On Why Lindsay Lohan Will Always Mean A Lot To Me

I made Mr. E sit through Mean Girls again- partially because he swore up and down he'd never seen it and partially because The Constant Gardner wasn't doing it for me. This may not be the best movie, but I think it has it's place as more than just a teenage comedy, mostly because it reminds me that I am sometimes a Mean Girl.

Is that awful?

I think that's the beauty of the silver screen. In a day and age where we are increasingly impatient, we receive our information in computer generated portions. Here's THIS commercial, read THAT billboard, listen to THIS ad before your next crazy cat video. It's all packaged and gift-wrapped to have the most appeal to us, the biggest impact. In this, movies are king.

For a short amount of time we're transported from our routine drudgery to a reflection of our own world. It's prettier there (or dirtier, depending on what you're watching) and stories wrap themselves up neatly into picture perfect endings. The myriad of characters we meet in our own lives are portrayed by beautiful people, boiled down to stereotypes and ambiguous life choices. We watch the story and we fall in love, or out of love, or rage or laugh or cry as we see fit and in the end- in a perfect world- we all learn the lesson we can relate to and we are able to face our lives once more.

Thus, I'm able to say with complete confidence that I am a Mean Girl. I'm also a Nice Girl and an Outgoing Girl and a Shy Girl, but mostly I'm just a Complicated Girl which I think everyone else may be, too. I don't fit perfectly into that Mean Girl slot, but I think that was the point of the movie. It was fed to you with fluff and comedy and so many high school tropes I could DIE (over-exaggeration was definitely present), but the message is so profound I wish I could sit my own kids down to watch it every day.

Judging others doesn't make me any prettier. It doesn't make me any smarter or any more successful than they are, it just makes me a big old ball of negativity. Maybe that's common sense or maybe you learned that lesson years ago, but I'm imperfect and I think I need constant reminding.

Especially when I'm confronted with the opposite message every. single. day. Magazines, commercials, even blogs can't escape the compulsion to show that enviously perfect snapshot. We're shown trends and fashions and diets and lifestyles to aspire to, disregarding all of the complicated ways we live our unique, individual, perfectly imperfect lives.

I need reminding that those lives may be pretty or organized or on-time and work for those people, but that's not my life. It doesn't reflect me or my values or the things that I want in my life. And sometimes, it takes an hour and thirty-seven minutes of watching high-schoolers cat-fight on-screen with perfect hair days and endless legs to remember that.

I can be a Mean Girl, but that's not all I am, either.

Elysium

We went into this movie with high hopes. After all, Neil Blomkamp directed District 9 which astounded and grossed us out by turns. But in a good way. It's hard to find big-budget films with original concepts these days, so while Elysium was technically a new story, the product was so wrapped in CGI that I felt I was rewatching an older movie.

The basic premise of the story is that Earth has been overpopulated and the rich have removed themselves to an orbiting paradise known as Elysium. The poor folk left on Earth live in slums and work at back-breaking jobs eager for the day when they can save enough to pirate their way through the atmosphere and into someone's well-manicured backyard.

Matt Damon plays...bald Matt Damon. He's an orphan with a vague female interest in his past and a yearning to get out of his current job by any means possible. We learn he's had some run-ins with the law before as evidenced by his demeanor towards some beautifully CGI'd police robots and the friends he surrounds himself with. When he's hurt for mouthing off he finds his lady friend at the hospital and we realize that she is battling her own demons- trying to find care for her sick daughter. Through an unfortunate working (accident?) Damon is sentenced to die so now his only hope is a "healing" bed on Elysium- ruthlessly guarded by Jodi Foster with a strange accent and a stick up her butt.

There was some serious lack of motivation and gaping plot holes, but the CGI was flawless. If graphics have gotten that good then why the heck are movies wasting paltry money to pay for anything less than Elysium? Watching the trailers for Elysium and World War Z back to back is almost painful, but even the graphics couldn't save Elysium's downward spiral.

My biggest issue was the movie's insistence that you feel a certain way in response to what was happing. In most cases the muusic and/or editing supports and strengthens a movie. It helps to encourage the viewer by piquing interest and guiding their emotions. Elysium felt more like the movie was shoving the emotions down your throwat yelling FEEL THIS. Flashbacks, a rjising crescendo to warn the audience- it was all expressly spelled out for you. Personally, I think a movie's worst mistake is to assume the audience isn't smart enough to understand what was going on. Flashbacks have their time and place but the same shots repeated over and over again just loses my interest.

This is a bigger problem than you'd think. Foreign movies looking for a US distrubutor are often edited to pieced to make them more digesible for American audiences. Snowpiercer and The Grandmaster are case in point- where studios over-rule directors in favor of a better response from viewers. Much like the test screening I attended a few weeks ago, unfinished movies are run by test audiences for generic pointers. Negative feelings are often evidence enough to chop the movie.

By the end of the movie I was rolling my eyes- another flashback? Another gut-wrenching slow motion shot? I felt cheated out of the emotions I was legitimately feeling- too closely monitored by the movie and ultimately I decided I didn't like it.

But those robots looked pretty cool.

It's Not Even About Affleck Anymore

In case you don't have twitter (I do! Follow me here!) or an internet connection, Warner Bros. has just announced that Ben Affleck will play Batman in the new Superman/Batman movie. And then the internet exploded.

I think this is a bad idea.

But not because of Affleck.

I don't think we're ready for another Batman movie. Come on, studios! We were just forcibly dumped by our favorite Batman series ever when Chris Nolan told us in no uncertain terms that he was done with Batman. And Christian Bale backed him up and told us no more Batman suits for him, either.

Look at the roller coaster of emotions we had in that series-here was the first Batman we could all get behind, not just the geeks and fans. We rooted for the villains just as much as the heroes, not because we all have a little evil streak but because the movies were complicated and real and challenged us with morals and ethics. We didn't go into Batman expecting just car chases and cool gadgets- we got philosophy and poignancy wrapped in layers of a bulletproof Batsuit.

We came together over midnight showings and bonded with Halloween costumes. We became the fandom we needed and maybe not the one we deserved. We had strong opinions on Rachel, and then on the Joker, even on the role that Joseph Gordon-Levitt may or may not have played.

So why jump on the bandwagon so soon? Why churn out a movie we didn't ask for and may not even want? Yes, this movie is technically in the Superman canon, but Batman is arguably one of the most well-known (pre-Hollywood make-all-of-the-superhero-movies era) superheroes in pop culture. This isn't the 1960s anymore where the Hollywood tells the public the movies they want to see. We're in the age of Kickstarter and Indiegogo fundraising millions, where the Internet has become a playground for those looking to lose their accountability and opinions give way to anger and hatred.

For all of the production studios' work trying to study the public through screenings and focus groups they're still missing the big picture. You want to know why movies are flopping left and right? Because you're trying to wrap a flop in a trend and that's not going over so well for you. Johnny Depp can't pull the fourth Pirates by himself and we aren't interested in The Lone Ranger regardless of the fact he stars in it. Studies show guys won't go see a sci-fi movie called The Princess of Mars so you re-brand it John Carter? Re-brand and promote a movie all you want but if your story sucks then even the cult followers can't overtake word of mouth.

Batman isn't about Affleck. It's about audiences telling the studios we're not ready for this particular story to be remade. Again. No amount of big budget or big names are going to change our minds. Stop trying to bank on the superhero trend and let us wait, let us at least get to a ten year reunion for crying out loud before you release another hero for us to root for. Audiences want a story, not a disjointed fandom.

Kiss Me

Imdb synopsis: Young woman engaged to be married finds herself in an affair with her stepmother's lesbian daughter.

We had the HARDEST time figuring out what language this movie was in. Since we were streaming from Netflix, there isn't too much to say about the subject on the screen. So similar to French, traces of German, a little English (which we all know is quite the mutt language)...we were so lost. Finally figured out it was Swedish and spent the rest of the movie hoping they would say the name of one of our furniture pieces. Or a kitchen appliance.

I wanted romantic but Mr. E was at a loss for something we hadn't seen recently in our own collection, so we turned, as always, to Netflix. "Romantic Movies," anyone?

This movie is GORGEOUS. As in, almost every frame could be a still photograph in my house. The artistry behind a lot of the shots blew me away. There was bokeh and landscapes and Swedish simplicity around every corner of the frame. Just beautiful!

The story wasn't particularly new- sort of a coming-out- but I think it was the details and the imagery that got me. Romantic, but sort of racy too, with all of the sex. Fair warning.

The Fisher King

Imdb synopsis: A former radio DJ, suicidally despondent because of a terrible mistake he made, finds redemption in helping a deranged homeless man who was an unwitting victim of that mistake.

Mr. E and I are unsure about exactly how we feel about this movie. For one thing, it was very 90's...for another, seeing Jeff Bridges play anything but The Dude is strange. But we stuck through it to get to the end and overall enjoyed the movie

This movie was pretty run of the mill- it had some interesting elements to it: production design for Robin Williams and his living space, the careful tread between reality and insanity. The acting was really good but I thought they focused too much on Jeff Bridges in the beginning to the point where the movie didn't really start until much later than it should have.

I liked the themes of the movie, the accountability in this technological world where there is no accountability, the avoidance of permanence and of stability, and the desire to look for meaning in life even when it's not part of the accepted societal bounds.

Robin Williams was kind of a diamond in the rough in this movie. You don't really see him do serious very often and even though his character was amusing, it wasn't focused on his comedic antics. So he could sit naked in Central Park and it worked for him. Even if I didn't really want to see Peter Pan in all his glory (sorry, childhood).

A Separation

Imdb synopsis: A married couple are faced with a difficult decision - to improve the life of their child by moving to another country or to stay in Iran and look after a deteriorating parent who has Alzheimer's disease.

We are on a foreign movie ROLL, people.

One of the hallmarks of a good movie is whether or not you have strong feelings about it. Hear me out! If a film has gotten under your skin, made you cry, annoyed you (because of content, not production choices)or otherwise impacted you...it might be a good movie. There are plenty of movies that I've seen that I am NOT crazy about. I didn't like them, I would never watch them again but I would still recommend them to a friend because they are experiences that must needs be had. Punch Drunk Love is a good example. A Separation is another.

I really liked this movie because I thought it told a good story. The characters were compelling- even though the culture is different from my own, the story was not so farfetched that I couldn't relate. You are constantly guessing whodunnit, which story is correct. The dialogue (and subsequently the subtitles) is so fast paced I found myself wondering how the movie was directed- was it ad-libbed? Improvised? Methodically played out? 

That being said...this movie drove me crazy. The characters were so convincing that I had a hard time liking ANY of them. Much like Game of Thrones shows you reasons to like even the most hated characters, this movie kept throwing reasons at you to DIS-like characters. What you at first thought was black and white is, in reality, so murky that fish could swim through and you wouldn't see them.

It's really no wonder this movie won so many awards- there's a depth of human emotion here that many movies can't even begin to attain.

Meserine: Killer Instinct

Imdb synopsis: The story of french gangster Jacques Mesrine, before he was called Public Enemy N°1.   
       
The more French movies I watch the more I think I may have been born in the wrong country. This isn't the pretentious film student in me talking (I’m not the kind of guy who enjoys the obscure art-house experimental French cinema) I actually think they have a very good mainstream lineup of movies. They know their stuff!

            Meserine: Killer Instinct (pronounced something like mowh-reen with that nasally sound that only French people make) is part one of a two part story. The second part, Meserine: Public Enemy Number 1, is also definitely worth a watch.

            The word I would use to describe this crime/thriller is riveting. This movie grabs hold of you in its relentless grip, and doesn't let go… at all… until the second movie ends. There are parts with so much tension and suspense that I found myself squeezing my hand into a fist, even though it was my second time watching the movie.

            The story is very character driven, and Vincent Cassel (the guy who dances through the lasers in Ocean’s 12) does a bang up job in making you both hate and love him. The story itself has a lot of similarities to Bonnie and Clyde but some major differences as well. Jacques Meserine isn't quite as monogamous as Clyde, but he does rob banks and create all sorts of trouble for the police.

            If you are the kind of movie watcher who doesn't mind reading subtitles and likes crime thrillers, then you should watch this movie. Parts 1 and 2 are both available to stream, for all those Netflixers out there.

Star Trek: Into Darkness

Imdb synopsis: After the crew of the Enterprise find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.

I thought that I could be geeky enough to go see Star Trek: Into Darkness without re-watching the first (newest?) movie. Silly Brie. Star Trek isn't for kids!

It's not necessarily that they relied to heavily on each other, I just forgot that they've been given free-reign to play around with the details of the Star Trek universe because of the rift they opened in the last movie with Spock vs. Spock. So when the movie started getting eerily familiar- haven't I seen this before?- there was a reason why.

This is actually an excellent movie to explain that there are choices in lighting/shooting a movie that can enhance the overall feeling or distract the viewer from what's really going on in a sleight-of-hand sort of way. Case in point: lens flare. JJ Abrams is really well known for his lens flare- that bright spot (sometimes a line of light circles) that is reminiscent of staring into or away from the sun, particularly through glass or a window. There are some people who find this very pretty and artistic. There are other people who so over-use this effect that it's ridiculous. You can decide which one Abrams is. In his defense, I think he might try to rationalize his use of lens flare because it reminds the viewer that there's a lot of reflection/ light going on in the scene. This makes sense on some level because Star Trek is very shiny and new and space-age-y so light will ping off all of the expertly polished surfaces, right? And all of those stars flying by and planets and lasers are pretty otherworldly, so it stands to reason you'd want the audience to feel transported and ethereal too, right? You be the judge.

Then there's dutch angles. This is when a shot is tilted- as in not level. Sometimes you see a shot that's upside down or from a character's perspective who is lying on their side or at some crazy angle. This helps invest the audience in the character's dilemma- one of the few shots that feels first-person. Dutch angles convey a sense of "off-kilter" to the viewer: maybe a pivotal moment or decision. It's also useful in action sequences because it gives the illusion of heightened drama or action because your eyes are trying to adjust AND follow what's going on on-screen, creating a sort of tension or anxiety. Or maybe you just use them because you're trying to be cutting edge. Whatever.

There are a lot of different ways that movies involve the viewer that we pick up on subconsciously, but I think I would prefer a movie that doesn't do them all at once.

The Mummy

Imdb synopsis: An American serving in the French Foreign Legion on an archaeological dig at the ancient city of Hamunaptra accidentally awakens a Mummy.

This is in my top four favorite movies (the others being End of Watch, Another Earth, and Like Crazy). The only reason I didn't give this movie five stars is because I'm slightly embarrassed by how much I love this movie. 

I remember when I was first told about this movie in fifth grade. I had a rolly-backpack (right at the end of when they were cool) and I was totally convinced that I was on my way to becoming a really cool kid. This kind of came crashing down when I chose reading to volleyball, preferred to hold the ropes for jump rope and despised all of the little girls in Sunday School. I was also sorely lacking in pop culture- we didn't have cable and I wasn't allowed to watch PG13 movies until I was 13.

When little ol' me, with aspiring dreams to be an archaeologist, lover of all Mediterranean myths and avid reader, heard someone nonchalantly re-telling what The Mummy was all about, I was hooked. When I finally saw the movie it had every effect on me it was supposed to have: I sympathized with courageous Eve, I swooned over smooth-talking O'Connell and I was terrified to pieces whenever Imohtep came on screen. It was everything a movie should be.

Like a well-worn novel, pages fraying, stains and creases across the binding, I lovingly re-watch this movie every few years. Each time I relive the Indiana-like adventure and I remember that I am incredibly entertained by the cheese and the humor in this franchise, sans the fourth movie. 

Drive

Imdb synopsis: A mysterious Hollywood stuntman, mechanic and getaway driver lands himself in trouble when he helps out his neighbor.

Oh, how I love thee. Let me count the ways...

Your soundtrack is ridiculous. I could (and did) listen to this all day. Especially when driving through LA. Because I hate driving through LA and you make it bearable.

Your lens flare. So tasteful. So clean. So "this is how it should be done, J J Abrams"

Your cast. Ryan Gosling is concise, quiet, forceful and gritty while still maintaining a measured shyness. Christina Hendricks is all 'tude and desperation. Bryan Cranston tugs on your heartstrings not just because of his limp, but his over-eager, can't-get-it-right attitude. Carey Mulligan and her quiet loveliness- how can her eyes say so much?

Your production design- a study in simplicity. Jewelry is simple, Driver only has a few outfits (under the iconic scorpion jacket) and the cars are less about the outside and more about the experience in the cab.

Your car-chases. Because your director DOESN'T EVEN DRIVE so why should we make a car commercial when you're really trying to tell a character-driven story (Michael Bay...)?

This movie was a huge influence for Mr. E's thesis Ganas, and upon re-watching (this is our third or fourth time now) you can totally feel the same tension when you see similar shots in both movies. 

Osama

Imdb synopsis: A 12-year-old Afghan girl and her mother lose their jobs when the Taliban closes the hospital where they work.  Now called 'Osama,' the girl embarks on a terrifying and confusing journey as she tries to keep the Taliban from finding out her true identity.

Another foreign movie because we're almost done with our pile of "to-sell" movies- those we're fairly sure we won't keep, but heck, we have the movie so may as well watch it. That's the great thing about Mr. E- every movie is watchable, every movie is studying and researching. Even chick flicks. 

This movie wasn't poorly done, and the acting wasn't bad, but there was just something about it that didn't mesh well. Maybe it was culture shock or maybe it was the disconnect between our situations, but I didn't feel bad for the main character. Not for want of trying, though. I had a hard time understanding her situation because of how whiny her character was: all crying and nasally complaints.

There's definitely something to be said about the message the director was trying to tell, sort of Les Miserables-esque in the way that society creates these sort of desperate situations in which people get caught. But upon reading Imdb, one of the trivia notes about the movie is that it ended with a happier outcome but once the director saw the movie he changed the ending and edited out all of the scenes that gave hope to the main character. I don't need all of my movies to end nicely or even for everyone to end up alive, but this movie was sort of a strong beginner that slowly meandered and lost its way until it keeled over and died. 

If you're looking for a strong Middle Eastern movie, I recommend The Stoning of Soroya M- with Shohreh Aghdashloo.

Bad Education

Imdb synopsis: An examination on the effect of Franco-era religious schooling and sexual abuse on the lives of two longtime friends.

Whoa. This movie was kind of outside our regular realm of movies, but it's a Thursday night and we're making enchiladas so Spanish foreign film it was.

I really enjoy Almodovar movies- he has a way of making long movies engaging and he likes to lead his viewer into a false sense of security before revealing his coup de grace. His stories are simple and very character-driven- minimal sets and/or changes but lots of contact between his characters. I really enjoyed Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown and Volver, so we assumed Bad Education would be just as good.

And it was. But the content wasn't something we were entirely prepared for.

Knowing nothing about this movie except that Gael Garcia Bernal was in the cast, we popped it in and sat back only to start playing chicken fifteen minutes in- I can handle this, can you? Bad Education is complicated movie about the lasting effects of child molestation, first love and blackmail. And transvestites.

Overall, I thought this was a good movie. It was interesting to see another culture's take on cross-dressing and homo-sexuality and I think the difference is that these plot points weren't only used for the shock-value (though that was there), it was actually a useful device to further the story. Also, Bernal is a fabulous cross-dresser. 

I looked over at Mr. E at the end and asked him how he felt about the movie and he responded, "As a film director...you have to watch a lot of different movies. Even one's you don't normally watch."

Wanted

Imdb synopsis: A frustrated office worker learns that he is the son of a professional assassin, and that he shares his father's superhuman killing abilities.

This movie was So. Bad. It was sort of a cross between Fight Club and every action movie ever. Assassins from a brotherhood given hits by a sentient weaving loom but a corruption in the ranks leads some to rethink their path. I like action movies as much as the next person, but this movie was a little too fantastical and never explained the world it was set in. 

In all honesty, I really like story lines with conspiracy theories and otherworldly shenanigans going on underneath our noses. Things we'll never know and never understand because we're not part of it. Isn't that kind of like the man's version of a princess story? Realizing that you're a part of something greater, that you were made for better things and didn't know it til someone rescued you?

Regardless, the movie making was awful. Most notably the sound mix was off- we were constantly turning the sound up (so quiet!) and down (good lord, the people down the street now know we're watching a movie). The farfetched stunts kind of took it down a peg too- curving the bullets, the car chases and so on. I don't mind suspending belief to watch some crazy moves in an action movie, but these bordered on comical.

Apparently I just wasn't the target audience for this.

Cabin in the Woods

Imdb Synopsis: Five friends go for a break at a remote cabin in the woods, where they get more than they bargained for. Together, they must discover the truth behind the cabin in the woods.

Let's preface this by saying that I do not like horror movies. Not even a little. I don't like being scared, I don't like being grossed out, I don't like being surprised by something that could kill me. But this was a really cool movie.

You kind of have two storylines going: your quintessential "group" of friends, innocent and eager for a trip to the mountains who will CLEARLY die, and some sort of scientists/engineers pushing buttons, watching cameras, trying to play God for some yet-unknown end. 

I thought this was classic Joss Whedon, sort of Buffy-esque where the world he makes isn't so different from your own but then he slams you with the otherworldly and you realize that he has no qualms luring you in to a false sense of security. Smart writing, both tongue in cheek and satirical but takes itself less seriously than you would think. 

I was told to watch this movie because there's a...particular beastie that has no place in horror movies but totally worked. And it did. It definitely worked. But then, I also asked if this movie was gory and the answer was no. Except the answer should have been a yes, shouted from the rooftops and accompanied by fanfare because there is bucketloads of blood and guts. 

Plus Chris Hemsworth. 

GIA

Imdb synopsis: Movie based on the life of Gia Carangi, a top fashion model from the late 1970s.

Lots of drugs, lots of sex, lots of spiraling out of control.

First of all, this movie was made by HBO.
Second of all, this movie shows a lot of Angelina...that I've already seen. Thanks, Hollywood.
Third, I learned my age when the majority of this movie was lost on me.

This isn't a particularly new story, and I've seen enough Angelina Jolie movies that it was a particularly new performance either. A lot of the same shots were repeated - photo shoots over and over again, a different dress, different make up and you're supposed to just bask in the stunning portraiture. Scene after scene of Gia doing drugs, falling apart, losing her cool and then coming back. Not a whole lot happened and it was only pretty for a little while. I come from the generation who snuck episodes of America's Next Top Model at a friend's house, so Jolie's edgy performance had nothing on Tyra.

It was interesting to see the combination of story and interview, but I didn't feel that it made the movie any stronger. 

Death at a Funeral

Imdb synopsis: A funeral ceremony turns into a debacle of exposed family secrets and misplaced bodies.

This was such an odd movie...I was intrigued with the acting line-up, but I didn't feel like the movie really went anywhere. It felt more like a play than it did a movie. It had potential to be really funny, but I think the actors were too busy trying to compete with each other rather than presenting a funny ensemble. And then I realized this scope was a remake...of a British film? Of all movies to remake, usually Hollywood focuses on foreign films with non-English languages. In fact there was only a three year turn-around between the two. AND Peter Dinklage (Lannisters represent!) reprised his role.

This movie kind of reminded me of The Hangover or Bridesmaids- they are different stories and different settings, but it's the same sort of general idea: one upstanding character is surrounded by temptation, distraction and all-around bumbling friends/family with some extreme situations. 

Dear movies,

We are past poop jokes in movies. Why are we spraying it, wiping it, smelling it, leaking it and stepping in it?

Love,
I can take a laugh, but not another crap (joke)

Mud

  Imdb synopsis: Two teenage boys encounter a fugitive and form a pact to help him evade the bounty hunters on his trail and to reunite him with his true love.

We went out to see this one on a whim. One of my professors told me that it was worth seeing. So when Mrs. E came home from work (yes, Mr. E is writing this one!) I surprised her with grilled burgers, fries, and chocolate milkshakes; all of which were home-made and freakin’ delicious. I know because I tasted them.

After our last few movies we’d seen on the big screen I wasn’t expecting much, but after about 15 minutes Mrs. E turned to me and said, “This is already better than The Place Beyond the Pines.” My wife speaks the truth. I just sat there for two hours and watched the movie. I wasn’t trying to guess what would happen next or analyze the filmmaking. For someone like me, that’s a very rare thing. So I tip my hat to Jeff Nichols for that one.

The relationships felt real, the situations were believable, and I cared for the characters. Everything ties up very nicely in the end, perhaps too nicely, but it felt good not to have any loose ends or plot holes dangling as I walked out the theater. It was beautifully shot and very well directed. Also, Matthew McConaughey was fantastic, I’m really digging the new direction his career is going.

I want to give this 4.5 stars, but that’s cheating, so just know this was very close to being a five-star rating for us.

Fast Food Nation

Imdb synopsis:An ensemble piece examining the health risks involved in the fast food industry and its environmental and social consequences as well.

I initially set this movie aside because I thought it was another documentary on America's eating habits. Or a documentary of some sort. No dice. This was a ensemble-cast movie based on a documentary. Which means it was a mismatched, un-coordinated expose following many characters that loosely are connected in the great meat-grinding machine of lies that is America. I was not impressed.

I have a hard time following political movies: not movies about POLITICS but movies that are trying to raise awareness/tell a message. This isn't because I don't agree with the message but because the message is being related poorly. It's hard to get a message across the screen without a story behind it, but I felt that this movie focused more on the former- concocting a viable string of events and characters to better relate to the viewer. I didn't think this worked very well.

You need stories that the audience cares for, that we'll root for; ones in which we can see ourselves, our family, our friends. You make characters with quirks and passions come to life so that your viewers understand and can apply it to their own zany selves. While the characters were quirky and the performances were realistic, the story just didn't mesh well enough for me to enjoy the story as a whole.

On a minor note (minor versus the awesome let-down this movie was), I was terribly disappointed that the ending arc to one of the main female characters was her preoccupation with why the cows she was trying to set free "didn't want to be free". Really? You're going to spend time and energy wondering why a herd of cattle didn't run out of a hole you made in the fence? It's a COW, hun.

Place Beyond the Pines

I had really high hopes for this movie. Yes, it had great actors, but more than that, it was a fantastic director- the same guy who did Blue Valentine, one of our favorite movies- and the story seemed to hit a lot of issues. In the end, it may have been too many issues.

Imdb synopsis:A motorcycle stunt rider turns to robbing banks as a way to provide for his lover and their newborn child, a decision that puts him on a collision course with an ambitious rookie cop navigating a department ruled by a corrupt detective.

First and foremost, Gosling is more than just a pretty face. He does awkward SO. WELL. The little half-smile he has when he's nervous or the thousand yard stare convey a lot. He doesn't feel obligated to "show" you emotion, he "feels" emotion. Even though Gosling was a headliner for the movie- and affects all of the other characters even when he's not on-screen- he wasn't in the movie as much as the other actors were. Which was disappointing because I didn't feel that the rest of the movie was carried very well.

The movie is separated into roughly three parts: Gosling's story, Cooper's story and the story of their sons. It's sort of a generational "sins of their fathers" type of thing. An important thing to remember about movies is that a lot of times they tell the same story, just different. The essence of the movie is the same, it's just the details, the character quirks, the setting and so on that make movies different. And with all of these variables, you could tell the same story over and over again and get a different feeling with each thing you change. So while the plot worked and hit all of the major points, I didn't feel that each third of the movie connected to the others. The message and/or the overall "feeling" of the movie was lost on me because there were so many tie-ins that the plot avoided.

Cianfrance could have stopped with just the story between Gosling and Cooper. Or he could have told the story about Cooper with Gosling as an interesting twist. Heck, he could have given more life to both supporting actresses which were relegated to having events happen to them instead of being three-dimensional characters. Nice try with the bra-less Eva Mendes, though. I bet lots of people enjoyed that.

I was really expecting a gut-clenching tale woven around mistakes made for all the right reasons. Instead I got a twisting, disconnected story with beautiful imagery of Schenectady (SO FUN to say) and too many loose ends.

The Hurt Locker

Imdb synopsis: Forced to play a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse in the chaos of war, an elite Army bomb squad unit must come together in a city where everyone is a potential enemy and every object could be a deadly bomb.

I guess Mr. E and I have been on a bit of a war movie binge. First Greenzone, now The Hurt Locker. We did something similar last year when all of the movies in a two week period were apocalyptic: The Postman, Book of Eli, The Road...

We are on a mission to watch all of the Academy Award Best Pictures. Call it something to cross off our bucket list. Eventually, I'd like to see all of the movies nominated, but that's for another day.

The Hurt Locker was a pretty good movie- poignant, spoke it's message through the experiences and trials of a character (unlike The Green Zone) and informative. This is one of those action movies that loves the handheld shots- jerky, quick movements of the camera that, in theory, help the viewer visualize movement and action in the scene, but can sometimes lead to motion sickness or headache. I didn't find any problems with it in this movie; I thought they had a pretty good mix of close-ups, establishing shots and hand-held. It was enough to build suspense, but not enough to make you feel like you were riding a roller coaster.

I'm getting a little apprehensive about Jeremy Renner. Granted, this movie came out a few years before he starred in everything, but as someone who's seen 4 or 5 of his latest movies, watching The Hurt Locker put me a little on edge. He seems to play a lot of the same characters: just a little bit bad boy, troubled past, fighting his inner demons. I love that he's down to get his hands dirty and do stunt-heavy roles, but are you really acting anymore? Or are you just being yourself?

Guess I'll need to see Hansel and Gretel, huh? There's no way it could possibly be bad boy, troubled past, demons, right?