The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1 (2014)

2/5

The third installment in the Hunger Games trilogy is--surprisingly--not the last, as you might expect from my use of the word trilogy. Instead, the producers behind the franchise are hoping to eke out every last cent possible from its fan base in the great tradition of Harry Potter and Twilight. It is worse off for it, as this film plods along slowly, without much purpose except to prepare us for the next one. It is not only painfully slow, it is also tremendously different in terms of style, mood, and thematics. The third Hunger Games movie could have been great if it ended the series, building on the momentum generated from the first two films, but it's not. Instead it's mediocre filler that prolongs the inevitable release of the finale.

This is (obviously) not an issue with the book, because the book doesn't end where the movie ends. If, in fact, the story benefited from being split into two parts, I presume the book would have been split into two books. It is not. It is one book. It is one story. If you need more time to tell the story you want to tell, make a miniseries instead of a movie. If you are unable to make creative decisions when it comes to editing, you are not a filmmaker. You are a moneymaker. And The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1, if you couldn't tell from the title, is a moneymaking grab.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1951265/

Don Jon (2013)

3/5

Joseph Gordon-Levitt's Don Jon is a bold directorial debut that succeeds on many fronts but doesn't fully satisfy. The movie stars Gordon-Levitt as a New Jersey twenty-something whose life revolves around a few things. One of them is online porn. His hook-up, Johansson, questions why he would watch porn when he can have "the real thing." And the movie spends a fair amount of time trying to answer that very question. It's actually an interesting one, one I think perhaps might be better served by a documentary-style investigation rather than writerly musings.

As far as the plot goes, it's a fairly predictable, well-worn story arc without a bunch of surprises. Gordon-Levitt infuses the movie with humorous ironies (I love his road rage when he's going to church) that make it feel fresh and fun. But the movie also has plenty of annoyances. For one, Gordon-Levitt's hair is horrific. It is eye-searing. And their New Jersey accents grind through your eardrum and drill into your brain. The subject matter is still somewhat unseemly for many people, and the movie isn't nearly charming enough to overpower their disgust.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2229499/

The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)

4/5

I have trouble reviewing movies I grew up watching, especially ones that have the cachet of Spielberg and the nostalgia of youth behind it. The Lost World is one such example. It is a remarkable but imperfect piece of filmmaking, yet all its flaws are ignored when remembering it 15 years later. Not quite the breathtaking, innovative escapism that Jurassic Park was, this sequel somehow manages to be both more mundane and more extravagant. Industrial Light & Magic's CGI here is astounding, even by today's standards. But all the special effects are front and center, with a spotlight shining down, instead of simply existing as a tool in the storyteller's arsenal. Though the plotting is as richly intricate and textured as the first one was, it puts too much emphasis on the spectacle of the dinosaurs. It makes the Tyrannosaurus Rex the protagonist, without humanizing it enough to make it feel like King Kong for a new generation. Like the 2005 King Kong remake, it centers on special effects instead of story, action instead of characters, and that is where it misses out on its full potential. The Lost World loses the awe that Jurassic Park had. The thrills excite, the jokes lighten the mood, and the movie reaches its inevitably satisfying conclusion, but not nearly as well as the first one did.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119567/

Crazy Stupid Love (2011)

4/5

Crazy Stupid Love has commas in the official title that I am intentionally omitting because they annoy me. The movie itself does not annoy me. In fact, it surprised me with its humor and heart. The plot follows Cal (Carell) and Emily (Moore) Weaver. Emily wants a divorce, and in fact she has already cheated on him with her co-worker David Lindhagen (Bacon). Cal's son (Bobo) is in love with his babysitter (Tipton), who is in fact in love with Cal. Cal starts frequenting bars, whining to no one in particular nonstop for two weeks about the impending divorce, until Jacob (Gosling) becomes so annoyed that he takes him under his wing and shows him how to assert his manhood and pick up women for one-night stands. Cal's first "success" is with a crazy teacher (Tomei) who seems excited by his honesty, but he never calls her back. Jacob, on the other hand, meets Hannah (Stone), who shakes him of his womanizing ways and turns him into a boyfriend.

There is one fantastic scene in the middle of the film that involves Cal and Emily talking on the phone, and it becomes evident that she still loves him and cares for him and misses him even if she can't live with him. It is a tender moment that is filled with genuine emotion and more complexity than you might at first assume. It almost forced a tear out of my eye. In fact, almost the entire plot seems very simple superficially but becomes much more multi-faceted just below the surface.

The acting by the entire ensemble is wonderful; everyone is able to juggle empathy with wit in fluid harmony. The directing as a whole was very effective, although it felt somewhat choppy as people were ignored for chunks at a time. On the whole, Crazy Stupid Love impressed me unexpectedly, much like Bandslam. If you had any interest in the actors or the plot, I would not hesitate to recommend this movie.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1570728/

The Kids Are All Right (2010)

4/5

The Kids Are All Right is an indie slice-of-life movie about a lesbian couple--Nic (Bening) and Jules (Moore)--whose children (Wasikowska, Hutcherson) decide they want to meet their sperm donor dad (Ruffalo). When they do, he instantly connects to the daughter while the son remains somewhat distant. Eventually he falls in both the kids' favor and they invite him over to meet their parents. Things get a little bit more confusing when Jules starts having sex with him.

As far as the acting goes, Annette Bening is phenomenal in a role that is understated and subtle. There are few flashes of anger, but you can tell her mood precisely by the smallest facial movements. She plays to perfection the entire life of a woman we only get to spend a few hours with, and we see the mistakes of her past and her thoughts of the future. She puts on display so much more than what is written in the script. As far as the script goes, it's good but not great. My big problem with it is the ending. It feels as if they were just shallowly writing everything off, or giving us a wry wink and nod and saying, "We know this movie isn't real and it doesn't matter what happens in the end." Either way, it really didn't satisfy me. I didn't feel any closure whatsoever. On the opposite end, the best thing about the script was its humor (far funnier than some other indie films like Margot at the Wedding).

With a title like The Kids Are All Right, it's begging for immature movie reviewers clamoring that the movie is just all right. But luckily I think it's more than that; it's entertaining, it's moving, it's funny. And it has some fantastic acting. I just wish it had an ending to match.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0842926/

Short Cuts (1993)

5/5

Robert Altman's Short Cuts is a virtuoso masterpiece, pure and simple. The movie follows five or so LA couples and their chance interactions over the course of a few days. At turns horrifying and heart-wrenching, the vignettes are immediately captivating and always engrossing. You watch in breathless anticipation for the entire running time. Clocking in at three hours, it may seem daunting at first, but once you start watching, you cherish every minute of it. From the humorous to the grotesque, from innocence to cruelty, this movie examines the gamut of humanity in all its glory and all its shame. It reminds us what kind souls look like in the presence of mean spirits. And in the end we somehow feel closure without getting any resolution; we know what will happen without having to see it on screen. This is the mark of a true storytelling master.

The acting by the huge cast is complete and all-encompassing; they succeed at fully embracing and transforming into their characters after even the deepest and most detailed scrutiny. Whether it is an old man getting years and years of guilt off his chest or a young couple dealing with the grief of a lost child, they are wholly believable and real. The performances are absolutely impeccable, making the already powerful script that much more potent. Coupled with stellar directing, the thematics feel wide open and inviting. The movie encourages us to really think about our place in life, to genuinely contemplate what we would do if we were given the lots these people are given. We come out of the theater reminding ourselves about how lucky we are. Short Cuts is a truly magnificent film and a truly stunning achievement. I don't think anyone could watch this movie and be unmoved; it is everything we expect of the movies and more.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108122/

Blindness (2008)

4/5

Blindness, directed by City of God's Fernando Meirelles, is a frightening, eye-opening film. In an unnamed, English-speaking city, an epidemic of blindness breaks out and the government begins to quarantine those infected. One woman (Julianne Moore) is still able to see, and helps her husband (Mark Ruffalo) govern Ward 1 of the quarantine facility with fairness and equality. A gangster (Gael García Bernal) uses his gun and threats of violence to take over Ward 3 and eventually the entire facility. He controls the food rations and requires other wards to pay him in jewelry; once that runs out, women. And from this basic, unsettling premise, we see the terrifying lengths men and women will go to when pitted against each other in a place without rules. What hope does good have at winning, or even surviving, against evil? Much like I Stand Alone, the movie is a bleak reminder of humanity at its most hopeless.

Technically, much of the movie was excellent. I loved the cinematography and its special effects, which simultaneously gave the film a gritty, raw realism and an evocative feel and mood. The music was memorable and brilliant, but felt out of place at times (it seemed a bit too playful). The editing was usually on-point but could sometimes be slow or poorly-timed. The characters were a bit bland, but the acting was more than adequate and altogether impressive. While movies like this are effective at what they set out to do, they are unpleasant and difficult to watch. Still, I felt moved by it and recommend it to those interested.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0861689/

The Big Lebowski (1998)

4/5

The first time I saw The Big Lebowski, I was a bit underwhelmed. I had heard the superlatives thrust about in zealous reviews, but at that time I was unfamiliar with the Coens and I didn't know "what it was that they did." Now I know, and I am truly impressed by their work here. Their inimitable style--from the precisely-crafted dialogue to the beautifully-envisioned compositions--is in full force in this movie. Unforgettable characters have emerged from forgettable roles. Simple phrases have become generational mottos. This is a movie that will remain in the collective cultural memory for a long time to come.

The humor finds itself in what the characters do and do not say and how they say it; it finds itself in their actions but more importantly in their motivations; it finds itself in the times, the places, and the moods of these individuals we slowly grow to appreciate if not love (thanks to narration by a "stranger"). While it is not particularly rare for me to laugh during a movie, it is hard for me to remember laughing so loudly, forcefully, and obnoxiously before this one.

Even so, the animated dream sequences are dated. I really don't like special effects that don't hold up over time. But there is a far more significant underlying problem I have with the film. As when I saw it the first time, I have trouble finding a point to it--something I can apply to my daily life more than simply quoting hilarious lines and/or putting them in my movie quotes quizzes. Maybe this movie is just entertainment, but I think the Coens should do more than that. I certainly know they can. But the question is whether or not I got anything more out of it than hearty laughs and good memories; and what is the answer? Does anyone have an answer in the affirmative, because I very much would like to love this movie more than I already do, and that is one major hurdle it must jump. Still, I would pop this movie in the DVD player in a heartbeat if I ever needed a quick laugh. And it's definitely worth watching if you haven't seen it already.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0118715/

Children of Men (2006)

5/5

Children of Men transfixed me from its beautiful opening shot and never let me down from that point on. The use of long tracking shots throughout the entire movie gave it a gritty, raw realism that made it incredibly powerful. The beauty of the piece is not just in the shot compositions and precise attention to detail, but also the manner in which such cinematic techniques are all put into practice. Everything about this dystopic future is the background because it is the setting of the story and not the story itself. That is perhaps why an explanation for mankind's infertility is never even attempted. Much of the movie is seen through windows, often barred, trapped in cars or buses. Sometimes the background is so richly textured that it is impossible to focus on the events taking place, and we drown in the abundance of information, requiring multiple viewings.

With a single event about thirty minutes into the movie a la Hitchcock's Psycho, Cuarón totally threw out the conventions of modern cinema and had me on the edge of my seat for the rest of the movie. There was no way to predict what was going to come next; anything was possible. And that made this movie truly terrifying. But the heart of this movie is the setting, the sad world our future becomes, where not even the cure to our disease can stop the bloodshed and anarchy.

The dialogue was brilliant, the acting phenomenal. Clive Owen is a magician, but he never steals the show because every other actor was awesome as well. There is one scene I can still see, in which Michael Caine is talking about Clive Owen's baby while Owen is listening in just around the corner. There is so much emotion and heartfelt sadness in that one scene that I would've been satisfied if all of the movie built up to just that one moment. And that is only halfway in; it just gets better from there. There wasn't much wrong with this movie, except that the camerawork was a bit shakier than I would've liked (although nothing so bad as in The Bourne Supremacy).

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0206634/