Showing posts with label viola davis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label viola davis. Show all posts
November 05, 2013
Prisoners (2013)
4/5
Prisoners is a viscerally intense and provocative morality tale about the lengths people will go to save the ones they love. The story is a difficult one to stomach: Keller Dover (Jackman) has his daughter stolen from him on Thanksgiving Day. Detective Loki (Gyllenhaal) initially suspects teenager Alex Jones (Dano), but quickly dismisses him after discovering he has the IQ of a 10-year-old child. Dover is convinced Jones is involved, however, and imprisons him in an abandoned building where he tortures him for information.
The acting is absolutely phenomenal. Jackman gives an emotionally searing performance, straight from the heart. Although his portrayal did at times seem to border on the melodramatic and overwrought, he walked that line expertly. Gyllenhaal is every bit his equal, although less explosive and incendiary. The problem with both characters (and, in fact, with almost every character) is that they don't feel unique at all. From the angry dad who takes matters into his own hands to the mother who shuts out the rest of the world to the driven detective who makes promises he can't keep, the interpersonal dynamic presented in this movie feels completely unoriginal and cliched. We've seen it before in The Lovely Bones and AMC's The Killing. That, or there is only one way families respond to tragedies involving their children.
But the movie grabs you, asphyxiates you. It has scenes of intense power and breathless anticipation. It emanates an aura of tension, an atmosphere of mystery. It's incredibly eerie. It's a promising start for director Villeneuve--he gives David Fincher a run for his money in the genre of dark, intelligent, moody psychological thrillers--and I hope he continues down this road in the future. I will definitely be watching.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392214/
January 25, 2012
The Help (2011)
4/5
The Help is a surprisingly affecting tale of race relations in Jackson, Mississippi during the civil rights movement. It is the story of "the help," black women who work as nannies and maids to rich white Southern belles, as told by budding author Skeeter (Stone). She asks Aibileen (Davis) and Minny (Spencer) to tell her what it's really like to work as the help, despite the significant danger publishing such an account would pose to everyone who contributes. Aibileen describes what it's like working for Elizabeth (O'Reilly), an incompetent young mother who plans to have another daughter because the daughter she already has is unattractive. Minny describes being fired by Hilly (Howard), the quietly racist, fervently superior, self-appointed ringleader of the young women in town, for using the indoor toilet during a tornado instead of the outhouse.
The story is predictably emotional at times, treading exquisitely close to melodrama, while mixing in equal parts entertainment and humor. This movie is blessed to have a competent director and eagle-eyed editor, who understand the heart of the story and let it shine through any fluff. The script is sensational, brought to life by superb acting. Viola Davis does a phenomenal job; her expressive face and subtle movements (a shift in body weight, a hesitance in her response) are able to convey incredibly complex feelings. Bryce Dallas Howard gives a riveting performance that combines charm and slime to create a wholly unlikeable young matriarch. But the movie is about more than racism and more than events in the past: it is about parenting, about unexpected relationships, and about the courage and sacrifice required to do the right thing. This is a gripping film from beginning to end and I cannot recommend it highly enough.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454029/
The Help is a surprisingly affecting tale of race relations in Jackson, Mississippi during the civil rights movement. It is the story of "the help," black women who work as nannies and maids to rich white Southern belles, as told by budding author Skeeter (Stone). She asks Aibileen (Davis) and Minny (Spencer) to tell her what it's really like to work as the help, despite the significant danger publishing such an account would pose to everyone who contributes. Aibileen describes what it's like working for Elizabeth (O'Reilly), an incompetent young mother who plans to have another daughter because the daughter she already has is unattractive. Minny describes being fired by Hilly (Howard), the quietly racist, fervently superior, self-appointed ringleader of the young women in town, for using the indoor toilet during a tornado instead of the outhouse.
The story is predictably emotional at times, treading exquisitely close to melodrama, while mixing in equal parts entertainment and humor. This movie is blessed to have a competent director and eagle-eyed editor, who understand the heart of the story and let it shine through any fluff. The script is sensational, brought to life by superb acting. Viola Davis does a phenomenal job; her expressive face and subtle movements (a shift in body weight, a hesitance in her response) are able to convey incredibly complex feelings. Bryce Dallas Howard gives a riveting performance that combines charm and slime to create a wholly unlikeable young matriarch. But the movie is about more than racism and more than events in the past: it is about parenting, about unexpected relationships, and about the courage and sacrifice required to do the right thing. This is a gripping film from beginning to end and I cannot recommend it highly enough.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454029/
September 12, 2010
Eat Pray Love (2010)
2/5
Eat Pray Love is a movie that pretends to be more than it is. It imagines itself as a universally philosophical journey that one woman takes to discover what's important in her life following an impending divorce. It instead plays as a travelogue to Italy (where she eats), India (where she prays), and Bali (where she loves) with a superficial sheen of self-discovery, but lacking any depth or importance. The plot is barebones and unconvincing. Perhaps the book is better, but watching this movie I had no idea why Liz (Roberts) was so fed up with her husband (Crudup) that she needed a divorce. I normally wouldn't have cared except that it was the impetus of her actions and the crux of the movie. Her journey is worthless if we don't understand why she's going on it in the first place. My other big complaint was at the end, where she meets and (apparently) falls in love with Felipe (Bardem). For the life of me, I cannot figure out why. They are together for a few unwitnessed days/weeks and suddenly they are in love? Their romance is assumed instead of shown (no thanks to the overabundant narration). There was more passion with the food in Italy.
Despite my criticisms, I didn't actually hate this movie. In fact, I didn't mind it at all, thanks to the acting, cinematography, and editing. While none of the actors were bad, they were pretty flat and boring. I couldn't tell if it was bad acting or bad writing, but based on the rest of the screenplay, I'm going to assume it's bad writing. However, Roberts and Jenkins were given very interesting characters to play, and they fill each scene they're in with emotion and empathy. While I don't think the cinematography was actually that impressive, the locales themselves are gorgeous. They're captured in exquisite detail, and I felt transported to each city. The editing was surprisingly the best part about the movie. It is extremely well done, cutting across time and space to unite multiple ideas and thoughts. But most people, myself included, can't treasure technical prowess if the storyline is bad or forgettable. And that is this film's fatal flaw. If you were interested in the movie based on the trailer, you might enjoy wasting 2 hours and 15 minutes watching it. But for everyone else, just pretend it never existed.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0879870/

Despite my criticisms, I didn't actually hate this movie. In fact, I didn't mind it at all, thanks to the acting, cinematography, and editing. While none of the actors were bad, they were pretty flat and boring. I couldn't tell if it was bad acting or bad writing, but based on the rest of the screenplay, I'm going to assume it's bad writing. However, Roberts and Jenkins were given very interesting characters to play, and they fill each scene they're in with emotion and empathy. While I don't think the cinematography was actually that impressive, the locales themselves are gorgeous. They're captured in exquisite detail, and I felt transported to each city. The editing was surprisingly the best part about the movie. It is extremely well done, cutting across time and space to unite multiple ideas and thoughts. But most people, myself included, can't treasure technical prowess if the storyline is bad or forgettable. And that is this film's fatal flaw. If you were interested in the movie based on the trailer, you might enjoy wasting 2 hours and 15 minutes watching it. But for everyone else, just pretend it never existed.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0879870/
December 26, 2008
Doubt (2008)
3/5
Doubt, a movie by John Patrick Shanley based on his play of the same name, is about a nun (Meryl Streep) in a Catholic school who suspects the priest (Philip Seymour Hoffman) of molesting a young child. As far as the acting goes, this movie is the one to see. Shanley is able to bring out amazing performances from his entire cast--I had no idea Amy Adams could pull out the tour de force she did. The others are perhaps superior acting jobs, and theirs are definitely more extensive and sustained, but Adams's portrayal of a recently-hired and innocent nun was the revelation for me. She exuded such emotion--such tenderness and honesty--that I was completely beside myself with empathy.
In addition to the acting, I was impressed by Deakins's cinematography, which you could tell Shanley was trying to use to separate the movie from the play. When adapting a play to the silver screen, you're losing the vivacity and involvement of a live performance, so the film needs to bring something else to the table, which has historically been in the form of cinematography. But while the cinematography was excellent, it wasn't enough to make it a memorable adaptation. The rest of the movie was not as great as I had anticipated. The script was underwhelming. Being a Tony- and Pulitzer-winning play, I was expecting phenomenal. And phenomenal is not what I got. I loved the dialogue, but the story could have used a lot of work. Everything is hinted at, bushes are beaten around, and nothing is revealed. Even if you pay strict attention the entire time, it's easy to miss out on huge plot points if you're not thinking the same thing they are. Still, the movie was pretty much what I expected, but just a bit weaker in quality than I hoped for. Definitely watch it if the trailer appealed to you.
Oh, and apparently Streep's glasses were anachronistic, but I did not find that to be distracting.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0918927/
Doubt, a movie by John Patrick Shanley based on his play of the same name, is about a nun (Meryl Streep) in a Catholic school who suspects the priest (Philip Seymour Hoffman) of molesting a young child. As far as the acting goes, this movie is the one to see. Shanley is able to bring out amazing performances from his entire cast--I had no idea Amy Adams could pull out the tour de force she did. The others are perhaps superior acting jobs, and theirs are definitely more extensive and sustained, but Adams's portrayal of a recently-hired and innocent nun was the revelation for me. She exuded such emotion--such tenderness and honesty--that I was completely beside myself with empathy.

Oh, and apparently Streep's glasses were anachronistic, but I did not find that to be distracting.
IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0918927/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)