Showing posts with label saoirse ronan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label saoirse ronan. Show all posts
February 27, 2015
The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)
4/5
Wes Anderson's The Grand Budapest Hotel is like many of Wes Anderson's other movies: delightful and magical if you like his style, banal and irritating if you don't. The plot follows a hotel concierge (Fiennes) who teams up with a lobby boy (Revolori) to prove his innocence after being framed for murder. The plotting is surprisingly intricate for a Wes Anderson movie, but is also somehow easy to follow at the same time.
What I like about Anderson's earlier movies is his ability to seamlessly switch between comedy and tragedy at the drop of a hat. Luckily, that opposition is still here, albeit in a less profound and less immediate form. Anderson superimposes an overall levity onto the relentless march of impending war, switching between the two moods from time to time, but The Grand Budapest Hotel focuses predominantly on the darker side of life.
Anderson has an undeniable visual style and he doesn't disappoint here. There's a reason this movie won the Oscar for best makeup and costume. He dresses his locales and his characters precisely and pristinely. The characters themselves (and the performances that underlie them) are not particularly deep or textured, but they are distinct and charming and unforgettable. They are brought to life by appealing, fast-paced storytelling and an irresistible, uncontainable magnetism. For Wes Anderson fans, The Grand Budapest Hotel is near-perfect filmmaking.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2278388/
October 23, 2011
Hanna (2011)
4/5
Hanna is a terrific movie. The plot follows the daughter (Ronan) of a rogue agent (Bana) on a quest to take revenge on the person who killed her mother (Blanchett). The scenario surrounding that basic premise is fairly uninspired and recycled, borrowing heavily from action movie tropes without anything to call its own. The writing is just as dull as the plot, with characters that, while well-acted, end up flat and boring because there's nothing original or even remotely interesting about what they do or what they say.
What this movie does have, and in abundance, is style. Its visual flair makes it a delight to watch from beginning to end. The movie uses the most exotic, curious, beautiful locales to set gun fights and chase scenes. It combines refreshing cinematography with eclectic, exciting music to create something unique and memorable despite its bland storyline. Wright directs this film with ease, using some of the same techniques he used in his earlier Pride & Prejudice and Atonement to striking effect. He even cuts away from the action from time to time to focus on images or ideas that are more captivating than the fighting itself. This is not a traditional action movie, and may in fact alienate some typical action fans, but it will enthrall those who appreciate the essence of cool.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993842/
Hanna is a terrific movie. The plot follows the daughter (Ronan) of a rogue agent (Bana) on a quest to take revenge on the person who killed her mother (Blanchett). The scenario surrounding that basic premise is fairly uninspired and recycled, borrowing heavily from action movie tropes without anything to call its own. The writing is just as dull as the plot, with characters that, while well-acted, end up flat and boring because there's nothing original or even remotely interesting about what they do or what they say.
What this movie does have, and in abundance, is style. Its visual flair makes it a delight to watch from beginning to end. The movie uses the most exotic, curious, beautiful locales to set gun fights and chase scenes. It combines refreshing cinematography with eclectic, exciting music to create something unique and memorable despite its bland storyline. Wright directs this film with ease, using some of the same techniques he used in his earlier Pride & Prejudice and Atonement to striking effect. He even cuts away from the action from time to time to focus on images or ideas that are more captivating than the fighting itself. This is not a traditional action movie, and may in fact alienate some typical action fans, but it will enthrall those who appreciate the essence of cool.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993842/
January 12, 2010
The Lovely Bones (2009)
2/5
Peter Jackson's adaptation of Alice Sebold's book The Lovely Bones is an interesting concept, but one that I did not find fulfilling or satisfying. It felt depressing instead of uplifting, with a poorly defined purpose that was carried out even more poorly. The plot follows 14-year-old Susie Salmon (Ronan) after being murdered by neighbor George Harvey (Tucci). Her death is a terrifying, painful, and drawn out one. It devastates and nearly destroys her family; her mother (Weisz) copes through acceptance and isolation and her father (Wahlberg) through denial and investigation. The police fail to locate the man after two years, and he prepares to strike again.
Technically, the film appears competent but has a number of underlying imperfections. Jackson uses editing expertly to build tension, however, the mood shifts at a brisk and almost too rapid pace. The audience is never quite sure what emotion to feel at what time. The directing also felt timid and uncertain, as if Jackson didn't think everything out and just started shooting. The beginning scenes hide Tucci's face, as if his identity would be a mystery throughout the film, but after about 5 minutes we find out who he is. Did Jackson not realize that a good 90% of the movie would be based around us knowing who he is or was there some ultra-subtle purpose that I missed?
I'm confused as to Jackson's motivations for a number of other scenes, especially those concerning Susie. I don't know what the "in between" represents or how any of her postmortem emotions are new, interesting, or even relevant. This newfangled purgatory is baffling, bizarre, and unnecessary, although I guess that's what separates it from other movies about similar topics. Unfortunately, I still found it to be an empty metaphor with uncertain meaning. The CGI is another area that appeared magical at first, but on closer inspection was just not quite good enough to be realistic. It was off by just a small amount, but enough to make you realize that what you were watching wasn't filmed but made, and that made it stand out even more. He spent far too much time on special effects and far too little time fortifying the story, understanding its meaning, and figuring out how best to show that to the audience.
I left the theater imagining that this was a great movie, or at least a good one. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that it had less meaning than I attributed to it and more problems than I originally recognized. Don't let Jackson's infamous special effects trick you: this movie is nothing special, and not worthy of your time or money. It's a simple story told simplistically. Other movies have tread more tenderly, examined the topics more sensitively, and forced you to think more honestly and deeply about your feelings than this movie did. For my money, I'd rather see In the Bedroom or Little Children again. Pass on The Lovely Bones.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380510/

Technically, the film appears competent but has a number of underlying imperfections. Jackson uses editing expertly to build tension, however, the mood shifts at a brisk and almost too rapid pace. The audience is never quite sure what emotion to feel at what time. The directing also felt timid and uncertain, as if Jackson didn't think everything out and just started shooting. The beginning scenes hide Tucci's face, as if his identity would be a mystery throughout the film, but after about 5 minutes we find out who he is. Did Jackson not realize that a good 90% of the movie would be based around us knowing who he is or was there some ultra-subtle purpose that I missed?
I'm confused as to Jackson's motivations for a number of other scenes, especially those concerning Susie. I don't know what the "in between" represents or how any of her postmortem emotions are new, interesting, or even relevant. This newfangled purgatory is baffling, bizarre, and unnecessary, although I guess that's what separates it from other movies about similar topics. Unfortunately, I still found it to be an empty metaphor with uncertain meaning. The CGI is another area that appeared magical at first, but on closer inspection was just not quite good enough to be realistic. It was off by just a small amount, but enough to make you realize that what you were watching wasn't filmed but made, and that made it stand out even more. He spent far too much time on special effects and far too little time fortifying the story, understanding its meaning, and figuring out how best to show that to the audience.
I left the theater imagining that this was a great movie, or at least a good one. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that it had less meaning than I attributed to it and more problems than I originally recognized. Don't let Jackson's infamous special effects trick you: this movie is nothing special, and not worthy of your time or money. It's a simple story told simplistically. Other movies have tread more tenderly, examined the topics more sensitively, and forced you to think more honestly and deeply about your feelings than this movie did. For my money, I'd rather see In the Bedroom or Little Children again. Pass on The Lovely Bones.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0380510/
January 09, 2008
Atonement (2007)
4/5
Joe Wright's Atonement is an utterly captivating film. When the 130-minute movie ended, I didn't even realize all that time had passed. I assumed we were halfway through. The plot concerns a 13-year-old Briony Tallis in pre-war Britain who sees her sister Cecilia with their gardener Robbie at a fountain and misunderstands their encounter as a rough, unwanted sexual advance. From that incident, she misjudges his character--perhaps intentionally out of jealousy--and tells a lie that sends him to jail. Perhaps she thought it was the truth. The film leaves the characters and their motivations open to interpretation, which helps the story remain with the viewer. Robbie is given the choice to go to war or stay in prison, and so he enlists. The second half of the movie details his attempt to return from battle and rejoin Cecilia. As Briony grows older and more mature, she realizes the grievous results of her decision and tries to atone for it.
The camerawork and compositions were beautiful. There is an oft-talked about 5 minute tracking shot depicting the devastation of Dunkirk--one I felt was an unnecessary waste of time, but impressive nonetheless. The editing was exceptional. The movie backtracks several times and reveals the truth behind Briony's misinterpretations. It was slightly confusing at first, but quickly grew on me as an effective and engaging storytelling technique. I absolutely loved the music. It perfectly fit the mood every time, whether at a tense moment, a sensual one, or an emotional one. The acting was truly stunning. Realistic, subtle performances revealed layers of complexity in every character. Vanessa Redgrave delivered an unforgettable, riveting performance for the few minutes she was on screen.
Despite all these technical achievements, I wondered what the point of the film was. It's a simple story with the only universal themes being regret and atonement. The story is unbelievably far-fetched; it's all too coincidental and extreme to be real. But perhaps that is the purpose of romance movies. To be the world of fantasy where there exists true love, hope, and happiness. Unfortunately for me, I watch movies as movies. And during the entire movie, I kept thinking: "A Very Long Engagement is much better." And so it is, in just about every way. But Atonement is still a technically outstanding, entrancingly romantic film for anyone interested in it.
IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0783233/
Joe Wright's Atonement is an utterly captivating film. When the 130-minute movie ended, I didn't even realize all that time had passed. I assumed we were halfway through. The plot concerns a 13-year-old Briony Tallis in pre-war Britain who sees her sister Cecilia with their gardener Robbie at a fountain and misunderstands their encounter as a rough, unwanted sexual advance. From that incident, she misjudges his character--perhaps intentionally out of jealousy--and tells a lie that sends him to jail. Perhaps she thought it was the truth. The film leaves the characters and their motivations open to interpretation, which helps the story remain with the viewer. Robbie is given the choice to go to war or stay in prison, and so he enlists. The second half of the movie details his attempt to return from battle and rejoin Cecilia. As Briony grows older and more mature, she realizes the grievous results of her decision and tries to atone for it.
The camerawork and compositions were beautiful. There is an oft-talked about 5 minute tracking shot depicting the devastation of Dunkirk--one I felt was an unnecessary waste of time, but impressive nonetheless. The editing was exceptional. The movie backtracks several times and reveals the truth behind Briony's misinterpretations. It was slightly confusing at first, but quickly grew on me as an effective and engaging storytelling technique. I absolutely loved the music. It perfectly fit the mood every time, whether at a tense moment, a sensual one, or an emotional one. The acting was truly stunning. Realistic, subtle performances revealed layers of complexity in every character. Vanessa Redgrave delivered an unforgettable, riveting performance for the few minutes she was on screen.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0783233/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)