Over 16,540,624 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
The last time that director Peter Jackson ended a trilogy was at the end of 2003. That film, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, was a perfect cap on a brilliant masterpiece. For some people (you know who you are), movies like Citizen Kane, Gone with the Wind, and The Empire Strikes Back, are considered to be their favorite (if not the greatest) films of all time. It's hard to dispute those works of art. For me however, it is still The Return of the King. *NERD ALERT* That film resonated with me on so many levels with its emotional tales of friendship, struggle, love, and loss, that when I had seen it, I knew that no film would ever hit me as profoundly again. So far I've been right. Does that taint my expectations for every film that I've seen since? Probably. But I do feel a sense of anticipation when hoping that another film might measure up. Stay with me. There's a point to all of this.
When reviewing the end of The Hobbit trilogy, one can't help but compare it to the end of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Will it do things right? Will it be a satisfying end to a memorable tale? Will it have twenty-seven endings (like it can't let go)? My short answer is, no. Now I will concede that maybe, just maybe, I have subconsciously convinced myself that all films (post ROTK) will inevitably come up short. But that doesn't mean that this movie couldn't have been so much better. My biggest problem, is that I didn't feel emotionally connected to anyone except for Thorin Oakenshield. The story is split between so many characters that there's no one to care about. Also, the sense of awe that I once felt, has been replaced by looking more for what was done wrong instead of just trying to enjoy it for what it is. Thank God that I saw this film twice. The first time left my high expectations drenched in underwhelming disappointment. After seeing it again, I believe my first opinions were a bit harsh. This film is still not anywhere near as good as ROTK mind you, but it is a nice companion to the whole schmear. Besides its character problems and the obvious over-stretching of its source material, The Battle of the Five Armies puts style over substance. It's kind of like Peter Jackson's version of the Star Wars Special Editions. Luckily this film's style of action is backed up by some of the best visual artists on the planet (Weta Digital).
The most important parts of this whole trilogy (The Dwarves) are mostly left in the background as disapproving servants to their wavering king. While most of them are left with very little to say, Thorin Oakenshield gets to have his moment. One of the most redeeming parts of this film, is of Thorin's fall into madness. Richard Armitage portrays him so well, that you wish that the many other good actors in this film would have had more moments to shine as well. Instead, everyone else gets spread "thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread". There I go, reverting to LOTR again. What actor teasing that bugged me the most though, was of Billy Conolly's (The Boondock Saints) dwarf, Dain. Connolly, a very underappreciated actor that livens up every scene of every film he does, gets about a few lines of dialogue and has no finality to his character. He just disappears. By the end, it felt as if even Jackson himself, had gotten tired and just wanted to end it all.
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, of The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies
The Good- The scorching of Laketown, the rescue of Gandalf, and the skills of the elves.
The Bad- Forced interspecies relationships and comedic relief disguised as this trilogy's version of Grima Wormtongue.
The Ugly (Truth)- After seeing this film in both the standard digital 24fps (frames per second) and the special 48fps, I can honestly say that the extra frames are a mixed bag. It looks great during scenes of battle but, during scenes of regular character movement, everything comes off as hyper-realistic and it pulls you out of the experience. They should use it like IMAX did with The Dark Knight Rises- for one big action sequence. Sometimes, the next level is just overkill.
Final Thoughts on The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies
Now I know that this review sounds like a giant knock on this movie but, my expectations were never going to be met anyway. It is most definitely worth seeing. Just try not to compare it to The Return of the King, like I did. This film was made to be seen in 3D. If you can find a theater that shows this in the 24fps 3D format, that's your best bet. Also, you might want to see it twice, like I did. For some additional reassurance, this prequel trilogy isn't even close to being as disappointing as that prequel trilogy from a galaxy far far away. Imagine, what if Sauron the dark lord was a whiny brat with the acting skills of Jaden Smith?
Rating- 7 out of 10
Links and Apps
Follow us on Twitter @mps5150
https://soundcloud.com/diicastdotcom
iTunes link to listen on your iPad, iPhone or iPod
Soundcloud App on Google Play to listen on your Android
Movie Review for The Imitation Game
From only seeing a few of the pieces on his resume, Benedict Cumberbatch has become one of my favorite actors. In such a short time, he has established himself as a top tier leading man. His brilliant performances on the miniseries, Sherlock, and as Khan, in Star Trek Into Darkness, got me hooked. Some other larger than life actors take decades honing their craft by working the theaters and doing small, unnoticeable roles. Greats like Anthony Hopkins (The Silence of the Lambs), Gary Oldman (The Professional), Ben Kingsley (Schindler's List), and Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood), have all put inhuman amounts of time into their careers, and it shows. Cumberbatch has also, but his star is rising much quicker. Like those other actors, he has an ability to immerse himself into his characters and convince the audience that they're watching reality and not an act. I have a strong feeling, that we have not yet seen the best of Benedict Cumberbatch, and that leaves us overflowing with anticipation.
The Imitation Game, is a one man showcase that Cumberbatch was born to play. There are other players involved mind you, but everything revolves around his character, Alan Turing, and his story. Alan's story is told out of order over three different times in his life- his teenage years at school, 1939 through the end of the war, and 1951 as a college professor. The "back & forth" method that's used with those timelines, helps to push the film along and tells a better overall picture than if it were shown in order. Although this movie is set mostly during WWII, there is very little that's war related to be shown. Instead, we get to see some of the people affecting the war from a comfortable distance.
What affected me most, is how well Cumberbatch and the film itself, conveys Turing's feelings of love and loss as a gay man. Myself being straight, I normally feel indifferent to same-sex relationships onscreen. But sometimes, a film (like this one) breaks through that barrier and makes me see past my own personal bias. Benedict Cumberbatch seems to get better and better as the film progresses, up through his final scene where he gives a powerful performance that leaves him and the audience emotionally drained. The little bits of humor that are evenly spread throughout, connects him with his costars. Keira Knightley (Domino), Charles Dance (The Golden Child), and Mark Strong (RocknRolla), each bring something special to their limited scenes and leaves you wanting more. One comical scene in particular, has Cumberbatch and Dance going intellectually back and forth at each other with neither one missing a beat. If I had any complaints about The Imitation game, it would be that the side characters were underused. But I guess that in a biopic, the more you give to someone else, the more you take away from the protagonist.
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, of The Imitation Game
The Good- Deals with the topic of homosexuality in a sensitive, non-preachy way, that doesn't try to play the crowd for shock value. Also, the subtlety of comparing men to machines for thinking differently.
The Bad- Hollywood's tinkering with some of the historical facts. But hey, what can you do? Sometimes a true story needs some extra drama to keep us from boredom. Also, I predicted the missing piece of the decoder puzzle before the film did. Who's the genius now?!
The Ugly- It's a tragic injustice that a genius who helped so many people, wasn't allowed to be himself for fear of legal and social repercussions. Imagine, how many people's lives have been destroyed by fear of the unknown. Imagine, how many of those lives could have contributed to this human race.
Final Thoughts on The Imitation Game
Films like this, remind you of what moviemaking is all about- the acting. Before visual effects and booming soundtracks, there were just some people on a stage, pretending to be someone else. Films like this, get to the core of the human condition and generate an emotional response. Isn't that why we watch movies? See this in theaters for a definite Oscar contender.
Rating- 8 out of 10
Links and Apps
Follow us on Twitter @mps5150
https://soundcloud.com/diicastdotcom
iTunes link to listen on your iPad, iPhone or iPod
Soundcloud App on Google Play to listen on your Android
Movie Review for Inherent Vice
Paul Thomas Anderson is near the top of the list when it comes to independent film directors. But as that kind of director, he can fall into that realm of eccentric freedom that plagues a lot of independent movies. Some of his films have been right on the money (Boogie Nights, The Master), some brilliant (There Will Be Blood), a mixed bag of humor and oddity (Punch Drunk Love), and a three hour symphony of tragic melancholy that feels like a hundred pound weight on your chest (Magnolia). The man is a very good director with his casting, visual style, and attention to detail but, when his films go in a direction that makes more sense to himself than to the audience, then the film fails as a whole.
Sad to say it but, Inherent Vice is just that type of film. A movie with all of the elements for greatness, only to be an in"co"herent waste of talent and of a hundred and fifty minutes. This movie doesn't know how to ground itself. Right from the get go, we (the audience) are shown the world through Joaquin Phoenix's (Walk the Line) Visine deficient eyes, and we have to go along for the ride whether we understand it or not. The sad part is, that so many things were done right. The costumes look great. The set designs and locations also look authentic to the era (1970's). The performances and sense of humor is very good as well. But if those things are shown from the perspective of a stoner hippie with early onset Alzheimer's, it all just falls into disappointment. The film goes from scene to gibberish laden scene without giving the audience a chance to register what has just been said. The large amount of characters also doesn't help the storytelling process. I guess my little brain couldn't process all of the information.
The acting itself is great. Phoenix comes off as idiotically sympathetic in the lead role. His best moments are when he's interacting with his ex-girlfriend, Shasta, played by Katherine Waterston (Michael Clayton). She has only a few scenes but, she pulls you into every moment (even when she isn't naked). The level of humor is fluent throughout with sight gags and reactions that will have you laughing out loud. Josh Brolin (Men in Black III) is hilarious as a loose cannon police detective with an affinity for chocolate bananas and Japanese pancakes. If the film had been more focused on him, it would have been much better. In only one scene, Eric Roberts (The Specialist) gives a magnetic performance. Martin Short (Jiminy Glick) also has a small cameo and comes off as a horny Mad Hatter on coke. Owen Wilson (Armageddon) has another forgettable performance, because I was once again distracted by his creepy nose that's even more vomit inducing than ever. I mean it's starting to look like silly putty stuck to the middle of his face. Maybe they can mold it into a real nose for once. I apologize for going off on an Owen Wilson nose tirade again (this isn't the first time). My therapist told me to acknowledge my faults. NNNNNOOOOOSSSSSEEEEE!!!!! The many other characters are all performed well but, there's so many of them that you get as confused as Phoenix in the first thirty minutes.
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of Inherent Vice
The Good- The six minute uncut take of Phoenix and Waterston seducing each other, the massage parlor "special", Brolin's final scene, and the hairy breasts photo reaction.
The Bad- If you took out most of the scenes of Phoenix getting high, the overlong two and a hour run time could have been brought down to a less, sleep-inducing, hundred minutes.
The Ugly- Take the comedic brilliance of the The Big Lebowski, and the wacky, over-the-top, drug tripping of, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and you might get a good idea of what this film tries to be.
Final Thoughts on Inherent Vice
Similar to last year's The Counselor, in that everything looks good and the acting is great, but the bad storytelling leaves nothing but a big, beautiful, painting, with a black hole at the center of it. What a shame. Wasted cast and way too long. If you're into dropping acid, then go and see Inherent Vice. Otherwise, watch it for free on cable in a couple of years, where you can take bathroom breaks and fast-forward through all of the B.S.
Rating- 4 out of 10
Links and Apps
Follow us on Twitter @mps5150
https://soundcloud.com/diicastdotcom
iTunes link to listen on your iPad, iPhone or iPod
Soundcloud App on Google Play to listen on your Android
