Spy (7/10): The name's Cooper, Susan Cooper.

“Can you imagine me as a spy?“

It’s a safe bet to say that Melissa McCarthy is at her comedic best when working alongside writer and director, Paul Feig (Bridesmaids and The Heat), so if you were worried about her recent failings in Identity Theft and Tammy, fear not because Spy delivers plenty of laughs and interesting action sequences. McCarthy can easily be discarded for repeating the same gags, but she proves that when given an intelligent script she can continue to deliver strong comedic roles. It helps that Feig is a fan of the spy genre and he cleverly manages to balance the action set pieces with the comedic moments. Spoof films have grown tiresome over the past years, but when done correctly they can still be entertaining and Spy is such a film. The film didn’t open strong with me, but it eventually grew on me as McCarthy’s character was empowered. 

In Spy, McCarthy plays the under confident Susan Cooper, a CIA analyst who serves as the eyes and ears of one of the agency’s top field agents, Bradley Fine (Jude Law). It becomes evident from the opening sequence that Fine is a spoof of James Bond, but I felt those moments a bit forced. When a mission goes wrong and the identities of all of the spies in the agency have been compromised, Elaine Crocker (Allison Janny), the agency’s stern boss decides to send Susan to Europe to uncover a conspiracy involving an arms dealer who is trying to sell a nuclear bomb to terrorists. The elegant dealer, Rayna Boyanov, is hilariously played by Rose Byrne who is convincing as one of the main villains in the film. Susan’s mission in Europe is compromised however, when the aggressive agent Rick Ford (Jason Statham) dismisses orders to stay clear from the site and decides to infiltrate the location despite having his cover blown. The interplay between Susan and Rick and between Susan and Rayna are by far the highlight of the film as these actors play off each other extremely well. 

Despite some hilarious scenes involving Statham, McCarthy, and Byrne, Spy misses some marks with a couple of characters. Jude Law is an incredibly talented actor, but I wasn’t a fan of his role here. He might be spoofing James Bond, but it’s Statham who delivers the most laughs poking fun of the macho character he has played during most of his career. It was great to see him back in a comedic role after his initial collaborations with Guy Rithcie (Snatch and Lock, Stock, and two Smoking Barrels). The cameo with 50 Cents was also quite horrendous and forced. Miranda Hart also has an important supporting role as one of Susan’s best friends in the agency, but I wasn’t a particular fan of her character and most of her jokes fell flat. Despite missing the mark at times, Spy is still hilarious when it centers on McCarthy, Statham, and Byrne. The feminist message might be too loud and obvious, but it works extremely well for a genre film where females are often overlooked and reduced to desk jobs. Spy also succeeds at delivering genuine suspense as we follow the hero trying to solve the case. There are memorable action sequences that take place in a kitchen and on a private jet that are incredibly entertaining, and it’s not something you see in spoof films. Spy balances the comedy very well and it delivers the action that espionage films have us accustomed to. I had a lot of fun with it.  


>

Black Sea (5/10): A submarine thriller that fails to deliver on the thrills.

“I lost my family because of this job.”

A thriller that fails to keep me at the edge of my seat is always a bad sign, especially when it’s from a director like Kevin Macdonald (The Last King of Scotland) whose work I’ve appreciated in the past (with the exception of The Eagle). I could forgive the lack of thrills if at least there was some investment in character development, but other than Jude Law’s lead character there wasn’t any depth in the rest of the cast. To make matters worse, there are several characters that seem to make terrible and unreasonable decisions. Everything seems to go wrong for the misfit crew members of the submarine during their quest in search for gold in the Black Sea and they don’t make matters easier by making dubious decisions. There is so much at stake for these men, but considering there was very little effort put to give them some depth I didn’t really care if they survived or not. Macdonald tries to make this a claustrophobic film about desperate men who are forced to these extreme conditions because they’ve been wronged by their employers, but it is hard to care for these people or even root for them and that is perhaps the main reason why I never felt the tension. The greatest dangers they face are themselves rather than the typical external conditions because there is a lot of suspicion and division. 

Jude Law is Robinson, a submarine Captain who has recently been fired by his employers after 30 years. One night at a bar, his friend tells him about a sunken treasure rumored to be lost somewhere in the Black Sea. Apparently during the Second World War, the Russians were sending Hitler several tons of gold to pay him off so that the Nazi’s wouldn’t invade their territory. The treasure never arrived and Robinson’s friend seems to know where it is. Funded by a wealthy businessman named Lewis (Tobias Menzies) he forms a crew to go in search of the gold. Of course since the gold is rumored to be under Russian waters he must hire several Russian crew members, which of course will affect the interpersonal relations between them. He also hires Fraser (Ben Mendelssohn), one of the best divers he knows although he is completely unreliable and Tobin (Bobby Schofield) a young teenager who Robinson has taken under his wings. Lewis also sends his personal assistant, Daniels (Scoot McNairy) to make sure they report all the gold to him, but he has no experience in a submarine and suffers from claustrophobia. It is implied from the very beginning that the misfit crew members aren’t going to get along too well, but if they want to find the gold they must learn to. 

I don’t know why the film failed to deliver that sense of tension that the trailers promised. I just never found the characters interesting. Jude Law has a strange Scottish accent that I honestly found distracting. Mendelssohn is a terrific actor, but his character makes so many unreasonable decisions in this film that it is hard to understand his motivations. Scoot McNairy is given the role of the nagging character who is always worried about everything. He is in charge of passing on the fear to the audience because everything he worries about ends up happening. His character is simply here in order for us to understand what is going on because he is the new guy who they have to explain things to. I simply wasn’t a huge fan of this thriller and I think that it had potential to be much better. It was tedious at times and I didn’t enjoy the ride as much as I thought I would. The cinematography however was solid and Macdonald does a great job of creating a claustrophobic atmosphere.    

My Review: I Heart Huckabees (5/10)

"The universe is an infinite sphere whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere."

Having seen David O. Russell's last three films which amassed him several Oscar nominations, I wanted to go back to one of his earlier projects that I missed. I had heard mix reviews about I Heart Huckabees, but I went into it with high expectations considering his latest films blew me away. I was really disappointed with the film despite the talented cast because the premise didn't appeal to me and the comedy didn't work for me either. The film centers on philosophical elements such as existentialism and nihilism, but it is treated in such a way that it seemed as if they were making fun of these theories without actually being funny. It isn't as deep as it is trying to be and despite the style that David O. Russell brings to the film it never managed to engage me. It's as if Russell simply mixed all these philosophical ideas in a blender and the result was I Heart Huckabees. The cast made the film a bit more tolerable considering they all bring their unique charisma, but the story simply didn't work for me. It was an annoying and frustrating experience where some of the comedic moments felt forced and unauthentic. Despite trying to be unique and quirky it was a forgettable experience and by far my least favorite film from David O. Russell. The cast put a lot of energy into the film, but it seems to be directed all over the place and the result was a rather pointless and uneven movie. I can see why some people fell in love with this existential comedy, but it simply didn't appeal to me due to the absurd premise. It is no secret that I'm not a big fan of surreal films, but I have enjoyed some when they at least have some narrative coherence. It wasn't the case with I Heart Huckabees.

The cast in this movie is extremely talented, and we have come to expect this coming from a Russell film because every actor in Hollywood is lining up to work with him. Jason Schwartzman is the sort of actor who is perfect for these quirky films. He is at his best working with Wes Anderson, and here he seems to be playing one of his characters. His chemistry with Jude Law and Mark Wahlberg was great. Perhaps the reason why I didn't hate this film was due to their performance because they elevated the material for me. Wahlberg had the funniest scenes and the only time I laughed in this film was with several of his anger outbursts. Naomi Watts and Lily Tomlin also delivered strong performances. Dustin Hoffman was a bit too quirky and his character was actually inspired by Russell's philosophy professor (Uma Thurman's father). I imagine he was highly exaggerated because his character was really out there. Isla Fisher and Jonah Hill have small cameos in this film and it was sort of a highlight for me to see them on screen. This was Hill's first feature film and no one would have imagined how successful he has become (two Oscar nominations for his recent work). As profound as the film tries to be I really don't feel like it has transcended and it should be ranked amongst Russell's weakest films over time. 

My Review: Gattaca (7/10)

“I got the better end of the deal. I only lent you my body. You lent me your dream.”

In Andrew Niccol’s directorial debut we are invited to imagine a world where humans are categorized according to their genetic make-up. In this world, genetic engineering is not only a possibility, but a very common thing. Society now classifies people according to their DNA, and social classes are determined by it. It is not a future too hard to envision considering over history we have categorized people according to the color of their skin, their race, or their gender. Niccol creates an interesting sci-fi premise by using this sort of allegory of our society and combining it with some action and romance. I have yet to see Niccol’s Lord of War, but from what I’ve seen his debut film has been his best. He had an interesting cast to work with as well. Ethan Hawke plays the lead role, Vincent Freeman, who was born with inferior genes and therefore not expected to live long. He must settle for unimportant jobs, and no matter how hard he tries, he is unable to achieve his dream of traveling to space. Those jobs are only available for humans with superior DNA. Jude Law plays a supporting role as Jerome Murrow, a man born with perfect genes, but after suffering an accident he is left paraplegic. Vincent assumes Jerome’s identity and by deceiving DNA testings he is able to follow his dream and is assigned on a space mission. It’s an engaging premise despite some flaws, but it is much more intelligent than some recent sci-fi Niccol films.

Ethan Hawke gives a solid performance, but he doesn’t really stand out here like he has in some of his other films. The best thing about Gattaca is its sci-fi futuristic premise which manages to thrill and keep the audience in suspense. Jude Law doesn’t add much to the story, but he is always an interesting presence. Uma Thurman plays Hawke’s love interest and gives the plot a romantic side. Her chemistry with Hawke is what makes the film emotionally engaging, because without her Vincent isn’t really engaging on his own. The film succeeds thanks to its strong narrative (written by Niccol himself) and the way it manages to adapt current prejudices in society to a future we don’t want to look forward to. It gets its point across of cautioning us and delivering meaning in a similar way that classic fairy tales did when our mothers read us the stories when we were kids. It has become a classic for some over the years. It’s not among my favorite films, but it was an enjoyable ride and i’m glad I finally got around to watching it.

My Review: Dom Hemingway (5/10)

"Property is a relative term for a thief."

Jude Law delivers an eccentric and energetic performance in the lead role as Dom Hemingway, a character we might find sort of difficult to root for considering he is so full of himself and spends most of the time ranting on and on about his opinions without ever caring who is listening or paying attention to him. The opening scene where he gives a rather long soliloquy about his penis sets the tone of this bizarre criminal dramedy, but by the end of the film everything that felt unique about it is tossed through the window by giving it a rather conventional sweet spirited Hollywood finale. The way it all of a sudden switches gears on us and gives the lead character a sympathetic heart made me feel even more disconnected towards a film I was already having trouble engaging with. The first hour or so of Dom Hemingway truly felt like a British black neo-noir comedy, but the ending had the traditional Hollywood stamp all over it. I don't want to take credit away from Jude Law however, because he really delivers every line with a lot of energy. He gives a strong performance and some of the dialogue he was given to work with was extremely funny. I really liked the scenes he shared with Richard E. Grant, his best friend and partner in crime, who was also excellent in this film without really having to do much. His quiet presence opposed to the energetic Dom was what I found funny. I also enjoyed Law's scenes with Demian Bichir, who I found to be the most engaging character in the entire film. Dom Hemingway has its moments, but I just didn't really like spending my time with this titular character.

The sharp and witty script was written by director, Richard Shepard (who is known for his direction in The Matador starring Pierce Brosnan).  The film opens with Dom Hemingway (Jude Law), a safe-cracker who has been in prison for the past 12 years, giving a rather long soliloquy, which we'll soon discover is one of his trademarks. One of the guards comes up to him and tells him he is finally going to be released from prison. The first thing that Dom does once he's out is look for Sandy Butterfield (Nick Raggett), and when he finds him he gives him a beating for having slept with his ex-wife. After settling that score, Dom gets back in touch with his former partner in crime, Dickie Black (Richard E. Grant). Dickie mentions to Dom that their former boss, Mr. Ivan Anatoly Fontaine (Demian Bichir), is grateful that he has kept his mouth shut all these years and is indebted to him. Dom's faithfulness to his employer has cost him 12 years in prison which ruined his marriage and his relationship with his daughter Evelyn (Emilia Clarke), so Dom is expecting a big reward. The next day Dom and Dickie head to France to meet with Ivan and collect his share. They celebrate together, but after leaving the party they crash into another vehicle, Dom and Dickie survive, but Ivan doesn't. When Dom returns to Ivan's villa he discovers that his girlfriend, Paolina (Madalina Ghenea), has run off with his money, so Dom is left with nothing as he heads back to the streets of London ranting on and on about his bad luck. Back home we follow Dom as he tries to win his daughter's trust back and find a means to live. 

There is not much more I can say about this film considering there isn't really much of a plot here. Dom Hemingway focuses more on the titular character allowing Jude Law to give an energetic performance. He probably had more fun playing this character than we actually did watching him. There are some witty lines, but they just weren't enough to justify a 90 minute film that feels disjointed. Jude Law reminded me of a much older version of Ewan McGregor in Trainspotting, but the film doesn't really come close to it. It does have that familiar British sense of humor, even though it was directed by an American. Dom Hemingway simply wasn't my cup of tea.

My Review: Side Effects (7/10)

¨Depression is the inability to construct a future.¨

Side Effects is said to be Steven Soderbergh´s last film, but I expect him to come back from retirement sometime in the near future. If he decides this is really going to be his last film then he will go out with a good resume, although I wouldn’t consider Side Effects among his best works, which are Traffic, Ocean´s Eleven, and Out of Sight, but it still is a strong film to go out with it. I actually enjoyed Contagion and Magic Mike more than I did this, but the variety of films that Soderbergh has directed is proof of what a versatile director he really is. His films are all very different from each other and even Side Effects takes a tremendous turn halfway through the movie proving what a great director Soderbergh can be. The movie begins as sort of this drama about pharmaceuticals and depression, but at the midway point it transforms itself completely to a provocative suspenseful thriller. This is not an easy task, but Soderbergh manages to make the transition masterfully. I had a hard time with the pace of the first part of the film, but your patience is really rewarded through the second part where the film picks up completely and has you second guessing everyone´s intentions. None of the characters in this film are likeable, they are all morally ambiguous but somehow we care for what happens to them. My only complaint would have to be that Channing Tatum´s character doesn’t get much depth, but the film really doesn’t focus on him so it is ok. His role could have been played by a nobody and it would have been pretty much the same thing. This is probably one of his weakest performances as of late. Rooney Mara, Jude Law, and Catherine Zeta Jones on the other hand give very strong performances and have us siding for each one of them at different times. This is something only Soderbergh could have pulled off, completely switching the genre of the film halfway through the movie.

This is one of those films that fortunately the trailer doesn’t give away much and that the less you know about the plot the better because the twists are really rewarding. I will describe the plot as brief as possible without giving anything away. Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara) had her world turned upside down when her husband Martin (played by Channing Tatum) was imprisoned for some kind of financial fraud. He was imprisoned for four years and he is finally being released. Emily is trying her best to adapt and make the transition back to her normal life after having decided to wait for him, but she´s finding it very difficult to deal with and is suffering from some sort of severe depression. One day she tries to commit suicide by smashing her vehicle into a concrete wall. She ends up in the hospital being treated for mild injuries and Dr. Jonathan Banks (Jude Law) treats her and makes a psychological evaluation. He decides to let Emily return home after she promises to continue treatment with him several times a week. During the days that follow, Emily continues to struggle with depression and Dr. Banks begins testing some new medication on her since she is struggling with the side effects. He also decides to set an interview with Dr. Victoria Siebert (Catherine Zeta Jones), Emily´s former shrink who treated her during Martin´s time in jail. Somehow Emily begins to experience some strange side effects and something goes terribly wrong putting both Emily and Dr. Banks’ life in the public eye.  

Side Effects may suffer from a very slow opening, but it does get better once the suspense begins. I loved the way in which Soderbergh suck me into the film and had me second guessing everything that was going on. That was what made this film enjoyable because I was prepared to stop watching when we got to the midway point. Jude Law and Rooney Mara were both superb in this film; they gave strong performances and had good characters to work with. The screenplay was also really well written with some great dialogues and fun twists. It was written by Scott Z. Burns who had worked with Steven in the past (Contagion and The Informant). He also is responsible for adapting the screenplay for The Bourne Ultimatum. His filmography is proof of what a talented writer he is, and he doesn’t disappoint here with a very clever and ingenious script. Side Effects is one of those movies that sticks with you and has you thinking for days to come. It is a very rewarding and satisfying film, but I´ve had more fun with other Soderbergh movies.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Anna Karenina (7/10)

¨Anna isn’t a criminal, but she broke the rules! ¨

After the success Joe Wright had last year with his thriller Hannah, he now returns to doing what made him famous: adapting well known romantic period pieces. His collaboration with Keira Knightley in Pride and Prejudice put him in the map. They teamed up again for Atonement with equal success, and now they got together for the third time for the adaptation of Leo Tolstoy´s famous novel. They say that the third time is the charm, but I found this to be their weakest collaboration together despite its four Oscar nominations (Cinematography, Costume Design, Original Score, and Production Design). Wright has had success in the past with these period pieces always receiving nominations for his work in the technical department. This film is a triumph visually with a great production and costume design representing 19^th century Imperialistic Russia. The performances are pretty much alright but no one really stands out here. The film is shot in an experimental way as the narrative seems to be taking place in a theater where actors come in and out of different sets through the stage. It strikes you odd at first, but later you get used to this approach which in a way works because the characters in this story are viewed through a lens in society in a similar way as we view actors performing plays on stage. It was an interesting and original way to make the film in my opinion, but I don’t know if it worked for everyone. The main issue I had with this film is that it was so focused on the beautiful exterior designs that the narrative and characters seemed to lack depth and humanity. Several issues were left out of Tolstoy´s novel, but it’s understandable considering Wright put more emphasis on the relationships than on socio-political ideologies.

The story is set in Imperialistic Russia during the late 19^th century focusing on aristocratic families. Anna Karenina (Keira Knightley), an aristocrat who is married to a senior government official named Alexei Karenin (Jude Law) who is twenty years older than her, decides to travel from St. Petersburg to Moscow to visit her brother, Stiva (Matthew MacFadyen) and convince his wife Dolly (Kelly Macdonald) to forgive him for being unfaithful to her in order to calm the turmoil that his affair stirred up in Moscow society. Stiva is a womanizer, but Anna convinces Dolly to forgive him and stay with him. Dolly´s beautiful sister, Princess Kitty (Alicia Vikander), invites Anna to a ball where she expects Vronsky (Aaron Johnson), a cavalry officer to propose to her. In the meantime a childhood friend of Stiva´s, Levin (Domhnall Gleeson) a passionate but shy landowner who lives in the country, has come to propose to Kitty as well. Kitty is in love with Vronsky so she politely refuses to marry Levin and he returns to the countryside. During the ball, Vronsky and Anna seem to instantly feel attracted towards each other and Vronsky completely ignores Kitty by choosing Anna as his dance partner instead of her. This is when Kitty realizes that Vronsky has never been in love with her, and Anna having such a strong attraction for Vronsky decides to return home to her husband and son before more damage is done. This is just the beginning for Anna´s moral troubles as, Vronsky takes the same train back to Petersburg and confesses his love to her. The two soon share a passionate affair, which Russian society will not forgive.

It must be hard to adapt what is considered to be one of the best novels of all time into a screenplay; and that difficult task was left to Tom Stoppard (Shakespeare in Love). I think that several elements from the novel didn’t translate very well, especially if the viewer wasn’t familiar with the novel. However the story is still so rich and powerful that the film works, although the characters don’t have enough depth as in the novel. Despite the difficulty in adapting the novel I feel the movie did succeed in some ways and makes this film worth the watch. Fans of period pieces will be delighted with the exquisite attention to the costume and production designs. They will also fall for this love affair, a story that has transcended time and space. Despite living in a very different society now, I feel that through paparazzi and gossip magazines we still kind of remain obsessed and judgmental towards Hollywood stars private lives in a similar way as ancient societies gossiped about aristocratic life. I do have to admit that as beautiful as the film might look, it does feel like it is missing a beat to it and will leave you a bit indifferent towards the end.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: Rise of the Guardians (7/10)

¨It is our job to protect the children of the world. For as long as they believe in us, we will guard them with our lives.¨

Rise of the Guardians is the latest animated film brought to us by Dreamworks (the studio that created Shrek, Kung Fu Panda, and How to Train Your Dragon) and directed by Peter Ramsey. This is Ramsey`s first film as a director as he is mostly known for his work as a storyboard artist for films like Fight Club, Men in Black, and Independence Day. Rise of the Guardians is probably not up to par with other Dreamworks projects, but it still manages to be a very entertaining animated film, and one kids will enjoy. The art direction is perhaps the best part of the movie, as the story and characters lack better development. There are a lot of action scenes that the children will enjoy, and plenty of funny moments as well. Rise of the Guardians is a fun movie, it just doesn’t reach the same level How to Train Your Dragon or Kung Fu Panda did. The animated film was adapted by David Lindsay-Abaire from William Joyce`s book. Children will really love this film because it has well known characters and the movie sort of has a Avengers look to it as these heroes assemble together to protect the Earth from a dangerous villain-

Jack Frost (voiced by Chris Pine) is the main character of the story is a mischievous kid who can turn anything into ice with his stick. The only problem is that no one seems to know he exists. The kids all seem to love North (Alec Baldwin) aka as Santa, Tooth (Isla Fisher) aka the Tooth Fairy, Bunny (Hugh Jackman) aka the Easter Bunny, and Sandman, but they don`t know of the existence of Jack Frost. These four guardians protect the children and ensure that their light always shine with amazement and dreams. Jack Frost on the other hand is always fooling around and doesn’t seem to have any responsibility whatsoever, but his life will change when the evil Pitch (Jude Law) begins to threaten the children and scare them off with nightmares. The four guardians discover that they will need the help of Jack Frost in order to protect the kids from this evil nemesis. The dreams and happiness of the children around the world are at stake.

Rise of the Guardians is a pretty inventive film, using these beloved characters from our childhood and turning them into superheroes that not only bring joy to the children in the holidays, but also protect and guard them from the darkness. I had a fun time with this movie, but I don’t think I would want to watch it again. I probably wouldn’t enjoy a sequel either, but nonetheless I had a good time with this animated feature. Kids will probably enjoy this more than adults.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

My Review: Hugo (10/10)

¨Maybe that's why a broken machine always makes me a little sad, because it isn't able to do what it was meant to do... Maybe it's the same with people. If you lose your purpose... it's like you're broken. ¨

Hugo is a beautiful film that works really well as a love letter from Martin Scorsese to all movie buffs, especially those who are fascinated with its history and origins. Hugo is a family film, but Martin introduces a bit of history so that everyone can become familiar with how it began. It`s like a film history lesson made in a very entertaining way. There are several funny scenes that kids will enjoy (mostly the scenes with the inspector chasing after Hugo), while there are also several serious and beautiful moments which serve as a homage to film history. Hugo works as sort of a poem and it is just marvelous to look at and listen to. I loved every second of this movie and every scene was so rich in meaning and just beautiful to look at. The use of 3D in this movie is just spectacular and I think Scorsese has used it better than any other film to date (including Avatar). This is Scorsese’s first film in 18 years that gets a PG rating, it’s his first time working with 3D, and it also is the first time in twelve years that he`s worked without Leonardo Di Caprio. That is a lot of firsts for a film that is done in such a marvelous matter. This is one of the best films of the year and it deserves every single one of its five Oscar wins. The visuals, the sound, the story, and the cast are all excellent in this wonderful movie and it`s really worth the price of admission. By all means pay the extra fee to see this film in 3D because it is well worth it. Scorsese knows his film history lesson and he really pays a beautiful homage to those early films which he has worked so hard to make sure get restored and saved.

The story takes place in a train station in Paris where twelve year old Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) lives on his own hiding and running from the Station Inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen) while making sure all the clocks in the station work. Hugo is on his own because his father (Jude Law) who was a clock maker and worked at a Museum died in a fire. All Hugo has left is a broken automaton that he was trying to fix with his father. Hugo believes that this automata holds a message from his dead father, therefore he works endlessly to try to find the right pieces to fix it. Hugo survives by stealing from the different shoppers in the station. One day he is caught stealing by a toymaker named Georges (Ben Kingsley) who orders him to give him everything he has in his pockets. Georges takes a notepad that Hugo`s father had given him, so Hugo decides to follow the grumpy old man home in order to retrieve his notepad. This is where Hugo meets Georges`s goddaughter, Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz), who befriends Hugo and the two begin to have adventures together. Isabelle promises to get Hugo`s notepad back and helps him finding the missing pieces needed to fix the automaton. Isabelle also introduces Hugo to the world of literature, while Hugo teaches her about cinema. Together they discover the truth about Georges and decide it is about time he stops hiding from the past.

Hugo is based on Brian Selznick`s children book, The Invention of Hugo Cabret, and the screenplay was beautifully adapted by John Logan (who previously worked with Scorsese in The Aviator). Besides being a love letter to the origins of film, the movie also has a very powerful message about finding purpose and meaning in life. Like machines, people can be broken if they don`t know what their true purpose in life is. Every piece in a machine has a specific function that makes everything work, and in the same way every person has a purpose that allows life to continue functioning as planned. I really loved the performance from the two kids in this movie: Butterfield and Grace Moretz. They looked lovely together. Grace Moretz is my favorite young actress and she just has the screen presence and charisma that other actresses don’t have. Ben Kingsley was magnificent in his key role, and so was Christopher Lee. Sacha Baron Cohen was funny as always, and his character served as the comic relief because I imagine many kids getting bored if the film only focused on the Georges character. This is really a great family film and one you should see, especially if you are interesting in the history of films and how it all began. There are several scenes from early films, and I can`t imagine how any true film lover wouldn’t like this wonderful movie. It`s a masterpiece.

    

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

My Review: Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (7/10)

¨Slow and steady wins the race. ¨

How can you go wrong with a movie involving one of the best literary detective characters ever? And if that isn`t enough consider having Robert Downey Jr. playing that part. It seems these two guys were meant to go together (although I guess I can say the same thing for him and Tony Starks). Downey Jr. is just a great actor with a perfect sense of comedic timing. Sherlock Holmes isn`t a great movie, but it`s really a lot of fun. It has plenty of action scenes, interesting characters, and a lot of funny moments. Add Guy Ritchie to the mix and you have the perfect popcorn flick. Sherlock Holmes may not be Snatch or Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels, but it does live up to the original film. This sequel is perhaps a little lighter and easier to follow which allows for a better pace, but it also is much simpler and the plot pretty plain. What makes this movie stand out from other ordinary action films are the actors and the action scenes. Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law have great chemistry together and they share a lot of funny scenes. Jared Harris provided a decent villain who could compete alongside Holmes with his intelligence. Noomi Rapace who really shined in the Swedish Millennium trilogy, doesn`t really stand out in this movie and doesn’t do much since she isn’t given an interesting character. I think she is misused here and it`s too bad because she is really a talented actress. The screenplay written by Michele and Kieran Mulroney is pretty solid. A Game of Shadows is a decent sequel and is a fun movie, but it does have several flaws nonetheless.

We are back in 1891 London right where the first film left us. Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) believes that Professor James Moriarty (Jared Harris) is responsible for a series of bombings across Europe that is threatening world peace. No one else seems to suspect Moriarty is involved and the press believes a group of anarchists are responsible for the explosions so Holmes decides to investigate on his own. Moriarty isn`t pleased to find out Holmes has been disrupting some of his plans. Irene (Rachel McAdams) continues to work for Moriarty delivering certain packages for people who sometimes end up dead, but Holmes gets in the way a couple of times. Meanwhile, Watson (Jude Law) is back visiting Holmes the day before his wedding expecting to celebrate his bachelor`s party, but Holmes has other plans. He has intercepted a message from Irene for a gypsy named Simza Heron (Noomi Rapace) and wants to find out what the Professor might be planning. At the bar Holmes saves Heron`s life after discovering that Moriarty wants her dead since her brother who works for him has been sending some messages to his sister. Watson doesn`t get the bachelor party he was expecting, but he makes it to the wedding the next morning. The honeymoon will also be interrupted after Moriarty threatens Watson and his wife, so Holmes decides it`s time to save his best friend by throwing Watson`s wife (Kelly Reilly) off the train and having her rescued by his brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry) while he and the doctor try to stop the Professor from beginning a World War.

Like the first film, Sherlock Holmes is very grayish, since that is probably what London looked like during 1891, although this time we get to travel all over Europe as Holmes chases Moriarty from one place to another. The plot is way more simplistic than the first film, but the action sequences are very similar. Ritchie always includes these sort of really fast paces action scenes with a lot of editing (which I`m not a really huge fan of since sometimes it`s hard to follow what`s going on with so much cutting and pasting. There are also some slow motion scenes which are sort of cool looking, but also a bit distracting. I think the best part of the series is the performances from Downey Jr. and Jude Law. This is what makes the franchise work and makes for an entertaining film. The action mixed with the comedy works really well and makes this an enjoyable movie experience. A Game of Shadows isn`t one of the best movies of the years, and it isn`t very memorable either, but it was a lot of fun and much better than other action films. It is very similar to the first film so if you enjoyed that one you will definitely like this sequel, and if you didn`t than I don`t think you will really be interested in seeing this because it follows pretty much the same design. The costume design in this movie is also pretty good, and it was fun to see Robert wearing all sorts of costumes throughout the film. A Game of Shadows is fun and you won`t be disappointed.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/