The Conjuring (2013)

4/5

James Wan's The Conjuring is a compelling piece of horror entertainment. It will make you jump out of your seat while watching it and make you afraid of the dark for days after finishing it. The movie claims to have been extracted from the case files of the same real-life self-proclaimed "paranormal experts" (Wilson, Farmiga) who brought you The Amityville Horror, but it won't convince any skeptics. I'm not sure why they spent so much of the movie emphasizing the "based on a true story" premise when the story and acting turn out to be so forgettable. If anything, it made the movie less scary. While we can always go back and try to poke holes in the "facts," we will automatically suspend our disbelief for a film that is up-front about being fictitious.

Where the movie shines is in its pacing, cinematography, and atmosphere. The movie starts slowly, building up an unease and tension that gives you a chance to exhale just frequently enough so you don't pass out. Wan conceives of haunting imagery that will stick with you, from dolls to jack-in-the-boxes, and lets your mind run wild. He lulls you into a state of calm before a torrential storm that you know is coming. And he does it so well. The Conjuring does just about everything right in a horror movie, but it doesn't do anything extra. And that is my biggest frustration with this movie. Nothing elevates it past its genre status, and it remains a one-trick pony for the people who already like that one particular trick.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1457767/

Young Adult (2011)

3/5

Jason Reitman's Young Adult is somewhat of a diversion from his earlier comedies (Thank You for Smoking, Juno). It follows the story of young adult fiction writer Mavis Gary (Theron), who returns to her small town of Mercury after learning that her high school boyfriend (Wilson) has just had a child. Aiming to ruffle some feathers and win him back, she accidentally bumps into someone else she went to high school with: Matt Freehauf (Oswalt). Matt walks with a cane, after having been beat up back in high school for supposedly being gay, and tries to convince her not to ruin the new couple's life. But he can only do so much, because he's not the only one with old wounds.

Ultimately, I think this movie takes a sobering look at the terrors of high school relationships, how awful and cruel those interactions can be, and how they can stir up primal emotions our evolutionarily-mature cerebral cortices should be able to inhibit. High school can be painful, and filled with painful memories, even in the most well-adjusted graduate. It's where we first develop a sense of superiority, a sense of insecurity, or a sense of dependency--and also a sense of self. It's a far more complex movie than any trailer could do justice to, and perhaps than even the film itself can. It is a funny movie, in the sense that there are sarcastic jokes and awkward moments, but it's also a very sad story, in the sense that we are faced by depressing realities. But for me, it was just hard to get into. There is more focus on the editing than the dialogue, more emphasis on the representation of the characters than the people who live these lives. It's a dark comedy, intelligently told, and wholly unlike Reitman's earlier works. If you decide to watch this movie, just go in knowing what to expect.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1625346/

Morning Glory (2010)

4/5

Morning Glory is a surprisingly affecting tale of a young, fiercely independent woman who believes in herself and her abilities. The plot follows Becky Fuller (McAdams), a TV producer who gets hired to rejuvenate the failing morning show Daybreak. Because of her age, nobody takes her seriously. But when she fires one of the co-anchors and hires news legend Mike Pomeroy (Ford) to take his place, people start cheering her on. Her handsome coworker Adam Bennett (Wilson) even asks her out on a date. But her challenges are far from over, as the ratings plummet further down and her boss (Goldblum) informs her that the parent broadcasting company may cancel the show altogether.

We all know this story. We all know the stresses of daily life and the balancing act between our professional and personal goals. We all know the trite romance that will develop between the handsome man and awkward woman. This movie deals with the former with aplomb and thankfully downplays the latter. But Morning Glory is also surprising in a lot of ways. It delves into a different kind of relationship rarely portrayed in cinema: the family dynamic that emerges after working with people day in and day out. It treats the coworker interaction as a special, cherished kind of relationship that is equally as important as the relationships we develop in our free time. It examines the workplace as a joyous environment, challenging but rewarding, filled with obstacles and solutions, instead of a miserable existence we so commonly hear about.

This movie succeeds not because of cinematography or editing, but because of convincing portrayals by the actors. You can see every bit of excitement and nervousness and determination in McAdams's eyes. Underneath Ford's gruff, monotone voice is a depth and texture that is not immediately apparent. It is so much more fascinating than him playing a jaded old curmudgeon. Morning Glory is a movie about love in a very nontraditional way. It's about loving ourselves, establishing priorities and dreams and never letting them go. This is an inspiring and uplifting movie. And here I was thinking it was just going to be another romantic comedy. I'm glad I was wrong.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1126618/

Watchmen (2009)

4/5

Watchmen was not as bad as I expected. I expected another 300, but I got something much better. After seeing both, I realized that Zack Snyder does little to alter, either improve or tarnish, the source material he is given. As far as graphic novels are concerned, Frank Miller's 300 sucks and Alan Moore's Watchmen rocks. Everything I liked about this movie originated from Alan Moore--the believable story, the complex characters, the mature mood and atmosphere. Everything I didn't like originated from Zack Snyder--the incessant slow-motion, the bad special effects, the poor music choices. There is one thing I will credit Zack Snyder with adapting successfully, and that is the intro credit sequence to backdrop the story's timeline.

Still, there were a number of changes Snyder should have made to make the adaptation more successful. First, it should have been around 2 hours (instead of 2 hours 45 minutes) and more focused. Snyder allowed extraneous material to bog down the pacing and confuse the audience. Second, there was way too much nudity, especially of a certain blue penis. (Also, why does Dr. Manhattan have eyebrows but no pubic hair?) Third, the actors spoke with comic book stylings, which stood as a stark contrast to the mature mood evoked by the movie's story. Fourth, it didn't really explain the universe. Why are these superheroes stronger/faster/smarter than everyone else? How can someone just raise their daughter into a career of crime-fighting? Why does Rorschach's mask constantly change ink patterns? How is Ozymandias faster than a speeding bullet? Most of these complaints are minor, but I often think of them when I think of this movie. Still, Watchmen is an altogether enjoyable experience and one I would highly recommend to people who are curious as to what might really happen in an alternate universe of superheroes.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/

Little Children (2006)

4/5

Todd Field's Little Children dramatizes the dark and sometimes dangerous underbelly of suburban parents and their interactions. The large cast of characters is well-envisioned, well-developed, and well-acted, although Patrick Wilson's performance sometimes felt a bit affected and rang false. Detailing the minutiae of these people's lives was oddly magnetic and hid the beginnings of an ominous foreboding. The plot follows some surprising avenues, heavily describing characters that at first seemed secondary. The editing was excellent. It propelled the movie forward, paced each story equally and fully, and still managed artistic flourishes here and there. There are scenes of incredible tension starting in the middle and increasing in magnitude as it nears the finale that hold the audience's attention and breath. I found myself emotionally involved with the characters as well.

Onto the parts I hated. I cannot get out of my head the completely unnecessary and distracting voice-over narration. I've said before that it's an excuse for sloppy filmmaking and that a good filmmaker can show visually what the narrator is saying. In this case, the narration actually adds nothing to the plot or characters and only serves to distance the audience from the events on-screen, reminding us that this was based on a book. There is not even anything to replace with images. Every single line the narrator was saying should have been simply excised. Also, I thought the film sort of chickened out from a satisfying ending, but in a way it also reaffirmed that it was trying to depict real life and that normal events happening in the span of a two hour movie cannot elicit life-changing decisions from real characters (or at least these specific events). And everything gets tied up in a bowtie a little too nicely at the end. Some of the director's decisions are just impossible for me to approve of. The slow-mo football game that reminded me of the homo-erotic mud/rain football scene in Invincible is one. Another is the overpolishing of scenes, separating them from reality. Despite these many problems, however, the film is engrossing and keeps you watching. If it sounds interesting, give it a spin.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0404203/