Showing posts with label Naomi Watts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Naomi Watts. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

St. Vincent


St. Vincent - 102min - PG13

This year’s films seem to be missing the emotional spark that lets you dive deep into the story. This movie should have been exactly what I needed. It's a very warm story that gives us a reminder that we need to not judge people. This move has all the elements for a green light film but falls sort of making a connection. They get a yellow light for the effort.

Oliver (Jaeden Lieberher) and his mother Maggie (Melissa McCarthy) move next door to the world’s largest curmudgeon, Vincent (Bill Murray). Being tight on options, Maggie asks if Vincent can watch Oliver after school as she is a single mom with a job that keeps her late. He agrees and takes care of Oliver. Hummm, that’s a stretch. Better to say he takes Oliver around with him everywhere he goes.

They go to the track and to the nursing home where Vincent’s wife lives and to the strip club where he visits his “girlfriend” Daka (Naomi Watts). They go everywhere really. Their exploits are documented by Maggie’s husband, David (Scott Adsit) and used against her to gain joint custody of Oliver. During their journey, Oliver gets an assignment to find someone who has the qualities of a saint, and he picks Vincent

Some movies you can tell are going to be aiming for the heart strings. This is one of them. As I have stated before and if you follow me you know I am a sap when it comes to movies. I am an easy cry. I never had an emotional connection to the characters. It was a really great show with the right characters and with some really good performances but lacked spirit.

There seemed to be a lot of elements that bogged down the story. I think the subplot where Vincent had a stroke really was almost too much to add with the gambling debts. The other problem was the neatness of how everything was wrapped up. I was thinking through the film that there is not going to be an easy way out of this mess. It felt like the ending was forced and wasn't a natural resolution to his problems.

The underlying message not to judge others is solid. We are never fully understanding a person’s journey so we shouldn't make assumptions about people. In the story, Vincent plays a completely unlikable character, but he is a product of the choices and events in his life. Oliver is forced to spend time with him so he gets to see him in a different light. Oliver gives us the fresh perspective that we need to see past the gruff nasty exterior.

It's hard to give this movie a lower than green light because it is was defiantly trying very hard. The failures of the story were just too much to cram into the amount of time. They were trying way too hard to make the differences in Vincent noticeable. The only real connection is between Vincent and Oliver.

Chris O’Dowd needs to get more work. He is absolutely hilarious in this role as an unflappable Priest who assigned the class the task of finding Saints among us. The interaction between him and Maggie is outstanding. Overall the Director/ Writer / Producer (Theodore Melfi) did a good job of making a clean movie, He just needs to eliminate some of the distractors and he could have a really great product. He did an interview and said he doesn’t like to get his stink on a film. It is a stink free film, but it does need a stronger voice.


What movie have you seen that was just short of making a connection? 

Monday, December 15, 2014

Birdman



Birdman - 119min - R


This movie has me in conflict on how to review it. My film student brain loves the way it was filmed and appreciates the artistry of the scenes and the performances. The regular viewer brain finds it hard to connect with the characters. If I can draw from an automotive analogy, this is a really nice car that has a dark and depressing destination. The fight in my head--very much like the one in Michael Keaton's head--makes me land on a solid yellow light.

Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) starred in the series Birdman twenty years ago. He hasnt done much with his life so he tries to jumpstart his career by directing and starring in a Broadway play. His daughter, Sam (Emma Stone), is a production assistant who is just out of rehab. His girlfriend, Laura (Andrea Riseboriugh), and Broadway newcomer Lesley (Naomi Watts) need a stand in for a recently vacated role. Lesley gets her friend Mike (EdwardNorton) to fill in but he causes problems as he is hard to get along with though he is brilliant on stage. The story focuses on the stress Riggan is under because he has poured everything into this production.

Not everyone will appreciate the labor that went into filming this picture. The film was shot to make it look like we are flying through the picture in one long take. There are obvious cut points in the film but they blend them together masterfully. The difficulty with filming in this fashion is the actors need to be spot on. If you have a six min take and one of the performers misses a cue or flubs a line, the crew has to set up from square one, especially if its a moving scene across the set and through another room. That is an incredibly challenging feat of filmmaking. The best part is they pulled it off. It was something the film geeks will Sqeeee over but its done subtly enough to not make it a distraction.  

The performances were really good but I didn't make a connection with any of them. I realize that the whole point of the film was to take a closer look at people in a rough time and place in their lives and how they are all struggling to keep afloat but it was hard to watch the level of anxiety portrayed. I walked out of the theater in a funk. As I think about it maybe it did connect with me emotionally, I was feeling their desperation and it made me depressed.

As a viewer I wasn't entertained and that is the bottom line. There were choices with the end that made me question what I was watching. I have stated before that the quickest way to lose me is to not play by the rules you set up for me. If you set the rules I will follow your story to the other end of the galaxy and different dimensions. The end made me shrug and say "Huh" and walked out.


To sum up I appreciate the film but didn't care for the ride. The best part of the journey is the going but the destination also needs to be worth the trip. What films have impacted you in such a way as to make you blue? 

Monday, December 5, 2011

J Edgar



J Edgar – 137 min - R

J. Edgar Hoover is a unique historical character that can be easily overlooked. He was credited with developing the FBI and organizing criminal investigations to include forensic investigation. With all of the good things he did for us, he was also a focus of scandal and a prime example of how absolute power corrupts absolutely. He was rumored to have surveillance on many political figures and would use them as blackmail material.

Does the movie, J. Edgar, mirror the facts of his life? I can’t say I don’t know more than what I have read on Wikipedia. Is this an intresting movie? Yes, but from a purely academic standpoint. Clint Eastwood has an eye for making movies with a clear and balanced point of view. This movie is one to see from a historical standpoint. Interesting but not entertaining, this move is a yellow light and I will present my evidence in the following review.

J. Edgar Hoover (Leonardo DiCaprio) grew up with his mother, Anna Marie Hoover (Dame Judi Dench). As an eager new employee at the Department of Justice, he was given the chance to develop the new FBI after his participation in a successful raid on some Communist dissidents. Using this opportuniy he grew his department and his influence. He used his resources to gather information on political figures to use in his “Confidential, Private” files with friend and partner, Associate Director Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer). There are rumors that they were more than just friends, as the heir of Hoover’s estate some believe that Tolson was his domestic partner.

The story takes us from the past and the future and someplace in the middle while J. Edgar is dictating his story to a number of writers he uses to document the history of the FBI. He tells the revolving scribes about his many high adventures in the FBI, in cluding details of his acts of heroism and the hard work of starting the system we now know today as the FBI.

Most of it was fabricated to make him and his bureau more entertaining to sell some of the comic books he was advisor on. He felt that American youth was in love with the gangsters in the movies and he decided to wage a war of image and made the G-man the new focus in film and media. Unfortunately, it was at the cost of the reality of many of the things he claimed to have done.

Clint Eastwood does make a great picture. He has a great eye for capturing the figures form history that can be easily overlooked. He reminds me of the correspondents on This American Life. They all take ordinary things and make them into an interesting story. This movie looks great but it has a History Channel documentary feel.

The subject of this film has some interesting points but they seem to be overshadowed by the overall creepiness of the man behind the power and his unchecked and corrupt rule of the FBI. Eastwood’s choice of blending the past and the future did not seem to work as well in this film. It was hard to follow where we were at in the story. Is this the past? The present? Is this him reminiscing? Or are we seeing the events unfold?

Spolier Warrning!!! Click here to submit to an FBI Review!!!


DiCaprio does a great job of wearing this persona like a costume. I forgot that it was him at a few points in the film. The age make up did a great job of transforming him through the story. He seems to be very vulnerable when his mother dies. Instead of being free from her tyranny he seems to be completely lost.

Helen Gandy (Naomi Watts) is fiercely loyal secretary and loves him in a familial way. Even up to the end she keeps J. Edgar’s secrets and shreds his personal and confidential files. I wonder it was out of loyalty or out of knowing how dangerous a weapon those files were, or both.

Those files were the only thing that saved him from the winds of political change. I can see where he needed to have them to keep control of his bureau. it also seemed like they became something more than just an insurance policy. They seemed to be a drug he couldn’t give up.

What historical figure should Clint Eastwood focus his next movie on? Who do you find interesting and under publicized?