Suburbicon

First Hit: A poorly conceived attempt to be relevant, darkly funny, and mysterious.

I generally like films written by Joel and Ethan Coen. I've previously enjoyed films directed by George Clooney. Actors Matt Damon and Julianne Moore always make roles better than they are written so I was looking forward to seeing this film. However, the mixture of this group didn’t resonate as something valid or comprehensive.

There were out-loud funny moments in a dark humor sort of way, but most of the time, the lack of information to string the film together had me a bit flummoxed.

Based in 1959, planned clean beautiful communities were sprouting up all over the United States. In Suburbicon there are two major stories. One, is about a black family moving into this all white neighborhood and how they are treated. Horribly is the answer to this part of the film. The second is how does Gardner Lodge (Matt Damon) respond to being pressured to repay an outstanding loan? Not very well.

The set up to the neighborhood of Suburbicon is that this is an upcoming proactive modern community that allows everyone to be prosperous. Everyone can live there, unless you have a different skin color. That's what Mr. and Mrs. Myers (Leith M. Burke and Karimah Westbrook respectively) quickly find out. Each night neighbors gather around their home and shout racist epithets at the home. Each night, the crowd gets larger. And the Myers simply, elegantly, and clearly ignore the rants.

In a symbolic scene in the grocery store, the store manager stands behind the checker and tells Mrs. Myers that each item she wants to buy is $20.00, is pointedly outrageous; “bread? $20.00, Milk? $20.00.” Instead of raising her voice and acting out, with a smile on her face, she leaves the store to go shop somewhere else.

The upside of this aspect of the story is that the Myers' son Andy (Tony Espinosa) strikes up a great friendship with Nicky (Noah Jupe) who is Gardner and his wife Rose’s (Julianne Moore) son. They ride bikes together and play catch with a baseball together. Both boys are surviving their own private hell.

Gardner’s story is more elusive in that we don’t know why he’s in debt. We are introduced to him and his wife Rose, who is in a wheelchair, as they are being shaken down in their house by loan enforcers. His wife dies from the incident but we later learn that Gardner may have something to do with the death, just like he had something to do with her being in a wheelchair. Margaret (also Julianne Moore), who is Rose's twin sister is visiting them and helping to manage their household.

The way Gardner deals with the death of his wife, the inclusion of his wife's sister into the household, the moralistic and societal way he tells his son that he’s too young to understand what is going on in the family and the world, and how the violence is used to resolve his issues, just didn’t work well. There were too many unanswered questions nor was there a clear plot line.

There seemed to be an element of this film that was trying to be cutesy while also being edgy and it just didn’t work. Many of the sets were nice to see as they reminded me of growing up in that time period. I didn’t think the two major stories were integrated very well and certainly weren't well matched to make it work holistically.

Damon was OK and it wasn’t his acting that failed, it was mostly the script and Clooney’s poor direction of the poorly conceived script. Moore was OK in both roles and I thought the best part was her being interviewed by the insurance investigator. Westbrook was probably brought the best acting to the film. She embodied the role of smiling through the racist actions against her and her family. Jupe did a really good job as the son trying to figure out why his mom is gone, his dad is fighting people, and his aunt Margaret is living with them. Espinosa was very good as the neighbor kid who was attempting to put the racism behind him and just be a young kid. The Coen’s script had some bones but it wasn’t a good final product. Clooney just didn’t have a handle on a unifying theme and objective point to this film.

Overall:  Not worth the time to see it.

Hail, Ceasar!

First Hit:  An odd film and despite the star power, lacks being interesting let alone good.

You’ve got Josh Brolin, George Clooney, Ralph Fiennes, Scarlett Johansson, Tilda Swinton, Frances McDormand, Channing Tatum, and Jonah Hill, yet the only part that stood out for me was Jonah Hill as Joseph Silverman, the finance guy.

Brolin as Eddie Mannix runs a Hollywood studio and is in the middle of a career crisis. Clooney is the bankable star who gets kidnapped for money. Fiennes plays a highly respected and temperamental film director. Johansson plays a single pregnant star who does swimming films (think Esther Williams). Tilda Swinton plays two roles, twin opposing gossip columnists Thora and Thessaly Thacker. Frances McDormand as film editor extraordinary. Tatum was a dancing (think Astaire or Kelly) actor. The story is about the trials of running a studio, the communist edge of the 50’s, the behind the scenes stories about actors. There were some funny parts (Hill and Johansson).

Brolin was OK as the studio head, who had no time for his family. Clooney was fair as the kidnapped star who was highly influenced by his kidnappers. Fiennes was very good and the director stuck with an actor who couldn’t act. Johansson was mediocre as the swimming star. Swinton was good in her two roles. Tatum was OK as the dancing communist. Hill, in his minor role, was for me, the best part of the film. Joel and Ethan Coen both wrote and directed this film and I’m sure it sounded better as a discussion than written or filmed.

Overall:  Mediocre film through and through.

Academy Awards - The Oscars

OK, here we are again celebrating another year of film going. Some strong films this year, films that broke box office records, and films that failed. Here are my choices for the following awards and some thoughts around some of them.

• Best Actor - Nominees are:  Bryan Cranston (Trumbo), Matt Damon (The Martin), Leonardo DiCaprio (The Revenant), Michael Fassbender (Steve Jobs) and Eddie Redmayne (The Danish Girl). This is not as strong a field as it was last year. The obvious missing actors are Tom Hanks (Bridge of Spies) maybe because he made it look so easy, and Steve Carell who was so quirky and interesting you just wanted to see what he was going to do next. Both of these were strong performances, yet not in my top two of this listing. Although Cranston's  performance was good, I didn't like the character nor the interpretation. Fassbender was very good, however this role had been done too many times in the last two years. I did not see The Danish Girl therefore I don't have an opinion. However, Damon and DiCapiro's performances were fantastic - beyond amazing. I loved each of them. My guess is that DiCaprio will win the Oscar.
• Best Actress  - Nominees are:  Cate Blanchett (Carol), Brie Larson (Room), Jennifer Lawrence (Joy), Charlotte Rampling (45 Years), and Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn). This is a strong category although I didn't see 45 Years, the others were great. I also see a missing person from this list and that would be Rooney Mara in Carol as well. Between Cate and Rooney I would have picked Mara because I felt as though her evolution through the film was a more powerful statement. However, she is in the Supporting Actress listing. Out of the nominated list, it comes down to two outstanding performances: Ronan and Blanchett. Lawrence's performance was really good and I was fully engaged with her character, however it did not have the power of Ronan or Blanchett's. Larson was also very strong, however so much of her performance is linked to Jacob Tremblay the young boy that it took away from her own performance. For me I'd like Ronan to get this Oscar in an amazing performance in a  wonderful film.
• Best Supporting Actress  - Nominees are:  Jennifer Jason Leigh (The Hateful Eight), Rooney Mara (Carol), Rachel McAdams (Spotlight), Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl), and Kate Winslet (Steve Jobs). As I mentioned earlier I think Mara's performance belongs in the Best Actress category. I didn't see The Danish Girl so I'm making my pick without full knowledge of the selections. However, without Mara I think the most interesting and performance is Leigh's. It was so hidden and yet over the top that I was mesmerized each time she opened her mouth and/or the camera focused on her. These are the top two and in my view either probably deserves the Oscar.
• Best Supporting Actor  - Nominees are:  Christian Bale (The Big Short), Tom Hardy (The Revenant), Mark Ruffalo (Spotlight), Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies), and Sylvester Stallone (Creed). The missing performance is Jacob Tremblay's in Room. He was phenomenal. But this is probably one of the strongest fields in years, so someone had to be left off the list. They were all great and my favorites out of this list are Rylance and Stallone. Rylance had such a small role yet it was so much impact on the film that it was unforgettable. However Stallone will get it for both this performance and his body of work as Rocky Balboa.
• Best Cinematography  - Nominees are:  Ed Lachman (Carol), Robert Richardson (The Hateful Eight), John Seale (Mad Max: Fury Road), Emmaual Lubezki (The Revenant), and Roger Deakins (Sicario). Although Mad Max: Fury Road was big it did not grab me because I thought the film was more on the mindless side. Carol was elegantly shot and fully deserves the nomination. However, The Hateful Eight and The Revenant are over the top amazingly beautiful and powerful. The Hateful Eight deserves a lot of credit for doing so much in one room, while The Revenant wins this award for how shots were made and the perspective by which they were made. The winner - pick.
• Best Adapted Screenplay  - Nominees are:  Charles Randolph and Adam McKay (The Big Short), Nick Hornby (Brooklyn), Phyllis Nagy (Carol), Drew Goddard (The Martian), and Emma Donoghue (Room). Wow, what a list. All great picks. Any one of these could win in any given year. However, my final two would be Randolf and McKay for The Big Short and Hornby for Brooklyn. In the end I'm picking Nick Hornby for Brooklyn because it was a great screenplay and a wonderful film to watch.   
• Best Original Screenplay  - Nominees are:  Matt Charman and Ethan & Joel Coen (Bridge of Spies), Alex Garland (Ex Machina), Pete Docter, Meg LeFauve, and Josh Cooley (Inside Out), Josh Singer and Tom McCarthy (Spotlight), and Jonathan Herman and Andrea Berloff (Straight Outta Compton). Another strong set of contenders. All very different films. In the end I think I like Ex Machina and Spotlight as powerful screen plays for very different reasons. One reflects a horrible set of acts by Catholic Priests and the other about the obsessiveness and controlling nature of technology. In the end I select Josh Singer and Tom McCarthy for Spotlight.
• Best Director  - Nominees are:  Adam McKay (The Big Short), George Miller (Mad Max: Fury Road), Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (The Revenant), Lenny Abrahamson (Room), and Tom McCarthy (Spotlight). Missing are:  Ridley Scott (The Martian), J.J. Abrams (Star Wars: The Force Awakens), Todd Haynes (Carol), Quentin Tarantino (The Hateful Eight) and John Crowley (Brooklyn). To me this is the most messed up nominee listing. How is Max: Fury Road better directed than all my exceptions? It isn't and doesn't hold a candle to them. Also given my exceptions, I think Abrahamson's delivery is not quite there. Anyway, from the nominee list, I would say it is between McKay, Inarritu, and McCarthy. In the end I'd select McKay (with McCarthy a very close second) because he did the most to keep the film on track. Inarritu had too many long wistful shots. However this listing of nominees is really flawed.
• Best Picture  - Nominees are:   The Big Short, Bridge of Spies, Brooklyn, Mad Max: Fury Road, The Martian, The Revenant, Room, and Spotlight. Missing here is Carol and The Hateful Eight. Mad Max: Fury Road is nowhere in the league as these other nominees and, in my opinion, doesn't deserve to be listed. I simply was board stiff by the one long chase film filled with foolish philosophy. It is hard for me to pick as I loved "Brooklyn" as being a wonderfully executed nostalgic story. I thought "The Big Short" told a compelling story of how our economy tanked. "The Martian" was beautifully delivered and Damon made it happen. "Bridge of Spies" and "Spotlight" are both amazing stories about something that really happened. I was totally engaged and felt they delivered in all ways; education and story. The only thing I didn't like about "The Revenant" was that there were too many long scenic only shots which took away from the story.  In the end, of the listed I'd like to see "The Martian" win but can also see the others winning except Mad Max.

Some other thoughts about films this year:

• "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" was amazingly edited.
• "Ex Machina's" visual effects were very strong and so were scenes in "The Revenant".
• "Anomalisa" and "Inside Out" were both amazing Animated Feature films.
• "Carol" had perfectly detailed costumes and overall set design.
• "Writings on the Wall" the song for "Spectre" was dreadful.

Note: I'll be England sitting in silence for 30 days starting late next week. I may be able to see one more film before I go, but otherwise I won't be seeing any films or posting any reviews until the first week of March.

Thank you for viewing my site.

Bridge of Spies

First Hit:  The difference between Spielberg films and other director films is always attention detail through craftsmanship – this film excels in every way.

When a film supplies and fulfills details around my childhood memories and does it with great storytelling, I’m hooked.

I remember the cold war. We use to practice diving under our desks and covering our necks with our hands in case “The Bomb” went off. We were told, we’d see the flashing light of the bomb in LA (I grew up in Southern California) and when we did see the flash we were to "drop, duck and cover".

The way Spielberg crafts the era and the story of three men, Rudolf Able (Mark Rylance) accused Russian spy, high altitude U2 surveillance pilot Francis Gary Powers (Austin Stowell) and lawyer turned negotiator James B. Donovan (Tom Hanks) was sublime.

The director takes his time, gives the audience relevant information, and then crafts a story that is interesting and fully engaging. Every scene is crafted to share an emotion or add to the audience’s understanding of story. The CIA agent following Able when the camera moves around the car to introduce the suspicion – perfect.

The story is about how an insurance lawyer, Donovan, is hired by the US Government to first defend Able in the US Court of law and then he’s recruited to negotiate a prisoner swap. The swap was for Powers who was a U2 pilot that was shot down over Russia. Because we were in the midst of the cold war with Russia neither government would acknowledge that they were talking with each other.

The feel of East Berlin, where the swap happened, was perfectly dreary. The relevant side story was that Donovan wanted an additional person included in the trade, Fredrick Pryor (Will Rogers). In this side story Pryor, a student, had gotten caught on the wrong side of the wall and was being used by the East Germans to make a name for their government. It also showed the strength of conviction of Donovan to get what he wanted, to be a humanitarian and how good he was at negotiating.

My favorite line spoken a few times in the film was:  “Would it help?”

Hanks was superb. He’ll probably be nominated for an award during award season. I would also say that Rylance was equally superb in his supporting role. He’s perfect and his ability to portray a subdued man on a mission who can be trusted is brilliant. Stowell was good as the U2 pilot. Matt Charman, Ethan and Joel Coen wrote a compelling, interesting engaging story, but it was Spielberg’s direction through clear vision that makes this film absolutely great.

Overall:  This is a perfect slice of history presented in a way that is simply great storytelling.

Unbroken

First Hit:  Unfortunately this film only focused on his suffering.

In many ways the story of Louis Zamperini’s life is too big and expansive for the screen.

This left Angelina Jolie with having to make a choice of what to present. She chose to share little of his joys and more on how he suffered. The major part of this film takes place while he is a prisoner of the Japanese in a POW camp located in Japan.

The punishment dished out Corporal/Sergeant Watanabe (the “bird” as prisoners called him) was relentless. He feigned niceness and respect from time to time, and then would turn around and punish Louis in horrible ways. The way this film was shot, broad vistas when in the plane or on the life raft to microscopic views of the torture. This isn’t to say that what Louis endured was brave beyond compare and therefore this is a major part of his life.

However, in the end, I was relieved that the film was over and very happy to read the post-closing credits and pictures of him, smiling and joyful – something that didn’t exist much, if at all, in the film.

Jack O’Connell as Louis was very good, but I felt as if something was missing within him that would make the story more real. Domhnall Gleeson as Pilot Phil was good as his friend and fellow survivor. Takamasa Ishihara was very good as Watanabe and provided a sick view of a torturer. Joel and Ethan Coen wrote this script, which was effective but very dark and one-sided towards gruesome punishment. Jolie’s direction was very pointed to the pain Zamperini suffered to the point of overload. Where was the man who was joyfully smiling at the end of the film.

Overall:  I felt that this film showed only a partial view of an amazing man.