The Wind Rises Review

SPOILERS:

Revered by generations of fans, adults and children alike, legendary Japanese animator Hayao Miyazaki has returned once more with what was originally announced to be his final film, The Wind Rises (he has since come out of retirement). A box office hit in Japan back in the summer of 2013, the Oscar-nominated animated film finally got a theatrical release in North America in late February, and for those overwhelmed by the frenetic and overly busy animation films in theaters recently, the cure has finally arrived.

After having already covered the harrowing impact of World War II on Japan’s citizens to amazing and unforgettable effect in Grave of the Fireflies, Miyazaki’s The Wind Rises is a return of sorts to that era of Japan’s history, but the approach this time is vastly different. Miyazaki isn’t interested in retreading his footsteps in this new film; The Wind Rises isn’t about the destructiveness of war and doesn’t dwell much on the ugly side of it. Instead, this film takes an aesthetically cerebral approach, an approach that is clearly personal and unique to the mind of a once in a lifetime filmmaker.

The Wind Rises is an autobiographical account of sorts of the life of Jiro Horikoshi, a Japanese engineer who would eventually design the famous Zero fighters of World War II. Resigned from an early age to the fact that his nearsightedness made his dreams of becoming a pilot virtually impossible, Jiro finds inspiration in the aviation magazines he avidly collected as a child and discovers a new calling. In a dream filled with improbable flying machines, Jiro meets Italian plane pioneer Caproni, a man who imparts words of wisdom that will define Jiro’s life: airplanes are beautiful dreams, engineers turn dreams into reality. It is within this dream realm and armed with the sage advice of his fictional Caproni that Jiro confronts his problems head on as he faces the many challenges and obstacles that stand in his way, from the realization that his designs will be used as fighters and bombers to the almost crippling fear of losing the love of his life, Nahoko. 

The Wind Rises is a film grounded in reality, a fact that sets it apart from the majority of the rest of Miyazaki’s work. There are no fantastical worlds, lurid creatures or improbable happenstances to be found here, except in Jiro’s dreams. Things are much more subtle and low-key, almost to a fault. Jiro isn’t a particularly captivating character and there is no real climactic moment or one overarching difficulty that Jiro must contend with, but The Wind Rises isn’t interested in big explosive finales or in manufacturing evil villains to root against; its chief focus is exploring the difficulties of creating something beautiful in a world where, more often than not, those wondrous things are distorted by the very forces that create them. And it is Jiro who goes through life attempting to tap into that force, personified in this film by the ebbs and flows of the majestic power of the wind. We witness its destructive capacities as massive fireballs swallow up the wooden city of Tokyo during the infamous earthquake of 1923, and observe in awe as flames are carried up in intensity and ferocity by a blistering wind, the very wind that leads him to meet Nahoko, and the very wind that eventually takes her away from him. 

When Jiro reaches the crucial point of his career as a plane designer, it is also the time that Nahoko’s illness is at its apex. Nahoko’s contraction of tuberculosis, an affliction of the lungs that affects your ability to breathe, is no coincidence. Here again we find the influence of the wind on Jiro’s life, an influence that takes away just as often as it gives back. At this point, we come to the aspect of this film that is most difficult to reconcile: the love story. It arrives out of nowhere, falls into place very awkwardly, and is the weakest angle of The Wind Rises, but Miyazaki uses it to make an important argument. As powerful as the creative process is, it gets its crucial strength from the love of someone at your side, and Nahoko's sacrifice is the key element that pushes Jiro over the top to design the defining creation of his lifetime, a creation that would be put to tragic and destructive use in World War II.

This is just one of the many indelibly saddening paradoxes of the world that shape Jiro’s life, but those who judge Jiro for his seemingly naive outlook and approach are sorely mistaken. This is a man who sees life for all its insurmountable flaws and unforgiving realities but chooses to soldier on anyway. In one of Jiro’s dreams, Caproni poignantly asks if Jiro would rather live in a world with or without pyramids. It is in Jiro’s discovery of the answer that he finds the inspiration to create wonderful things, to design the contraptions that, by all rights, shouldn’t be up there in the first place. As Caproni states so elegantly, “airplanes are beautiful cursed dreams, waiting for the sky to swallow them up.” Fulfilling the potential that comes from inspiration arrives at a great and sometimes perilous cost, but Jiro is ultimately willing to pay the price. One only has to bring up the countless innovations that the wars of the 20th century brought us or the unforeseen destructive potential of dynamite and the ethical dilemma that consumed its inventor, Alfred Nobel, to find some real life parallels of the film’s subject matter. The film thus reminds us that many of the revolutionary inventions and innovations of the world only came into existences under the auspices of the great war machine that defines human history. Does this ugly truth absolve the creator, and does this stark reality mean that no innovation should be attempted in the first place? Anyone who watches this film will know Miyazaki’s answer.

Verdict: Does The Wind Rises stand up to Miyazaki's best? Not by a long shot, but this mature and elegant biopic is the clear signature of a master at work. What this film lacks in truly compelling narrative it more than makes up for in a beauty of vision that is simply unsurpassed in animation.

B

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 126 minutes

MPAA Rating: PG-13

English Cast: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Emily Blunt, John Krasinski, Stanley Tucci

Director: Hayao Miyazaki

Screenplay: Hayao Miyazaki

2014 Oscars Post-Mortem

So 12 Years a Slave wins the big one and Gravity takes away 7 Oscars in total. Spike Jonze won for his timely futuristic sci-fi romance Her screenplay and 30 Seconds to Mars frontman Jared Leto's return to acting after a 4 year hiatus earns him an Oscar. Overall, it was a more predictable Oscars ceremony than usual and there were no major surprises. Just a few notes though:

Brad Pitt wins his first Oscar....as a producer.

Aside from his brief (and terrible) supporting role in 12 Years a Slave, Brad Pitt also served as one of five accredited producers who worked on the Best Picture-winning film. Who would have thought that Brad Pitt, formerly of Brangelina fame, would eventually be winning Oscars for producing anti-slavery period pieces? Having already been nominated as a producer for Moneyball back in 2011, hopefully this Oscar win will mean more Pitt-produced films of that calibre and less of the World War Z variety. 

Leonardo DiCaprio will have to wait another year for that elusive first Oscar.

DiCaprio probably missed his best chance to win an Oscar in 2004 when his excellent portrayal of Howard Hughes in The Aviator was overlooked by the Academy in favor of Jamie Foxx in Ray. The five time Academy Award nominated actor is still in his prime though and a few more Martin Scorsese collaborations might just break the curse.

Matthew McConaughey's career turn-around is now complete.

It wasn't long ago that Matthew McConaughey had virtually become typecast as the charming (and typically shirtless) piece of eye candy in a long line of atrocious romantic comedies. But after great performances in Killer Joe, Mud, and his award-worthy turn in HBO series True Detective, McConaughey's career has seen a resurgence of late. Throw in an Oscar win for Dallas Buyers Club and a starring role in Christopher Nolan's highly anticipated upcoming sci-fi film Interstellar and it looks like all the woeful action adventures (Sahara) and painfully bad chick flicks (Failure to Launch) are things of the past.

Films and performances that deserved some recognition:

All is Lost

A film which suffered perhaps from too many similarities with last year's Life of Pi and a lack in overall action or excitement, All is Lost boasts a great and virtually dialogue-free performance from Robert Redford and a wonderfully executed simple survival story. A celebration of the visual power of cinema at its finest.

Hugh Jackman and Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners)

An electrifying performance by Hugh Jackman and some superlative directing by Denis Villeneuve elevated what could have been a forgettable missing child drama into a riveting psychological slow-burn thriller that definitely qualifies as one of the year's best. Unfortunately, it only received an Oscar nomination for cinematography this year. Truly a shame.

Joaquin Phoenix (Her)

Phoenix takes the eccentric character of Theodore Twombly and turns him into a genuine yet flawed person seeking love in a world where a true connection is hard to find. Phoenix builds a pretty believable relationship with what is basically a disembodied voice and makes it look easy. 

Only God Forgives

Say what you will about Ryan Gosling's unexpectedly non-macho, low-key performance and the film's heavy-handed symbolism, but Only God Forgives is a visual feast to behold (if you can stomach the endless violence). This film pops on the big screen and the costume/production design is sublime. An effective little film if you don't go in expecting Drive 2. 

Oscar Isaac (Inside Llewyn Davis)

Isaac's natural performance in Inside Llewyn Davis is spot on and complements the Coen Brothers' style perfectly. Aside from playing the guitar and doing the vocals for all of his songs, Isaac gives what would otherwise have been an unpleasant lead character a touch of earnest sincerity and we soon find ourselves trapped with Llewyn within the confines of his inescapably bleak world. 

2014 Oscar Predictions

We have finally arrived at the zenith of the annual awards season: the 86th Annual Academy Awards are now only a day away. After the Best Picture win of Argo and the Best Acting win of Daniel Day-Lewis for Lincoln, which movies and which actors will add their names to the illustrious winners of yesteryear? The shameless self-promotion, the pompous self-congratulatory awards circuits, and relentless marketing campaigns all come down to this. Who will take the major awards, and who will be left with only millions of dollars in the bank to comfort them after missing out? Your guess is as good as mine but here are my predictions anyway:

Best Picture:

Will Win: 12 Years a Slave

Should Win: The Wolf of Wall Street

The 2013 Best Picture race boasts a stronger line-up than it has in previous years but as always, there are a number of clear front-runners. Taking into account its subject matter and its critical acclaim thus far, 12 Years a Slave is as close to a shoo-in as you can get when it comes to the Oscars but Alfonso Cuaron's sci-fi epic Gravity could pull off an unlikely upset. Viewed purely as a spectacle on visual terms, what the film-makers accomplished with Gravity was unparalleled in 2013, but unfortunately, the acting of the leads and most of the dialogue and narrative was much less inspiring. Just as a precedent, the enormously successful 2009 film Avatar was similarly hailed as a visually stunning cinematic landmark but also suffered from a derivative storyline, a fact that may have contributed to smaller art-house film The Hurt Locker taking home the big prize. This brings us to the film that should win the prize, but due to its edgy content and provocative style, probably won't. As well done, emotionally charged, and full of great performances as 12 Years a Slave was, one film stands above the rest, and that film is The Wolf of Wall Street. Coming close to Scorsese's best, Wolf of Wall Street is an energetic, captivating, endlessly entertaining and deeply poignant film that perfectly encapsulates the must-have-it-all mindset and culture that has become deeply ingrained in modern day society. 

Best Actor:

Will Win: Matthew McConaughey

Should Win: Chiwetel Ejiofor

There were some great performances in 2013, so great in fact that such illustrious names as Tom Hanks (Captain Phillips) and such great performances as those of Oscar Isaac (Inside Llewyn Davis) and Joaquin Phoenix (Her) didn't even make the cut this year. After his surprise win at the Golden Globes in Jaunary, Matthew McConaughey has become the clear favorite to take the Best Acting Oscar prize for his complete physical transformation into AIDS diagnosed hustler Ron Woodroof in Dallas Buyers Club. While that was undoubtedly a great performance, it's difficult to overlook the superb job perennial supporting actor Chiwetel Ejiofor did in 12 Years a Slave. An emotionally taxing and challenging part to say the least, Ejiofor brings a proud defiance and silent resilience to his portrayal of Solomon Northup in a role that just may be the defining performance of his career. And unfortunately, despite another stellar turn in a long list of them, it looks like Leonardo DiCaprio will have to wait another year to finally win that elusive first Oscar.

Best Actress:

Will Win: Cate Blanchett

Should Win: Cate Blanchett

This one's a bit more difficult to prognosticate than other Oscar races this year as there hasn't been one particular stand-out performance this year. However, Cate Blanchett's empathetic portrayal of Jasmine, a delusional woman reeling from her millionaire husband's infidelity and fraud conviction, should not be overlooked. A thoroughly unlikeable and narcissistic person, Blanchett deftly find the humanity in her character, and we can't help but sympathize and root for her as she comes to terms with her new reality and attempts to rebuild herself from the shambles of her former well-to-do life.

Best Director:

Will Win: Alfonso Cuaron

Should Win: Alfonso Cuaron

Simply put, no one film-maker in the running for Best Director created as unique and innovative a film as Alfonso Cuaron did with Gravity. Steve McQueen (12 Years a Slave) and Martin Scorsese (The Wolf of Wall Street) might stage an upset and may have won in a different year but the 2013 directing prize is there for Cuaron's taking. An edgy and daring film-maker, one could see signs of greatness in Cuaron's earlier films such as Children of Men and Y Tu Mamá También, but Gravity's box office and critical success could mark the beginning of a great new chapter in Cuaron's career. 

Best Supporting Actor:

Will Win: Jared Leto

Should Win: Michael Fassbender

Jared Leto undergoes a complete physical transformation that eclipses that of any other major Hollywood performance in 2013 and after his Golden Globe supporting actor win, a male acting sweep for Dallas Buyers Club is indefinitely in the cards. The only serious challenge for Leto this year could be Michael Fassbender's powerhouse performance as the villainous plantation owner Epps in 12 Years a Slave. It takes guts to play such a detestable and reprehensible character and the fact that Epps comes off as a deeply troubled, complex, and tormented man and not simply as a generic villain is down to Fassbender's excellent and Oscar-worthy performance. 

Best Writing, Original Screenplay:

Will Win: Her

Should Win: Her

As defining a film for our day and age as could possibly be, Her captures a unique aspect of the potential and perhaps, inevitable future. As artificial intelligence becomes more and more sophisticated, the possible repercussions for society and people's relationships are explored with an endlessly creative and inventive wit and honesty by Spike Jonze. A mature and remarkably nuanced script that sheds light on our innate desire for connection, Jonze taps in to the essence of what will always make us human, regardless of the world that is constantly changing all around us.  

Best Documentary:

Will Win: The Act of Killing

Should Win: The Act of Killing

A unique insight into a strange and little-known world, The Act of Killing follows the efforts of a group of Indonesian gangsters and militiamen as they attempt to film a movie recreating their murder and torture of more than 500,000 Communist Party members in the 1960s. Capturing these men in all their hypocrisies, denials and paradoxical rationalizations, we witness how a mass murderer wakes up in the morning and lives with what he has done day in and day out. Men reference raping little girls, recreate massacres, and showcase execution techniques for the camera with a casual and apathetic manner that will disturb most viewers. Truly an unforgettable documentary. 

Best Foreign Language Film:

Will Win: The Great Beauty

Should Win: The Great Beauty

There are a number of really solid films up for the Best Foreign Langue Oscar this year, even with the exclusion of Palme d'Or winner Blue is the Warmest Color due to a minor technicality. Danish film The Hunt and its star Mads Mikkelsen have been garnering awards and acclaim aplenty, and Hany Abu-Assad's Omar is the second Palestinian film to be nominated in the past 8 years. The Great Beauty, reviewed here, might just edge those two films this year though. 

The Rest of the Major Awards:

Best Supporting Actress:

Will Win: Lupita Nyong'o

Should Win: Lupita Nyong'o

Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay:

Will Win: 12 Years a Slave

Should Win: The Wolf of Wall Street

Best Cinematography:

Will Win: Gravity

Should Win: Gravity

Pompeii Review

MINOR SPOILERS:

For anyone familiar with his earlier movies, it should be fairly obvious that director Paul W.S. Anderson has never been one for subtlety, nuance, or any significant substance in his work. And true to predictable form, Anderson’s latest special effects-laden extravaganza, Pompeii, is no different. Whether it’s the increasingly insufferable Resident Evil franchise or such masterful flops as The Three Musketeers 3D or Alien Vs. Predator, Anderson doesn’t exactly have the greatest track record but he does do some things well: he’s always possessed a certain flair for cool visuals and he does have a knack for great action sequences. So in a way, Pompeii makes sense for a filmmaker of his, albeit limited, talents. The premise is nice and simple and could have made for a decent little movie; it’s the execution that’s ultimately the downfall of almost every aspect of Pompeii. 

Based on the actual infamous volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in A.D. 79 that buried the ancient city of Pompeii and preserved its inhabitants under layers of ash and molten lava, any historical accuracy with regards to this movie ends there. We follow the story of Milo (Harington), a gladiator and last of a long line of proud Celtic horsemen, a line ended by the brutal murder of his entire family at the hands of the Romans. A strong and silent type that we’ve seen countless times before, Milo’s fighting skills become legendary and they soon earn him the opportunity to go before a much bigger audience in Pompeii. It’s there that he will collide with destiny, seek his freedom, and get revenge on the evil and cruel Romans. And oh, lest we forget, it is also there that he will meet the generic and bland woman of his dreams. And that’s pretty much it. 

Apart from being incredibly unoriginal and remarkably boring, the thing that stands out the most in Pompeii is the general laziness of the narrative and the storytelling. Aside from the obvious and endless similarities between it and Gladiator, this movie puts very little effort in building its characters or giving them anything resembling a three-dimensional genuine personality. While on the road to Pompeii, Milo meets his love interest Cassia (Browning), an aristocratic young and beautiful lady who reviles all things Roman and also happens to have 21st century morals and sensibilities for good measure too. And because we didn’t have enough clichés already, Pompeii proceeds to give us a good old-fashioned story of forbidden love. Him a sexy brooding gladiator, her a kind-hearted lady of noble lineage caught in the clutches of evil Senator Corvus (Sutherland), a man who also conveniently happens to be the Roman commander who ordered the massacre of Milo’s family all those years ago.  That set-up is just one of many examples of how Pompeii paints everything in the broadest and most basic strokes. And onwards we carry on as the filmmakers continue to go through the motions. Milo becomes enemies with the best gladiator in town, a man who is on the brink of freedom, but of course, they end up becoming the best of friends. Milo and Cassia bond over their love of horses, but this soon attracts the ire of Corvus, as he attempts to orchestrate Milo’s death in the arena through a mock battle retelling of his famous suppression of Milo’s people (another one of many plot points “borrowed” from Gladiator). Corvus's bullying ways don't just stop at Milo: the people of Pompeii are portrayed as long-suffering subjects of the cruel and brutal Romans, all of whom are pure evil of course. All of this is uninspiring stuff to say the least and some of the casting choices here are disastrous. The two leads exude zero chemistry and zero personality and Kiefer Sutherland stands out in particular as he waltzes around in Roman armor with a bizarre semi-British accent that comes and goes from scene to scene.

The relentless nonsense of one of the weakest and most passionless love triangles in recent memory continues throughout the runtime, but it isn’t until the second half that the film slightly redeems itself as the inevitable wanton death and destruction that we all knew was coming finally arrives. And how did we know it was coming? Just to make sure we didn’t forget about that pesky volcano looming ominously in the background, the camera pans back and shows us the aforementioned CGI-rendered volcano over and over and over again. And then it shows us it a couple more times just to double check and make sure that even the most ADD-ridden viewer remembers it’s there. Once the volcano begins to erupt and the action starts in all of its cheesy hokiness, the movie finally starts to have some fun. Cue heroic dashes to save damsels in distress, epic battles to the death, villains getting their comeuppance, and just some good old general mayhem as people frantically and desperately try to outrun the volcano’s reach. All this of course, is neutered by the fact that this film is rated PG-13, a decision that takes away somewhat from the perverse fun that a disaster movie is supposed to be. As exciting and pulsating as the action is however, it’s bogged down by the fact that the movie is still obsessed with resolving the dramatic soap opera of its weak characters. We watch as Milo and Cassia try and foil all the elements pitted against their love, and watch as the good guys win their “symbolic” freedom, but none of it resonates. Put simply, the filmmakers just can’t expect us to care about what happens to these people when they didn’t care about developing them in any meaningful way in the first place. And yet, the movie sets up all of these dramatic moments in the midst of the action in the hopes that we’ll care anyway. Good luck with that. 

Verdict: There’s two ways of looking at Pompeii: as a love story set in the backdrop of inevitable tragedy or as an epic and intense disaster film. Unfortunately, this derivative and lazy Gladiator/Titanic hybrid is a resounding failure either way.

C

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 105 minutes

MPAA Rating: PG-13

Cast: Kit Harrington, Emily Browning, Kiefer Sutherland, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje

Director: Paul W.S. Anderson

Screenplay: Janet Scott Batchler, Lee Batchler, Michael Robert Johnson

Cinematography: Glen MacPherson

Robocop Review

SPOILERS:

We live in a world where technology is advancing faster than society’s comprehension of all the ethical ramifications that come with it, and with films such as Her and Wally Pfister’s upcoming Transcendence tackling the subject, the time is ripe for a film that blends those prescient moral dilemmas with great CGI and lots of action. Cue Robocop, a movie that may draw comparisons with certain baffling recent 80s remakes such as The A-Team or Red Dawn, but what sets it apart is the fact that it’s a reboot that makes sense. In fact, the most surprising thing about this project is that the powers that be didn’t pump out a new Robocop movie sooner. 

It’s 2028 and we are introduced to a world where robots and cyber technology have replaced the common soldier in America’s international peacekeeping efforts. And the big debate now stirring at the home front then becomes: why not bring that same technology to safeguard the streets of America’s crime-infested cities? Enter Raymond Sellars (Keaton), the egotistical and greedy Omnicorp CEO who is keen to cash in on the potential windfall the American market represents. Facing stiff resistance to his plans to use robotic police officers from certain cautious elements within the government, he needs a gimmick, some kind of marketing ploy to sway public opinion in his favor. This is where undercover cop Alex Murphy (Kinnaman) falls into the equation. After Murphy is brought to the brink of death while investigating corrupt cops and illegal arms dealers, Sellars and Dr. Dennett Norton (Oldman) use him as a guinea pig for a new kind of police officer: one with a soul and free will, a robot that can tell the difference between right and wrong. Caught in the middle of a political battle and struggling to reconcile his humanity with his new stark and unsettling reality, Murphy must also get revenge on those responsible for destroying his life. 

Before we get into the flaws of this movie, of which there are many, the film-makers should be commended for not going the same exact route as the original. This is a revamped version that won’t remind you of its predecessor; this new Robocop stands, and falls flat, on its own two feet. While the original film by Paul Verhoeven gave us a darkly comedic satire about the overabundance of violence in our media and culture, the new Robocop arrives as a flaccid cautionary tale for modern day America. Instead of opting for a chaotic and dystopian future, director José Padhila chooses to ground Robocop’s world within more realistic territory. Aside from the flashy technology on display here and there, it all feels and looks the same as the world we live in. The film also decides to focus more on the human element of Robocop as well as on Murphy’s family, something that the original neglected to do (perhaps intentionally). This works well for the most part; we get into some interesting and compelling territory when Dr. Norton struggles with the realization that he can improve Murphy’s capabilities as a killing machine at the price of stripping away his humanity piece by piece, a trade-off that makes the initial experiment of creating a robot with a soul a redundant failure. As the reluctant and torn Dr. Norton, caught between trying to do the right thing and the immoral realities of what he is actually undertaking, Gary Oldman is great as always and elevates proceedings considerably.

Now on to Robocop’s many problems: Padhila shot to fame with the critically acclaimed Elite Squad and Elite Squad: The Enemy Within, films that are noted for their stark and gritty realistic style. And while some of that style comes through in his latest effort, much of the personality and panache that was evident in his earlier work is nowhere to be seen here. Coming with such a big budget and all the risks entailed in that, Robocop is a great example of a case where the design by committee approach fails miserably. Put simply, Robocop plays things way too safely in the hopes that it won’t provoke too much or offend the audience’s delicate sensibilities. Pushing boundaries are a big no-no and priority number one is to appeal to as many people as possible. Period. Such an approach will never make for a great movie and Robocop is simply one in a long line of Hollywood action films that don’t give its audience enough credit. Case in point: throughout the film, parallels between Robocop’s fictional future and America’s current use of drone warfare are drawn in an obvious and unsubtle way by the loud-mouthed and belligerent TV presenter Pat Novak (played with over-the-top campiness by a wig-donning Samuel L. Jackson).  There’s nothing better than starting a movie, a primarily visual medium, by having a character just directly tell the audience everything, and after Novak spoon-feeds us the basic lay of the land, the debate is polarized nicely and neatly for us simpletons to easily understand. Sellars is a guy who likes robots and random Senator is the guy who doesn’t. Got it? Done.

And the problems don’t end there. There are a number of visually impressive action set pieces throughout the film but they fail to be compelling or engaging whatsoever. We know that Robocop will survive through all these scenes, because he’s Robocop. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing in action movies and it’s usually part of the fun, but when there’s very little innovation or creativity going on besides sidekicks duly and predictably sacrificing themselves (but he only gets a shoulder wound because he’s a good guy), or Robot 1 pile-driving into Machine 2, it becomes very hard to be invested in anything that’s going on. The same can be said for most of the movie. Things move at a good pace and time passes by quickly but none of it engages the audience. When every scene begins, we already know what’s going to happen next and we already know what’s coming up. We have arbitrary emotional connection scene with the child, and then we proceed to arbitrary sex scene with the wife. Ironically, much of the character development in this movie is done in such a soulless robotic way. Social commentary on subjects such as free will or the intangible and unquantifiable nature of the human spirit emerge every now and then, but it all feels undeveloped and incredibly simplistic. Eventually, the film ends by showing us how the human spirit can triumph over any obstacle. It would be inspiring if it wasn’t so lazily and shoddily done.

Verdict:  Half-hearted in its message and approach, Robocop is a serviceable reboot that does the bare minimum with its story and characters. Fans of the original will definitely be left less than satisfied. Let’s just say that I wouldn’t buy that for a dollar!

C

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 108 minutes

MPAA Rating: PG-13

Cast: Joel Kinnaman, Abbie Cornish, Gary Oldman, Michael Keaton

Director: José Padilha 

Screenplay: Joshua Zetumer

Cinematography: Lula Carvalho

The Great Beauty Review

SPOILERS:

Movies about the meaning of life always carry with them an implicit sizable risk. In a cinematic world full of unstimulating and quickly forgettable movies, The Great Beauty ambitiously takes on those risks and succeeds admirably for the most part. Tackling a difficult subject that has been the downfall of many an art house film, The Great Beauty doesn't have anything especially new to say and it doesn't particularly tell us something most of us don’t already know. Be that as it may, with this latest effort, writer-director Paolo Sorrentino delivers a mature film that does what cinema does best: tantalize and engage on a visceral and emotional level. 

Set in the Eternal City of Rome, The Great Beauty thrusts us right in the middle of a decadent world of vapid socialites, over-the-top parties, and self-aggrandizing elites that indulge in every whim and in every carnal desire. And Jep Gambardella (Servillo) is the man who is always at the center of every party. An aging writer for a prestigious cultural column, Jep is our gateway into this fantastical scene that borders on a farcical satire of all things Italian. Once a celebrated and award-winning author of a novel in his early 20s, Jep has rested on his laurels and avoided writing a novel ever since; you quickly get a sense that Jep is a world-weary man who has seen and experienced everything there is to experience and has come to the conclusion that it all hasn’t amounted to very much.

A cynical and caustic observer, Jep regards all his surroundings with a disinterested gaze as the film unfurls rapidly and unevenly around him. He is acquainted with the cultural literati and artists of Rome and can have any beautiful woman he desires but is bored with them all. But after his 65th birthday party and a query about a long awaited second novel, a lifelong search for the meaning of it all begins to torment him more than it ever did in the past. And it is in Rome's superficial high society that Jep seeks to find the answers that he has long been aching for. Throwing in jabs at virtually every aspect of Italian life, this film and its protagonist seem to have something to say on pretty much everything under the sun. We are introduced to the self-involved eccentric denizens of Jep’s world but we don’t always see them through Jep’s judgmental and condemning eyes. Much of that judgment is left for us to make as we sit back and observe the pretensions and follies of Jep and the colorful cast that inhabit his city; all these people are searching for the same thing as Jep but what we soon discover is that their superficial attempts are all in vain. In the midst of his own search, Jep, more often than not, exposes the hollowness of their attempts. From abstract conceptual artists who don’t comprehend their own abstractions, to middle-aged men pursuing narcissistic younger women in an attempt to recapture a long lost youth, to authors with illusory and fragile pretensions that collapse at the merest introspection, to religious leaders more interested in talking about food recipes than the metaphysical mysteries of faith, no one and nothing escapes Jep’s (or the director’s) wrath.  

There’s plenty to sink your teeth into here but much of it is just a flashy show that hints at a deeper significance that passes by too quickly for it to resonate or to be fully fleshed out. Much like the day to day (or to be more accurate, night to night)  whirlwind of Jep’s existence, this film whizzes by all of the social engagements and events of Jep’s life and never lingers anywhere for too long. But perhaps, that’s the point. Behind all the gaudy artifices and benign pleasures on display, The Great Beauty seeks to shed light on the transcending quality of life that lies beneath the crude and deceivingly appealing veneer on the surface. It’s easy to forget that in the middle of the insanity of the endless anecdotes and side stories that director Paolo Sorrentino chooses to show us but the film does have a grounding logic and purpose, as scattered and unfocused as it frequently tends to be. Part dark comedy and part existentialist drama, everything that The Great Beauty embodies is encapsulated in the opening scene. In the blistering heat of the Roman summer and with a choral accompaniment in the background, a Japanese tourist is busy snapping pictures of the ancient city. At that very moment, in the midst of all this history, all this wonder and all this beauty, he collapses from a heart attack and promptly dies on the spot. And it is that cruel and jarring contradiction that is what this movie is all about. We are mere tourists in a life that comes and passes us by in an instant and it’s easy to get overwhelmed by it all. In his old age, Jep realizes this more than most, especially after he receives word that a (supposedly long forgotten) old flame of his has recently passed away. And after a new yet tragically fleeting romance taunts him with what could have been possible, Jep’s journey allows us to get immersed ever further into his world until, just as he undoubtedly also has become, we end up truly and completely repulsed by the shallowness it represents. 

As diluted as the narrative of The Great Beauty eventually becomes, this film is always just simply attempting to answer the following questions: What is important in life? What truly matters? And unlike most films on the subject that tend to end things on an ambiguous note, Jep finds the answer he is looking for, as unremarkable and predictable as that answer is. It is in famed nun Sister Maria, who at first seems like just another humorous jab at meaningless religious conventions, that Jep finds his answer. A Mother Teresa type, the impossibly old-looking nun lives a simple yet happy life that is stripped down to the basic essentials, and it is her words of wisdom that help Jep, a man who has indulged in life’s excesses far too much, to find that elusive beauty and finally find the motivation to write that second novel. And as Jep informs us at the very end, the rest is all a trick. 

Verdict: Ambitious to a fault, Paolo Sorrentino’s The Great Beauty is a passionately made and exhilarating film that hits the mark more often than it misses and leaves plenty of food for thought for those willing to partake in its journey. 

B

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 142 minutes

MPAA Rating: NR

Cast: Toni Servillo, Sabrina Ferilli, Carlo Verdone, Carlo Buccirosso

Director: Paolo Sorrentino

Screenplay: Paolo Sorrentino, Umberto Contarello

Cinematography: Luca Bigazzi

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty Review

We live in a cynical time and age and nowhere is that more reflected than through the medium of cinema. Just a quick glance at the movies that have broken box office records in the past few years and many of them (The Dark Knight, The Hunger Games, and Man of Steel to mention a few) are incredibly dark and typically involve impending destruction and the end of world. In the midst of all this doom and gloom, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty hit theaters in late December with an unapologetically sappy and uncynical tone and promptly flopped on arrival. One of the casualties of the crowded 2013 Holiday season, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is a lukewarm effort that definitely left audiences and critics with mixed reactions and it’s easy to see why. 

Unknown to most is the fact that The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is actually a remake of a 1947 movie and both are based on a short story written by James Thurber all the way back in 1939. As dated as the origin material is though, the core of the story remains current and more than fitting for a modern day retelling. Walter Mitty (Stiller) is a meek and introverted long-time employee of Life Magazine who happens to have a crush on the new girl (Wiig) in the office. Leading a simple and unassuming life, the dissatisfied Walter has a tendency to daydream and fantasize about heroic exploits and romantic adventures throughout any given day. But Walter`s life gets turned upside down by the announcement that Life Magazine is shutting down its print edition (something that actually happened in 2007) and laying off the majority of their staff. Things get even worse for Walter when a valuable negative sent by famed photographer Sean O'Connell (Penn) gets misplaced on his watch. Spurred on by the threats of an insufferable boss and a desire to impress the woman of his dreams, Walter buys a plane ticket and soon embarks on a journey of self-discovery that will ultimately turn him into a man reborn.

With such a premise, it`s hard to believe that The Secret Life of Walter Mitty failed to click with a large mainstream audience but the fault may lie in the execution. A tale of pure escapism that seeks to inspire and ignite the imagination, cheesiness and hokiness reign supreme here and an extensive suspension of disbelief is required to properly enjoy this movie. Toss in some cliched indie movie tropes as well as frequent and obtrusive product placement and you’ve got yourself a less than palatable updated version of a forgotten classic. At its core, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is a slightly naive feel-good movie with a simple message of breaking the shackles of normal dreary life and venturing beyond its suffocating confines. On a basic level, this film does accomplish that but the journey doesn't feel as well-rounded and satisfactory as it should. With the lifelong failure suggested by a blank dating profile section staring him right in the face, Walter Mitty represents all of us who do the bare minimum and fantasize about their dreams instead of actually going out there and seizing them. A worthy message indeed, but the film then goes ahead and sells you a superficial and conveniently packaged story that betrays that very message.

It`s at this interval that we arrive at the main problem of The Secret Life of Walter Mitty. As deep and insightful as it thinks it is, this movie is an easily disposable product that plays things far too safe and conventional. While much of what we see is all nice and warm and fuzzy, very little of it is memorable and even less resonates. Corny reiterations of the Life Magazine motto recur throughout but the film only scratches the surface of the potential of truly exploring the meaning behind that motto. Although Walter does go to some remote and beautiful places, risk his life on numerous occasions and experience some astonishing things, most of it feels like we're watching someone crossing off an arbitrary checklist of cool things to do. After some unsubtle plot-integral product placements (involving eHarmony and Papa John`s amongst others) and a couple of death-defying feats and exotic trips later, we are expected to have experienced a complete change in the character but very little of it feels genuine. When Walter`s voyage comes full circle, he has the expected moments of resolution with the various important people in his life but they seem routine rather than deep or insightful.  And the funny thing is that while Walter`s adventure scenes are amazingly shot and stunningly beautiful, they are the weakest element in this film. Working as standalone scenes, they’re astonishing. In the context of the movie however, they seem rudderless and perfunctory. Much like pretty postcards from faraway places, these adventures end up seeming like token things to be collected rather than actual, vivid, tangible experiences.

After the success of his 2008 film Tropic Thunder, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty represents an impressive and worthy different direction for Ben Stiller. Known mainly for romantic comedies that range from the passable (There’s Something About Mary, Meet the Parents) to the atrocious (Along Came Polly, Meet the Fockers), this new movie is an interesting choice for Stiller and his low-key performance as the good-natured but timid Walter is spot on. Although Walter is undeniably an oddball, he possesses an earnestness and everyday quality that helps ground this movie and lends it some of its best moments. Sean Penn also pops up in what is effectively a cameo role and his scene involving a snow leopard is simple yet powerfully effective. There are some great laughs to be found here and Walter`s increasingly farfetched and extravagant daydreams are perhaps the best parts of this movie. What was lacking unfortunately was a better developed and more nuanced storyline for Walter, a storyline that ultimately fails to deliver the promise of what could have been. Pretty awesome trailer though.

Verdict: As beautifully shot and visually stunning as this movie is, a simplistic barebones storyline and love story both fail to engage at the same level. In the end, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is a refreshing change that occasionally delivers but fails to elevate itself beyond its many flaws. 

C+

Trailer:

Movie info:

Runtime: 114 minutes

MPAA Rating: PG

Cast: Ben Stiller, Kristen Wiig, Sean Penn, Adam Scott

Director: Ben Stiller

Screenplay: Steve Conrad

Cinematography: Stuart Dryburgh