Foxcatcher (2015)

Title: Foxcatcher (2015)

Director: Bennett Miller

Cast: Channing Tatum, Steve Carell, Mark Ruffalo, Sienna Miller

Steve Carell has gotten an Oscar Nomination for his performance as John Dupont, the mad man millionaire who shot Olympic wrestler Dave Shultz three times, point blank, for god knows what. It’s one of those crimes where we’ll never really know what happened, because those involved won’t say, so it’s probably some really dark secret thing that they don’t want anyone knowing about, which gets your imagination going as to what really happened. Some say it had something to do with exposing Dupont’s potential homosexuality, others attribute the murder to John Dupont’s schizophrenia and others say he was just high on drugs. Similar to The Wolf of Wall Street (2014), this is the story of a millionaire with enough money to be high all the time, on the drug of his choice. Apparently, one of them was cocaine.

So anyhow, the story is all about how John Dupont, one of the richest men in America, decides he is going to fund the American olympic wrestling team by creating a training compound called ‘Team Foxcatcher’. You see, Dupont was an Olympic wrestling aficionado, so he wanted to back the team up, go for the gold by sponsoring these young guns, he also wanted the glory of being called their ‘coach’, though in reality, he had very limited knowledge of the sport. Things go sour when John Dupont’s schizophrenia or his drug abuse begin to show their ugly face. Will Team Foxcatcher win the gold medal? Can the team hold together when its financial backer is a certified wacko millionaire?

So this is one of those movies that runs on the strength of one particular performance and that’s Steve Carell’s portrayal of John Dupont. Everyone else in the film is great, it’s refreshing to see Channing Tatum trying something serious, and the same goes for Mark Ruffallo who turns in a solid performance as Dave Schultz. The thing with Carell’s performance is that we’re used to seeing him play the goofball Manager of Dunder Mifflin, Scranton branch on The Office. But here he is playing a psycho and it’s a drastic change to be sure. It’s not surprising to see a comedian trying something new, comedians always try to branch out into more serious roles in order to stretch their acting abilities, to grow as an actor. We’ve seen a lot of comedians do this, Bill Murray is a good example, but I guess the biggest example would be Tom Hanks, a straight forward comedian who’s suddenly this serious Oscar Caliber actor who rarely makes a comedy anymore. Will we see Carell leave comedy forever after Foxcatcher? I hope not, to me Carell is such a hilarious actor he should keep making funny movies forever, but of course, an actor wants to expand and grow, so I wouldn't be surprised if he wants to explore the serious/dramatic route for a while.

That's Steve Carrell playing John Dupont on the left, and on the right, the real John Dupont, playing at being a coach for the Olympic Wrestling Team. 

Speaking of the Oscar race, Foxcatcher has been nominated for Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor. Mark Ruffalo gets the nom for Best Supporting Actor. I think he did a fine performance here playing Dave Schultz, Mark Schultz’s big brother, but he has some stiff competition. The same goes for every category that Foxcatcher is nominated in. If you ask me, Carell and his performance as John Dupont is the only chance Foxcatcher has at winning an Oscar. Even director Bennett Miller, who also directed Capote (2005) and Moneyball (2011) doesn’t have much of a chance against the contenders going up against him. For me, the best director Oscar will go either to Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu for Birdman or Richard Linklater for Boyhood, simply because of the technical prowess displayed in both of these films and the phenomenal concepts behind both of them. Both Birdman and Boyhood are so much more complex in execution than Foxcatcher, that its pretty obvious either of those two will win. And therein lies Foxcatchers limited chances, its a pretty simple picture when compared to other Oscar contenders. Don’t get me wrong, Foxcatcher is a completely watchable film with many merits, it just didn’t say much to me, it felt like a lightweight thematically speaking, like empty calories. I mean, the sibling rivalry angle isn’t exploited much and neither is Dupont’s possible homosexuality. Things are sort of touched upon, but never really explored, ultimately, Foxcatcher left me wanting more, I wanted it to dig deeper, but I detected a bit of restraint on the filmmakers part.

Why wasn’t Dupont’s schizophrenia explored more in depth? I mean here’s a guy who reportedly spoke to rocks, thought spirits and spies where after him and thought that treadmills could send him back in time! It would have been interesting to see this angle explored a bit more. The film does go into Dupont wanting to garner others respect, mainly his mothers. Here's a man who's trying to do something great, but is unable to because he himself isn't a "great man", so what does he do? He hangs around the greats, to see if some of that greatness and talent rubs off on him, but that's not how it works. Greatness is achieved through talent and dedication. Dupont wanted to pretend. In regards to Dupont’s schizophrenia, the film reminded me a bit of Ron Howard’s A Beautiful Mind (2001) a film in which Russell Crowe plays a brilliant mathematician who also talks to imaginary people, yet is brilliant in his own field. The only difference is that A Beautiful Mind ends on a more positive vibe, while Foxcatcher goes down a darker path. So in conclusion my friends, Foxcatcher was a good movie, with a strange vibe which I enjoyed. You know something is off, but you’re not sure what it is.  And we get Steve Carell’s awesome performance, which is strong enough to get him an Oscar this year;  but the competition is tough, we’ll see.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Dave and Mark Schultz during their glory days

The Avengers (2012)

Title: The Avengers (2012)

Director: Joss Whedon

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Mark Ruffalo, Gwyneth Paltrow, Scarlett Johansson, Samuel L. Jackson, Chris Evans, Jeremy Renner, Tom Hiddleston, Chris Hemsworth

Review:

The Avengers is visual crack, seriously, your eyes will become instantly addicted to the silver screen. This movies so good, you wont want to blink! It’s been a while since I’ve been honestly and wholeheartedly floored by a film, so kudos to Joss Whedon for making a film that reminds me why I love going to the movies. I want to be blown away, I want to be wowed, I want to laugh. And I got all these things with The Avengers; a gigantic, bombastic, non stop thrill ride of a movie!  A love letter to super hero comics! It’s been a while since I heard gasps in the movie theater, but it happened last night. People where gasping whenever any super hero would show up on screen. People were clapping after action sequences, they even clapped when the Marvel logo went up on screen…it was an event.

Sure other films based on comic books have been made; and a lot of them have been quite good. For example, so far I rank Sam Raimi’s Spider Man 2 (2004) as one of those films that really captured what super hero comic books are all about, and I hold that film in high regard, but The Avengers blew it away. The Avengers is officially my #1 super hero film of all time. Watching this film, I felt like I was in geek heaven, there’s this thrill you get when you see all of these super heroes together up on the screen!

The story for The Avengers is fairly simple. Loki, the demigod from Asgard wants revenge. If you remember correctly, in THOR (2011), Loki wanted to be king of Asgard, but Thor stopped him before he could achieve his goals, so now Loki wants not only revenge, he also wants to rule over earth. He wants humans kneeling at his feet! In order to do so he enlists the help of an alien race called ‘The Chitauri’. SHIELD is an organization in charge of national security, so seeing as how this is a potentially earth threatening situation, they decide that the best way to confront this is to organize a group of the most powerful super heroes on the planet. And so The Avengers are born. Will they be enough to go up against Loki and his alien army? 

A lot of what makes this film work so well is the fact that Joss Whedon directed it. Here’s a man who is king of the geeks. He understands very well the pleasures of reading a good super hero comic book. He knows what super hero fans want to see in an Avengers film, because he is one of them. He knows what fan boys consider cool, and he gives it to them. How perfect is Whedon for directing this film? Well, apart from his vast television experience (he created Buffy and Angel) and having directed the incredibly underrated sci-fi/western Serenity (2005), he's also written quite a few Marvel comics himself, including his popular Astonishing X-Men run. Many directors have tried to capture this magic of reading comic books, of seeing powerful beings kicking the hell out of each other, but only some achieve it well. For example, Sam Raimi and his first two Spider Man movies, Bryan Synger and his X-Men films, Chris Nolan with this Batman franchise…and now Joss Whedon can be added to the ranks, and dare I say it he is the one who has made, what I’m sure will be considered by many as one of the best superhero movies ever made. In my opinion, this Avengers film eclipses all other Marvel movies, you kind of feel like they are less somehow after watching The Avengers, which is simply put loaded with non stop coolness from opening to closing credits.

The success of this film show us one thing: a movie will work better with the appropriate director at the helm, get a guy who knows what his talking about, a guy who knows a thing or two about the characters and their backgrounds, about special effects, about getting an audience hooked. I’m sure all those years in television production taught Whedon all about what needs to be done to keep the audience happy, to get them hooked. This is a director whose been given a lot of money to bring this film to life (reportedly 220 million) so basically, Whedon, King of Geeks was given the keys to heaven. Marvel Disney did well in trusting this guy with The Avengers, no one else could have gotten this film this right.

Whedon directs! 

So what’s so good about this film? Well, let’s see, it brings SHIELD to life is what it does. For years, as a comic book fan, I’d been reading stories involving SHIELD and now finally I get to see it come to life; and in such a spectacular manner. I mean, SHIELD’S flying fortress, wow, what a sight! Which reminds me, the visual effects on this film are top notch, cutting edge, state of the line. They’ve done a fantastic job of bringing these gods to life. The action sequences where fantastic! What I really loved about them is that the action sequences are extended. Once they start, they don’t seem to stop! The levels of destruction on this one are gargantuan! Battle sequences go on and on, and on, showcasing one awesome moment after the next. It’s an onslaught to the senses, which is why you’ll probably want to see it again. After all, this is a Marvel comics film we’re talking about, and Marvel Comics have always been king of the cliffhangers! Most of their comic books end with a caption that reads: “come back next week for the thrilling conclusion” or a “to be continued”. This was a very successful technique, I know it kept me buying comics for years! They’ve just applied this age old formula to films. This one also has an ending that will make you want to come back for that sequel, so after the credits, wait a couple of minutes, comic book fans will salivate at what they see, I know I was left thinking of the possibilities for the inevitable sequel.

Captain America comes full circle with this film by becoming the leader of The Avengers

The heroes are the star of the show and they all get their moment to shine. I loved how Whedon wrote this film because none of the heroes feel left out. They are all equally important in the story, they are all useful, they all got a purpose. And this film really connects with all the others that came before it, which I thought was awesome. Characters reference events that happened in their own respective films, which is why I personally recommend seeing all the other ones that came before it before you see this one. But honestly, I don’t think you’ll get lost if you haven’t, the films story is a simple alien invasion flick. But speaking about the heroes, I believe this is the best depiction of these guys on any movie so far. Hulk really smashes! Captain American leads! Iron Man is a genius, an asshole and a hero all rolled up into one! Thor is truly the God of Thunder controlling lighting bolts through his hammer. By the way, has anyone noticed how many Oscar  nominees are on this film? 

The embodiment of hotness, Scarlett Johansson

On the negative side of things I will say that the whole alien invasion story line in which Loki opens dimensional portals in order to bring an army of alien beings to assist him in his conquering of the earth sounded and at times looked extremely similar to Michael Bay’s Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011). But don’t you worry about that because The Avengers is infinitely better than anything Bay has directed. Also, I wish Nick Fury had done a bit more in the film, it would have been cool to see Jackson kicking ass in some form or another in his own spectacular action sequence, but then again, he's not really a 'super' hero in the true sense of the word. Hey, at least he can shoot a bazooka! Okay, so my last words on The Avengers? It’s definitely worth the price of admission, so if I was you, I’d buy that ticket and take this ride! This is officially the first blockbuster of the summer! And it’s a good one, so what are you waiting for?  

Rating: 5 out of 5  

Shutter Island (2010)

Title: Shutter Island (2010)

Director: Martin Scorcese

Writer: Laeta Kalogridis, based on the novel by Dennis Lehane

Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Mark Ruffalo, Ben Kingsley, Max Von Sydow, Elias Koteas, Jackie Earle Haley, Emily Mortimer

Review:

Martin Scorcese is one of those directors who’s name is a household word. Scorcese is as much a star of his movies as his actors are. And this is not without merit for Scorcese is responsible for some of the best films ever made, including some of those fantastic films that were made during the 70s that still, to this day influence modern filmmakers. Films like Taxi Driver and Mean Streets. Both awesome films on their own right; both masterpieces. And both are only a small representation of what this great American filmmaker is capable of producing. His body of work is certainly an impressive one. And one that has never shown signs of diminishing in terms of quality of storytelling and filmmaking ability. In other words, Scorcese is a master. There’s no denying that. So, how did Shutter Island, his latest film, fare?

Scorcese, directing the hell out of Kingsley, DiCaprio and Ruffalo

Shutter Island is the story of one Teddy Daniels, federal marshal. He is visiting the incredibly mysterious Shutter Island, and island that is home to one of the most dangerous psychiatric wards in the world. A ward that houses the most criminally insane individuals on the planet, the ones that are deemed too dangerous to live in society. The ones that have committed the most heinous crimes. Teddy arrives to investigate the disappearance of one of the inmates. I mean, patients of the ward. It seems like she simply vanished from her cell! How did she disappear from her cell without a trace? How did she achieve this when her room was locked and her windows were barred up? Why did she leave without any shoes on? Where is she? Will she survive the fierce storm that’s forming outside? Will Teddy uncover the truth behind this ever evolving mystery?

And that’s a key word on this movie: mystery. It’s ever present, from the first frame of the film to the last. The whole film is drenched in atmosphere, like one of those old school horror movies where the storm never lets up. I personally love movies that do this because I really hate it when horror movies loose that spooky feeling. It makes you kind of wish they stretched it out for longer. But not with Shutter Island, with Shutter Island you get a constant spooky vibe, constant suspense, constant mystery, a constant ominous feeling. The psycho ward feels like one of those castles from the old horror movies, a castle at the end of the cliff. I tell you, that spooky feeling never lets up! The deeper the movie goes, the darker the mystery, the darker the film. The stronger the storm! If you love spooky old school horror movies, where the wind is howling all the time, and the storm looks like it’s never going to end, then Shutter Island is for you.

Thematically speaking though, I loved what this movie was trying to say. Filmmaking is a mirror of our society, which is an aspect of filmmaking that I love. I think its so interesting how we can communicate so much through films. I sometimes feel artists and filmmakers communicate with society in code, through their films. Saying important things that sometimes people don’t like to talk about, addressing themes and issues that need to be addressed and discussed. But sometimes filmmakers don’t like to be so obvious with what they are saying, so they’ll embellish their tales with complications, and drama. But at the core, you sometimes have to wonder while watching a film: what’s this filmmaker trying to communicate? What is he trying to say? Shutter Island is one of these movies. It’s not your typical spooky psychological thriller. Though it succeeds marvelously at being one, this movie is trying to communicate so much more then just a spooky scare.

At heart, Shutter Island is similar to Joel Schumacher’s Falling Down (1993). If you remember correctly, Schumacher’s Falling Down was about a guy (Michael Douglas in one of his finest roles ever) who is driven mad by the way things are set in society. He can’t take it anymore so he bolts and goes ballistic, lashing out against society. Shutter Island has that subversive vibe going for it. It criticizes the government for performing experiments on people, hideous experiments to see what makes people tick. This is one of those “us vs. them” movies, where every one acts just a little weird. Kind of like in Invasion of the Body Snatchers or The Wicker Man (1973). The kind of film where everyone is in on something, except our protagonist. You get the vibe from the very beginning that something is a little off on Shutter Island, and that everyone is acting just a little strange. Its one of those movies where “they” want to control and dominate you, and if you don’t play along, then you are going against the grain, and that cant be good for you. You have to either comply, play along, or be eradicated.

Mario Bava would be proud

In many ways, this film is kind of like a cautionary tale for people with a rebellious spirit, same as Falling Down was. Its trying to say, something might be going wrong, the government might be corrupt, and everything society holds true and certain is a lie, but you still gotta play ball or you are going down. But again, this is all embellished in the film. Which is probably why most people aren’t going to get it. This was probably the reason why after the film was over I heard some people saying the movie was crap. That’s the problem with today’s film going audience, they’ll go in droves to mindless crap like Transformers 2 (2009), but they’ll think that Shutter Island is a boring movie that has too many talky scenes. It doesn’t have that huge splash of an ending, with a lot of special effects.

And yeah, it’s true, this is a very cerebral film. It’s not a film about special effects, or grizzly deaths, or car explosions. This is a movie with a brain, with something to say. Proof of this films cerebral introspective nature is the films many nightmare/flashback sequences, which by the way I absolutley loved! Scorcese really went wild with the dreamsequences on this film, it gave the whole movie a very hallucinatory vibe that I really dug. And on top of that Shutter Island  has an excellent cast, and it was made by one of the most legendary filmmakers in the industry. I mean, as far as I’m concerned, Martin Scorcese has been on a roll and has never stopped ever since he started making movies. He has not given up like many directors have at his age. He continues making excellent films, with passion, drama and intrigue. That’s one thing this movie has a lot of, intrigue. By the way, the feeling of mystery in this movie is only augmented by the films amazing musical score. Martin Scorcese is a film director that has not forgotten the importance of music in a film! I thank the movie gods for that, especially in a movie of this kind. The music Scorcese chose for this film (composed of famous classical music tracks) kind of guided us through the roller coaster ride of emotions that both images and music conjure up. It’s as if the music was telling us how we should feel. I love that kind of score on a film! Very grand. Very classy. Just as grand and just as classy as the movie itself.

Rating: 5 out of 5

Where the Wild Things Are (2009)

Title: Where the Wild Things Are (2009)

Director: Spike Jonze

Stars: Max Records, Catherine Keener, Mark Ruffalo

Written by: Spike Jonze and Dave Eggers, based on the book by Maurice Sendak

Review:

Spike Jonze is one of those filmmakers who takes his time to make his movies, but when he finally comes out and makes one, you just know it’s going to be something special. I still have not been disappointed by this auteur, so the expectations for Where the Wild Things Are were very high for me. Through productions pictures and clips and finally the trailer, I could see that Jonze was headed in the right direction with this one and that the film was going to prove to be something special indeed. So how did it turn out?

Its Tantrum Time!

Where the Wild Things Are tells the story of Max, a young boy desperately in need of some attention. Like every little ten year old boy, he wants people to spend time with him and acknowledge his existence. Problem is, everyone in Max’s family is so caught up in their own world that they ignore him. So he goes on these fits of anger where he starts destroying things and biting people. One day, when Max can’t take it anymore he runs away. He gets on a boat, and starts traveling to a mysterious fantastical island inhabited by wild creatures. Who are these creatures and how will they help Max overcome his anguish?

 

So yeah, this movie had lots of production troubles because it was never really clear what tone the film was going to have. This happens a lot with films that are hard to categorize. Should the film be for kids or for adults? Normally, this uncertainty in a production spells certain doom for it. It happened with The Monster Squad (1987) and Howard the Duck (1986) two movies that the studio didn’t know how to market. Are these movies made for adults or children? As a result, both of these movies, though fun and entertaining ended up confusing audiences and tanking at the box office. Not becaue they were bad, but because the studio didn’t know how to market them, which is the kiss of death for any production. Often times, the main problem with this kind of film is that studios fear that the film isn’t childlike enough. They either don’t want the film to be too graphic or violent, or they don’t want characters spewing profanity. But most of the times they just don’t want the film to be too scary for kids, because then they can’t sell it to kids.

But what happens when a film touches on child like themes, but isn’t necessarily a movie for children? Then the studio has to make a decision. In the case of Guillermo del Toro’s Pans Labyrinth (2006) they decided that the film was not for kids. That it was a fantasy film for adults, so they marketed it as such. And that worked wonders for the film because it was a critical and box office success. The same dilemma popped up with Where The Wild Things Are. Studio went through a process, until they finally decided that it was not going to be marketed as a film for kids, and that it was a film about childhood, but for adults. I think children could have seen this movie just fine, maybe they wouldn’t have found it to be a “fun movie”, but I don’t think they would have found it too scary. A 10 year old kid could take this movie in just fine. I don’t necessarily think that the movie was too scary at all; maybe the real problem would have been that the movie was too cerebral and symbolic for them, or not fun enough. And kids don’t really enjoy that, so the studio went with the “not for kids” thing. Which is fine by me. This movie works just fine as a fantasy film for adults.

This is one of those films where the kid cant take the realities of the world and escapes to a fantasy land in his mind, where he can work out his issues and hopefully come out of it with some sort of a solution that he can apply in the real world. On this one the issue is that he feels ignored, he wants people to talk to him, play with him. Problem comes when he doesn’t know how handle rejection and looses control of his rage. When he travels to his imaginary world, he meets the Wild Things, which of course represent people and situations from the real world. There is one of the Wild Things named Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini) who is a mirror image of Max. He is wild and has these anger tantrums where he starts breaking everything. So Max immediately takes a liking to him. And like in many films of this kind, ends up realizing what is wrong with his life and how to work on his problem.

One of the most interesting aspects of this film are the creatures, which were done by Jim Henson’s creature shop. Those Jim Henson guys are experts at making big hairy creatures that look like giant stuffed animals. The Jim Henson guys were perfect for this; with the Wild Things they created these creatures that bring to mind Ludo, the big dumb hairy creature that accompanies Jennifer Connely in Labyrinth (1986) or the giant guys from Jim Henson’s excellent childrens show Fraggle Rock. Big hairy lovable looking creatures. The only thing is that these Wild Things aren’t necessarily so cuddly and cute; they actually want to eat Max at one point! The creatures are certainly interesting to look at. Consequently, they are also interesting to listen to, the creatures were voiced by the likes of James Gandolfini, Paul Dano and Forest Whitaker.

Spike Jonze as a director did a fine job with this movie. He managed to make a movie that’s not overtly sugar coated like some children fantasy movies can be. This movie deals with the dark side of Max. Max sees himself in some of these creatures, and the creatures are wild and violent at times. But at the same time, the island where these creatures live is an extremely beautiful place. The movie does a fine balance between dark and light. There’s a scene where the creatures and Max run to the edge of a cliff and start howling together (something that the creatures love to do) and the scene is like these creatures basking in the glory of nature and all its splendor. At the same time they are celebrating being together and alive, same as any family should. I loved the symbolisms in the film. The creatures like to sleep in piles, one on top of the other in extreme togetherness, representing the togetherness that a family should have. So the film isn’t all gloom and doom, it actually has a very positive vibe to it in spite of dealing with the dark side of a child’s psyche. Where the Wild Things Are also reminded me of one of Spike Jonze’s music videos for Weezer called “Island in the Sun” which was filled with scenes of the sun shinning and the band playing with a bunch of exotic animals. For a movie that was deemed to dark by studio heads, this movie is filled with lots of sunlight and beauty.

Spike Jonze, spending some time on the set with actor Max Records

If you ask me, this movie goes down as a great childrens movie. Right up there with the great fantasy flicks like Labyrinth, Pans Labyrinth, The Wizard of Oz and others of its ilk.

Rating: 4 out of 5