Still Alice (7/10): Moore's powerful portrayal of a woman suffering from mental illness elevates this film

“So live in the moment I tell myself, it really is all I can do, live in the moment.”

Still Alice is a film that touches delicate subject matters, which sometimes don’t make for a compelling watch. It’s hard to sit down and watch someone suffering from Alzheimer’s Disease and witness their slow deterioration as they gradually lose their mind. Somehow, Julianne Moore gives such a powerful performance that makes this delicate theme worth your while. She carries this film, and elevates it from your standard mental illness movie. Julianne Moore is on the top of her game and following her strong performance in Maps to the Stars, she delivers an authentic portrayal of a woman trying to come to grips with her terrible diagnosis. The film intelligently centers on her in a very authentic way instead of focusing on the rest of her family, like so many films tend to do when the character has hit rock bottom with their mental disease. As the title suggests, the focus is on Alice and her character is fully developed even when she is at her lowest. As an audience we sometimes tend to look away or find ways to ignore people with mental illness, and many films do so by focusing on the reaction of the rest of the family or on the loved ones as if the main character has lost his or her personality. But we are reminded in this film that Alice is still Alice, and Julianne Moore makes sure we come to grips with this. Julianne Moore will probably be nominated for her lead performance here and it wouldn’t surprise me if she wins her first Oscar after her fifth nomination. She is long overdue.

It’s no surprise that this film was delivered in such an authentic way when you take into consideration that the co-director, Richard Glatzer, suffers from ASL and can’t speak himself. If a film wants to deliver a powerful and empathetic film about mental illness, then there is no better way to do so than having someone who is experiencing this first hand. Glatzer, who has co-directed his previous films with Wash Westmoreland, reunites with him once again co-writing the adapted screenplay from Lisa Genova’s novel. I know the issue has been explored many times before and one could assume it enters familiar territory, but Moore’s portrayal of the character makes this film stand out from others. For people who have gone through similar issues with a family member or close friend, Still Alice hits home, but it does so in a compassionate way. It reminds us how fragile our minds and life can be. Having Moore play a highly intelligent linguistic professor makes this all the more shocking as we see how she struggles with the disease. The most emotional moment of the film comes when Moore’s character is giving a touching speech about how she is dealing with the disease. It was a powerful moment in the movie and Moore deserves all the recognition she’s been getting for her performance. Alec Baldwin and Kristen Stewart both give strong supporting performances as well. The entire film rings true in its exploration of mental illness, and the performances never go over the top. Everything about this film rings true despite the delicate themes that are touched. The subject matter might not be appealing for most audiences and they may find the film tedious, but for me it hits home and I found it to be a compelling drama.

Homefront (4/10): Next time let Jason Statham unleash the beast!

"Whatever you're thinking, rethink it."

I can't think of a better actor to deliver a line in a menacing, yet calm way, than Jason Statham does here.  He is one of the contemporary action stars that audiences will go see without hesitation or worrying about the screenplay. The reason is because there are very few actors that can deliver their fight scenes as well as he does. Audiences can feel every punch or kick from Statham without the need of quick edits or shaky camera movements. Unfortunately, the main problem with Homefront is that director Gary Fleder (Kiss the Girls, Runaway Jury) didn't use his action skills as a means to improve the movie, but rather sticked to the usual way of filming action scenes which involve quick edits, extreme close-ups, and shaky camera movements. Why would you have Statham star in your film if you don't take advantage of his well choreographed action scenes? The few action scenes in Homefront could have been shot with a steady camera and less cuts which would have made this a much more enjoyable watch because Statham has a great screen presence and he's always fun to watch. It's too bad that they decided to hold Statham's character back and didn't let him explode on screen. 

Homefront's screenplay was adapted by Sylvester Stallone from Chuck Logan's novel. Sly had intended to use the story for another Rambo sequel, but decided to put it into Statham's hands instead. The premise of the story is very familiar as you have the main character moving to a small town in order to put his violent past behind him (if you think about it, it is what Rambo has always been trying to do, but somehow he's a magnet for violence). Homefront is just another standard action film that follows pretty much every genre convention so it becomes way too familiar to enjoy it as something other than that, but the problem is that Fleder tries to make a more serious film instead of accepting the fact that it is simply a silly and familiar story. By trying to build character and move the story forward, the film loses its steam because it doesn't accomplish neither and ultimately it drags for most of its runtime. The few action scenes aren't entertaining either because of all the hyper editing going on. The film tries to build character and introduce new elements but it doesn't do it well. Take the romance for instance which is introduced, but it never goes anywhere with the subplots it introduces. We know exactly where everything is leading up to so the least you can do is explode Statham's potential instead of underlying his performance. 

Despite the familiar story and the hyper edited action scenes there are some positive elements to Homefront. First of all the cast is solid. Besides Jason Statham, you have James Franco, Kate Bosworth, Winona Ryder, and Frank Grillo starring together. James Franco plays a very different villain. He is a local meth kingpin who goes by the name of Gator. He might be intimidating in his small local town, but we know he is no match for Jason Statham. There isn't a second in this film where we feel Statham's character is in real danger and all we are waiting for is for him to let his rage loose. The small grudges that the people in this town hold are about to be blown out of proportions and they will soon find out that they are completely out of his league. The second positive thing about this film is Kate Bosworth's performance. She is almost unrecognizable in her role here, but she delivers the best performance of the movie. If your a fan, you will want to check this film out, if not then there isn't anything worth your time in Homefront.