The Official Review Thread of 2014

[Sabin]

I just saw Big Hero 6 as well, and yes, that short is very sweet. It had a similar beautiful passage of life feeling that the montage in Up did and managed to be quite moving without destroying my heart. Kudos!

Big Hero 6 is a superhero team film, and the fact that it feels faintly lame when it's overtly operating in that realm is a testament to how good the rest of the film is. Baymax is a very endearing creation and the film does an excellent job of consisting tying the narrative to one simple aspect of the Hiro/Baymax relationship: Baymax will help Hiro on this quest because it will heal his emotional distress. The Miyazaki aspects of the film are curiously slim, and therein lays the difference between a Miayzaki film and Disney/PIXAR/Dreamworks, whatever. Simplicity vs. mass appeal. But the first scenes after the first act with Hiro and Baymax and lovely because the humor is coming from Baymax's personality and physicality. My girlfriend uproarily laughed every time Baymax attempted a fist bump and awkwardly verbalized his interpretation of the "blowing it up" sound. To complain that the film loses something when it becomes a superhero film misses the point that really it's kind of amazing that a film like this allowed for something as lovely at the center in the first place. Also, I haven't heard anybody mention Scooby Doo when describing this film. Hiro's team is remarkably similar to the Scooby Gang and their mission is pretty much pulled from that playbook. To the film's credit, the superhero ambitions are suited perfectly to these animators and they come up with some very entertaining visuals. The villain's micro-bot army is very fun.

Tee is right that it will do, but the nicest thing I can say about it is that at its dumbest, I was still having fun.

[Mister Tee]

Big Hero 6 will do. It's nothing great; certainly not on par with the Pixar or Miyazaki efforts that have made this category shine. But, especially in the early part of the film -- before the superhero stuff really kicks in; when it's mostly about science geeks trying to dazzle one another and, oh yeah, improve the world -- it's got a fresh spirit, nice pacing, and a bunch of cool, not-the-same-old-thing visuals. It's disappointing that it devolves into a somewhat ho-hum super-villain narrative (this part is a bit like The Incredibles Lite), but it has more heart than most of the other cartoons I've endured over the past several years. I find it clearly superior to recent winners Rango and Brave, and maybe even a touch better than Frozen...though I found the LEGO Movie wittier, and more surprising in general. I think LEGO and Big Hero could make for a pretty evenly matched competition for animated feature.

The accompanying short is sweet, though I have to say I spent much of it thinking the poor dog was going to keel over with a heart attack.

[Sonic Youth]

I suspect critics who hated Ron Howard's unabashedly sentimental "A Beautiful Mind" are bound to dislike "The Theory of Everything,"

Thanks for the heads-up.

[ITALIANO]

Films dealing with physical disabilities are not new. Going back to dramas like "The Winning Team" (1952, about baseball star Grover Cleveland Alexander who had epilepsy) and "The Elephant Man" (1980, about Joseph, but called John, Merrick who may have suffered from a deformity known as neurofibromatosis type 1). These, and countless other films through the years, attempt to show how such illnesses have tested the will of talented or decent people. Often these are derided as Oscar-bait and overly sentimental heart-tuggers.

No well, The Elephant Man wasn't considered - at least at the time - a sentimental, purely Oscar-baiting movie - it was too dark for example. And even My Left Foot - which some mention when reviewing The Theory of Everything - was never accused, as far as I remember, of being just that kind of product.

[criddic3]

THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING ***

Films dealing with physical disabilities are not new. Going back to dramas like "The Winning Team" (1952, about baseball star Grover Cleveland Alexander who had epilepsy) and "The Elephant Man" (1980, about Joseph, but called John, Merrick who may have suffered from a deformity known as neurofibromatosis type 1). These, and countless other films through the years, attempt to show how such illnesses have tested the will of talented or decent people. Often these are derided as Oscar-bait and overly sentimental heart-tuggers. Stephen Hawking's story is no different in this regard. No doubt plenty of observers will have similar complaints about the new James Marsh drama "The Theory of Everything," which begins expanding from its limited release this week.

The film tells the story of Hawking's courtship and relationship with Jane Wilde, whom he meets at Cambridge University in the 1960's. Based on her memoir Travelling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen, we see how the brilliant cosmologist Hawking suffers his fate by slowly succumbing to the physical degenerative disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, commonly known as Lou Gehrig's Disease. Focusing on how the couple finds ways to maintain a sense of normalcy in their life together while battling this debilitating illness, Jane and Stephen share a loving home, have children and continue to encourage Hawkings' scientific studies.


As with all such situations, the burden is high for Jane. She takes on the difficult task of caring for her husband while he eventually cannot move at all. Her mother Beryl (played by Emily Watson, in a brief appearance) suggests she join the local church choir. When she does so she meets the handsome widower Jonathan Jones (Charlie Cox), who becomes part of the family as a friend who helps Jane with Stephen's care. There is an instant connection between Jonathan and Jane, which leads to speculation that something more is going on. Eventually the talk sends Jonathan away. though the stage has been set for the Hawking marriage to dissolve, despite the love shared by the couple. Understanding this dynamic, Stephen early on tells Jane he would not blame her if she were to stray, but her Christian background seems to have held her back from acting on this idea. She later would marry Jonathan. So, too, would Stephen marry his caretaker in later years. Yet the two remained great friends.

The decision to focus on the marriage, rather than solely on Stephen Hawking's scientific theories may prompt some to criticize the structure as old-fashioned romanticism. The theories about time and man's place among the stars is not ignored in the film. In fact, it is given its due throughout the film, but the heart of the film is in the unyielding love that allows that mind to thrive. Indeed, it is perhaps cliche to note that "love conquers all." After all, though, Hawking was given only two years to live by doctors, and he is still with us at age 72.

I suspect critics who hated Ron Howard's unabashedly sentimental "A Beautiful Mind" are bound to dislike "The Theory of Everything," but the acting in this film is impressive. Eddie Redmayne, who broke out two years ago with a strong interpretation of Marius in the musical "Les Miserables," not only conveys the physical hardships but also the formidably disarming twinkle in Hawking's eye, the sense that this is a special man. Felicity Jones, whose star rose with the film "Like Crazy" a few years ago, is tender and determined as Jane. She projects Jane's love for Stephen with a sparkle, and is affecting as she attempts to grapple with the reality that she may not be in love with him anymore. Their performances, and chemistry, is what you'll remember long after seeing the film.

[anonymous1980]

THE HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY PART 1
Cast: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Donald Sutherland, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Julianne Moore, Jeffrey Wright, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Stanley Tucci, Natalie Dormer, Willow Shields, Sam Claflin, Mahershala Ali, Patina Miller, Jena Malone.
Dir: Francis Lawrence.

I haven't read the books so I'm assessing this purely as a movie-goer who enjoys the films (though I'm not a super fan or anything). This one is not as good as Catching Fire but still very much enjoyable. The two hours just flew by. I still think the obvious profit-driven decision to expand the third book into two movies was a mistake in terms of making a narratively strong film but somehow they did a passable job. If you're neither a fan of the books nor the first two films, there's little here to recommend apart from checking out of the last performances of Philip Seymour Hoffman who actually elevates a lot of the material along with a surprisingly strong cast of supporting players. Jennifer Lawrence is great as usual. It's a solid film and I will be watching Part 2.

Oscar Prospects: Since the first two didn't get any nominations, I doubt the third one's gonna get anything. Maybe Original Song.

Grade: B.

[anonymous1980]

WINTER SLEEP
Cast: Haluk Bilginer, Melisa Sözen, Demet Akbag, Ayberk Pekcan, Serhat Mustafa Kiliç, Nejat Isler, Tamer Levent, Nadir Saribacak, Emirhan Doruktutan.
Dir: Nuri Bilge Ceylan.

This year's winner of the Palme D'Or and Turkey's submission for the Best Foreign Language Film category at the Oscars. I'm more of an admirer rather than lover of Ceylan's previous film Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (which I think is due for a revisit by me) so I was cautiously optimistic about this one. I liked this one quite a bit better. It's about an aging former actor who runs a mountaintop hotel in Anatolia with his divorced sister and much younger wife. Despite the fact that this film largely consists of lengthy conversations, it managed to hold my attention almost its entire over-three hour running time. The actors play a significant part but the gorgeous cinematography of the beautiful rural landscape made the film for me. It's not QUITE a masterpiece since it lacked that extra something for me that would put it over the top. But as it is, it is a solid, admirable piece of work that would test some people's patience.

Oscar Prospects: I don't know if this can make the Best Foreign Language Film list without help from the committee. But Cinematography also deserves a mention.

Grade: B+

[anonymous1980]

THE DROP
Cast: Tom Hardy, Noomi Rapace, James Gandolfini, Matthias Schoenaerts, John Ortiz, Ann Dowd.
Dir: Michael R. Roskam.

Mild-mannered bartender gets caught in the middle of a web involving his bar being used as a "drop bar" (bars used as cover for dirty money exchanges by the mob). Of course nothing is what it seems. Adapted by Dennis Lehane based on his own short story, this film is just a tad too talky (rule # 1 of screenwriting: show don't tell) but thankfully, the very strong cast sell everything and makes you hang on to every single word. This film is of course one of the final on-screen performances of James Gandolfini and he is as usual excellent here but the film belongs to Tom Hardy who continues to impress as one of contemporary's cinema's most gifted actors. The third act twist would have been a bit ridiculous had it not for his performance. Overall, yes, I've seen this type of stories before and done better but the cast is so much fun to watch, I didn't care.

Oscar Prospects: I suppose James Gandolfini could make another try for Supporting Actor but if he missed for Enough Said, I doubt he's getting in for this. Tom Hardy will have to wait again for his first nomination.

Grade: B.

[ITALIANO]

It's possible that, as far as "character studies" in American cinema go, Nightcrawler is more profound than most - but, I mean, this says alot about American cinema, not about Nightcrawler. As a portrayal of what today is called "a sociopath", it's definitely not Taxi Driver - it's simply not edgy enough. Jake Gyllenhaal's character is too obviously a screenwriter's invention, and what he says, almost every single line actually, is too obviously "written" by that same screenwriter. It's simply not believable. Interesting, at least at the beginning, but not believable. And of course we have been told before, and in better movies, that television is amoral - big news! The movie - whose pace is slow, very self-important - gets a bit more lively towards the end, when the "thriller" side takes over - there's some suspense, and one or two unexpected cynical moments. But really, a good European movie would take just a few scenes to say all this movie says in its two hours.

It will be completely ignored by the Academy, and, mostly, for good reasons. Yet there's one aspect which should probably be considered - Rene Russo's performance as the ageing, still beautiful head of the tv news. While the movie is obsessed by Jake Gyllenhaal as if he were the new Robert De Niro or Al Pacino (and don't get me wrong, he IS a good actor - just not a charismatic one), and of course is also co-produced by him, it's Rene Russo whom I wanted to know more about. The role unfortunately isn't developed as it deserved to be - which will cost her a Best Supporting nomination that otherwise would have been quite possible - but she's clearly, today, a mature performer and an interesting screen presence. (American cinema in the 50s and 60s would have given her some wonderful, and wonderfully bitter, roles). The movie's only brilliant, and even courageous, idea is to make her the romantic and even sexual object of the younger Gyllenhaal's attentions - but then, rather less courageously, it refuses to show us them together in bed. In the 70s it wouldn't have happened.

[criddic3]

NIGHTCRAWLER

Jake Gyllenhaal stars as Louis "Lou" Bloom, who has a great ambition to be a success, but is first seen pushing stolen construction merchandise. He doesn't get much traction when looking for a job, until one day he discovers the world of freelance video journalism while stopped at the scene of a car accident. So he gets himself a camcorder and a police radio scanner.

Lou learns that this works a bit like storm chasing. In order to get the best footage of a crime scene, you have to race against not only police, but also rival freelancers. A fast learner, Lou advances in this medium by selling his videos to a local news station director named Nina (Rene Russo). Despite the more cautious attitudes of her crew, Nina senses a ratings opportunity in Lou's increasingly aggressive tactics, which include attempting to get the most graphic close-up images of crime and accident victims. Hiring an assistant, naive and money-desperate Rick (Riz Ahmed), Lou is in business. As Lou and Nina enter into a dangerous pact, he profiting from her eagerness for better ratings, we begin to wonder just how far Lou is willing to go with his scheme.

Sensationalism in news has long been a topic of concern for people. "Nightcrawler" uses this to its advantage by giving us a scenario where amoral people are willing to cross certain lines to get the most attention-grabbing headlines, no matter the consequence. Gyllenhaal is superb at presenting Lou as a borderline psychotic without ever seeming to have evil motives. It's quite a trick. Rene Russo has her best role in years, playing a woman who is nearly as amoral as Lou but for different reasons. They need each other to survive this seedy underworld of nightcrawling journalism. This is one of the best films of the year.

[anonymous1980]

NIGHTCRAWLER
Cast: Jake Gyllenhaal, Rene Russo, Riz Ahmed, Bill Paxton, Michael Hyatt, Kevin Rahm, Ann Cusack.
Dir: Dan Gilroy.

A sociopathic petty thief decides to become a "nightcrawler", or videographers who go around taking crime/accident footage for local morning news outlets. This sort of feels like a somewhat updated version of Network for our time where people's voyeuristic tendencies and thirst for sensationalism equals a network's ruthless chase for ratings but there's so much more there. It's also a biting social commentary for the contemporary economic conditions combined with the cold logic of a capitalistic society to be financially successful no matter what the cost. All this is wrapped in a supremely entertaining, darkly comedic crime thriller. It pulls it off quite brilliantly. It doesn't hit you over the head with the message but it's there. It's anchored by Jake Gyllenhaal's fantastic performance. His normally kind, puppy-dog eyes is transformed here into a menacing, calculating creep. This is a terrific film.

Oscar Prospects: I think Gyllenhaal is in the running for a Best Actor nomination but I think Screenplay, Cinematography and Original Score should be considered too.

Grade: A-

[The Original BJ]

Because of my affection for Ed Wood, I went into Big Eyes -- the latest Burton biography with a script from Alexander & Karaszewski -- with great anticipation. Somehow I always seem to forget that, despite singular talent, Tim Burton is probably more likely to deliver you a bad movie than a good one, and Big Eyes is yet another disappointment.

The biggest problem with the movie is simply the fact that its story just doesn't have much conflict. Walter Keane decides to pass off his wife's work as his own, and she...goes along with it. That's a premise that simply doesn't allow for much story propulsion, especially because, at least at first, the movie doesn't seem that interested in exploring WHY she makes that decision. For much of the early portion of the movie, I kept thinking, if Margaret didn't like this situation so much, all she'd have to do is speak up and her problem would be solved; I wasn't especially engaged in a narrative where the main character's chief obstacle would be so easy for her to surmount.

And then (and this only counts as a spoiler if you aren't familiar with art history), she finally does say something, but this story turn happens in an extremely linear way: she hadn't spoken up before, and then she decides to say something. Not sure how I would have instructed the screenwriters to make this turn more exciting, but once again the wispiness of the set-up becomes a narrative issue -- all she had to do to set the record straight was...set the record straight. Not much story fun there.

At this point (well, maybe a bit before then), the movie really rides off the rails tonally, culminating in a grindingly bad court room sequence that doesn't so much stretch credulity as rip in half and toss it out the window. (Here the movie also attempts to answer the question of why Margaret was so complicit in the ruse, but at this point that felt like way too little, too late, to be of much compelling thematic interest.) I think the fact that the movie ends in such an outrageously silly sequence isn't going to endear it to many people -- what had been, up until that point, a simply uninteresting movie becomes a laughably over-the-top one, and here I have to fault Burton along with his screenwriters for letting things get so out of control.

There's someone else at fault, too -- Christoph Waltz, who, especially in the latter portion of the movie, is giving a performance that I think is pretty terrible. I'm starting to feel like this guy shouldn't be allowed to act in anything but Tarantino movies -- whatever feels genuinely inspired about his work in Quentin's films is completely absent from much of his other performances, no more so than here, when he becomes almost an anchor attached to the hull of already sinking ship.

Amy Adams fares better, and is committed throughout to portraying her character in as dramatically grounded and dignified a manner as possible despite the cartoons flailing around next to her, but she's stuck in a project that isn't utilizing her abilities to anywhere near her potential. I don't think she's getting nominated for this, but I guess if desperation for candidates does manage to get her on the ballot, she'd be nothing more than filler.

But truly, I wouldn't be surprised if Big Eyes rolls snake eyes this season.

[anonymous1980]

BIG HERO 6
Cast: Ryan Potter, Scott Adsit, Daniel Henney, TJ Miller, Jamie Chung, Damon Wayans Jr., Genesis Rodriguez, James Cromwell, Maya Rudolph, Alan Tudyk, Stan Lee (voices).
Dirs: Don Hall & Chris Williams.

*insert smart-ass joke about not remembering seeing Big Hero 1-5* Okay, that's out of the way. This is a terrific film. Disney Animation is on a roll. A teenage robotics genius mourning the accidental death of his older brother discovers someone stole his microbot invention to be used for less-then-honorable reasons and so he "upgrades" his brother's health care robot Baymax. The movie has everything: It is actually very funny, lots of clever, great jokes in it. It's visually eye-popping, lovingly designed. It's got some great action sequences. It also has a big heart and dramatic heft to create a terrific piece of pop cinema. I have to say that this is the third film this year so far that tackled the subject of grief and loss through genre and did it very well. (The other two are The Babadook and John Wick. Someone should write an essay on that or something).

Oscar Prospect: It's a threat to WIN Best Animated Feature. I think it should get in Sound Mixing, Sound Editing and, yes, Production Design.

Grade: A-

[anonymous1980]

LEVIATHAN
Cast: Aleksei Serebryakov, Roman Madyanov, Vladimir Vdovichenkov, Elena Lyadova, Sergey Pokhodaev.
Dir: Andrey Zvyagintsev.

This is the Russian entry to this year's Best Foreign Language Film Oscar race. This one is about a man who is being forced to sell his house and land way below its cost by a corrupt mayor and other drama ensue. A slow burn for sure but the drama unfolds beautifully so. Despite the deliberate pace, there's always seems to be an aura sprinkled through out. The film is known to be quite critical of the Russian government and from what I can tell, a lot of it seems to be similar to the situation here in the Philippines though I'm not familiar with the minute details of it. But still, it's quite an absorbing drama, beautifully shot and well-acted by a fine ensemble.

Oscar Prospects: I would say it has a good shot at getting Foreign Language Film if it's based purely on merit.

Grade: A-

MOMMY
Cast: Anne Dorval, Antoine-Olivier Pilon, Suzanne Clement.
Dir: Xavier Dolan.

I recently saw I Killed My Mother and it's safe to say between this and that film, writer-director Xavier Dolan must have a lot of mommy issues. Well, I guess we really have his mom to thank because she raised a very, very talented young filmmaker who created this remarkable piece of work. Anne Dorval once again plays a flawed mother, this time of a teenage boy with severe behavioral, emotional and mental problems. They are befriended by a neighbor who happens to be a teacher with a stuttering problem. The three actors playing the principal are all outstanding. Dolan manages to mine quite a bit of the same themes with that other mom-themed film without feeling like he's repeating himself. I wasn't so sure about the entire changing of aspect ratios but I warmed up to it. I'm astounded that he's only 25 and is already ratcheting up a respectable filmography.

Oscar Prospects: All three principal actors deserve a shot at acting nominations but I think this one only has a fair shot at the Best Foreign Language Film prize.

Grade: A-

[The Original BJ]

I may have to disagree with the Sabin/BJ take about the ending, partly because I was worried the film was going to take the comforting way out: have Lou nailed by the police, and thus removed from our universe.

Well, certainly the actual ending is preferable to THAT. But I might have wanted to see just how far Lou might have been willing to go to avoid getting caught -- if anything, I'd have preferred the conclusion to be even more cynical.

But I've found this one has set very well in memory over the past couple weeks. Or maybe it's just that since then, I've seen a couple movies being talked about as Best Picture candidates that I found severely underqualified, and Nightcrawler just seems so much more exciting by comparison.