Daily Movie
"Film as dream, film as music. No art passes our conscience in the way film does, and goes directly to our feelings, deep down into the dark rooms of our souls.” ― Ingmar Bergman Follow on Twitter @MilesDailyMovie. 'Mad Max: Fury Road' (2015) "So I exist in this wasteland. I am the only one that…
https://s1.wp.com/i/favicon.ico
24 Miles
“Film as dream, film as music. No art passes our conscience in the way film does, and goes directly to our feelings, deep down into the dark rooms of our souls.” ― Ingmar Bergman

Follow on Twitter @MilesDailyMovie.

‘Mad Max: Fury Road’ (2015)

“So I exist in this wasteland. I am the only one that runs both from the living, and the dead. Hunted by scavengers, haunted by those I could not protect.” – Tom Hardy as Max Rockatansky

Bottom line: At first glance, “Mad Max” is your average explosive, male-driven summer blockbuster, but the furious Furiosa easily takes over a film, and more importantly, changed the way filmmakers approach the genre in the future.

Director George Miller took a while, but after several decades, his return to the world of Mad Max carries an amazing amount of symbolism in the midst of expensive explosions.

“Mad Max: Fury Road” doesn’t play by the big-budget rules. Instead, Miller presents a social experiment, but leaves out any direct notion that it is an experiment. He just let’s us waft in an inviting cloud of feminism and post-apocalyptic mayhem without addressing the fact that Max takes a backseat to a much more riveting story.

In a vast desert landscape, humanity is crippled. Society has collapsed to the point where water and other basic necessities are a delicacy. Within this broken world are two rebellious characters creating their own path.

Max is man of few words, but the loss of his wife and child drives him to survive. Not only does he roam the sparse desert wasteland enduring like the rest of the world, but his struggle to find peace of mind lingers. Then there’s Furiosa, a woman of action who sees her path to survival can only become a reality if she returns to her childhood homeland. Their paths collide, and they find a similar interest when a warlord is after his “wives” that Furiosa freed before betraying him. Once the narrative stage is set, vehicular warfare takes over as our heroes race to safety.

The film is a lengthy, adrenaline-fueled battle, and Miller methodically staged each sequence to match a comfortable pace for such a thrilling concept. His minimal use of CGI is the talk of the town — and for good reason. We often go to the movies and see a computer-generated spectacle that’s blatantly impossible, but the majority of what happens on screen in “Fury Road” actually happened.

Practical effects in a big-budget action flick such as this take much more thought and consideration to pull off than diluting the story with CGI, but when successful, it provides an inspiring viewing experience. Miller vibrantly delivers everything we need to know about the characters and the world surrounding them without dialogue controlling the narrative.

The first trailer I saw for “Fury Road” looked wonderful. I was excited for a big-budget, art house action film, but it wasn’t until Entertainment Weekly wrote a piece about Furiosa’s role in the movie in an early May edition that I realized we were in for a special summer treat. Her boiling rage is what drives the film, where Max is much more level-headed and basically takes a supporting role in his own film.

Miller hired Eve Ensler, author of “The Vagina Monologues,” to coach many of the women in the film, which is something every male director should take note of — especially in a Hollywood environment where sexism runs rampant (less than two percent of the 100 highest-grossing films from 2013 and 2014 were directed by women.)

“Fury Road” is the fourth film of Miller’s exciting franchise, but it doesn’t seem like a sequel. It stands as its own artistic vision. The societal implications, masterful special effects and shocking imagery doesn’t just add on to a superb anthology, but shakes up the action genre as a whole.

Fun fact: The film was originally supposed to star Mel Gibson in the title role back in 2003, but George Miller ran into problems with shooting locations, and with Gibson’s interest in The Passion of the Christ (2004), it never happened.

Run time: 120 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 98 percent

…

Oscar Underdogs: Week Three

Best Actor

Michael Keaton’s performance in “Birdman” has been the talk of Hollywood for months. An Academy award for best actor was a given, but this category has quickly become one of the more competitive races we’ll see at this year’s ceremony.

Staring in a film with the most nominations, Keaton has won a Golden Globe and a Critics choice award for his captivating role as a dwindling celebrity looking for the spotlight one more time. Keaton’s frontrunner status is now in question after Eddie Redmayne won the SAG Award for his role in “The Theory of Everyting,” which adds to his Golden Globe victory in the drama category.

Bradley Cooper’s role in the controversial, yet highly successful box office hit “American Sniper” has earned him a seat at the table, but not many critics were giving him much of a chance at a victory. It’s possible that Keaton and Redmayne will cancel each other out, and Cooper will be sitting there with his arms wide open.

A victory for Cooper would be a tough task. Marcia Gay Harden is the only person to ever win an Oscar without a Golden Globe, Critics Choice Award or a SAG nomination. This has turned into one of the hardest categories to predict, but Keaton will most likely walk away with the award.

The Underdog: Steve Carell

Steve Carell stars in the critically praised drama “Foxcatcher.” Director Bennett Miller’s latest project is based on true events, telling the tragically twisted story of the relationship between multi-millionaire John Du-Pont (Carell) and two Olympic wrestlers; Mark Schultz (Channing Tatum) and Dave Schultz (Mark Ruffalo).

Carell’s most popular role before “Foxcatcher” was the critically sub-par sequel to “Anchorman.” Carell fans will be stunned when they see him as the eccentric Du-Pont. He’s creepy, confused and produces some of the most chilling scenes in any film this past year.

His performance is one thing, but Carell’s physical transformation is shocking in itself. “Foxcatcher” redefined both Tatum and Carell’s career, and we can expect more serious, award-winning roles from both actors in the future.

Best Supporting Actor

J.K. Simmons is everywhere right now. Other than staring in the suspenseful hit “Whiplash,” he’s on our television via State Farm, the voice of the yellow M&M and is the most recent host of NBC’s Saturday Night Live. It would be shocking if he doesn’t win this award after his sharp rise in popularity, and not to mention sweeping the supporting actor category in every major award ceremony this year.

The Underdog: Ethan Hawke

The attention to technical detail is what makes “Boyhood” one of the best dramas the film world has ever seen. It’s a genuine experiment of the human condition. Director Richard Linklater takes 12 years of footage and is able to create a singular narrative through the eyes of an adolescent boy, Mason (Ellar Coltrane), who literally grows up as the film progresses.

Ethan Hawke and Patricia Arquette play Mason’s parents, who “grow up” throughout the film just as much as Mason. We see flashes of road trips, family dinners and other relationship-driven situations building up to an emotional analysis of human growth. There was no need to research time period clothing or trends, which creates a natural nostalgia. This natural accuracy is just one unique aspect to an already uncommon theme.

The release of “Boyhood” happens to be during a time where Ethan Hawke needs it the most. It’s safe to say this talented actor hasn’t seen the spotlight as much as he should. Watching him perform in “Boyhood” was special, specifically watching him in the early stages of the film when Hawke was a much younger actor with a lot more eccentric confidence. As the film unfolds, Hawke’s character matures and so does his acting. After his impressive showing in “Boyhood,” Hawke will not have any trouble finding more Oscar-worthy roles in the future.

…

Oscar Underdogs: Week Two

The best actress and best supporting actress categories both have front-runners who look unstoppable, leaving many of the nominees to go unnoticed. Here are the Oscar underdogs for this year’s actress categories.

Best actress

Julianne Moore will more than likely take home the award for best actress after showing the world once again how well she can light up a screen in “Still Alice,” where she plays a woman battling early onset Alzheimer’s. She’s already won a Golden Glove and Critics Choice award for the role, only helping her campaign for the Oscar. Jennifer Aniston’s role in “Cake” was the popular prediction to challenge Moore, but surprisingly the Academy didn’t even award Aniston a nomination.

The underdog – Rosamund Pike

“Gone Girl” was the first film in a string of Oscar hopefuls, otherwise known as “Oscar season.” As expected, film fans fell in love with director David Fincher’s r

eturn, and Rosamund Pike’s role earned a great amount of hype. Once Oscar season started winding down, the film world realized the “Gone Girl” hype was a product of a sub-par summer at the movies.

Regardless of the film’s best picture miss, Pike is a true treat to watch. Fincher brings out the best in Pike and her co-star Ben Affleck with a dark and intelligent thriller with style to boot. Pike takes the opportunity to shine under great direction and does just that. Unfortunately for Pike, her crazed role as Amy Dunne lost a lot of steam in favor of more somber roles.

The best actress category is one of the more talented groups we’ll see at the ceremony. Felicity Jones stared in “The Theory of Everything,” but any award-winning momentum the film produced came from Eddie Redmayne’s portrayal of Stephen Hawking. From Reese Witherspoon’s emotional performance in “Wild” to Marion Cotillard’s knockout performance in the Dardenne brother’s latest film “Two Days, One Night,” the girls brought the house down this year in both categories.

Best supporting actress

Patricia Arquette is winning just about every award for her role in “Boyhood,” so any other winner in this category will be a surprise. Arquette’s role is just one of many outstanding 12-year performances in director Richard Linklater’s most recent project, and it would be more than fair if Arquette walks away with the award.

The underdog – Emma Stone

Other than Arquette, the category is full Oscar underdogs. Emma Stone’s performance in “Birdman” has the best chance to pull off an upset, but a win would most likely have to be the result of the Academy choosing her film for best picture.

Stone plays Sam, the daughter of the film’s protagonist, Riggan (Michael Keaton). Her character is quirky, but also intense at just the right moments. One of these moments comes at an important time in the film’s narrative where she verbally attacks her father about his self-image issues. It’s a powerful scene where we get to see the talented actress up close and personal as the camera slowly drifts toward Stone while she rants about society’s idea of relevancy and her father’s ignorance.

Stone has a few of these important heart-to-heart encounters with her father, but also latches on to Edward Norton’s character at times to add to the film’s charming allure. The young actress is taking flight, not only gaining Oscar attention but also starring as Sally on Broadway’s “Caberet.” A role that’s been played by both Judi Dench and Liza Minnelli. It wouldn’t be surprising if we saw Stone back here again next year.

The rest of the pack will need a lot of help to pull off an upset. Laura Dern is nominated for her role in “Wild,” playing the mother of best actress nominee Reese Witherspoon (which is odd because Dern would have had Witherspoon at 9 when considering their real-world age difference, but hey, movies).

Kiera Knightley is nominated for her role in “The Imitation Game” as Joan Clarke, a cryptanalyst who was part of the team trying to crack the Enigma code. Knightley has been nominated once before for her role as Elizabeth Bennett in the 2005 Jane Austen adaption “Pride & Prejudice.” Unfortunately, Benedict Cumberbatch’s performance overshadows Knightley’s achievement.

Meryl Streep is nominated for another Oscar this year for her bewitching role in “Into the Woods.” The 19-time Oscar nominee’s chance to win this category started to dwindle a week after the film’s release. Many critics and Oscar fans gave the film an unnecessary amount of best picture hype, but it just didn’t resonate with film goers.

Watch for next week’s final segment of Oscar Underdogs where we’ll look at some of the talented best actor nominees who will most likely leave the ceremony empty-handed.

…

Oscar Underdogs: Week One

The Academy Awards are three weeks away, and with nominees home after the Oscars’ annual luncheon, there are a few categories with predictable winners, while others are up for grabs.

Regardless of what happens, each category is loaded with talented performers and technical masterminds who will leave the ceremony empty-handed.

This week is the first in a three-part weekend edition series highlighting the lesser-known, underdog nominees. This week, we’ll look at director Damien Chazelle’s riveting story about a young musician seemingly willing to put up with anything to become one of the greatest drummers of all time.

“Whiplash” is one of eight films nominated for best picture, but will most likely fall short of the evening’s most anticipated award, regardless of it receiving better reviews than most of the other films in the category.

With films such as “Birdman” and “Boyhood” gaining so much award-winning momentum, it’ll be hard for the rest of the pack to compete.

“Whiplash” squeaked into the category after actor J.K. Simmons started earning some attention for his electrifying role as an abusive jazz band instructor. Simmons’ performance has already earned him a Golden Globe for best supporting actor, and he is the front-runner for the same award at the Oscars.

Simmons plays alongside the young Miles Teller, an actor who starred in “21 and Over” before “Whiplash.” The casting decision might have been odd at first, but there is little fault in Teller’s captivating performance, one that will no doubt earn him several intriguing roles in the coming years. The 26-year-old has already landed a high-profile role in the upcoming Fantastic Four reboot as Mr. Fantastic.

Andrew Neyman (Teller) is a young, up-and-comer at a prestigious music school on the east coast. While his father’s failed writing career lingers in his mind, Neyman is powerfully driven to become one of the greats, even if his own family doesn’t appreciate his craft.

Aggressive instructor Terrence Fletcher (Simmons) roams the halls as a godly figure, one who can stand outside of a lower-level band practice and make each player’s hair stand up at the thought of playing in his distinguished studio band. After infiltrating one of Neyman’s rehearsals looking for players to help him perfect his studio band, Fletcher finds Neyman’s spirit appealing and takes him under his wing, forever changing the young man’s life.

His passionate love for drumming quickly turns into an obsession, and Fletcher’s brutal and often cruel teaching methods don’t help Neyman’s diminishing mental stability. The more Fletcher pushes, the more Neyman tests the limits of the human spirit.

The acting is what gives “Whiplash” its kick, but there’s a lot to be said about the film’s stunning cinematography.

When a movie about drumming in a studio band can be genuinely stressful, leaving the viewer utterly stunned by the protagonist’s drive to succeed, one can only look at how it’s made.

The camera work is constantly shifting during each musical scene, quickly cutting from musician to teacher at one moment. Then, with one quick halting motion of Fletcher’s hand, paired with a longer take of the forceful instructor’s critique, it instantly changes the mood of the setting.

“Whiplash” offers an insight into the world of competitive jazz playing, but with its own darkly unique twist. Hidden under the unhealthy relationship between teacher and student, master and apprentice, is an odd connection the two of them share, one that binds them together in the pursuit of their individual goals.

“Whiplash” is full of uncomfortable moments and strenuous drama, but the rigorously triumphant finale will without a doubt win over any viewer’s heart.

Next week, don’t miss the second part of “Oscar Underdogs,” where we’ll look at some lesser-known nominees in the best actress and best supporting actress categories.

Fun fact: The director and writer of the film, Damien Chazelle, could not get funding for the movie, so he instead turned it into a short film and submitted it into the Sundance Film Festival in 2013. The short film ended up winning the Short Film Jury Award, and he got funding soon after.

Run time: 107 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 95 percent

Published by The O’Colly: http://www.ocolly.com/blogs/article_439f408c-ad9e-11e4-b37e-33499fc8a19e.html

…

‘Spirited Away’ (2001)

“Once you do something, you never forget. Even if you can’t remember.”- Mari Natsuki as Zeniba

Bottom line: “Spirited Away” is a dazzling fairy tale drawn to captivate and provoke a better appreciation for the world around us.

Animation director Hayao Miyazaki is known as one of the world’s master animation artists, and “Spirited Away” is just one of the many examples of his enchanting talent. His vision for “Spirited Away” is reminiscent of an early Disney, and oftentimes the depth of Miyazaki’s characters elevate him past the animation mogul.

His beautifully realized fantasy land is safe for kids, as the PG rating suggests, but Miyazaki exudes themes of death and dreadful pain that many films in the genre won’t touch.

Following his award-winning 1997 fable “Princess Mononoke” (1997), Miyazaki returns with another visually stunning Alice in Wonderland-like story about a ten-year-old child, Chihiro, who loses her way after her parents decide to take an unscheduled stop at a mysterious tunnel during a ride along the countryside.

Much to her dismay, Chihiro’s parents investigate the blocked tunnel. Once they walk through, an abandon amusement park awaits, and her anxiety only escalates. Chihiro’s parents soon fall for a “trap” and are unable to move forward, leaving Chihiro alone in a haunting place where monsters and ghoulish happenings surround the frightened child.

Chihiro quickly realizes she’s stumbled upon a resort for these ghouls and monsters to unwind after their taxing work in the world of humans.

A friendly “boy” finds her and explains the rules of the world she’s found. First, she has to work because laziness is frowned upon. Second, she must take on a new name, Sen, but if she forgets her real name, she will never be able to leave.

Whether it’ spirituality, the significance of words or the power of love, “Spirited Away” has a lot to say. It’s not just a children’s outlet. Miyazaki aims to impress with entertainingly influential dialogue and his persistent need to hand-draw all of his work.

The originality of “Spirited Away” is exposed through this persistence and gives the added CGI visuals a heavenly appeal that should be seen by any appreciative film-goer. The watercolor backdrops and attention to detail will dazzle with ease, especially if you understand the sheer amount of work and talent it takes to produce such magnificent moving art.

Watching the film is more of an event than just a simple movie night. It’s a powerful accomplishment in the world of animation — a world that seems to produce simple, mind-numbing content for children far too often.

Fun fact: First anime film to be nominated for (and win) an Academy Award. It also has the longest run time of any other film nominated or winning in that category (125 minutes).

Run time: 125 min.

MPAA rating: PG

Rotten Tomatoes: 97 percent

‘The Babadook’ (2014)

“You can’t get rid of the Babadook.”- Noah Wiseman as Samuel

Bottom line: In the modern horror genre full of cheap tricks and jumpy scares doubling as punch lines, “The Babadook” is sincere — in a terrifying kind of way.

Jennifer Kent’s directorial debut is a chilling work of art that easily finds its way under the skin. Playing the role of writer as well, Kent’s complete vision of “The Babadook” is a prime example of how to make genuine horror while still utilizing the standard tropes of the genre.

Providing a subtle dose of intelligence to match the terror, Kent’s thrill ride pleasantly burrows its way into the psyche. The film’s mixture of brains and horror brawn gives it an obvious advantage over other wannabe fright fests.

“The Babadook” disturbs with ease, but the dreamlike atmosphere outside of the film’s eerie storybook horror quickly becomes a nightmare, and Kent’s ability to visualize the gradual change is captivating.

Amelia (Essie Davis) lost her husband in a car accident on the way to deliver her son Samuel (Noah Wiseman), and she’s still trying to cope several years later. As Samuel’s ever present fear of monsters escalates, Amelia has trouble finding any moment of peace. Samuel’s fear turns into violent reactions, and the friends they once had seem to be slipping away — throwing Amelia into a deeper state of anxiety.

Things get so bad for Amelia and Samuel that they can’t even read a simple children’s book at bedtime. They find a strange book within the house and read it before bed, but the feature character, the Babadook, hides in the shadows and only feeds Samuel’s fears. Amelia begins to sense a looming figure as well and attempts to destroy the book, but that only makes things worse for the two. The finale has yet to be written, and the simple book reading ignites Amelia’s psychosis, and The Babadook’s story can now be completed.

The terrifying elements of the film are both visual and literary. Amelia’s reading of the Babadook’s book is something I’ve simply never seen before. Samuel’s cringe worthy cries about what will happen to the child are almost background noise to Amelia’s fascination with the book’s disturbing content — frantically reading and flipping through the pages as if to find something more lighthearted.

If there are any modern horror doubters still remaining, “The Babadook” is a true inspiration for the genre, and a testament to what filmmakers are doing in the world of horror. In 93 minutes, Kent uses her grim artistic vision to tap into our childhood fears and the anxiety of adulthood as well.

Wiseman does so well “pretending” to see a terrifying figure it becomes hard to ignore him. His character’s constant violent outbreaks paired with his ongoing persistence to protect himself from the inevitable showdown with the Babadook is often humorous but obviously terrifying for his mother. Davis counters Wiseman’s character antics with a severe state of depression — one that only adds fuel to her psychotic flame.

“The Babadook” is easily my favorite horror film of the year, but that doesn’t do it justice when competing with a Purge sequel and “Annabelle.” Kent has developed a masterpiece, one that’s better than most horror films of this young century.

Fun fact: “William Friedkin, director of ‘The Exorcist,’ said “I’ve never seen a more terrifying film than ‘The Babadook.'”

Run time: 93 min.

MPAA rating: Unrated

Rotten Tomatoes: 98 percent

‘Birdman’ or (‘The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance’) (2014)

“Popularity is the slutty little cousin of prestige.”- Edward Norton as Mike Shiner

Bottom line: “Birdman” is ambitious, and director Alejandro G. Inarritu’s impressive technical exhibition is only accentuated by Oscar-worthy performances from Michael Keaton and Edward Norton.

“Birdman” is simply a lot of fun. It’s satisfying to see Michael Keaton perform so brilliantly in 2014 in itself, but Inarritu’s unique vision is more than worthy of the film’s hype — he’s able to create the impression that the entire film was shot during one take.

The ambitious nature of Inarritu’s technical showcase is paired with a captivating story about the human spirit that’s emotionally gratifying, erratic yet warm, and has a funny side that will sneak up on you.

“Birdman” is a black comedy that literally follows Riggan (Keaton), a washed-up actor who earned his fame from starring in a superhero franchise decades earlier, and documents the days leading up to the premier of his Broadway play. The once iconic movie star must battle with his lingering ego while he attempts to repair his broken relationships, career and inevitably himself.

Inarritu is close friends with “Gravity” director Alfonso Cuaron, and was able to partner with cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki (who won a technical Oscar for “Gravity”). The end result is a sensational piece of cinematic magic. Flowing from narrow corridors to crowded New York streets, the camera’s lengthy tracking shots are captivating and an example of stylistically orchestrated filmmaking at its finest.

Watching closely, an attentive viewer may be able to locate several instances where there may have been a cut, but doing so will take away much of the enjoyment the imaginative shooting provides. Falling for the magic is the whole point of going to the movies.

Keaton’s involvement is obviously amusing. He’s an actor who “peaked” more than 20 years ago when he stared in Tim Burton’s “Batman,” much like Riggan. Keaton plays on this, toying with his real-life persona and the somewhat quiet career he’s had since going toe-to-toe with The Joker.

His performance is hyper-active and full of emotion, and at times made me question whether he’s acting — checking the ticket again to make sure I wasn’t watching a Keaton biopic. There is a sense of desperation in his character, visibly building up and weighing on Riggan’s psyche as the play’s premier quickly approaches.

Edward Norton also toys with his real-life reputation of being demanding and difficult on set. His character, Mike Shiner, is Riggan’s co-star and stepped in after an actor was injured during rehearsals. Norton’s performance is calm but electrifying, finding the right balance between pretension and candidness.

For those who enjoy an extravagantly hypnotic visual experience, “Birdman” is more than satisfactory. The compelling nature of the acting core, paired with the exhilarating movie magic makes “Birdman” one of the more intellectually satisfying movies of 2014.

Fun fact: Given the unusual style of filming long takes, Edward Norton and Michael Keaton kept a running tally of each actor’s mistakes. Emma Stone made the most mistakes, Zach Galifianakis made the fewest.

Run time: 119 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 94 percent

‘Drive’ (2011)

“You know the story about the scorpion and the frog? Your friend Nino didn’t make it across the river.”- Ryan Gosling as Driver

Bottom line: With a powerfully stylized mix of abrupt violence, fascinating imagery and well placed music, “Drive” is aesthetic action at its finest.

Director Nicholas Winding Refn throws viewers back several decades with a sleek ode to the spirit of 80s action cinema — but with a modern setting. Fast cars and mobsters are everywhere, but somehow a pleasant feminine side finds its way into the action.

The violence escalates at a slow rate, but when it peaks, some might find it off-putting. “Drive” is a sharp shot of adrenaline with an unpredictable nature, and is neither a character study or an inflated action movie. “Drive” is simply a fun ride for both the intellectual viewer and gritty action fanatics.

Ryan Gosling stars as the “Driver,” a hired wheelman in Los Angeles. Whether it’s Hollywood stunt driving or steering getaway vehicles for armed heists, our Driver is talented behind a wheel. Though a loner at heart, he falls for the girl next door, Irene (Carey Mulligan), a young mother who’s ex-convict husband, Standard (Oscar Isaac), drags her into the dangerous criminal underworld of L.A.

Driver can’t help but throw himself into the equation, volunteering to be the driver in Standard’s next heist. The mission quickly goes wrong, and Driver finds himself frantically trying to protect the girl he loves while a trail of deadly mobsters are after his head.

Gosling has proven he has a gift for finding powerful characters and highlighting the most fascinating aspects about them — even if it’s just their appearance. He’s one of the few actors who can be exceptional without having to say much.

The tone is anything but the same from start to finish. The romanticism of the beginning takes a drastic shift to the artistically suspenseful action film we define it as at the end.

“Drive” has what many “vehicle action” films don’t: A brain. It’s far more astute and imaginative than what’s expected from the genre today. With minimal CGI usage, “Drive” looks more real than you would expect it to as well. There is a high level of respect here for film fans, but the creative writing and talented cast easily satisfy the casual moviegoer.

Fun fact: Despite the driving themes, director Nicolas Winding Refn does not have any interest in cars. He doesn’t hold a driving license and has failed his driving test eight times.

Run time: 101 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 93 percent

Nov. 3, 2014

‘Nightcrawler’ (2014)

“What if my problem wasn’t that I don’t understand people but that I don’t like them? What if I was the kind of person who was obliged to hurt you for this? I mean physically.”- Jake Gyllenhaal as Lou Bloom

Bottom line: Pulse-pounding doesn’t do “Nightcrawler” justice — Dan Gilroy’s directorial debut is a consistently dark but visually welcoming thrill ride with intriguing social commentary to boot.

Gilroy develops a constant sense of distress with Gyllenhaal’s invading charater, Lou Bloom, somehow piecing together scenes with drastically different tones to create a chilling and fluent narrative.

Take a close look at the film, and it becomes a satire, but watching it with a comedic mindset will distract the viewer from how brilliant of a thriller it is at the core.

“Nightcrawler” follows Lou Bloom, a man looking for career stability who winds up finding it in the high-speed world of L.A. crime journalism.

Bloom witnesses freelance, breaking crime journalists –“Nightcrawlers” — filming a crash scene and decides to weasel his way into the cut-throat profession. It’s a job that turns victims and tragedy into the money Lou takes home for the night, and Gilroy doesn’t let us forget that part. The media criticism is blatantly apparent — almost to a fault, but Gyllenhaal’s performance makes up for any misstep, soaking up the viewer’s attention.

Gyllenhaal is in good company. Rene Russo helps out with a desperate character of her own, Nina, a TV media veteran who finds herself on the hot seat. Her ratings must hit an all-time high before the quarter ends to solidify her job security. Lou thrives in her desperation, taking his search for bloody footage to unimaginable extremes.

It’s unpleasant. It’s uncomfortable. Most of all — it doesn’t care. The unrelenting, in-your-face intensity of the film’s dark motif is a sharp parallel to Gyllenhaal’s vivid character — one that could win him an Oscar.

Robert De Niro was an experienced actor at 33 when he starred in Martin Scorsese’s “Taxi Driver” (1976). De Niro went from gangster in “The Godfather: Part II” (1974) and “Mean Streets” (1973) to psychotic. Gyllenhaal, 33, is also starting to channel his inner-eerie — one that develops over the course of an entire film rather than all at one time.

Fun fact: During the scene where Jake Gyllenhaal talks to himself in the mirror, Gyllenhaal got so into the scene that he punched the mirror. The mirror broke and ended up cutting Gyllenhaal’s hand. He had to go to a hospital and get stitches. He returned to the set right after he got discharged from the hospital.

Run time: 117 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 93 percent

Oct. 30, 2014

‘Pontypool’ (2008)

“Your friend is sick. I’ve seen a lot of this lately. She doesn’t know it yet, but she’s hunting us.” Hrant Alianak as Dr. Mendez

Bottom line: Starting off quiet but using restrained comedy to develop an intellectual punch, “Pontypool”is a truly unique low-budget “zombie” flick.

Director Bruce McDonald drops the standard cheap thrills for a metaphorical scare, producing an impressive B-movie that satisfies the intellectual horror fan and gore junkie alike.

Grant Mazzy (Stephen McHattie) finds himself taking a few steps back from his career as a shock jock after taking a radio announcing job in the small town of Pontypool, Ontario. On his way to work one snowy morning, Mazzy encounters a strange woman on the side of the road repeating his words until she simply disappears. A mild encounter compared to what’s in store for him and his radio crew.

After a few hours on the air, helicopter reporter Ken Loney informs listeners about a possible riot outside the office of Dr. Mendez, which quickly turns into much more. Soon after his report, an eerie transmission in French takes over the airways.

It wasn’t the most informative transmission, warning listeners to not use terms of endearments, phrases that conflict or the English language. It doesn’t seem as if this day could get any more strange, but a quick phone call confirms the town of Pontypool is under quarantine.

According to Dr. Mendez, there is a virus infecting the townspeople hidden in human language, and only certain words trigger a reaction. Once the words are said and “understood,” the virus takes over the host.

“Pontypool” is a witty, cerebral horror that plays with the genre’s popular lingo, but lacks a lot of action sequences. When the action does come, it makes up for the dead air with a heavy dose of gore.

Novelist Tony Burgess adapted this screenplay from his own book, “Pontypool Changes Everything,” and according to McDonald, he completed the adaptation in 48 hours. The film was shot as both a movie and a radio play — both of which draw their influence from Orson Welles’ production of “The War of the Worlds.”

“Pontypool” is perplexing at times, but it seems to be made for the second viewing — one that feels surprisingly different than the first. As the film creeps along, the metaphorically packed dialogue seems to shift the nature of the movie itself.

The originality is shocking for a movie with a $1 million budget. The camera work and impressive editing could easily convince a viewer they’re watching grade A Hollywood horror.

Fun fact: Actress Georgina Reilly had a problem with her character’s having to “babble” and was concerned about what the words would mean to her character.

Run time: 93 min.

MPAA rating: NR

Rotten Tomatoes: 82 percent

…

Daily Movie is offline until Oct. 30, 2014. Thanks for reading!

…

Oct. 13, 2014

The Indie Uprising

Richard Linklater unveiled his independent 12-year project “Boyhood” this year and captivated viewers everywhere. Unlike the majority of popular independent achievements, “Boyhood” is looking at a best picture nomination at the Oscars this year.

Linklater takes 12 years of footage and creates a singular narrative through the eyes of an adolescent boy, Mason (Ellar Coltrane), who literally grows up as the film progresses.

It’s a truly authentic cinematic experiment for the ages. It doesn’t just highlight childhood development, it’s an ode to parenting and the constant complications and fulfillment of raising kids.

Linklater’s success is a testament to the flourishing state of the independent film market. Here are a few indie treats to watch at home:

‘Cloud Atlas’

Since the release of “Cloud Atlas” in 2012, many critics have tried to dissect the film, but like any elegant piece of art, the true experience is original to the viewer. Even so, “Cloud Atlas” wants us to find a meaning in the pile of overbearing rhetoric. Six stories overlap each other between 1849 and 2346, where the actors play several different roles and genders within each story.

Based on David Mitchell’s novel of the same name, “Cloud Atlas” makes one thing clear, there is an echoing concept that our lives are all connected by the desire for liberation. The narrative is complex, told in order but then cycled backward. It can prove to be burdensome for many, but the immense scope and gravity of the film cannot be avoided.

With a budget of more than $100 million, Cloud Atlas is one of the most expensive independent films to date.

‘Samsara’

“Samsara” jumps from one culture to the next, capturing the vast range of humankind and the world we inhabit. This image-driven documentary might have convoluted messages, but the gorgeous visuals make up for any of the narrative defects.

Fricke filmed this piece over the course of five years and 25 countries, relying on imagery instead of dialogue. “Samsara” documents the far corners of the world, whether it’s dangerous disaster zones, indigenous societies or natural wonders.

It’s an impressive spectacle, but more importantly, “Samsara” is a vacation from the standard movie. I love getting lost in transfixing films attempting to bridge cultural gaps.

‘Holy Motors’

Overwhelmingly strange and consistently erratic, “Holy Motors” is something viewers won’t soon forget. It’s visually entrancing and carries a challenging narrative that’s easy to overlook in favor of its stylistic imagery.

The viewer is thrown into the life of Monsieur Oscar, a puzzling character who aimlessly jumps from one life to the next. One hour he’s an assassin, and after a trip in a seemingly ordinary limousine, he’s a captain of industry. Roles are being played, but who is the man behind the many crafts?

Every once in a while we are reminded that filmmakers are still capable of finding obscure ways to be obscure. “Holy Motors” is like a crossword puzzle that’s more fun to play than solve.

…

No Daily Movie Oct. 10-12

…

Oct. 9, 2014

‘Seabiscuit’ (2003)

“The horse is too small, the jockey too big, the trainer too old, and I’m too dumb to know the difference.”- Jeff Bridges as Charles Howard

Bottom line: Here’s your basic “overcoming the odds” theme, but “Seabiscuit” thrives on talented camera work and thrilling races — separating it from the pack.

At its center, this is a story about how one small animal can help an entire nation forget about their woes in the midst of a depression. The racing sequences are top notch and do well to complement the majority of the film’s persevering themes.

In his second film, Director Gary Ross brings back the acting duo from his directorial debut “Pleasantville” to recreate a troubling time in American history. “Seabiscuit” is a depression-era sports flick about a storied racehorse. Seabiscuit, a small and often lazy horse, grew up spending his days sleeping, eating and misbehaving.

Three men would shape this bum into one of the most beloved racing legends of all time: Owner Charles Howard (Jeff Bridges), who has a keen eye for talented outcasts, trainer Tom Smith (Chris Cooper), who is an outcast himself for trying to heal injured horses instead of killing them, and jockey Red Pollard (Tobey Maguire), who started off cleaning stables.

Based on Laura Hellenbrand’s best-selling novel, “Seabiscuit” follows these three men in their attempt to create something out of nothing. The country’s financial crisis is the film’s backdrop, contributing its own stressful layer of drama.

The narrative structure is a standard sports timeline. The majority of the film is slower, dialogue-driven content, and the characters face a major setback right before the final event (in this case, a race — no way!). The slow start to “Seabiscuit” is full of leisurely character introductions, but the impressive racing scenes make up for the sluggish character development.

The races are intense because they have to be; it would be tough to make the impact “Seabisuit” does without them. Cinematographer John Schwartzman gets close enough to the action that viewers have to question where the cameras are located. The shots often mimic the rider’s experience, pulling the viewer into every key moment and jockey exchange beautifully.

If there is anything bad to say about the film, it’s the strange lack of gambling. Betting is a major element in the racing world — it always has been. “Seabiscuit” seems to avoid it altogether and almost condemn it when it is seen. There could have been an intriguing subplot diving into the world of gambling at the track, but it seems the crew decided it would be too distracting.

Nevertheless, the lack of gambling doesn’t make the film inaccurate. The content’s powerful themes do the trick well enough. At times it may seem these “true events” are carefully constructed, but nothing will keep the viewer from feeling the emotional impact of “Seabisuit.”

Fun fact: While the movie describes War Admiral as being a huge horse close to eighteen hands tall, the real-life War Admiral was well known for being one of the smallest sons of Man o’ War. War Admiral was actually the same size as Seabiscuit, which was approximately fifteen hands tall.

Run time: 140 min.

MPAA rating: PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes:77 percent

Oct. 8, 2014

‘Galaxy Quest’ (1999)

“Don’t open that! It’s an alien planet! Is there air? You don’t know!”- Sam Rockwell as Guy Fleegman

Bottom line: With an excellent cast and intelligent humor, “Galaxy Quest” does so much with so little, cleverly dropping odes to classic science-fiction along the way.

Director Dean Parisot’s cunning comedy may not seem promising on the surface, but “Galaxy Quest” quickly grabs the viewer with amusing, down-to-earth characters and surprisingly impressive special effects.

The film carefully stabs at the popular “Star Trek” franchise it’s honoring, but creates its own charming universe at the same time. Not only are the trek tropes present, but “Galaxy Quest” also spoofs the franchise’s immense fandom. It could have easily poked fun at the trek culture, but instead celebrates the devoted fan base.

For a mere four years, the NSEA Protector carried a fearless crew throughout the galaxy — running into dangerous obstacles and thrilling adventures along the way. As soon as it began, the show was cancelled.

Skip ahead 20 years, where we see our five courageous space travelers still in costume at quest conventions around the world. Fans flock to see their childhood role models, but some of the fans may be more alien than the average Trekkie.

A group of exotic lifeforms have been slowly intercepting television transmissions from Earth and considering them “historical documents.” When they arrive at the convention to ask the actors for help, the ignorant crew is again sent off into space — for real this time. There’s no director, script or second takes. The actors must bring their characters to life and deliver the most important performance of their careers.

Tim Allen, Sigourney Weaver, Alan Rickman, Tony Shalhoub and Sam Rockwell — What’s not to like? These veteran actors all bring their own special dynamic to a narrative with several holes, drastically impacting the film’s predictable subject matter.

The best comedy comes out when the illogical aspects of science fiction get in the character’s way. The film’s effects and set design are easily overlooked for the acting star power and constant wit, but it’s a superb addition to an already unexpected satirical treat.

Fun fact: This film was one of the earliest to have its own internet domain and website, GalaxyQuest.com. However, instead of being a polished part of the film’s marketing campaign, the site (in keeping with the film’s fandom theme) was deliberately designed to look like a fan page, with screen captures and poor HTML coding.

Run time: 102 min.

MPAA rating: PG

Rotten tomatoes: 89 percent

Oct. 7, 2014

‘Holy Motors’ (2012)

“Your punishment, my poor Angèle, is to be you. To have to live with yourself.”- Denis Lavant as Mr. Oscar

Bottom line: Overwhelmingly strange and consistently erratic, “Holy Motors” is something viewers won’t soon forget. It’s visually entrancing and carries a challenging narrative that’s easy to overlook in favor of its stylistic imagery.

Every once and a while we are reminded that filmmakers are still capable of finding obscure ways to be odd. “Holy Motors” is like a crossword puzzle that’s more fun to play than solve. When reading reviews for this film, you’ll likely find a bunch of critics who are trying to stay away from admitting they don’t quite understand the movie’s mysterious themes.

I’m one of them. I’ve watched this back-to-back, and it almost left me even more confused after round two. From the opening sequence, which begins in a movie theater, “Holy Motors” seems to simply celebrate the magic of movies and their powerful impact on modern culture. That’s the best explanation I can conjure up.

The viewer is thrown into the life of Monsieur Oscar, a puzzling character who aimlessly jumps from one life to the next. One hour he’s an assassin, and after a trip in a seemingly ordinary limousine, he’s a captain of industry. Roles are being played, but who is the man behind the many crafts?

He’s alone, accompanied only by his limo driver, Céline, a blonde woman transporting him to different locations throughout Paris. Every time Oscar returns to the vehicle, a contract awaits him, like an assassin receiving a new hit assignment. Where is this man’s home? His family?

“Holy Motors” is truly a phenomenal viewing experience. From scene to scene, the viewer is left entirely clueless as to what lies ahead for Oscar. His random lifestyle leaps are unexpected, and the transformations keep the viewer sucked into a story that makes little sense.

This is the “modern art” of film. It can mean whatever the viewer wants it to mean. Oftentimes, this is something to stay away from, but director Leos Carax is talented in the art of visually mesmerizing people. Anyone could watch it and fall for the eye-pleasing fantasy.

When it finally concludes, “Holy Motors” rattles the brain, but ultimately reminds the viewer of the power behind carefully crafted obscurity in film.

Fun fact: The film’s initial concept started with a trend Leos Carax had observed where stretch limousines were being increasingly used for weddings. The director was interested in the cars’ bulkiness. From that grew an idea for a film about the increasing digitization of society; a science fiction scenario where organisms and visible machines share a common superfluity.

Run time: 115 min.

MPAA rating: NR

Rotten Tomatoes: 91 percent

Oct. 6, 2014

‘Gone Girl’ (2014)

“What are you thinking? What are you feeling? What have we done to each other? What will we do?”- Ben Affleck as Nick Dunne

Bottom line: David Fincher, again, masterfully uses an obscure plot and stabs at the media as a platform for a black comedy hidden behind a thrilling mystery.

As long as “Gone Girl” is, it never drags on, nor does the mood falter. Fincher swiftly jumps from overtly subtle humor to hair-raising thrills, creating a crowd-pleasing thriller with depth and unyielding obscurity.

Based on Gillian Flynn’s novel of the same name, “Gone Girl” unravels the secrets behind a seemingly normal modern marriage. Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) returns home to find his wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), has gone missing on the day of their fifth wedding anniversary.

With the growing pressures from the media spotlight and looming detectives, Nick’s idea of his perfect marriage is quickly changing. Did Nick Dunne kill his wife? Strange incidents add on to the lies and deceitful behavior, making it a popular question.

Flynn’s story easily matches Fincher’s often twisted vision, helping Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike shine under his artistic direction. In the early stages of Oscar season, Pike looks to be a heavy best actress contender. Her performance manages to be captivating, disturbing and genuine, often at the same time.

Let’s not forget the more than beneficial Affleck, who is no stranger to Oscar contention after directing and staring in 2013’s best picture of the year, “Argo.” Affleck reportedly postponed a film he was directing to star in a Fincher film.

“He’s the only director I’ve met who can do everybody else’s job better than they could,” he said.

Affleck hit the books with “Gone Girl,” researching several men accused and convicted of killing their spouses, particularly Scott Peterson. Peterson was convicted of first-degree murder in the death of his pregnant wife, Laci, on Nov. 12, 2004. Laci disappeared in December 2002 while Scott claimed to be fishing.

The theory was that Scott murdered his wife because he wished to be rid of his imminent fatherhood. Even though the prosecution lacked physical evidence connecting Peterson to the crime, he was formally sentenced to death on March 16, 2005.

The effort doesn’t go unnoticed in Affleck’s powerful representation of Flynn’s character. Flynn, who also wrote the screenplay, has addressed the slight deviation from the novel toward the end, stating she wanted fans of the book to have a fun viewing experience next to the story’s newcomers.

These deviations are fairly minimal. The film does well to replicate the novel’s timeline, which could be because Flynn wrote the screenplay. For me, this is a negative. When novel becomes movie, they should be separate entities — their own works of art.

These are two drastically different entertainment mediums, and when one attempts to replicate the other, it often seems forced. Luckily, with Fincher at the helm, the subject matter is a side note to larger, often comedic themes.

Fun fact: Ben Affleck would constantly sing ’80s songs in between takes. Impressed, Tyler Perry decided to start a game that ended up lasting the entire duration of filming. Perry would start to sing the most random song he could think of to see if Affleck would start singing along. According to Perry, Affleck knew all of the words to every single song Perry threw at him, including ones by Barbra Streisand.

Run time: 149

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 87 percent

…

October 3-5 — No Daily Movie

…

Oct. 2, 2014

‘August: Osage County’ (2013)

“I dont need your help. I have got myself… I know how this goes. Once all the talking is threw, people just go back to their own nonsenses. I know that so, dont worry about me. I will manage.”- Meryl Streep as Violet Weston

Bottom line: With a long list of veteran cast members, “August: Osage County” nearly overwhelms the viewer with the amount of acting brands looking for the spotlight, but when it’s Julia Roberts and Meryl Streep, there isn’t much to complain about.

Based on John Letts’ Broadway play, “August: Osage County” is an acting clinic. Letts adapted the play himself, and the character’s dramatic depth might not have come out in the hands of a second-string cast. Considering the bland “dysfunctional family” content doesn’t offer anything new, “August” features two Oscar-nominated performances from a couple of Hollywood’s most popular actresses, which is more than enough for viewers.

Letts has a history with maniacal characters and odd situations, and he’s good at implementing both with unyielding intensity. This type of tone gives great actors, like Streep and Roberts, the ability to shine in their roles as they deliver Letts’ powerful dialogue. Every little remark or private conversation is skillfully designed, using hurtful language to develop deeper themes.

Violet Weston (Streep) — ironically — has cancer of the mouth. This daunting fact, along with her many addictions, has added to a stressful mourning process after her husband’s death. Violet’s family must reunite in the midst of tragedy while she’s on the brink of losing her mind.

Emotions are running high, and the stress quickly starts obscure drama and reveals secrets better left hidden. Each family member will be forced to examine themselves and the relationships they hold dear. This is August in Osage County, Oklahoma, and it’s hot.

“Gravity” and “12 Years a Slave” dominated last year’s Oscars, but there were many gems hiding in the mix of impressive nominations. Streep was nominated for Best Actress in a Leading Role, but fell short to Cate Blanchett’s commanding performance in “Blue Jasmine.”

Roberts found her way back into Oscar contention for the fourth time in her career, but couldn’t compete with Lupita Nyong’o’s mesmerizing supporting performance in “12 Years a Slave,” which also won Best Picture.

Check out some of the other supporting cast members: Chris Cooper, Ewan McGregor, Sam Shepard, Abigail Breslin, Dermot Mulroney and Benedict Cumberbatch.

Streep is often over the top during her drugged-out rants, but there are only a handful of actresses who could get away with it, and she’s one of them. With that being said, Roberts truly steals the show. There is something humble about her approach, quietly delivering potent dialogue. It’s just not the same Julia Roberts we are used to seeing. At this point in her career (it’s been almost 15 years since “Erin Brockovich”) it’s safe to say she could use a re-brand. “August” could be the start of that new image.

The melodrama is tough to avoid with a premise like this, but the acting helps level the playing field and deliver dynamic, character-driven scenes.

Fun fact: Filming at the house took place in the fall. At times it was as chilly as 40 degrees outside. When the leaves around the house began to turn, the production crew painted them green. When the leaves began falling, computer-generated ones were added in post-production.

Run time: 121 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 64 percent

Oct. 1, 2014

TV Edition: ‘Arrow’

Season 3 of “Arrow” premiers Wednesday, and will look to revitalize the show’s image with the introduction of new superheroes and villains, specifically The Flash, a character securing his own weekly Tuesday night spot on The CW this fall.

The Flash will appear in a two-episode crossover right in the middle of Arrow’s third season. Titled “Flash vs. Arrow” and “The Brave and the Bold,” these two episodes will either give new life to the “Arrow” series or give “The Flash” more momentum. The CW is hoping for both.

One thing is for sure, this crossover will open creative doors for comic book characters on television, especially when a network can acquire the appropriate rights to feature multiple heroes in their own shows.

Other than the heavily anticipated Flash appearance, other characters will be featured this season including The Atom (Brandon Routh). While The Atom will be an intriguing addition, this season’s main villain, Ra’s al Ghul (Matt Nable), will introduce the batman universe to the ever-expanding world of “Arrow.”

“Arrow” Executive Producer Andrew Kreisberg was promoting this crossover months ago in an interview with Entertainment Weekly. After two seasons, the show has created a formula, and predictability can be a side effect to formalized superheroes. Kreisberg said the staff didn’t want to wait any longer for a crossover, hoping it would create a redefining spark for “Arrow” and develop some deserving momentum for a Flash spin off that could be a whole lot of fun.

“It’s really going to be an adventure with the Arrow and Flash on both episodes,” he said. “Watching the two teams come together and fight alongside each other, it’s one of the most fun parts. We just don’t believe in waiting. We really believe in accelerated storytelling and especially for those first nine episodes of the season—for both shows—hopefully we’ve designed it so that none of these [make you say], ‘Well, I missed that one, it’s fine.’”

Nable’s appearance as Ra’s al Ghul won’t be what we’ve seen at the movies. The character will be featured in the fourth episode, “The Magician,” and “Arrow” showrunner Marc Guggenheim discussed the villain’s surprising introduction to the series during Comic-Con in July. Guggenheim said the latest Batman trilogy was influential to the series, but the Ra’s al Ghul we will see this fall on The CW won’t be like what we’ve seen in the past.

“Arrow” premiers its third season Wednesday at 7 p.m. on The CW, while “The Flash” will premier Tuesday at 7 p.m. When each series reaches their eighth episode, they will come together for this special crossover event.

Sept. 30, 2014

‘The Cabin in the Woods’ (2012)

“Yeah, uh, I had to dismember that guy with a trowel. What have you been up to?”- Fran Kranz as Marty

Bottom line: With a seemingly predictable premise, this satirical ode to horror offers much more than advertised.

“The Cabin in the Woods” is able to be funny, obscure and frightening — often all at once. Director Drew Goddard’s unique meta-movie drastically shifts tones at least three times, but gains more momentum with every twist.

Reflecting themes from Wes Craven’s “Scream” and Machael Haneke’s disturbing sideshow “Funny Games,” the film is an examination of why horror fans enjoy the genre’s “unpleasant” nature.

A group of typecast teenagers head off to a cabin in the woods for a weekend away. Shortly after they arrive, a sense of isolation starts to set in after attempts to interact with the outside world.

When a cellar door blasts open, the obvious explanation would be the investigate, right? The cellar is packed with ancient relics and random gadgets. When one of the genre’s standard characters reads from an old diary, she raises a family of zombie killers from the ground. With the obvious threat roaming the cabin, a mysterious entity is keeping tabs on the action.

“The Cabin in the Woods” is as self-aware as it can be, capitalizing on the overused themes of the horror genre, but doing something much more in the process. It attempts to display organized free will, questioning whether the characters make choices because of the genre’s requirements or because they truly decide their own path. Bold themes — but the direction and careful attention to the genre’s roots make “The Cabin in the Woods” a rare piece of art not to be missed.

One big question that arises when a horror film tests the genre’s boundaries is whether it’s effective. Are we scared? “The Cabin in the Woods” does have it’s scary moments, but that’s not the point. The film is essentially a horror genre fanboy exam.

Perfection isn’t the best way to describe this one. The tone is often disjointed and the story seems to make itself up as the narrative moves along, but “The Cabin in the Woods” seems to tie everything together with a dramatic, dream-like finale.

Fun fact: The movie’s opening was a deliberate attempt by filmmakers Drew Goddard and Joss Whedon to confuse the audience and make them think they walked in to see the wrong movie.

Run time: 94 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 92 percent

Sept. 29, 2014

‘Tusk’ (2014)

Fellow O’Colly Entertainment writer Brandon Schmitz reviews one of the more shocking films of 2014, “Tusk.”

“Are you really mourning your humanity? I don’t understand, who in the hell would want to be human?”- Michael Parks as Howard Howe

Bottom line: This is a tough one. “Tusk,” director Kevin Smith’s first foray into horror comedy, has haunted me since I left the theater.

For better or worse, this movie is unforgettable.

Based on a conversation from Smith’s show SModcast, the film appropriately follows Wallace Bryton (Justin Long), a famous podcaster who travels to the woods of Manitoba, Canada.

While interviewing the mysterious Howard Howe (Michael Parks) about his storied life, Wallace’s situation takes a turn for the macabre.

Meanwhile, Wallace’s best friend Teddy (Haley Joel Osment) and girlfriend Ally (Genesis Rodriguez) go searching for him.

The cast shines across the board. Although I’m indifferent toward many of Long’s previous roles, “Tusk’s” script accentuates his strengths as an actor.

His deplorable narcissism coupled with Park’s off-putting eloquence makes for some riveting dialogue during the film’s first act.

Smith successfully blends palpable atmosphere with subtle comedic undertones early on. The snappy dialogue may not be on par with Tarantino’s, but the fact that I’m even making that comparison is a testament to how solid the film’s first third is.

It isn’t until the second act that “Tusk” goes bonkers; from then on, it’s an escalation of madness. It’s definitely a gamble on Smith’s part for shifting gears so deliberately, for he will either lose his audience or take it along for the ride.

Although a quick Google search would reveal the film’s major hook, I won’t spoil it here. Suffice it to say, this hook entails some of the most disturbing images I’ve seen in a movie. Some may dismiss the twist as pure shock value — a couple of people at my screening even laughed — but I was horrified. It’s psychological horror at its best.

Unfortunately, this is also where the movie starts to lose its tonal consistency. The comedic elements are heightened tenfold, but given how dark the story had just gotten, I was too disturbed to laugh.

Honestly, these scenes sound funnier when Smith describes them on his show. There is a glorified cameo that comes into play around the third act, and the responses have been polarizing.

I tend to groan at this actor’s over reliance on playing unrestrained caricatures, but he does deliver a handful of chuckle-worthy lines. It’s conflicting; his performance is the only comedic element that sort of works throughout the film’s latter half, and yet he is distractingly out-of-place.

That said, “Tusk” excels as a cerebral horror film, with twisted imagery and minimal gore. I’m not sure whether it’s for me, but I admire Smith’s willingness to cross certain lines.

Although I’ll never watch this movie again, I definitely won’t forget it, either.

Fun fact: Quentin Tarantino was offered the role of Guy Lapointe, but turned it down saying he dug the script and “couldn’t wait to watch Michael Parks let loose his internal Kraken,” but he had no interest in acting at the moment.

Run time: 102 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 42 percent

Sept. 27, 2014

‘Skyfall’ (2012)

“Some men are coming to kill us. We’re going to kill them first.”- Daniel Craig as James Bond

Bottom line: Director Sam Medes revitalizes the Bond brand with an intelligent thriller — one that’s easily in the best Bond conversation.

The Bond franchise celebrated it’s 50th anniversary with “Skyfall,” which was the perfect time to pull of something huge. After “Quantum of Solace” didn’t find much favor with viewers, Medes created an action thriller that’s easy to watch and finds a lot more common ground with the origins of James Bond than its predecessor.

One of the more ambitious Bond films to date, “Skyfall” is dark, subtle and full of visual brilliance. It’s a recovery that could buy the franchise at least another 10 years.

Bond’s origins and emotional love for country are exposed after an assignment goes awry, and the identities of MI6 agents around the globe become compromised. After an attack on MI6, M (Judi Dench) is forced to relocate the agency. Her job security is soon questioned after Gareth Mallory (Ralph Fiennes), Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee, challenges her decision-making abilities.

It’s now difficult to trust anyone within a heavily compromised MI6, but M has one ally: James Bond (Daniel Craig). Eve (Naomie Harris), MI6 field agent, accompanies Bond as they follow a trail leading to the mysterious and deadly Silva (Javier Bardem), who has a ruthless motive that’s yet to be revealed.

Craig and Bardem shine, but that’s no surprise. Both are proven veteran actors in this genre and beyond. The great thing about “Skyfall” isn’t so much the impressive acting, but how the film pays attention to those actors. Medes is elegant in his approach to Bond, keeping the spastic editing and blurry images to a minimum and letting the characters come to life.

It’s simply a different kind of Bond movie. From the opening Istanbul chase to the emotional finale in the Scottish Highlands, “Skyfall” is sentimental in its representation of James Bond, the person. The emotion perfectly melds with the superb acting and riveting visuals.

Fun fact: Judi Dench has more screen time in this film alone than Desmond Llewelyn had in his 17 films as Q, making her portrayal of M the most common character in the series after Bond himself.

Run time: 143 min.

MPAA rating: PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes: 92 percent

Sept. 26, 2014

‘The Conspiracy’ (2012)

Bottom line: In a film culture where money often takes over the box office, “The Conspiracy” is a worthy low-budget thriller that takes a dying found-footage premise and gives it an engaging twist.

“The Conspiracy” is more of a faux-documentary than a mockumentary and is able to keep the audience committed to the story with a short 84 minute run time, while making real-world conspiracies fun again. Director Christopher MacBride utilizes the found-footage thematic device with this movie better than any filmmaker since Daniel Myrick’s “The Blair Witch Project” in 1999.

Two filmmakers set out to document the life of a crazed conspiracy theorist, but what they don’t know is where one of his most convincing theories will take them. When the man disappears without a trace, the filmmakers turn the documentary into an obsessive quest to uncover the truth behind his theories.

When they discovers recurring trends they can’t ignore, a secretive group called Tarsus pops up on their radar. The group is an eerie combination of the Parallax Corporation from Alan J. Pakula’s “The Parallax View,” and the disturbing cult group seen in Stanley Kubrick’s “Eyes Wide Shut” (there’s even a few fun odes to Kubrick’s final film).

What’s electrifying about “The Conspiracy” is it could be a true documentary if the final 30 minutes were edited out of the final cut. The fact that it’s based on real conspiracy theories is what makes the film so thought-provoking, often blurring the line between fact and fiction.

MacBride stated a friend introduced him to conspiracy theories, and, according to him, “For several months I got lost down that rabbit hole and eventually a light bulb just went off, and I realized there was a really compelling story to tell set in that world.” MacBride went on to say how he doesn’t want people to see the film as a “found-footage” spectacle, but something of its own.

This is MacBride’s directorial debut, and even though we’ve seen this type of film so many times over the past decade, “The Conspiracy” is refreshingly original and a genuine shocker toward the chilling finale. The plausible aspect the first half of the film proposes is what makes the creative ending so compelling.

The closing sequence is long, and impressively combines high-tech gimmicks with effective faux-documentary devices, all adding up to a thrilling third act.

Overall, “The Conspiracy” does two things well: it provides a fascinating examination of modern and ancient conspiracy theories, linking them to the film’s already pulse- pounding subject matter, and revives a dwindling found-footage genre.

Fun fact: Tie clip footage was shot with a Canon 7D DSLR strapped to the cinematographer’s chest. He was then guided by the actors.

Run time: 84 min.

MPAA rating: NR

Rotten Tomatoes: 86 percent

Daily Movie turns 3… months old. Time for a break. See you on Friday.

Sept. 22, 2014

‘The Sandlot’ (1993)

“You know, if my dog was as ugly as you. I’d shave his butt and tell him to walk backwards.”- Patrick Renna as Ham Porter

Bottom line: Even though “The Sandlot” thrives on borrowed content, its nostalgic sensationalism with continue to resonate as the years pass.

Placing the derivative themes aside, “Sandlot” director David Evans was able to connect with a large group of kids and children at heart with a mix of genuine charm and humorous coming-of-age subject matter.

Many childhood struggles are presented in this 1990s backyard comedy. Looking for acceptance after moving into a new neighborhood, trying to connect with a stepfather and simply growing up are all covered with sensitivity in “The Sandlot.” The best thing going for this film is how many people connect with its themes, but just as many people will find it overly nostalgic to the point of annoyance.

For those who enjoy tones similar to “Stand by Me” or “American Graffiti” — even though both are superior films — will find comfort in “The Sandlot.” The kid-friendly narrative strategy often resonates with more than children, and that’s the case here.

Scotty Smalls (Tom Guiry) finds himself in a new community after his mother and stepfather decided to relocate the family. His new location sparks an interest in baseball, and the neighborhood hotshot, Rodriquez (Mike Vitar), takes him under his wing.

Soon, Smalls is part of the local baseball scene. Their adventures include treehouse parties, swooning lifeguards, trash talking rival baseball teams and even trying something “taboo” at the traveling fair.

The drama starts when a valuable baseball drifts beyond the sandlot’s fence, where a ball-eating dog is the subject of a local legend. The ball sports Babe Ruth’s autograph, and knowing how valuable that is, the kids realize the only option is retrieval.

Without the nostalgia, “The Sandlot” is mediocre to poor, but the film’s sentimentality is hard to avoid. At a basic level, it’s “Field of Dreams” for young teens, but extends far beyond tween territory.

The world will have a tough time forgetting “The Sandlot.” After more than 20 years, it’s still something most film fans and sports fanatics can easily watch and thoroughly enjoy.

Fun fact: In order to establish the close bond between Smalls and Benny, the director had Tom Guiry and Mike Vitar meet and rehearse together weeks before the rest of the kids showed up to film. It worked so well that the other kids genuinely believed the two actors had been friends for a long time.

Run time: 101 min.

MPAA rating: PG

Rotten Tomatoes: 57 percent

Sept. 21, 2014

‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ (2014)

Bottom line: The second installment to the most recent “Apes” reboot loses one of it’s leading actors, but makes up for it with smart special effects and emotional appeal.

“Cloverfield” director Matt Reeves adds “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” to an already historic franchise. “Dawn” had a mission for this sequel, make it better than the original. Its predecessor, “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” (2011), was a critical and financial success. This was a relief to many viewers tired of gritty disappointing reboots, but the film found success with a solid mixture of special effects and actor James Franco leading the way.

In “Dawn,” Franco is out of the picture, but ape lovers need not worry. Gary Oldman (“The Dark Knight Rises”), Jason Clarke (“Zero Dark Thirty”) and Keri Russell (“Mission: Impossible 3″) provide an even better arsenal of acting power. We cannot forget about the brilliant Andy Serkis, who we have seen play some of the most popular creatures, including Gollum in ” The Lord of the Rings” series. Serkis will throw on the CGI suit and reprise his role as Caesar, king of the apes. His success in reflecting animal movements in one of the brighter sides of a film world caught up in computer generated images.

At the end of “Rise” we were left with an image of Caesar and his band of merry apes hiding out in the woods, looking over a city with an expiration date. In “Dawn,” this developing nation of genetically evolved apes finds a group of humans who are threatening their way of life after a deadly virus wipes out a vast amount of humans. As peace agreement is made, but the treaty is short-lived and war will determine who will inhabit Earth as the dominant species in the wake of this disaster.

“Dawn” finds success in several aspects. Each one is hard enough to find success individually. For the entire two hour duration, the film is able to keep a high level of tension in every scene. Even in the scenes with heavy dialogue, the interspecies conflict is always looming, as the brink of war is frightening for both sides.

Constant tension is difficult to keep for this amount of time in any film, but the fact that it’s successful doing so in a sequel is one of the most impressive aspects of the film. This is not a minor improvement, the sequel is exponentially better than its predecessor, and “Rise” was an impressive film in itself.

Serkis steals the show with his ability to display a passionate and thoughtful non-human performance. Though we have seen Serkis and other actors play the physical canvas for CGI, his role hasn’t necessarily been invented yet in film, so this style is beginning to break ground, which makes “Dawn” that much more of an exciting gift. It’s a great performance in general, one that many viewers will overlook thinking he is just an animation. There is someone behind that computer generated image making those movements, and it’s one of the most impressive acting achievements in recent memory.

Though these apes are highly evolved, speaking is not something they have mastered yet. Subtitles throughout the movie creatively give us words for their intricate sign language. The smooth dialect transition between apes and homo sapiens keeps the viewer informed and interested in the narrative.

“Dawn” was filmed mostly in Vancouver and New Orleans, and the 3D viewing experience throws you right into the wet, misty greenery of a convincing California setting. Though 3D viewing is not a necessity, “Dawn” is one of the films where your $15 would be a smart investment. Most of the time the 3D element is promotional and therefor unimpressive, but “Dawn” manages to engulf you in the world of apes on the rise.

Reeves lays on the imagery, but instead of pushing for the geeky, scientific route, he manages to promote a deep, philosophical narrative that’s intelligent as it is thought-provoking. He does this without overwhelming the viewer, which is popular in today’s cinema.

“Dawn” is heavy on the CGI, but if you are going to use it in a world where nearly every movie has some sort of computer generated image, make sure it’s done in a smart way. “Dawn” excels in the intelligence column and provides a profitable and intriguing spectacle.

Fun fact: Koba, Caesar’s first assistant ape, bears the name that Joseph Stalin used as a nickname. Their personalities are somewhat similar, and the ascent to power bears a resemblance to Stalin’s.

Run time: 130 min.

MPAA rating: PG-13

Rotten Tomatoes: 90 percent

Sept. 20, 2014

‘The Blues Brothers’ (1980)

“It’s 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it’s dark… and we’re wearing sunglasses.”- Dan Aykroyd as Elwood Blues

Bottom line: Jake and Elwood’s chaotic adventure is too overblown, but in the end, the charming cast is able to sew everything together with a string of powerful musical numbers and pure wit.

Today, watching “The Blues Brothers” is more of a nostalgia trip than anything, but thanks to the chemistry between Dan Aykroyd and John Belushi, it’s a daft comedy worth revisiting.

The musical sequences are captivating for many reasons. They’re fun and obviously thought-out, but the film offers surprising cameos from the likes of Ray Charles and Aretha Franklin, who get to take over the screen with their iconic talents. Before “Blues Brothers,” we just hadn’t seen such a super-charged musical comedy like this one.

Belushi and Aykroyd star as Jake and Elwood, characters created on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” but ended up defining themselves elsewhere. When Jake is released from prison, he and Elwood visit “The Penguin,” a nun who raised them in boarding school. The brothers discover the Archdiocese won’t support the school any longer and sell the facility to Education Authority. Their only option to keep it up and running is paying a $5000 tax within 11 days.

Jake and Elwood feel the urge to help, so they decide to get their blues band back together, with hopes of earning the money at a big gig. Their “mission from God” turns out to be anything but heavenly, picking up a new enemy at every turn.

As director John Landis (“Animal House”) kept throwing money at it, the film almost lost control of itself. Somehow, the casting saved the day with two killer performances from Belushi and Aykroyd, strategic cameos and a laundry list of capable support. The brothers come off as slightly rough around the edges with cynical personalities and a simplistic outlook on life, and their mood perfectly complements the film’s outlandish themes.

The chase sequences are simply incredible. Under elevated train tracks, on overpasses, flying over a separating bridge, tearing up Daley Center and a lengthy police car pileup are just a few instances we get to see where some of the film’s extensive budget comes into play.

First appearing on “Saturday Night Live” in 1976, The Blues Brothers appeared only two more times on television. The band stretched far beyond the comedy show, releasing an album and going on several tours. Even after Belushi’s death, and to this day, The Blues Brothers are an active band. They “reformed” in 1988 for a world tour with rotating guests and band members, and again in 1998 to film the sequel, “Blues Brothers 2000.”

With all of the dynamics on display in “The Blues Brothers,” it’s turbulent and lazy, but that’s what makes it truly brilliant.

Fun fact: 103 cars were wrecked during filming, a world record at that time. This feat was exceeded two years later, when 150 cars (and a plane) were crashed for H.B. Halicki’s “The Junkman” (1982). That record in turn held for two decades, until over 300 cars were wrecked during the filming of “The Matrix Revolutions” (2003).

Run time: 133 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 87 percent

Sept. 19, 2014

Film Enthusiast Week – Day 5: Robert Redford – Our Man

Michael Sloyka, Oklahoma State PhD student and English Department Professor, is this week’s final film enthusiast. Check out his Robert Redford feature below.

About me

Sept. 18, 2014

Film Enthusiast Week – Day 4: ‘Cape Fear’ (1962)

Megan Porter, aspiring screenwriter studying Filmmaking at the University of Oklahoma, is today’s film enthusiast. Check out her review of the 60’s classic, “Cape Fear,” below.

About me

Movies have been a part of my life since I can remember, whether it was hiding behind a couch scared because my brother wouldn’t turn off “Child’s Play,” or watching “The Lost Boys” every day until I finally became sick of it. I’ve always had a passion for film because it can have so many different effects on your life.

There is always that movie you turn on when you’re having a bad day – the movie you must introduce to every new person you meet – the movie you need for a day where thinking just feels like a lost cause, and then there are the movies you watch when you need a fictional character to relate to.

As a screenwriter, I am drawn most to the movies that people can relate to. While watching a movie that is an escape is always great, there is just something special that comes with watching a movie that feels familiar. With that being said, I am not going to write about one of those films.

‘Cape Fear’ (1962)

“You just put the law in my hands and I’m gonna break your heart with it. Ain’t nothin’ can stop me. You understand that don’t you? That house and that car and that wife and that kid they ain’t nothing to you now. I got somethin’ planned for your wife and kid that they ain’t nevah gonna forget. They ain’t nevah gonna forget it… and neither will you, Counselor!” –Robert Mitchum as Max Cady

In 1961, Gregory Peck read a book titled “The Executioners” and immediately knew he wanted to make it into a film. At that time, he was filming “The Guns of Navarone” with director J. Lee Thompson. He liked what he had seen from Thompson, gave him the book, and told him that if he liked it then he wanted him to direct the movie. Thus began the process of making one of the best psychological thrillers, “Cape Fear.”

The film follows Sam Bowden, a lawyer whose happy life comes to a halt once convicted rapist Max Cady comes back into town with a vengeance. Bowden was the key witness that put Cady away for 8 years on an assault charge, and Cady has yet to forget it. As Cady continues to taunt Bowden with threats against his wife and daughter, Bowden becomes more and more desperate to get rid of him as the film goes on.

Thompson and Peck knew that Cady’s character was going to steal the show, and casting had to be perfect. Their thought of perfection lied with Robert Mitchum. Their choice was right, because the movie wouldn’t have been the same without Mitchum’s portrayal of the drunken, terrifying miscreant. The film also brought in familiar faces like Martin Balsam (“Psycho”) and Telly Savalas (“Kojak”) as the supporting cast. However, the star of the film might be the score composed by the infamous Bernard Herrmann, who was most famous for his work on several Alfred Hitchcock films including “Psycho.”

As they finished filming, the studios told Thompson that they didn’t want any blood, violence or violence against women in the film. So what’s a director supposed to do when the entire movie is set around violence against women? Thompson had to cut down scenes considerably throughout the film which left more imagination up to the audience. Rather than a film that shows everything, it held it’s enticement in the suggested intentions of Max Cady, and they cut it together very well.

This film set the bar for psychological thrillers and is still a popular film today. In 1991, Martin Scorsese remade “Cape Fear” with Nick Nolte portraying Bowden and Robert De Niro as Cady. While Scorsese can do no wrong, there are just some aspects of his rendition that don’t compete with the original. The performances by Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum are two of them.

Fun Fact: Gregory Peck thought that the original title, “The Executioners,” wouldn’t sell tickets. He thought that geographical names had more of a selling point such as films like Casablanca. Peck put his finger on a map and traced up the Atlantic Coast until he came across Cape Fear River in North Carolina. He decided it was the perfect title for the film.

Run time: 105 min.

MPAA rating: NR

Rotten Tomatoes: 95 percent

…

Sept. 17, 2014

Film Enthusiast Week – Day 3: ‘Team America: World Police’ (2004)

Brandon Schmitz, Entertainment writer for Oklahoma State’s student newspaper, is today’s film enthusiast. Check out his review of Trey Parker’s “Team America: World Police” below.

About me

Regardless of whether it’s at home or in a theater, watching a movie is often a social experience for me. Most movies — even bad ones — at least give my friends and me something to discuss.

More than that, though, movies are a legitimate art form, and — next to video games — my favorite storytelling medium.

‘Team America: World Police’ (2004)

“I’ve got five terrorists going southeast on Bakalakadaka Street!” – Trey Parker as Joe

Trey Parker and Matt Stone’s subversive “there’s-no-line-we-won’t-cross” brand of humor has helped “South Park” remain successful for nearly 20 years. And though 2004’s “Team America: World Police” isn’t exactly a hidden gem, it is among their most underappreciated works. Not only that, but I believe it’s the duo’s best.

Featuring an all-marionette puppet cast, the film follows Gary Johnston, a popular Broadway actor recruited by America’s most elite military team. His acting skills are instrumental in rooting out Kim Jong Il’s terrorist plot. Meanwhile, Hollywood’s most famous actors have an agenda of their own.

The synopsis almost speaks for itself, for “Team America” is a biting satire of over-the-top summer blockbusters, particularly those directed by Roland Emmerich and Michael Bay. It hits all of the right notes, from the reluctant hero to the edgy rival with a dark past to the overtly manipulative musical score.

Speaking of which, the musical numbers are among the film’s highlights, and arguably the most enduring aspect of its legacy. “America, F*** Yeah,” with its crude macho-posturing, is the obvious standout, but the others are worthy of just as much praise.

“Freedom isn’t Free” highlights the extreme nationalism of Toby Keith’s work, while “End of Act” is both a send-up of the obligatory boy-loses-girl song and a rant against Bay’s “Pearl Harbor.” Additionally, “Montage” is, well, perfect exercising music.

The puppets are also used to remarkable comedic effect. Character expressions veer into uncanny valley territory in the best possible way, while fight choreography often boils down to two puppets flailing their arms around each other.

Parker and Stone don’t hesitate to mock both sides of the political spectrum, either. Although liberal Hollywood is a primary target, the basis of Team America itself is a satire on the United States military’s constant interference in international crises. As a result, the movie never comes across as heavy-handed.

The movie turns 10 next month, and it has steadily grown on me as one of my favorite comedies. Its lampooning of the Hollywood blockbuster is spot-on, while its treasure trove of memorable quotes rivals that of “The Big Lebowski.”

Fun fact: The opening scene in Paris includes several subtle details, including the streets themselves, which are paved with croissants.

Run time: 98 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 77 percent

…

Sept. 16, 2014

Film Enthusiast Week – Day 2: ‘The Fighter’ (2010)

Tim Ahrens, design editor for Oklahoma State University’s student newspaper, is today’s film enthusiast. Check out his review of David O. Russell’s Oscar-winning drama below.

About Me

Many of my friends in high school happened to be film enthusiasts as well, and we made a few short films ourselves and showed them in our school. Looking back they were just weird comedies and nothing more, but it was fun being able to make a movie.

My desire to watch movies, good or bad, influenced my decision to start a Blu-ray collection the summer before my senior year of high school. The goal has been to increase my collection by at least 100 films or seasons of TV series each year.

I have 260 as of a little more than three years of collecting (thanks for making me broke, college), and it’s something I take a lot of pride in and will continue to do as I grow older.

More than anything, movies are a chance to escape from reality and the stresses of the world. Whether a comedy, horror or drama, a good movie can be captivating. After all, as a journalist, I’m drawn to good storytelling, and I watch movies hoping to find that.

‘The Fighter’ (2010)

“Are you like me? Huh? Was this good enough to fight Sugar Ray? Never had to win, did I? You gotta do more in there. You gotta win a title. For you, for me, for Lowell. This is your time, all right? You take it.”- Christian Bale as Dickie Eklund

David O. Russell’s past three films (“The Fighter”, “Silver Linings Playbook,” “American Hustle”) have combined to win three Oscars and nominated for 22 more. That alone speaks to his directing prowess, and it all began with this 2010 hit.

Based on a true story, the film follows boxer Micky Ward (Mark Wahlberg), a working-class man trying to become a success story out of Lowell, Massachusetts. Micky is known to be a good boxer, but it’s hard to make a name for yourself when you’re the half-brother of “the pride of Lowell,” Dickie Eklund (Christian Bale). Dickie’s fame comes from his fight against Sugar Ray Leonard when he “knocked down” the boxing great.

While Wahlberg stars as Micky, it’s Bale who steals the show with his portrayal of Dickie. Bale’s ability to transform both physically and in character between roles shines in this film, the primary reason he took home the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in 2011. It doesn’t take long to see Dickie for who he really is: a has-been who fell on hard times but acts as if his glory days are ongoing. It’s a cliché among former athletes, but it’s truth all the same.

Dickie can’t share all the blame for the inflation of his ego. His family, led by matriarch Alice Eklund (Melissa Leo, 2011 Oscar for Best Supporting Actress), treats Dickie as if he is a god, all the while choosing to cast aside their knowledge of Dickie’s crack addiction. Only stepfather George Ward (Jack McGee) and friendly police officer Micky O’Keefe (as self) see Dickie will acknowledge Dickie for what he truly is. Bartender Charlene Fleming (Amy Adams) offers an escape from Micky’s living nightmare of constantly standing in Dickie’s shadow.

Boxing movies as a whole tend to tell a universal story. It’s one of redemption, of men who have hit the lowest points of life only to make the most of an unlikely opportunity to come their way.

This film has all of that, but the kicker lies in its truth. Micky Ward is close to being a real-life Rocky as you can get, and his story is one worth exploring through film. Even more authentic is the location and abilities of the cast to blend in with the northeastern background. My father is from outside New York, and I heard enough of the accents, attitudes and vulgarities associated with the area growing up to admire “The Fighter’s” authenticity.

More than anything, this film brings out in its audience what sports movies tend to do: The desire to root for the underdog and see him persevere to conquer his troubles. With a strong cast, it’s well worth a viewing.

Fun fact: Christian Bale spent hours of time with the real Dicky Eklund to learn how to emulate him properly. He had to lose 30 pounds of weight because Eklund was a crack addict at the time. Director David O. Russell said it was much more than mimicry. He remarked: “Dicky has a rhythm to him, a music. Christian had to understand how his mind works.”

Run time: 116 min.

MPAA rating: R

Rotten Tomatoes: 91 percent

…

Sept. 15, 2014

Film Enthusiast Week – Day 1: Remembering Roger Ebert

To open up Film Enthusiast Week, I can’t think of featuring anyone other than the ultimate film fan boy himself: the late Roger Ebert.

Ebert was a film critic, journalist and screenwriter, but we will always remember Ebert for his contribution to what we now know as the mainstream film culture. Ebert’s reviews and television presence gave the movies a more mainstream audience. From 1967 until his death in 2013, Ebert wrote for the Chicago Sun-Times and was the first film critic to win the Pulitzer Prize for criticism. His reviews reached 200 newspapers in the U.S. and abroad, while publishing 20 books and several review collections at the same time.

Chicago Tribune critic Gene Siskel teamed up with Ebert and popularized television film reviewing with their show “Sneak Previews.” When Siskel died in 1999, Ebert continued the show with co-hosts and special guests. The term “Two Thumbs Up” originated from this show. It was used when the two critics had the same positive review.

From 2002 until his death in 2013, Ebert lived with thyroid and salivary gland cancer that required lower jaw-removing treatment, which left him without the ability to speak or eat normally. Even with his handicap, Ebert continued to share his film critiques with the world until his final day.

Ebert created a top ten favorites list in 1991, and “Raging Bull” made the cut right next to “Casablanca” and “Citizen Kane.” Even though “Raging Bull” is widely known as a masterpiece, it’s obvious this was a personal pick for Ebert.

In honor of Ebert, here is his “Raging Bull” review written on May 10, 1998.

‘Raging Bull’ (1980)

“Get ’em all in a back room, smack ’em around, no more big shot, without his gun. They’re tough guys. They’re all tough guys.”- Robert De Niro as Jake La Motta

“Raging Bull” is not a film about boxing but about a man with paralyzing jealousy and sexual insecurity, for whom being punished in the ring serves as confession, penance and absolution. It is no accident that the screenplay never concerns itself with fight strategy. For Jake LaMotta, what happens during a fight is controlled not by tactics but by his fears and drives.

Consumed by rage after his wife, Vickie, unwisely describes one of his opponents as “good-looking,” he pounds the man’s face into a pulp, and in the audience a Mafia boss leans over to his lieutenant and observes, “He ain’t pretty no more.” After the punishment has been delivered, Jake (Robert De Niro) looks not at his opponent, but into the eyes of his wife (Cathy Moriarty), who gets the message.

Martin Scorsese’s 1980 film was voted in three polls as the greatest film of the decade, but when he was making it, he seriously wondered if it would ever be released: “We felt like we were making it for ourselves.” Scorsese and De Niro had been reading the autobiography of Jake LaMotta, the middleweight champion whose duels with Sugar Ray Robinson were a legend in the 1940s and ’50s. They asked Paul Schrader, who wrote “Taxi Driver,” to do a screenplay. The project languished while Scorsese and De Niro made the ambitious but unfocused musical “New York, New York,” and then languished some more as Scorsese’s drug use led to a crisis. De Niro visited his friend in the hospital, threw the book on his bed, and said, “I think we should make this.” And the making of “Raging Bull,” with a screenplay further sculpted byMardik Martin (“Mean Streets”), became therapy and rebirth for the filmmaker.

The movie won Oscars for De Niro and editor Thelma Schoonmaker, and also was nominated for best picture, director, sound, and supporting actor (Joe Pesci) and actress (Moriarty). It lost for best picture to “Ordinary People,” but time has rendered a different verdict.

For Scorsese, the life of LaMotta was like an illustration of a theme always present in his work, the inability of his characters to trust and relate with women. The engine that drives the LaMotta character in the film is not boxing, but a jealous obsession with his wife, Vickie, and a fear of sexuality. From the time he first sees her, as a girl of 15, LaMotta is mesmerized by the cool, distant blond goddess, who seems so much older than her age, and in many shots seems taller and even stronger than the boxer.

Although there is no direct evidence in the film that she has ever cheated on him, she is a woman who at 15 was already on friendly terms with mobsters, who knew the score, whose level gaze, directed at LaMotta during their first date, shows a woman completely confident as she waits for Jake to awkwardly make his moves. It is remarkable that Moriarty, herself 19, had the presence to so convincingly portray the later stages of a woman in a bad marriage.

Jake has an ambivalence toward women that Freud famously named the “Madonna-whore complex.” For LaMotta, women are unapproachable, virginal ideals–until they are sullied by physical contact (with him), after which they become suspect. During the film he tortures himself with fantasies that Vickie is cheating on him. Every word, every glance, is twisted by his scrutiny. He never catches her, but he beats her as if he had; his suspicion is proof of her guilt.

The closest relationship in the film is between Jake and his brother Joey (Joe Pesci). Pesci’s casting was a stroke of luck; he had decided to give up acting, when he was asked to audition after De Niro saw him in a B movie. Pesci’s performance is the counterpoint to De Niro’s, and its equal; their verbal sparring has a kind of crazy music to it, as in the scene where Jake loses the drift of Joey’s argument as he explains, “You lose, you win. You win, you win. Either way, you win.” And the scene where Jake adjusts the TV and accuses Joey of cheating with Vickie: “Maybe you don’t know what you mean.” The dialogue reflects the Little Italy of Scorsese’s childhood, as when Jake tells his first wife that overcooking the steak “defeats its own purpose.”

The fight scenes took Scorsese 10 weeks to shoot instead of the planned two. They use, in their way, as many special effects as a science fiction film. The soundtrack subtly combines crowd noise with animal cries, bird shrieks and the grating explosions of flashbulbs (actually panes of glass being smashed). We aren’t consciously aware of all we’re listening to, but we feel it.

The fights are broken down into dozens of shots, edited by Schoonmaker into duels consisting not of strategy, but simply of punishing blows. The camera is sometimes only inches from the fists; Scorsese broke the rules of boxing pictures by staying inside the ring, and by freely changing its shape and size to suit his needs–sometimes it’s claustrophobic, sometimes unnaturally elongated.

The brutality of the fights is also new; LaMotta makes Rocky look tame. Blows are underlined by thudding impacts on the soundtrack, and Scorsese uses sponges concealed in the gloves and tiny tubes in the boxers’ hair to deliver spurts and sprays of sweat and blood; this is the wettest of boxing pictures, drenched in the fluids of battle. One reason for filming in black and white was Scorsese’s reluctance to show all that blood in a color picture.

The most effective visual strategy in the film is the use of slow motion to suggest a heightened awareness. Just as “Taxi Driver’s” Travis Bickle saw the sidewalks of New York in slow motion, so LaMotta sees Vickie so intently that time seems to expand around her. Normal movement is shot at 24 frames a second; slow motion uses more frames per second, so that it takes longer for them to be projected; Scorsese uses subtle speeds such as 30 or 36 frames per second, and we internalize the device so that we feel the tension of narrowed eyes and mounting anger when Jake is triggered by paranoia over Vickie’s behavior.

The film is bookmarked by scenes in which the older Jake LaMotta, balding and overweight, makes a living giving “readings,” running a nightclub, even emceeing at a Manhattan strip club. It was De Niro’s idea to interrupt the filming while he put on weight for these scenes, in which his belly hangs over his belt. The closing passages include Jake’s crisis of pure despair, in which he punches the walls of his Miami jail cell, crying out, “Why! Why! Why!”

Not long after, he pursues his brother down a New York street, to embrace him tenderly in a parking garage, in what passes for the character’s redemption–that, and the extraordinary moment where he looks at himself in a dressing room mirror and recites from “On the Waterfront” (“I coulda been a contender”). It’s not De Niro doing Brando, as is often mistakenly said, but De Niro doing LaMotta doing Brando doing Terry Malloy. De Niro could do a “better” Brando imitation, but what would be the point?

“Raging Bull” is the most painful and heartrending portrait of jealousy in the cinema–an “Othello” for our times. It’s the best film I’ve seen about the low self-esteem, sexual inadequacy and fear that lead some men to abuse women. Boxing is the arena, not the subject. LaMotta was famous for refusing to be knocked down in the ring. There are scenes where he stands passively, his hands at his side, allowing himself to be hammered. We sense why he didn’t go down. He hurt too much to allow the pain to stop.

…

Daily Movie is taking a two day break (Sept. 13-14). Stay tuned for Film Enthusiast week. Starting Monday, five fellow film lovers will share some of their favorite cinema. Thanks for reading!

Sept. 12, 2014

‘Forgetting Sarah Marshall’ (2008)

“She got me this, okay because I would always leave my cereal boxes open, and the cereal would get stale, and so one day I came home, and she had this waiting for me, because it keeps my cereal fresh. And now I have the freshest cereal.”- Jason Segel as Pe