REVIEW: “American Hustle”

HUSTLE POSTER

I may not be a card-carrying member of the David O. Russell fan club, but there are several things you have to give him. He has a knack for creating and developing raw and thoroughly engaging characters. He is also able to put together incredible ensemble casts perfectly in tune with his characters. Both of these strengths are the key reasons why Russell’s new film “American Hustle” works. The movie has several of his same indulgences that don’t always work for me but it’s the characters and performances that makes this film so intriguing.

The movie is set in 1978 and is loosely based on the FBI’s ABSCAM operation. It’s a time of good music, big collars, and really bad hair. Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) is a con artist who joins up with and falls for Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams). The two run a small time but controlled loan scam that is bringing in some nice cash. Things are going well until they are caught up with by an ambitious FBI agent named Richie Di Maso (Bradley Cooper). But Richie doesn’t want small time cons. He wants the career-boosting big fish. So he forces Irving and Sydney to work for him and entrap bigger targets, namely politicians and government officials.

HUSTLE1

Irving doesn’t like his circumstances at all. He likes things small and low-key. He also doesn’t like Richie and his constant changing of the rules. He feels that going too big will jeopardize the whole operation. But the biggest threat to their plans may be Irving’s loose cannon wife Rosalyn (Jennifer Lawrence). She’s loud, volatile, and she knows Irving has a thing for Sydney. That’s a pretty lethal cocktail. Another complication comes in the form of a New Jersey mayor named Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner). He’s a popular and seemingly well-meaning guy who develops a friendship with Irving. The trouble is he becomes one of Richie’s prime targets.

This interwoven web of ‘who’s conning who’ could have been an utter mess but it actually plays out in an entertaining and fairly cohesive way. Much of that is due to the sharp script penned by Russell and Eric Warren Singer. It’s not perfect. There are lulls along the way and I couldn’t help but feel that they stretched the story to its limits. There are also a few glaring questions that remain unanswered. They don’t cripple the story the way major plot holes do, but they did stand out to me. Still, in terms of delivering a slick and stylish story, Russell and Singer pull it off.

But getting back to a previous thought, neither the direction nor the script are the film’s strongest point. The movie’s true success lies in the performances. It starts with Christian Bale. Armed with pretty much the same voice that he used playing Dicky in “The Fighter”, Bale was the most compelling character of the bunch. While he may sound like Dicky his physical appearance was quite different. In “The Fighter” Bale lost over 30 pounds to convincing depict a crack addict. In “American Hustle” he gained nearly 50 pounds which we get a good look at in the film’s opening scene. But Bale delivers much more than just a physical transformation. He gives us a character who is funny, selfish, crooked, pitiful, sympathetic – all encapsulated within a wonderful performance.

HUSTLE2

I also liked Bradley Cooper, an actor who has gotten surprisingly better over time. His character is a little hard to gauge at first but as the story unfolds so does Richie’s personality and ambitions. Cooper gives an hearty performance that does at times get a tad too big but is still impressive. And speaking of big, Jennifer Lawrence is also good as the powder keg Rosalyn. She has already raked in a ton of critical acclaim but I wouldn’t call this her best work. The character is loud and abrasive by design so the performance has to be big. But it isn’t until later in the film that Lawrence is actually allowed to show her range. On the other hand Amy Adams (goofy split-up-the-front blouses aside) is fantastic. Her character isn’t a ‘take home to meet the parents’ kind of girl, but there is a sad and needy underlying thread to her. Adams never misses a beat. And I can’t forget Jeremy Renner who has a smaller role but to me was just as good as anyone else.

I can’t say that “American Hustle” has any kind of staying power and I don’t think I’ll remember it as one of the great films. But there is something about these generally unlikable characters that draws you to the screen. In typical David O. Russell fashion they are a little too abrasive for my taste. But each is fascinating in their own right and each truly desires something more: Irving – to be a more successful con, Richie – an FBI superstar, Sydney – British royalty, Rosalyn – a loved and appreciated wife, Carmine – a legendary mayor. Most of the credit for this goes to the performances. “American Hustle” is more of a showcase of great actors than it is great storytelling, but it still keeps you glued to the screen as you watch them do their work.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Inside Llewyn Davis”

LLEWYNPOSTER2

I am such a fan of Joel and Ethan Coen. Dating back to 1984 with their first film “Blood Simple”, the brothers have put together an incredible filmography, etching out a prominent name for themselves in the process. Not only that, they have developed into some of the greatest filmmakers of our time. Armed with a sharp wit and an undeniable style, the Coens have taken their special brand of cinema to a variety of places. Their latest is the early 1960s New York folk music scene. The film is “Inside Llewyn Davis” and while it may not be the best Coen brothers movie, it is undeniably theirs.

I was so glad to hear that Oscar Isaac had gotten the lead role. This criminally underrated actor has amazing acting chops yet rarely gets big leading parts. Here he plays Llewyn Davis, a down-on-his-luck musician struggling to get by in 1961 New York City. Llewyn’s singing partner has committed suicide, his solo album isn’t selling, and he is flat broke. He spends his nights on the couches of different acquaintances and his days trying to get enough gigs to get by until his big break comes.

LLEWYN1

There really isn’t a lot of plot in “Inside Llewyn Davis”. We basically spend a few days with Llewyn witnessing his routine and seeing the nature of his struggles. It doesn’t take long to learn that Llewyn is his own worst enemy. He’s constantly driving people away whether it’s fellow musicians, family, hospitable friends, or even girlfriends. Llewyn is selfish, uncompromising, and irresponsible yet he never casts an examining light on himself. He’s not a character who will draw the audience’s affection. Much like the other people in his life, we can’t get that close to him even though we feel sympathy towards him. Llewyn is an extremely talented musician. He just needs to get himself out of the way.

This is a colder Coen brothers picture that clearly has no desire to be hopeful or uplifting. Perhaps that why I had trouble embracing the film at first. Don’t misunderstand me, I’m not saying a movie has to be uplifting or hopeful. I don’t believe that at all. But watching Llewyn continually self-destruct for the entire film had me wishing for a glimmer of hope. There are a few scenes of the Coen’s signature dark humor that occasionally lighten things up, but mostly this is a pointed, unflinching character drama that captivated me while still holding me at arms length.

LLewyn3

As with all Coen brothers films this one is loaded with an assortment of interesting characters and captivating faces. We get quick but great roles for John Goodman and F. Murray Abraham. Justin Timberlake is surprisingly good as a fellow musician who is married to Llewyn’s ex-girlfriend Jean. She’s played by Carey Mulligan who is very good in the role. But her character is one of the few Coen creations that could have been handled better. She’s abrasive and profane to the point of being distracting. There is a subtle attempt at humor with Jean and her harsh personality but she disappears before we are allowed to see the compassionate side we are teased with. But this is Oscar Isaac’s show and he gives an Oscar-worthy performance. He brilliantly flexes his acting and singing muscles in what I hope is some career-launching work.

“Inside Llewyn Davis” has all the other traits you would expect from Joel and Ethan Coen. There is beautiful cinematography. The sense of time and place is impeccable. The music is unforgettable and the film features arguably the best soundtrack of the year. And it’s certainly a smart film featuring great vision and unquestionable craftsmanship. But for me it doesn’t quite rank up there with the Coen’s best pictures. That said, this is another time capsule experience brought to us by two of the best in the business, and anytime they make a movie it’s something special. Better yet, it has stuck with me and different themes from the film keep coming to mind. That a sign of something good.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Her”

HER POSTER

In the not too distant future of Spike Jonze’s “Her” technology has made major leaps, fashion senses have eroded, and Hollywood’s cynical views of relationships have remained the same. Loaded with ambition and lauded by many as the best movie of 2013, “Her” incorporates a familiar science-fiction concept into what is more or less a love story and relational study. But it’s far from conventional or cliché. That said, it isn’t a film free of problems which (for me) ultimately keep it from being the modern day masterpiece that some are touting it as.

The story revolves around Theodore Twombley (Joaquin Phoenix), a nerdy introvert who works as a letter writer for people who have a hard time sharing their feeling. Theodore is a lonely soul. He’s currently involved in divorce proceedings from his first wife Catherine (Rooney Mara) and he hasn’t been able to get out of his ever-present state of melancholy. He has practically no social life and outside of his longtime friend Aimee (Amy Adams), there is no significant person in his life.

HER2

Theodore’s life takes a strange and unexpected turn when he purchases a new operating system for his computer. But this is no Windows XP. It is an adaptive artificial intelligence that evolves and takes on its own personality. The OS (voiced by Scarlett Johansson) goes by the name Samantha and soon develops a very personal and intimate relationship with Theodore. Samantha begins to fill the lonely void in Theodore’s life while he becomes her window to a new and exciting world. But the reality that she is an operating system causes him to wrestle with the legitimacy of their relationship.

The science-fiction mainly serves as a subtle backdrop with the exception of the familiar idea of computers becoming sentient. But Jonze deserves credit. He’s really doing a lot more here than first looks might reveal. He takes an interesting look at our infatuation with our gadgets and where that could perceivably lead us in the future. There is also a strong focus on communication or lack thereof. The film shows us several relationships that struggle due to the poor abilities to communicate. And speaking of struggles, prepare for a lot of them. In Jonze’s gloomy view of love, nearly every relationship struggles and has a rare hope for survival.

Her3

On the other hand, it’s the rich and unbridled conversations between Theodore and Samantha that causes their relationship to flourish. There are so many scenes of them just talking about simple things that may seem inconsequential but that are vital to making a relationship work. Phoenix is amazing and completely wraps himself up in his character. He displays an enormous range of feelings with such realistic fervor. And Johansson shows why voice work is deserving of more attention than it’s given. Her voice is sultry and sexy but it’s also warm and vulnerable. These two show a deep and growing attraction, yet even here we see Jonze use a little bait and switch.

But while I really appreciate Jonze’s originality and I love being challenged by deeper thought-provoking approaches, there were a handful of things that kept me from fully embracing this as a great film. First there is the movie’s glacial pacing specifically in the second half. The aforementioned conversations between Theodore and Samantha are good at first, but they reach a point where they no longer move the story along. The countless closeup shots of Phoenix laying on a pillow talking to Samantha well after their love has been established grew a bit tiresome. This only slowed things down for a movie that already had a calculated and deliberate pace.

HER1

The film also contains some unneeded scenes that added little to the movie. Olivia Wilde pops up as Theodore’s blind date. While her presence had a purpose, she was a very flimsy, throwaway character. There is also a weird scene where Samantha calls on a surrogate to serve as her physical body in order to be intimate with Theodore. It’s an intentionally uncomfortable scene laced with a touch of dark humor. But as it plays out things get sloppy especially with the surrogate character herself. And then there are these occasional odd tone-shattering attempts at humor. One involves a lewd act with a dead cat’s tail and the other features a cartoony video game character who suddenly spews a river of obscenities. This silly juvenile humor came across as cheap and both scenes felt completely out of place.

I wish I could toss aside those complaints because “Her” does many things right. It asks some great questions and it certainly allows for a variety of interpretations. For example take the ending. Depending on your interpretation it could be a very light and hopeful ending or a very dark and depressing one. I liked that. I love the work we get from Phoenix and Johansson and Rooney Mara’s character added a deeper emotional twist that I really responded to. But the film’s cynicism, the constant lingering of the second half, and some questionable script choices hurt my experience. It’s one of the few movies that captivated me yet had me checking my watch before it was done. Ultimately that’s a disappointing combination that pushed me away a bit.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

The Top 5 Performances of 2013 – Supporting Actress

A light painting of the year 2013 written against a black background

I love this time of year. It’s when we look back at the movie year that was. In addition to my Top Films of 2013 list I like to break down the four major acting categories and list my five favorite performances of the year for each. And we start today with the ladies. I’m looking at the five phenomenal performances by actresses in a supporting role that really blew me away. There were many this year but these are the ones that top my list:

#5 – Elizabeth Debicki – “The Great Gatsby”

A GatsbyTalk about a movie that drew a mixed reaction! Baz Luhrmann’s “The Great Gatsby” was a fever dream built around some great source material and some good performances. Perhaps the biggest surprise for me was the performance from Australian newcomer Elizabeth Debicki. She played Jordan Baker, a beautiful yet mysterious woman whose playfulness is only trumped by her conceit. Much like the Nick character, I was fascinated with Debicki’s portrayal of Jordan. Unfortunately the script shortchanges the character a bit and Debicki isn’t given enough screen time. Personally I found her performance to be magnetic.

#4 – Allison Janney – “The Way, Way Back”

A WAY WAY

It’s funny, this is a performance that I liked a great deal after first seeing it but probably not enough to include it on a prestigious list like this. Yet over time Allison Janney’s work in “The Way, Way Back” has stuck with me. It’s definitely the wackiest performance on my list but it really is brilliant work. Janney plays a kooky, hard-drinking woman who will never win ‘Mother of the Year’. She has a number of funny lines but she never falls into a caricature. In fact there is a warmth to her despite her self-destructive malfunction and we see that because of Janney’s performance. It’s a role that could have went terribly wrong but Janney doesn’t allow that to happen.

#3 – Emily Watson – “The Book Thief”

_MG_9531March 11, 2013.cr2

I am a huge fan of “The Book Thief” and a big reason for that lies in the performances. From top to bottom the film’s cast is exceptional. Emily Watson plays a strict foster mother who at times comes across as detestable. But surprisingly the character has more depth than we first think and Watson’s shining performance brings her complexities to the surface. It’s not a showy or flashy performance that will naturally draw awards, but I believe she is a big part of one of the film’s key emotional threads. It’s great work from a wonderful actress who rarely gets her due.

#2 – Vera Farmiga – “The Conjuring”

A CONJURING

This may be a small cheat. It could be argued that Farmiga is the lead in James Wan’s surprisingly good horror film “The Conjuring”. I think she could be considered either way so for my benefit I’m putting her here. Farmiga is a wonderful actress and this performance is no exception. There is an natural feel to her work in the film that mainly flows from the 100% commitment she gives to the material. As with many good characters, there is a complexity that draws our interest but it’s sometimes the performance that sparks that. Such was the case here. Farmiga had me from her first scene and I was connected all the way through.

#1 – Lupita Nyong’o – “12 Years a Slave”

A 12 years

I realize that this may be the obvious or popular pick but that doesn’t bother me. It’s also the right pick for me. I thought the performance from Kenyan actress Lupita Nyong’o was one of the most piercing things I saw in 2013. It’s a performance that comes across as raw and gushing with emotional power. But that is exactly what the character needed. It’s impossible not to be drawn to her and there are a number of her scenes that will stick in the back of your mind well after the movie is done. I fully expect Nyong’o to get an Oscar nomination and it would be well deserved. In fact, I say give her the statue. It was certainly my favorite supporting actress work of the year.

Thanks for reading. The supporting actors are next. What did you think of this list? Please take time to share your thoughts or your picks in the comments section below.

REVIEW: “Blue Jasmine”

BLUE poster

Each year has its share of certainties: we grow a year older, we have to pay our taxes, my sports teams disappoint me, and Woody Allen puts out a new movie. Now that doesn’t mean that every one of Allen’s films are masterpieces (ala “Midnight in Paris”). In fact some of them are just dreadful (ala last year’s “To Rome with Love”). But one thing about the bad ones, you always know the next film is only a year away. And maybe, just maybe, Allen will land one of the real gems he’s capable of making.

Here’s the good news – “Blue Jasmine” is one of the good ones. This character study touches on a number of subjects from business ethics to family troubles to rabid consumerism. At the center of it all is a captivating performance by Cate Blanchett. She plays Jasmine Francis, a New York socialite whose posh lifestyle collapses when her crooked husband is arrested and loses their fortune. Penniless and without a place to go, Jasmine flies to San Francisco and moves in with her estranged working-class sister Ginger (Sally Hawkins). It’s here that she must learn to start a new chapter of her life or drown in her despair of leaving the affluent upper crust.

BLUE1

To go further, Jasmine is a wreck. She’s coming off of a nervous breakdown, she pops anxiety pills like candy, and she has an affinity for heavy drinking. She still carries her spoiled and privileged attitude which clashes with her new destitute reality. And all of this is brought on by her lousy husband. We see the events leading to Jasmine’s fall from luxury through several cleverly incorporated flashbacks. We watch her husband Hal (Alec Bladwin) and his penchant for women and shady business deals while she lives in a diamond-studded state of naïveté. She’s content with living high on the hog while asking no questions whatsoever. That proves to be a costly mistake, both mentally and monetarily.

Jasmine’s snooty ego doesn’t fit well with the circle of people she is introduced to in San Francisco. This class clash is the prominent focus for most of the film. This is also where we meet the film’s fantastic assortment of side characters. Hawkins is great as Jasmine’s kindhearted sister and I really liked Bobby Cannavele as her blue-collar beau hunk boyfriend. We get Michael Stuhlbarg as a lovestruck dentist and Peter Sarsgaard pops up as a wealthy businessman with political aspirations. But the biggest treat was Andrew Dice Clay. Yes you heard me, Andrew Dice Clay. Gone is the loud obnoxious standup routine. Here he plays a humble, hard-working fellow that you can’t help but sympathize with. And it’s all because of the unbelievable turn from Dice Clay. He was completely natural and restrained. Brilliant work.

BLUE2

But the true star is Cate Blanchett who undoubtedly gives one of the year’s finest performances. There are bits of subtle humor that are sprinkled in throughout her story. But she’s more of a sad, self-destructive woman who has no sense of direction or belonging. Blanchett visualizes her struggles through every fidget, every bead of sweat, and every outburst. She’s not a likable character by any stretch but she’s simply mesmerizing. Blanchett gives a performance that is getting some Oscar hype. Personally I think it demands an Oscar nomination.

It’s clear that “Blue Jasmine” was influenced by other films. For example if you listen closely you can hear “A Streetcar Named Desire” passing in the distance. But Woody Allen has always been a filmmaker who treasures inspiration and when he is on his game he can truly deliver. This is really good material handled by an excellent cast including a surprise performance from Andrew Dice Clay and some of the best work of Cate Blanchett’s career. “Blue Jasmine” may not stay with you for a long time nor be considered among Allen’s very best by the bigger fans of his work. For me it really worked and it’s definitely good Woody Allen.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Blackfish”

Blackfish poster

It’s good to see that documentaries are slowly becoming a recognizable force in the world of cinema. Each year an assortment of insightful and engaging docs that inform and challenge are made by visionary and passionate filmmakers. This year one of the films getting a lot is of press is “Blackfish”. This documentary focuses on Tilikum, a 12,000 pound orca who performs at SeaWorld in Orlando, Florida. It chronicles the events surrounding Tilikum, including his original capture in 1983, his life in captivity, and his involvement in the deaths of two trainers and a SeaWorld guest.

Let me start with the film’s strength. This is a brilliantly made documentary in terms of its structure and pacing. Director and co-writer Gabriela Cowperthwaite has an unquestionable knack for presentation. With practically no spoken narration, the film seamlessly moves from one interview bite to another mixing in home video footage, archived news reports, and courtroom testimonies. There is never a lull and I found myself glued to the screen even when some of what I was seeing wasn’t that convincing. It has a riveting cinematic flare to it that definitely hits on the emotional level. And clearly emotions were a central target that “Blackfish” had in mind.

Blackfish2

For me, good documentaries enlighten, challenge, inform, and expose. I like it when they take on a tough subject with passion and conviction. But I also appreciate balance, not in terms of equal time for a counterpoint, but in fact telling and representation. That’s a balance that I think is missing here. “Blackfish” is after all an advocacy film. It has a clear objective in mind and there is nothing wrong with that. But there reached a point where I felt chunks of information were being left out and the film was going for a more emotionally manipulative approach. I’m certainly not saying there aren’t moments that truly cut to the heart, but “Blackfish” wants the audience thinking solely with the heart and judging by many of the responses that seems to have worked.

Those interviewed for the doc are mainly a handful of ex-SeaWorld trainers, an OSHA representative, and an orca expert. It’s a single-minded group who offer some thought-provoking insight but also have a similar objective – spotlight the evils of orca captivity and put the crosshairs on SeaWorld. I thought the film’s case was the strongest when it was explaining facts about orcas in their natural habitats. It is also hard not to be effected when we see how some of these early parks operated. And I believe the doc raises some good questions about SeaWorld’s safety protocols.

Blackfish1

But the film falls short when it tries to land its bigger punches. For example the main argument of “Blackfish” is that Tilikum killed three people as a direct result of being held in captivity. Yet Tilikum’s culpability in two of the deaths is sketchy. The first death also involved two aggressive female orcas and the second death involved a man who hid in the park and climbed into the tank with Tilikum after hours. Cowperthwaite briefly touches on these details but then uses the deaths to further a point of view. There is also the goal of making SeaWord out to be nothing more than an evil money-grubbing corporation. While SeaWorld should answer some of the film’s piercing questions, this is a self-serving characterization that overlooks some key facts about the establishment.

“Blackfish” makes a few other missteps. It often gives definitive statements about ambiguous events and it does try to frame opinions as facts. But it also gave me a greater appreciation for these incredible animals and it challenged my past apathy towards their plight. “Blackfish” does ask some powerful questions and it does so through a near perfect presentation. I only wish it was as interested in appealing to the audience’s examination as it is to the their emotions. That type of manipulation just wasn’t needed. Then again, it seems to be a tactic that has really worked so far.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS