Details: Directed by Clint Eastwood. A war film starring Bradley Cooper. Run time is over two hours.
This is Hurt Locker, except its about snipers instead of bomb disposal. And it’s directed by Clint Eastwood. Oh, it stars Bradley Cooper instead of Jeremy Renner. Otherwise, fairly similar tone, themes, plot progression.
I know there is some controversy around the film, but it feels artificial. Like a guy doing marketing for the film is trying to gather attention. No real controversy here. Just another war movie. Regardless, decent film with some emotion and a few good action scenes.
Score: 7/10 It’s Hurt Locker, with snipers. Sort of.
Edit: After thinking about it, there is a bigger difference in this film from Hurt Locker. In Hurt Locker, the protagonist is an adrenaline junky that likes going to war. Here, the protagonist suffers from regret and PTSD from the war. The two films have opposite themes.
Details: Directed by Richard Linklater. A drama starring Ellar Coltrane, Patricia Arquette, and Ethan Hawke. Run time is almost three hours.
Wow. Wowowow. What a movie. I am going to discuss this movie at length and describe certain scenes so I’m giving the score upfront.
Score: 9/10 Amazing. So many films, independent and otherwise, try to do what this film does and no other film in my memory accomplishes it like this movie. No film compares in its expression of ordinary life and the passage of time. It is unique. I can think of no other film in the history of cinema like it. My vote for best picture of the year.
I learned about this movie originally from an article I read some months ago. According to the article, about twelve years ago, Richard Linklater secured funding and started planning and shooting a film about a boy growing up. The gimmick was that Linklater planned on filming a different portion of the film every year for twelve years so that we could watch the boy — and the rest of the cast — age. It was an interesting concept, but I was well aware that a gimmick alone does not necessarily make a masterpiece. It was still a good idea.
Subsequently, I would learn of the unheard of (near) 100% approval rating on rotten tomatoes and know that I needed to watch this movie.
Walking into the theater I had a feeling it might be a tear-jerker. I also hadn’t watched any trailers and was bracing myself for what may have been a terrible movie.
Luckily, it wasn’t bad. It was — in my opinion — a masterpiece. Not that it was the greatest film ever made. Definitely not. It is a masterpiece because of what it tries to convey and how it goes about doing it.
First point to address, the gimmick.
A part of me wants to say that the use of gimmicks in films are cheap and do not add anything to movies. Unfortunately, this movie proves me wrong. The film focuses on ordinary life and its progress. Watching Mason (the protagonist) and the rest of the cast age over real time adds immense meaning and emotion to the movie. You watch these scenes and this child become a teenager and… it just triggers something. Perhaps it’s nostalgia, perhaps not, but you feel it nonetheless.
Furthermore, one also can’t help thinking about the difficulty of coordinating a film like this over a decade. It is clear that this film must have been a passion project of sorts, where no one participating was really sure it would ever be completed. I mean, who really knows if every one will stay on board for twelve whole years?! All the way from childhood to adulthood. Unbelievable.
Secondly, the tone/approach/theme.
The primary message this film tries to convey is the mundane progression/movement through life, be it from the children’s perspective or the parents.’ A message often attempted by films, but none achieved as successfully as in this film, likely due to the nature/business of casting, scripts, direction, and the general method of producing films. Here, there is something incredibly honest in the performances as well as the scenes and subject matter.
For example, there is a scene when they were children and Samantha, Mason’s sister, is singing Oops I Did It Again by Britney Spears to annoy Mason. Then the moment the mother comes in, Samantha starts fake crying and Mason gets yelled at instead.
Or the scene where teenage Mason is riding in the minivan with his dad and he gets mad at his father for forgetting about a promise he made to Mason in third grade where he would give him his old car. Instead, his father forgot, sold the car, and used the money to buy the minivan they are currently in.
Almost every scene in this film instilled in me a sense of deja vu and amusing nostalgia. From watching my parents fight, or other weird kids in school, or significant others, Boyhood triggers all those memories.
In many ways, Boyhood is structured like memory. The scenes are not necessarily of major points in Mason’s life, but they are a hop and a skip around those random moments we don’t know why we remember, like when a sibling annoyed you or a time when you saw your mother cry.
Additionally, there were many scenes that seemed to set up a possible serious injury — like out of an action movie or something — but didn’t. This surprised and impressed me, and further reinforced how this film was about the ordinary. It was not about life altering extreme Hollywood-esque drama/plot twists. You are well aware of the beats to this story and there is something to watching and remembering these moments.
Lastly, the protagonist, Mason, and his sister Samantha.
Mason and Samantha. There cannot be enough said about these two. I don’t know if they are professional actors, but I am leaning hard towards no. And that is great.
In many ways, the other members of the cast — particularly the professional/experienced actors — detract from the film. The key to what makes this film, what makes this collection of ordinary events so entertaining and engrossing to watch is the very natural and very honest portrayal of Mason and Samantha.
You watch these two, interesting kids with very pronounced personalities grow into awkward teens with awkward body language and awkward bodies. And what you realize as you watch this is that this is what teenagers are like. Just weird and not necessarily trying to portray a caricature you’d normally see in your typical mainstream entertainment.
A stage actor would likely be out-of-place in a film like this because they would likely try to emote and express their feelings, whereas a real teenager doesn’t truly know how to express themselves. A real teenager often tries to communicate with the end result being a jumble of words that are all wrong and feel weird. And this is amazing to watch. By casting these kids (one of whom is Linklater’s real daughter) Linklater creates a film with vulnerability and genuineness not present in any other film. You really can see Ellar Coltrane in Mason and feel a kind of sympathy with him as an observer of — and participant in — the human experience.
In conclusion, I loved this movie. And it is a movie. Not a documentary, reality television show or anything. It is directed fiction and the plot still follows beats set by the director. But there is a flow to the beats and the actors’ performances that takes from the actors’ real lives… and that is beautiful.
When the movie ended and I exited the theater, I was well aware Boyhood was good. It was not a tear-jerker for me, at least not yet. However, as time went on and I began to remember different parts of the film, how I felt during those parts, the subjects being discussed, and the growth of these characters and their actors, that’s when I really began to feel that emotional lump in my chest. Much like life, you only really appreciate the film as time passes; in hindsight.
It’s a movie that stays with you and lingers on long after you’ve watched it. At least it did for me. Now, go watch it for Pete’s sake.
It opens “five years and some change” before the events of the current film. John Wick is an unstoppable hitman for Viggo and Viggo’s criminal organization. The film should open with an action scene showing John’s prowess, skill, and ferocity. There should be a large body count and John working his way up henchman, through boss henchman, and eventually killing the target.
John soon meets his future wife, Helen, by happenstance. They fall in love and John realizes there is more to life than just killing and he wants out. He goes to Viggo and asks to leave the life behind. Viggo surmises that this is about a girl. Viggo expresses to him that there is no getting out of this kind of life, except in a coffin. Viggo explains further that even if Viggo gave his blessing (which he does not want to do) to leave his gang/outfit, their enemies would inevitably find him and kill him, and his woman, if/when he becomes vulnerable.
It is here where Viggo offers John the “impossible task” mentioned in the current film. Viggo states that if John completes this task, he will never bother John again and that John will be free to live his life as he sees fit. What Viggo doesn’t say is that this is likely a suicide mission.
The mission is this: Every five years, the heads of all the crime organizations on the east coast meet in New York City to discuss matters related to each and to coordinate. Viggo offers that if John can learn of the meeting place and kill every single crime boss of every major crime organization and their lieutenants, then Viggo can take over in the resulting chaos and power vacuum and that John will be free, of enemies and of Viggo. John, being the badass he is, agrees.
John then goes on a killing spree over New York City of numerous crime bosses and their henchman. He eventually learns of the meeting place’s location, which is in a hotel. John assaults the hotel in a flurry of bullets, martial arts and explosions. He eventually makes his way up the building to where all the bosses are holed up.
Upon entering the room, he finds Helen standing next to the leader of all the crime bosses, along with a small army of henchmen and other bosses. Helen works for the leader of all crime bosses. All the bosses and guards are pointing their guns at John. John realizes that the innocent woman he fell in love with was also part of this life of crime and violence. John realizes he will likely have to kill Helen. In a moment of rage and confusion at his predicament, John ultimately decides on killing everyone anyway.
Insert big action scene with John killing everyone, saving Helen for last. After every else is dead, John walks over to Helen, gun drawn, but ultimately decides not to kill her and that tells her to leave. That’s when the leader of all crime bosses, who was fatally injured, attacks John and prepares to kill him. After another little fight, John is put in a disadvantage and about to be killed. Helen intervenes and shoots the leader of all crime bosses with one of the guns from the fallen henchman. Helen tells John she’s sorry. John gets up and kisses her.
Transition to a patched up John having a meeting with Viggo. Viggo is noticeably uncomfortable and expresses his surprise at John’s accomplishment. Viggo doesn’t say it but he is also fearful of John as well. Viggo honors his end of the bargain. John exits the room to Helen waiting in a car downstairs.
Viggo’s final words to John are that they hope that if their paths cross in the future, it will be as better, more civilized men. John replies: “If our paths cross again, it will not be civilized.”
Viggo whipsers under his breath, “Be seeing you John.”
John leaves with Helen and they ride off into the sunset.
A side note:
Many of the actors from the current film should make an appearance in this prequel. Michael Nyqvist, Adrianne Palicki, Bridget Moynahan, John Leguizamo, Bridget Regan, Lance Reddick, Ian McShane, and of course, William Dafoe should be included. DaFoe should have a more substantial role with him participating in the final assault on the hotel. Alfie Allen may make an appearance foreshadowing the events of the current film.
Details: Action movie starring Keanu Reeves. Run time is about an hour and forty minutes.
I originally watched this movie for one reason: Rotten Tomatoes gave the movie an 83% approval rating and, based on the trailer, there is no way this movie deserved this score. I mean, one of the reviews said it was Keanu Reeves’ best film since the Matrix. Although, when I think about it, that isn’t saying all that much.
Welp, after watching the movie I can confirm that John Wick is indeed a great movie and a fun ride (caution: this may be solely because of my low expectations for the film).
This film is ridiculous. The premise is this: John Wick, former hitman, has his car stolen and puppy killed, and then goes on a killing spree for revenge. That’s it. And it is glorious.
From the first action scene, the audience knows to strap in and prepare for a crazy ride. There are few films that can make an audience gasp out loud and this film certainly succeeds in that regard. The action is well choreographed and induces many gasps and laughs as well. It’s a fun, action-filled movie.
Score: 7.6/10
POTENTIAL SPOILERS AHEAD
I do want to draw attention to one scene. Many films (The Protector, starring Tony Jaa, comes to mind) have a precise moment that sets the tone, that alerts the audience about the crazy that’s about to follow. This film is one of them and the scene that does it is John Leguizamo’s scene when he makes that phone call to let the mob boss know that someone killed John Wick’s dog and stole his car. That scene was hilarious.
END SPOILERS
8/10 Can’t wait for the Blueray and I sincerely hope for a sequel.
Details: War drama starring Brad Pitt, Shia LaBeouf, and Logan Lerman. Run time is two hours and fourteen minutes.
The movie was okay, but not worth its ticket price.
I’m not a fan of Brad Pitt or Shia Labeouf. Shia Labeouf’s public image is odd and makes his characters unconvincing. Brad Pitt has no range. People may enjoy looking at him, but he is the same character in every movie. He had no business being in Twelve Years A Slave. He was tolerable in this movie.
I will say Jon Bernthal was great. Actually, all the performances I’ve ever seen from him have been great. Walking Dead, Wolf of Wall Street, Bernthal adds credibility to a film and he does so here.
There are a number of ways to view this film.
It can be viewed as a poorly executed attempt at a historically accurate World War Two movie that tries to show the horrors of war.
It can be viewed as tank porn for tank-o-philes.
It can be viewed as an action B-movie with an excessive amount of violence.
If any of these appeal to you, then watch the movie. Otherwise, avoid wasting your time here.
Score: 4/10 Some of my friends enjoyed the movie after I told them it was bad. They likely enjoyed it because I set their expectations so low.
Details: Action, science fiction film that runs for an hour and a half. Stars Scarlett Johansson.
Interesting concept. The execution needed a little work. Overall an interesting film with some action but is mostly science fiction.
Directed by Luc Besson, it certainly shows his style. I also enjoyed watching the guy from Old Boy shout in Korean.
The biggest negative is that there is no real point or theme to the story. It’s just an hour and a half long ride where you get to see some sites in Taiwan and Paris, with some special effects thrown in. Plus, there’s Scarlett Johansson for those who enjoy her.
Score: 6/10 Somewhat enjoyable, but I would not buy the DVD.
Details: Animated adventure film starring Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, and Will Ferrell among others. Run time is one hour and forty seconds.
Since this is my first movie review, I should state how these reviews will go. I am only going to discuss the aspects of whatever I’m reviewing that were interesting to me. I am unlikely to cover every character and element of the plot in the film. Now let’s get to it.
Originally, I had very low expectations for the movie. It was difficult to imagine a Lego movie that portrayed any kind of meaningful story and was not just one big advertisement for Lego, similarly to how Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle was a big advertisement for those little burgers/digestive-tract-self-destruct devices.
However, a friend raved about the film. Of note is that this friend hypes everything he remotely likes like Macho Man Randy Savage selling a Slim Jim. However, I figured if the movie was not completely terrible, it may be worth a watch.
So, me and two friends went to the movie. There was a Toys R Us on the other side of said theater in case the movie was so great we needed to buy some Legos afterwards.
Overall, the movie wasn’t bad. Frankly, it was exactly what I expected. It was as if someone with an Adderall addiction went off their medication and wrote the screenplay for this film. In other words, it was written to imitate a child’s perspective and it does this well.
There were many funny moments. Morgan Freeman’s performance was noteworthy. Although, I feel like I will love just about anything where I get to hear Morgan Freeman’s voice, i.e. the voice of God.
The funniest moments easily belong to Batman (played by Will Arnett). One scene that stays with me (*SPOILERS*) was when they flew Batman’s Batplane into the sunset, and someone comments that they are going to crash, to which Batman retorts, “Yeah, but it’ll look really cool.” They then fly through the sun leaving a bat shaped hole in the sun (*END SPOILERS*).
Ultimately, should you watch this movie? If you’ve ever owned Legos or if you have children, then yes. I watched the movie in the afternoon with an audience filled with kids.
Speaking of children, sometimes you forget how different adults are from children. In this case, the kids ignored all the parts I found funny and instead laughed at all the places I didn’t. They still seemed to enjoy themselves though.
Muse Bank 