While We're Young (7/10): An honest and funny portrayal about aging.

“For the first time in my life I've stopped thinking of myself as a child imitating an adult.”

This is my fourth Noah Baumbach film and up to now I have enjoyed all his movies although I still think Frances Ha is his best possibly because Greta Gerwig is the perfect match for delivering the lines he writes. His screenplays are unique and he writes about things he knows and experiences by living in New York. His characters come out as hipster and snarky most of the time and for that reason it’s hard to enjoy hanging around them, but the way Baumbach approaches the material makes the experience an interesting one. Despite writing his films as comedies, Baumbach is concerned with being honest and arousing deep emotions in his audience. In While We’re Young Baumbach also includes the familiar topic of aging, but he does so with his own unique style. In a great scene we see the older generation messaging each other in their latest iPhones, watching series in their Apple TV, and listening to music in their iPods, while the young and cool kids are going vintage listening to old records, playing board games, and watching video tapes in their squared TV. It was an interesting commentary on how at times we struggle to keep up with technology to continue looking young, while the hipsters go out of their way to try to stand out by bringing things from the past but as hard as they try they never do turn out to be very sincere and authentic or as cool as they’d like to be. This generation gap is honestly explored by Baumbach and he does so with his classic comedic touch.

In While We’re Young, Baumbach introduces us to a mid aged married couple, Josh (Ben Stiller) and Cornelia (Naomi Watts) who unlike most of their other married friends haven’t had children. In a way it does affect their friendship with other couples their same age because they can’t relate in the same way. Josh also happens to be a struggling documentarian who has spent the past ten years trying to finish his latest film. He also gives courses and it is during one of those lectures that he befriends a young couple, Jamie (Adam Driver) and Darby (Amanda Seyfried). They are hip and cool kids who seem to be living spontaneously. Darby even makes her own ice cream. When Jamie praises John for one of his earlier documentaries, he quickly takes a liking for the kid and accepts an invitation to hang out with them. Jamie himself is an aspiring documentarian and Josh decides to take him under his wings and assist him. Both John and Cornelia befriend this young energetic couple and their lives begin to change. They enjoy the feeling of being able to look and act young again, but not everything is what it seems.

Ben Stiller has worked with Baumbach in the past and he sort of plays a similar character here. He is full of himself and seems to be discontent with the way his life is going. He is still at his dramatic best when working alongside Baumbach. It was fun to see his transformation once he befriends Driver’s character and even begins wearing a fedora to look hip. Naomi Watts is also great and delivers in her physical comedy scenes, especially in one where she is invited to a hip-hop dance class with Darby. Adam Driver also returns after his collaboration with Baumbach in Frances Ha and his character is very phony. From the moment he appears on screen you realize he isn’t as spontaneous as he claims to be. The film is at its best when it focuses on the dynamic relationship between these two couples, but it gets off course at times when it tries to be a commentary on artistic integrity. Baumbach didn’t seem capable of balancing those two themes and for that reason the later section of the film doesn’t work as well as the first half.       

Insurgent (4/10): Bigger and louder sequel, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's better.

“You are living proof that the divergent problem has grown beyond all control.”

Director Robert Schwentke (RED, RIPD) replaced Neil Burger for the Divergent sequel which is much bigger, louder, and action packed. I actually ended up mildly recommending the first film which I found engaging enough thanks to Shailene Woodley’s lead performance. Unfortunately, Insurgent is a step down for the franchise because bigger doesn’t necessarily mean better. The action scenes look great and the film is very pretty to look at, but the main issue I have here is with the story which I felt was so convoluted that I wasn’t able to engage with any of the characters. I honestly couldn’t remember much of what had happened in Divergent (which means it didn’t really make an impact on me the first time around), but we get enough flashbacks and exposition here to recall some of the important events. We are also introduced to the two other factions that the first one left out (amity and candid) so we get new characters that mostly appear on screen for a couple of minutes. Octavia Spencer is the leader of amity and Daniel Dae Kim of candid. Insurgent also introduces us to the factualness who are led by Naomi Watt’s Evelyn. So Insurgent basically ha the same flaws most sequels do, which is try to make everything bigger and it ends up crowding the screenplay and leaving little room for character development. Sure, some of the action scenes are great (mostly the first couple of scenes) but I simply lost interest in the story and found it incredibly tedious and boring. By the end I didn’t really care what could happen to any of the characters. I haven’t had much luck with Schwentke’s films recently and would’ve preferred Burger continued directing the franchise instead. If you are a fan of Veronica Roth’s YA novels you probably will enjoy this, but I’m not familiar with her work and didn’t enjoy this film at all.   

Insurgent takes place right after the events of Divergent so if you haven’t watched the first film you might feel lost. Basically, the story is set in a dystopian future where society is divided into five factions based on people’s virtues. Jeanine (Kate Winslet) is the head of the erudite (the intelligent faction) who basically has control over this wrecked city surrounded by giant walls which separate them from the vast outdoor wasteland. The heroine of the franchise is Tris (Shailene Woodley) who discovers she’s divergent because she doesn’t fit into one faction, but decides however she wants to be Dauntless (the more adventurous and fearless members of society who become the protectors of the city). Here she falls in love with Four (Theo James), befriends Christina (Zoe Kravitz), and is bullied by Peter (Miles Teller) and Eric (Jai Courtney) who are all returning characters in the sequel. In Divergent, Tris discovers that her kind isn’t accepted in society believing they are a threat for not fitting in. She also discovers that Jeanine is planning on taking over the rest of the factions beginning with Abnegation which is where her parents (Tony Goldwyn and Ashley Judd) reside. Her parents are killed in the attack but she eventually stops Jeanine’s plan. Insurgent picks up right after the attack as we follow the surviving fugitives hiding out with the Amity faction. Tris’s brother, Caleb (Ansel Elgort) is also with them. Jeanine will stop at nothing to capture Tris discovering she’s a valuable asset. 

The plot in insurgent felt much weaker and the film focuses mainly on the action sequences. There are way too many characters introduced, which is a shame because it diverts the attention at times from the main ones. Shailene Woodley gives a solid performance but she didn’t carry the film this time around. I found her character a bit less charismatic since she spends most of the film feeling guilty and unable to forgive herself for the loss of her parents and friends. Theo James isn’t any better either and the romantic chemistry that existed in the first film grows weak this time around. Ansel Elgort is devoid of all the charm he brought to the table in The Fault of Our Stars (it is weird seeing him play Woodley’s sister in this film after being her love interest). My favorite performance in this sequel surprisingly came from Miles Teller who doesn’t get much screen time but shines in the few scenes he’s in. The villains aren’t actually very menacing and everything about this sequel felt more boring and tedious to me. Even the simulation and dream sequences are a bit of a letdown and took me away from the film completely.    

Birdman (9/10): The technical ambition pays off for Iñarritu and Lubezki.

“You're doing this because you're scared to death, like the rest of us, that you don't matter. And you know what? You're right. You don't. It's not important. You're not important. Get used to it.”

No matter how people feel about this film, there is no denying that Birdman is a technical marvel. Emmanuel Lubezki is one of the best cinematographers in Hollywood and he should continue working and experimenting with his fellow Mexican directors. Birdman is visually astonishing and one of the most unforgettable moviegoing experiences of the year. He blew us away last year when he took us to space in Gravity, and now he astonishes audiences once again by giving us the illusion that the film is taking place entirely in one single shot. From the opening shot, Lubezki is letting us know that we are going to get our heads spun and so he circles around a table with four actors discussing their roles in the play they are about to act in. Birdman is unlike any other film I’ve seen in that sense, where you feel like you are watching actors in a live theater. The audience becomes the camera which follows around these egocentric and troubled actors as they interact with one another. The film has stuck with me and it is one of those rare movies I’d like to experience once again in the theaters. I can’t think of another film that manages to portray the passage of time so well without having to cut from one scene to the next the way Birdman does. 

Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu is better known for his realistic and depressive films focusing on separate characters whose lives intertwine someway or another (Amores Perros, 21 Grams, Babel). This was quite a fantastic change of tone from his previous and more depressing films. He has crafted one of the best films of the year with groundbreaking editing effects that magically make us believe the film is all a continuous shot. He also uses dark and satirical humor to critique egocentric Hollywood actors, critics, artists, and even audiences who eat up anything they are served as long as there are loud explosions and non-stop action scenes. Iñarritu takes a shot at just about everyone.

Alexander Dinelaris's script was wickedly smart and satirical with some great and memorable dialogues that complement the technical achievements of the film very well. Birdman has a lot to say about our human nature and our desperation to become relevant and important. It is a complete film that deserves all the recognition and awards it has been receiving.

The performances in Birdman also stand out above most films released this year. Michael Keaton is fantastic as Riggan Thomson, a once popular actor who starred in a superhero franchise but hasn’t been able to do anything relevant since. He is known for the character of Birdman, but he wants to prove he is a real artist and not just a washed up celebrity. That is why he is risking everything in a play he is directing, writing, producing, and starring in. His good friend, Jake (Zach Galifianakis) is co-producing the play with him. Lesley (Naomi Watts), Laura (Andrea Riseborough), and Mike (Edward Norton) are the actors he hires for the play, while his daughter Sam (Emma Stone) is working for him as his personal assistant as she tries to recover from her former drug addictions. The supporting cast is excellent in this film, especially Edward Norton and Emma Stone who share several great scenes together along with Michael Keaton. Galifianakis also impresses in a much more serious role than what we are used to seeing him in, but this is still Keaton’s film who displays a wide range of emotions. Birdman has become such an important part of his life that he actually interacts with him in a surreal way. The film balances this magical realism very well and Keaton pulls off the feat of having these inner conversations with himself. The intimate camerawork only enhances these performances even more. 

St. Vincent (7/10): Bill Murray makes it worth your time.

“I honestly don’t remember.”

If you happen to look at the poster for St. Vincent you might go into it expecting a full blown comedy, but you would be surprised because this film takes a much more dramatic and sentimental approach. There are several funny scenes of course because Bill Murray and Melissa McCarthy are involved, but it’s also touching and emotional. There are many comparisons in tone with Jack Nicholson’s As Good As it Gets because the lead character is a grumpy old jerk who the audience is forced to sympathize with. It is a very fine line that an actor has to walk through when portraying a character such as this because the performances can seem cartoonish and forced at times, but Bill Murray pulls it off in a very authentic way. His character actually feels real in this movie despite all the flaws with the script and the overly familiar plot. St. Vincent follows pretty much all the cliches in the genre where you have this grumpy man being softened by a kid in need of a father figure (think Up, Big Daddy, Bad Words, Bad Santa, among others). Even Michael Douglas starred in a similar role this year in And So It Goes. The difference however with that film is that Bill Murray was able to make his character feel believable. St. Vincent is worth the watch because you get to see one of the greatest comedic actors in a lead role, and that is something rare these days. The film may be formulaic and sentimental but Murray makes up for its flaws and turns this into an enjoyable experience. I have no idea where the Oscar buzz came from because it isn’t even close to being a groundbreaking film. It is way too familiar and full of cliches, but Bill Murray gets to do what he does best and that for me is a good enough reason for recommending this film. Director and screenwriter Theodore Melfi’s greatest asset is Bill Murray; without him this film wouldn’t even be talked about. 

I know that I’m being unfair with the rest of the cast by giving Bill Murray all the credit, but there are also some very interesting performances from them as well. It was a pleasure to see Melissa McCarthy playing a hard working single mother. For the first time she didn’t get a character that was screaming all the time (she is funny doing that but she was getting typecast). She gives a genuine and toned down performance and I hope she gets more roles like this. Naomi Watts played a Russian hooker (a lady of the night is how Murray’s character explains it to the kid) and I actually enjoyed her performance as well. I thought she nailed the accent and had some funny scenes. Chris O’Dowd shines as the teacher of a Catholic school and Terrence Howard makes a couple of screen presences as well. The sweet kid is played by Jaeden Lieberher and he also delivers a believable performance and shares great chemistry with Murray. This is the sort of sentimental film which audiences will love, and thanks to a strong cast many critics may be won over as well despite all the flaws. In the end my major complaints are that everything is resolved a little too tightly and some of the subplots could have been explored a lot better (like Murray’s relationship with his wife). It is a feel good movie which Murray sells really well despite being mean spirited throughout most of the film.

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: Sunlight Jr. (4/10)

"It's all you wanted to do, just cry. And now look at you. There's two men out there in the kitchen fightin' over you."

Sunlight Jr. is director Laurie Collyer's follow up to Sherrybaby and once again she creates a strong leading female character, but her script is weak and despite showing the reality and hardships of life it doesn't seem to be saying anything. It is just a depressing vision of lovers who are struggling to survive and keep their love afloat. We usually don't get to see this side of society represented on film, but despite her efforts and Naomi Watt's excellent performance we don't actually get anything special or revealing from Sunlight Jr. The film doesn't have anything to say and it just puts us right in the center of the lives of two people who are barely making a living and who are basically hopeless. Despite giving her lead female character a lot of substance, the rest of the cast are pretty much one dimensional. Collyer doesn't seem to like men very much as none of them in this film have any redeeming quality. Watts however had a lot to work with since her character has a lot of depth and is determined to overcome her struggles. Everyone else is just there to bring her down, and in a way they bring down the entire film as well. The storyline is just too grim for my taste. I'm not being fair with Matt Dillon, he gives a strong performance, it's just that he didn't have much to work with and like his character he is disabled by the script. 

Melissa (Naomi Watts) and Richie (Matt Dillon) are happy together despite their economic struggles which force them to live at a small motel in Florida. Melissa works as a clerk at a nearby convenience store (Sunlight Jr.) winning minimum wage, while Richie who is a paraplegic is unemployed. He receives a monthly check for his disability, but it's not much. Despite the harsh conditions Melissa and Richie seem happy together, and when she finds out she's pregnant they both have something to look forward to. However their situation changes when Melissa loses her job and it takes a toll on their relationship. They are forced to move back with her alcoholic mother, Kathleen (Tess Harper), and the tension builds. There is also Melissa's ex boyfriend, Justin (Norman Reedus), who has been stalking her and complicating things even more. That is about all the drama you will get from Sunlight Jr, which doesn't really seem to explore any issues.

Sunlight Jr. might be a very authentic and realistic portrayal of an underrepresented side of society, but it really doesn't have anything to say either. It is grim and realistic, but there is no message. It's as if we got to catch a glimpse of someone's life, but we don't learn anything we haven't already seen before.  The performances from Watts and Dillon are what make this film slightly tolerable, but the pacing and lack of narrative hurt this film. It is just a sad film that fails to connect with you. Sunlight Jr. can be described as a slice-of-life drama, but there isn't really much more to this indie. It is a very slow and depressing film to sit through and I think that was Collyer's intention. She's not aiming to entertain, she wants us to see the struggle these people go through, but she does so without giving us any hope whatsoever and leaves us depressed.

My Review: Adore (6/10)

"Now I feel really sinful."

Adore is an Australian film by French director, Anne Fontaine (Coco Before Chanel) focusing on a taboo subject matter involving two mothers falling for each others sons. The premise may have been explored before in other films, but here it is the main focus of the movie and the entire drama centers on this dual relationship. For a character driven film, I felt that the film lacked some more chemistry between the characters. I was a little disappointed with this film because I was never drawn into the world of these people although I must say that the highlight of the film is the gorgeous cinematography thanks to the beautiful location where the story took place. The film looked great, but it lacked substance. I wasn't impressed with any of the performances although they weren't bad either. Naomi Watts comes from a superb performance in The Impossible, but here she was sort of the weak link because the chemistry she had with James Frecheville's character was nonexistent.   The film does kind of suck you in to this small Australian town, but it never fulfills or delivers anything interesting. Fontaine barely explores the Freudian psychological elements involved, but it never really delves deeper. Perhaps she is waiting for the sequel in which she will have the two fathers date each other's daughters. I felt like she never took any risks with this taboo subject matter. 

Lil (Naomi Watts) and Roz (Robin Wright) have been neighbors and best friends since they were young girls. They have spent their entire lives together in a small Australian beachside town. They both got married and had sons who also became great friends. Lil's husband died when her son Ian (Xavier Samuel) was still a very young boy. Roz and her husband Harold (Ben Mendelsohn) have had a great relationship along with their son Tom (James Frecheville). Tom and Ian spend most of their time surfing on the beach while Lil and Roz love to sunbathe. Their ideal life begins to shake when Harold is offered a job in Sydney. Roz and Tom don't want to leave, but Harold accepts the job. In Harold's absence Roz begins having an affair with Liz's son, Ian. When Tom discovers his friend with his mother he tells Lil about and they begin an affair of their own. The two couples fall for each other and seem to agree on continuing the unconventional affair against all odds. 

The film might not have worked as a drama in its pure form because the conflict between the immorality of the characters' actions never felt real, but in my opinion it worked as a sort of allegory in life as to how we accept certain actions once others commit them. We seem to justify our actions because other people around us do the same thing. That is how I felt about this movie once Tom sees Ian get involved with his mother. He feels justified to do the same thing and none of the mothers can say anything because they are doing the same thing. In their small ideal world everything was bliss because their actions were justified by each other, but once their world gets bigger and new characters begin to enter the scene their actions don't seem as conventional or right as they did at first. That is when everything begins to shake and there are consequences for their actions. So even though this film didn't work as a psychological character driven movie, it does sort of play out well as a metaphor on life and how we justify our actions by the actions of others.

My Review: Mulholland Drive (5/10)

"Now you will see me one more time, if you do good. You will see me, two more times, if you do bad. Good night"

Mulholland Drive is considered by many one of the best films of the last decade (2001-09) and among David Lynch's best work. There is no denying that Lynch is one of today's most revered directors, but this is actually the first film of his that I've been able to see. Unfortunately I wasn't able to enjoy this movie as much as everyone else did and I'm ashamed to admit that Lynch is way to smart for me. While watching this film I felt that there were several scenes that didn't make much sense and that the director was just being pretentious showing his craft and great skills, but after reading the Hulk's critique of this film explaining every single detail in the movie I have to admit that Lynch was a genius and I just didn't get the movie in the same way others did. Looking back I realize that every scene has a meaning and the film is rich in symbolism and semiotics. Despite paying attention to the film I missed very important things that I can now see were really thought out by Lynch. I feel ashamed because I wasn't able to grasp the film in the same way Lynch would have wanted me to and I felt everything was pointless. The performances in this film are really great but I was never drawn into the film in the same way others were. I guess I'm not someone who cares too much about dreams or puts too much thought into them and their underlying meanings. What I did enjoy about this film were the satirical elements introduced by Lynch about the film industry in Hollywood. The characters were really well developed and the mood of the film is suspenseful at times. I also enjoyed the score of the film and thought it really added to the overall eeriness of Mulholland Drive. I might enjoy this film more if I watch it again now that I have understood most of the underlying meanings and symbolisms here, but I just can't gather myself to watch it again because I was never absorbed by the story and found everything rather dull.

Betty (Naomi Watts) is a young aspiring actress who has just arrived at Hollywood from a small Canadian town. Her aunt, a successful actress herself, has allowed her to stay at her home while she is off shooting a movie. When Betty arrives at her apartment she is surprised to find out that there is a young woman already there. This beautiful brunette is suffering from amnesia after surviving a terrible car accident right before she was about to get murdered and has decided to hide in the apartment after seeing Betty's aunt leave. She thinks her name is Rita (Laura Harring), but she can't remember anything else. Betty decides to help her and allows her to stay with her. In the meantime there are a few other stories taking place. On the one hand we have a director (Justin Theroux) who is looking for a lead actress to replace the one that has disappeared. The producers want to force him to choose Camila Rhodes (Melissa George), but he refuses. There are also a series of detectives (Robert Forster and Brent Briscoe) trying to solve a murder, and a hit man (Joe Messing) who is a little inept at his job. All these stories seem to overlap each other as everything is connected, but at the same time not everything is what it seems as the line between dreams and reality is a very thin one.

I love films that aren't told in chronological order like this, but I had trouble here putting all the pieces together. Now that I was able to understand it all I can see how brilliant Lynch was using all these different imageries. This is a film about transferring guilt and romanticizing love in an otherwise cruel and dark world. Lynch is always in control of his craft here, but he was way ahead of me and truly lost me. Naomi Watts had a breakout performance here, and she is now one of Hollywood's best known actresses, but this will be the role many will remember her for. Laura Harring is also great here as the needy and vulnerable character that Betty wants her (or fantasizes her) to be. Mulholland Dr. is a very complex and thrilling mystery that begins to make sense long after you've seen it. Is succeeds in the fact that the images stay with you and haunt you, but I really didn't have a pleasurable experience watching it. This is a very ambiguous film and Lynch has written a fabulous screenplay, but one that I wasn't prepared for. This is a very dark film that plays out as a contemporary film noir. Lynch was nominated as best director for his work here, but surprisingly it didn't receive any other nomination in 2001. The film has garnered cult status over the years and I understand why. I'm a little disappointed with myself for not enjoying this as much as I should have.

Rating: 5.9/10

My Review: The Impossible (8/10)

¨The most scary bit for me was when I came up and I was all on my own.¨

The Impossible is Spanish director, Juan Antonio Bayona’s, follow up to his 2007 hit El Orfanato (The Orphanage). He has decided to change the genre, but still manages to direct a great film. This is a very powerful and emotional family drama about the true story of the tsunami that hit the coast of Asia in 2004 and a family’s struggle for survival. The film is based on the main character’s story: Maria Belon and the screenplay was adapted by Sergio Sanchez who had previously worked with Bayona in The Orphanage as well. The story was really well developed although sometimes the film felt a little over the top with the melodrama. Films always add a few elements to spice up the story a bit so I can’t say how true this movie is to what actually happened in real life, but what I can say is that the Spanish family this film is based on is played here by a British one so there are some changes. Anyway, The Impossible works really well as a family drama and many people left the theater with tears in their eyes. This is a tear-jerker, so if you’re an emotional person this film will pull your strings, especially through Naomi Watts’s performance who gives a powerful and a very physically challenging one. Her Oscar nomination was very well earned although she probably won’t be the winner. The film also succeeds in the technical aspect as the tsunami is beautifully shot and one of the greatest scenes in the movie considering it is one of the worst national catastrophes of our time. The imagery will remain in your head.

Henry (Ewan McGregor) and Maria (Naomi Watts) travel to Thailand for their Christmas holidays alongside their three children: Lucas (Tom Holland), Thomas (Samuel Joslin), and Simon (Oaklee Pendergast). They are having the perfect family vacation in the beautiful coastline of Thailand in a lovely villa. Along with several other tourists they spend Christmas Eve together and the next morning the kids open their gifts. Everything seems to be going lovely, and then all of a sudden out of the blue a giant wave comes roaring across the entire coastline taking everything along its path. We follow the wave as it washes over the entire place, then the camera follows Maria and Lucas as the current has washed them far away from the villa. Maria is badly injured, but she is glad to have Lucas by her side. This is the story of their fight for survival and struggle to reunite with the rest of their family. The tsunami scene is terrifying as we see the terrible effects it had on the population, and isn’t an easy watch, but it is worth it because it has an uplifting story.

Naomi Watts has been receiving a lot of recognition for her work in this film, and she is truly amazing, but I thought Ewan McGregor also delivers a great performance as well and many people have ignored him. The children in this film are also great here, especially Tom Holland who should have received a nomination for his work in this film. He shares a great chemistry with Naomi Watts and holds up his performance to hers. My only complaint for this movie is that it goes overboard with the melodrama and intends to have everyone leave the theater with tears in their eyes, but it truly is an uplifting story. It is worth the watch and I recommend it because it reminds us that with faith we can achieve impossible things, and that we shouldn’t take things for granted because things can change drastically from one moment to the next. Life is fragile, but love can conquer all.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/

My Review: J. Edgar (6/10)

¨Do I kill everything that I love? ¨

J. Edgar is Clint Eastwood`s latest biopic that tells the story of Edgar Hoover`s life and how he created the FBI during a span of over fifty years. Hoover was a very controversial character, some people hated him and others loved him, but Eastwood doesn’t take any sides; he simply allows us to judge his work for ourselves showing us the good and the bad. Hoover didn’t have an idealistic life either; Eastwood also focuses on his personal life and exposes some of his secrets. The film was written by Dustin Lance Black, who also wrote the Oscar nominated biopic: Milk, but unlike in that movie, this time the story suffers from a very slow pace. The weakest thing about J. Edgar is truly its pacing. The subject matter is just so wide that the movie fails to focus on just one particular detail and tries to mash everything together with a series of numerous flashbacks. There were some very interesting moments during the story, but they were just too far spread out and most of the film was really a bore to sit through. I wish the film would have focused more on just one or two aspects instead of trying to include such a broad range. By trying to show everything that went on in Edgar`s life, we truly end up not knowing much. This movie suffers from the typical case of trying to say so much that you end up not saying anything at all. The film should of focused on a much shorter time period (let’s say the Lindbergh case for example which was probably the most interesting part of the film) instead of covering all the specific details. The highlights of this film however are the performance from Leonardo DiCaprio as Hoover, and the art direction which is just beautiful (like in every Eastwood film).

As for the story, the movie begins with an older version of J. Edgar Hoover (Leonardo DiCaprio) narrating his memories to one of the agents and telling him to write his memoirs. It was during the communist hunt that J. Edgar found the opportunity to tighten his grip in the law enforcement agency and make important arrests after several communist revolutions began taking place across several major cities in the US. Hoover was completely dedicated to his job and slowly began building what today we know as the FBI. He had a very awkward social behavior, and very few friends. They called him Speedy for the way he talked, and he was very close to his mother (Judi Dench), to whom he looked up too all the time for advice. He trusted very few people, one of them was his personal secretary Helen Gandy (Naomi Watts) and the other his right hand man and personal assistant, Agent Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer), with whom he had a secret love affair despite the fact that he tried to deny it and hide it. After the witch hunt was over with, Hoover`s attention shifted to arresting important gangsters and mafia groups, and in doing so he slowly began to build the Bureau. He had secret personal files on every United States president he served under, whether it was Roosevelt or Kennedy. The true highlight of the film and the turning point for the Agency`s autonomy came with the Lindbergh case which received a lot of media attention after a child was kidnapped from his own home. Hoover used this case to build prestige for the Bureau and create a fingerprint database of every citizen in order to solve crimes easier. He built the Federal Bureau of Investigation and this is how he did it.

One of the most distracting things about J. Edgar is the makeup. Some of the actors really looked bad when they had to play older versions of themselves (Armie Hammer above all). They should`ve stuck with hiring older actors to play those roles because the makeup really didn’t work. It was awful. Leonardo DiCaprio does save this movie however, from being bad thanks to a great performance. He deserved an Oscar nomination, but I guess the film just wasn’t good enough. Armie Hammer also was great in his supporting role, but his makeup when playing an older version of himself distracted us from his true performance. The rest of the supporting cast just doesn’t have enough time to shine on screen, with the exception of Judi Dench who is as brilliant as usual. Naomi Watts did have plenty of screen time, but she really didn’t have a memorable performance. I`d have to say that J. Edgar is one of Eastwood`s weakest films, but I am still a huge fan of his work and wish him the best in his upcoming projects. The subject matter in this film is interesting, but the pacing is just poorly done. I recommend it only for DiCaprio or Eastwood fans although I wouldn’t be watching this film a second time.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com

My Review: Dream House (5/10)

¨Once upon a time, there were two girls who lived in a house¨

I was really disappointed with the trailer of Dream House. It gave away too much and I would`ve preferred not to know as much as I did going into the movie because the first 45 minutes of the film are totally wasted thanks to the trailer which gave away the twist that happens about midway through the movie. I have no idea what the producers were thinking about when they did this. I don`t know if it was because of the trailer, but everything was obvious and predictable from the beginning which took away much of the suspense and thrills. If you haven’t seen the trailer going into this movie then I think you`re better off, but I still wouldn`t recommend this film unless you are a fan of any of the actors or Oscar nominated director Jim Sheridan. Sheridan is known for making hit or miss films; his latest films Brothers was great, but before that he directed the mediocre Get Rich or Die Tryin. One thing is for sure, he always works with some talented actors; and that is perhaps the best thing about Dream House, its cast: Daniel Craig, Naomi Watts, and Rachel Weisz. The weakest link is the script which could have been great if written by a talented writer, but David Louka isn`t known for writing interesting scripts. The story had a lot of potential, but the delivery was just poor and everything became predictable. The film was saved from disaster by the strong cast, but I still wasn`t pleased with the end product.

Will Atenton (Daniel Craig) decides to quit his publishing job in the big city and move to a quiet country house with his wife Libby (Rachel Weisz), and two daughters Trish (Taylor Geare) and Dee Dee (Claire Geare) and becoming a writer. They seem to be living a perfect life, but one night one of his daughters claims she`s seen a man outside staring at the house. At first Will doesn’t pay attention, but after beginning to see things himself he begins investigating the house. Someone is definitely outside stalking the place. He discovers that about five years ago a family was murdered in that very house: a young wife, two daughters, and the father who became the prime suspect. His name was Peter Ward and police never seemed to gather enough evidence to lock him in, but he was institutionalized at a mental hospital. Will begins investigating and discovers that Peter has been released from the institution and is convinced that is the man who has been threatening his home. In the meantime his neighbor, Ann (Naomi Watts), seems to know what happened that terrible night but isn`t willing to tell him the whole truth. As Will continues to uncover the secrets that the house hides he begins making some unsettling revelations.

Dream House is a very predictable film and in my opinion the cast was wasted in this film because they could have made a much more interesting thriller with a decent script. Instead the producers ended up making a movie we`ve seen hundreds of times before. It was a cheap imitation of Scorcese`s Shutter Island. I couldn’t help but compare what was going on with so many other similar films. Ever since The Sixth Sense, producers have tried to find better twists for their thrillers, but have mostly failed to do so (with the exception of Shutter Island and The Others). Dream House is supposed to be a thriller but it has little thrills, it`s supposed to be a mystery but the real mystery is why the producers decided to reveal so much in the trailers. There are a lot of things that went wrong in this film, but I guess Daniel Craig and Rachel Weisz won`t be complaining since they got married shortly after working together in this film. I guess some movies are much more fun to make than to watch. I am still waiting for a decent 2011 thriller, this was definitely not it. This isn’t a scary movie either, like some people might expect from a haunted house film. It`s a plain suspense thriller that gives away a lot of the thrills in its trailer. Enough said.

http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/