented 5 years ago, here they feel a bit tired.

Elysium, like District 9 and Children of Men, delivers a precisely-detailed and complexly-envisioned future. But the characters with which it inhabits that world are unexciting; their quest is uncompelling; the stakes are underwhelming. It is not enough for the background to be thematically interesting, because the foreground is what will get our blood pumping and bring us to our feet cheering. Instead the story feels like a pretty barebones excuse for fights and explosions. Luckily, the (rather sparse) action is exceptional, leaps and bounds better than most of what we are seeing in theaters today. Some scenes are so visually arresting, so stunningly beautiful, that they seem somehow operatic and timeless. That they are simultaneously violently graphic and viscerally horrifying does not diminish their value, but simply brands them in our minds.

Elysium is ultimately not as good as District 9. While perhaps more technically impressive than his previous work, it needed a stronger story to unlock all the potential it had. What frustrates me is that we know Blomkamp can do better. And I sincerely hope he pulls through on the next one, because I love watching his movies.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535108/

Saving Mr. Banks (2013)

3/5

Disney's Saving Mr. Banks is an expectedly heartwarming story about the creation of the Mary Poppins movie. Walt Disney (Hanks) has been trying for decades to woo P.L. Travers (Thompson) into giving them the rights to adapt her Mary Poppins books for the silver screen. Due to recent financial difficulties, she finally agrees to meet with the Disney songwriters (Novak, Schwartzman, Whitford) as long as she gets the final say in what ends up in the film. Upon first blush, she appears to be a crotchety old fart with a bug up her butt; she is senselessly rigid and unreasonable in her demands. But as the movie progresses she opens up, first to her chauffeur (Giamatti) and then to Disney himself. We discover what her childhood was like, why she wrote the Mary Poppins stories, and why she clings so closely to the words she put on the page.

Immediately after exiting the theater, I remember thinking how life-affirming and rewarding the movie felt. But looking back, it seems extraordinarily Hollywood-ized. Disney is basically advertising itself, which heavily limits how much we might believe that this was "based on a true story." If you've seen the trailer, there really is nothing particularly surprising about Saving Mr. Banks, from the saccharine atmosphere to the predictable storyline. After all, the ending "reveal" is so obvious they made it the title of the movie.

But the movie is not about twists and mysteries; it's about characters and their motivations. And there again the movie stumbles. Travers feels like an obstacle the entire time, who is eventually overcome by American bravado and intelligence, instead of a complex character with nuance and subtlety. Instead of framing the movie as a character study, Hancock directs it so conservatively that it loses the depth that Thompson worked so hard to infuse in her character. There is so much more to P.L. Travers than her childhood, but that is all we get to see. The movie rides on her ability to generate empathy within the audience members, and Hancock shoots himself in the foot by making her the enemy at the outset.

Now, that's not to say that this isn't an entertaining or enjoyable film. It very much is. It's delightful and funny too. And it will have you reaching for your tissue every once in a while. But it doesn't feel honest to me. It feels deceptive and inauthentic. And it's such a shame because so many fine actors deliver impeccable performances here. It's a good movie, but not as good as it could have been.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2140373/

White Christmas (1954)

3/5

White Christmas is a whimsical musical from the 50's set after World War II and starring Bing Crosby. That's about all you need to know to get a sense of what it's like. There is nothing inspired or creative about this film. It feels like it was churned out of the Hollywood studio machine--and almost certainly was. The plot follows two soldiers (Crosby, Kaye) who take up a performing career after the war. They meet two singing sisters (Ellen, Clooney) and unexpectedly find themselves performing together at an empty hotel run by their old commanding officer (Jagger). Wanting to do something special for him, they decide to film a live TV special there without letting him know.

The movie is decidedly middle of the road. The acting is flat--somehow deadpan with a smirk, like they know they're being filmed--and the cinematography is bland. The story is straightforward but tepid, although it has a fair number of tear-jerking scenes and laugh-out-loud moments. Unfortunately, I don't think I'll ever find myself truly attached to war movies because I never had to go through anything resembling war. I just don't have a connection to the subject matter and cannot appreciate it as much as someone who does.

I'm not quite sure why it's a Christmas classic, because there are far better movies that fit the bill. I guess this one has singing in it, so I suppose it's got that going for it. The songs are kind of catchy at first, but in retrospect quickly become forgettable and meaningless. (I would argue the same is true about Singin' in the Rain, which I love.) At the end of the day, I'd rather watch Holiday Affair than White Christmas during the next winter season, although neither of them really wowed me. White Christmas gets a solid meh from me.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047673/

American Hustle (2013)

5/5

David O. Russell's American Hustle is a phenomenal piece of entertainment. The plot is what it is: interesting but predictable. It is very loosely taken from real-world events, so much so that Russell doesn't even say that it was "based on a true story." Instead he writes that "some of this actually happened." Who knows what did and didn't. But does it even matter? While parts of the story may proceed out of historical necessity, I get the distinct sense that Russell's real joy in writing act after act was to unveil backstories, to reveal motivations, to delve into his characters. He focuses on the people rather than the plot.

Russell's directing is a bit more on point than last year's Silver Linings Playbook. He downplays the camera as an active participant, although it is not quite the invisible observer we are accustomed to. The cinematography and editing are unexciting. He steps back as a director to showcase his actors, and it was the right move. Russell allows his actors to breathe, to inhabit their characters, to follow them wherever they go.

Christian Bale somehow offers us a charismatic, sympathetic view of an intensely unlikeable, unattractive man. Underneath his bad combover is a hyper-functioning brain and below that still is a broken, aching heart. We care for him, although any rational person seeing his character in real life and hearing about his actions would find him repugnant and deplorable. That we are able to cheer for him at the end is a testament to his acting ability. Jennifer Lawrence gives an equally impressive turn as his wife. She unwittingly manipulates, she foolishly destroys, she ferociously loves. She is a mess, a chaos of emotion that falls apart and builds itself anew daily. She finds strength amidst mental illness in such a way that it tears us up. Lawrence makes her character human in the most unexpected of ways, in the simplest of words, in the subtlest of gestures.

I could go on and on about the rest of the cast--Amy Adams and Bradley Cooper deliver perhaps the finest performances of their careers--but I would rather you experience it for yourself. It is one thing to read about these characters; it is an entirely different thing to watch them light up the screen. And seeing this ensemble perform is absolutely mesmerizing.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800241/