REVIEW: “The Jungle Book” (2016)

March 8, 2017 by Keith Garlington

As a moviegoer one of the best experiences you can have is unexpectedly discovering a wonderful film. It may be a movie you flippantly dismissed. Maybe one you had absolutely no expectations for. But then you see it and you’re blindsided by how good it truly is. Everything I just described defines my experience with Jon Favreau’s “The Jungle Book”.

This semi-live action remake of Disney’s 1967 animated classic may be my biggest surprise of the year. On the surface remaking this story through live action and a ton of CGI seems unnecessary. But while it has been years since I’ve seen the original, Favreau’s freshened up version pulls just as much from Rudyard Kipling’s 1894 stories as the animated feature. And it actually leaves a much stronger and more satisfying impression. Again, something I never expected.

Debuting young actor Neel Seethi plays a “man-cub” named Mowgli. Orphaned as a child and raised by a wolf named Raksha (Lupita Nyong’o), Mowgli lives among the pack trying to fit in but knowing he is unlike the other wolves. A black panther named Bagheera (Ben Kingsley), who first discovered Mowgli as a baby, now trains him to live like the wolves while avoiding his ‘man tricks’ as a means to survive. Despite the good intentions, this only accentuates Mowgli’s human-born inferiority.

When the dry season arrives a vicious human-hating Bengal tiger named Shere Khan (Idris Elba) breaks a longstanding water truce and states he will kill Mowgli once the rains come. Fearing for his wolf family’s safety, Mowgli leaves his pack and ventures into the jungle, but he quickly realizes the dangers of Shere Kahn’s violent and dogged determination.

The Justin Marks screenplay bounces back and forth between perilous thrills and lighthearted comedy and that’s no complaint. It works because he always keeps the focus on Mowgli and his venture to find and understand where he fits in. It’s a simple but heartwarming story that never flatlines and never insults its audience by dumbing itself down. It’s one of those rare family treats that easily speaks to every age group.

The story is also written in a way that allows Favreau and his animation team to flex their computer-generated muscles. Let me be clear, this film looks amazing. The effects are nothing short of extraordinary. Shot entirely on Los Angeles sound stages and employing the latest innovations in motion capture, photorealistic rendering, and CGI, Favreau’s undertaking was incredibly ambitious and could have easily failed. Instead he creates a gorgeous and sublimely realistic world that shows off one incredible location after another and that makes talking animals as believable as possible.

And speaking of those talking animals, the voice work is another huge plus. Kingsley, Nyong’o, Scarlett Johansson as a sultry serpent, Christopher Walken as a gigantopithecus mob boss – they’re all excellent. But the standouts are Bill Murray as a big brown sloth bear and Elba’s terrorizing Shere Kahn. Murray’s Baloo allows him the vocal space to be exactly what you would want from him – Bill Murray playing a bear. On the other end Elba brings such danger and menace to the film’s tiger antagonist.

But it all comes back to Seethi and his wonderful debut performance. The lone human character of any significance, Seethi is asked to carry a pretty big load. He manages wonderfully. His performance is one of many things that make Favreau’s project so satisfying. Toss in its great characters, good story, perfect pacing, and mind-blowing special effects. There are two songs which feel wedged in and a little jarring and the plot does rely on a couple of ‘conveniences’, but in no way do those minor gripes ruin what may have been the most pleasant surprise of 2016.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

2017 BlindSpot Series – “In the Mood for Love”

March 5, 2017 by Keith Garlington

With such a passionate, seductive title, “In the Mood for Love” may tempt you to believe it is something it’s not. The film’s English title is based on “I’m In the Mood for Love”, a song made famous by the likes of Louis Armstrong, Frank Sinatra, and Nat King Cole among others. But unlike the song’s alluringly romantic sentiment, the film has a much more cynical perspective – cynical yet still intensely romantic.

There’s a key line in the film where a character asks “It was so nice then, wasn’t it?” In many ways that’s the question from the start. Early on the film conveys a feeling that we are looking back in time – that we are gazing on what might have been. Technically we aren’t, but writer and director Wong Kar-wai’s crafty approach leaves us wondering. Elements of time do play into the story and the aching hearts of the two main characters intensifies the more time passes by.

The film features popular Asian stars Tony Leung and Maggie Cheung. Their story begins in the crowded, changing 1962 Hong Kong. Both are stable career people. Leung plays a reporter named Chow while Cheung plays an executive’s assistant named Su. They end up moving next door in the same tight apartment building. Everything seems pretty stable except for one thing – their marriages. As it turns out their spouses are having an affair together and that discovery serves as the catalyst for their unique relationship.

Wong Kar-wai’s hypnotic story structure elegantly drifts back-and-forth between dreamy and bruising reality. There are no dream sequences – only soothing interludes in tune with the narrative’s continuity yet feeling almost otherworldly. It’s here that the camera steals the show. Scene after scene features Kar-wai’s masterful blend of lyrical and visual.

The story moves at a deliberate but meaningful pace. Su and Chow are two bruised souls who in each other find an outlet to reckon with their pain and feelings of betrayal. They role-play in an attempt to figure out who made the first adulterous move. They rehearse the best way to confront their cheating spouses. Yet during all of their time together they are determined not to commit the same sins. Ironically it’s a misunderstanding of this pledge that proves to be their biggest hurdle to true healing and happiness.

As I mentioned “In the Mood for Love” is intensely romantic but painfully so. There is a continual aching from title screen to end credits. It’s emphasized through the film’s mesmerizing cinematography and composer Shigeru Umebayashi’s entrancing “Yumeji’s Theme”. Wong Kar-wai keeps everything moving at his pace and with his two main characters as the focus. We never once see the faces of the adulterers. We see their backs and hear their voices but that’s it. So many movies like to put the cheaters in the spotlight. This film is much more interested in the real people left in their wake.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Don’t Think Twice”

March 2, 2017 by Keith Garlington

Writer-director Mike Birbiglia proves he’s one to watch after his smart, witty, and utterly genuine comedy/drama “Don’t Think Twice”. This infectious indie examines the fine line between collaborative loyalties and personal career ambitions while at the same time celebrating a very distinct form of American performance art.

Birbiglia’s career in humor has had many faces. He’s mostly known for his stand-up comedy but has found success as an author and film actor. Birbiglia also spent time doing improv during his college years which strengthens his voice in this film. He’s a guy who intimately understands the difficulties of the funnyman trade which is made clear by the delicacy and candor he uses in handling his material.

The story revolves around a Brooklyn-based improv troupe known as The Commune. It consists of six friends who genuinely love what they do but who aren’t without higher ambitions. While they maintain steady audiences, making people laugh isn’t always a lucrative occupation and several members work side jobs just to get by. The big blow comes when the group is hit with the news that their theater space is closing. Yet regardless of their circumstances and just like in improv, the tightly-knit group always have each other’s back.

Miles (played by Birbiglia) founded the group and spends his spare time teaching improv and talking about the time he was “within inches” of making it big. Jack (Keegan-Michael Key) has a ton of talent but tends to thrust himself into the spotlight. His girlfriend Samantha (Gillian Jacobs) doesn’t know where she wants her career to go. Allison (Kate Micucci) has been struggling to finish her graphic novel for years. Bill (Chris Gethard) battles insecurity and feelings that true success has passed him by. Lindsay (Tami Sagher) lives off of her rich parents and is constantly in counseling. It’s a good assortment of characters with solid performances throughout.

Their camaraderie is tested when one member breaks their second commandment – “It’s all about the group”. Reps from Weekend Live (a sketch comedy television show in the vein of Saturday Night Live) attend one of The Commune’s shows and afterwards offer auditions to two members of the group. What looks like opportunity for two gives way to envy, frustration, and insecurity as each person is forced to deal with where they are in life both professionally and personally. And as in reality, the truth isn’t always easy to digest.

Despite the great chemistry in their performances and their seamless friendships, Birbiglia creates a looming cloud of desperation that hangs over each character. And everything is grounded in reality. Because of this the film works as a genuinely funny comedy but also a bittersweet drama. Everyone feels in tune with their circumstance and each relationship we get is authentic.

By the end of “Don’t Think Twice” I felt I knew each of these people. I knew their personalities, their struggles, and their aspirations. Most importantly I cared. That’s because there is an honest approach to the material by everyone involved. I found myself caught up in its wit and sincerity as well as its ability to remind us that life can be as spontaneous and uncertain as the performance art this film is celebrating.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

Random Thoughts: The 2017 Oscars

February 27, 2017 by Keith Garlington

It’s hard to believe another year and another Oscars ceremony has come and gone. As expected a lot of things went the obvious route and there were very few surprises. The were some great speeches, some weird moments, and relentless political babbling from Jimmy Kimmel . But the 2017 Academy Awards will forever be remembered for its ridiculous goofup to end the night. As a whole it was a fun celebration of the past movie season. As I do every year, here are a few random thoughts.

Jimmy Kimmel had some decent moments. There were some good gags particularly his constant bit with Matt Damon and some of his political stuff hit the mark. Eventually politics got old yet Kimmel milked it dry. He ended up helping the show run about 40 minutes over. Overall not bad hosting but nothing special.
Let’s get right to it. Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway’s Best Picture announcement is now etched in Oscar history. The win went to “La La Land”, they had time to walk up to the stage, they hugged and celebrated, gave acceptance speeches, and then someone magically got word that “Moonlight” was the actual winner? I’m not a conspiracy theorist but something seems a little fishy.
Beatty has gotten a lot of heat, but it’s pretty clear he and Dunaway aren’t to blame. The production team and PricewaterhouseCoopers are more responsible for the flub. Who knows the full truth, but it sure is a lot to swallow. Pretty embarrassing. It was a kind move by Kimmel to try and deflect the blame towards himself.

As for “Moonlight”, it remains my least favorite of the Best Picture nominees. I just don’t share the adoration. It’s a very okay movie that loses a ton of steam once Mahershala Ali leaves the screen. Aside from Ali and some striking camerawork, “Moonlight” takes a long time to say much of anything, but it does check several important boxes that will help Academy voters to feel better after last year’s drumming.
Hats off to Jordan Horowitz, producer for “La La Land”. In what had to be a major disappointment he was incredibly gracious is handing the trophies over to “Moonlight”. Wonderful appreciation shown back by Barry Jenkins. Both men showed a lot of class.
“La La Land” didn’t go home empty-handed. The film won six Oscars despite missing a well-deserved Best Picture win. There were hints it could lose the biggest award. For some reason many naturally rebel against movies that earn a lot of awards attention. Plus with so many people currently hellbent on division why would the Best Picture Oscar go to a nostalgic movie aimed at making us feel good and offering a cinematic and musical escape? Unfortunately the writing was on the wall.
Remember when “Hacksaw Ridge” won for Best Editing? Historically there’s a strong link between winners of Best Editing and Best Picture. I thought for a second that we might be blindsided at the end of the show. Actually we were but for much different reasons.
Predictably Casey Affleck won the Best Actor Oscar for “Manchester by the Sea”. Great performance but Denzel Washington was my hands-down favorite. I knew he was a long shot to win, but he gave a performance not to be forgotten. And what an amazing presence at the Oscars!

Speaking of Affleck, notice how he got a standing ovation yet many still treat Mel Gibson as a pariah? Another case of selective forgiveness?
And speaking of Mel, it looked like he was having a good time and took Kimmel’s ribbing like a champ. It was also nice to see his genuine joy for the others who won for “Hacksaw Ridge”.
My goodness, Viola Davis. Not only did she give one of the best performances in “Fences”, but she gave the best speech of the night. She was gracious and genuinely moved. Supporting Actress was a strong category but Davis was definitely the best. It was so good to hear her name called.
While we are on great speeches, the humility shown by Mahershala Ali was incredible. His Supporting Actor win clearly touched him which is always great to see. He gave three really good performances in 2016 and it’s good to see his work rewarded.
The parachuting candy thing – did they really need to do it THREE times?
On the other hand the tour bus bit was pretty funny. Imagine that surprise! And thanks to it #garyfromchicago became a thing!
One of the real treats of the night was seeing winners spread out among most of the Best Picture nominees. “La La Land”, “Moonlight”, “Hacksaw Ridge”, “Manchester by the Sea”, “Fences” and “Arrival” each took home statues.
Sunny Pawar was absolutely delightful. Kimmel looked a little goofy during their moment but how adorable was Pawar?

The In Memoriam was particularly brutal this year. Many scoff at the Academy’s “death montage”. I actually appreciate the honoring of their memory. Fisher, Hurt, Kennedy, Riva, Reynolds, Wilder, Paxton, Yelchin, Kiarostami and so many more. Tough losses.
And Sara Bareilles’ singing of “Both Sides Now” during the In Memoriam – emotional and beautiful.
The Best Picture goof up wasn’t the Academy’s only mistake. During the In Memoriam costume designer and four-time Oscar nominee Janet Patterson was shown. She passed away last October. Here’s the problem, along with her name was a picture of Jan Chapman, a producer who is quite alive. Come on Academy, really?
Here’s a fun Oscar fact that may have went unnoticed. Kevin O’Connell won the Sound Mixing Oscar for “Hacksaw Ridge”. It was his 21st nomination without a single win…until last night!
Despite taking up a Best Actress spot from several more deserving women, they still found a way to give Meryl Streep a standing ovation. Yes, we get it, she’s great, move on.
I’m usually not that into the musical performances on Oscar night but a couple really stood out. I mentioned Bareilles, but how about young Auli’i Cravalho ? She hit the audience with a soaring rendition of “How Far I’ll Go” from “Moana”. It was fabulous despite her being hit with a flag. And then she ended it with a sweet genuine exhale. Her expression was priceless.

“Suicide Squad” is now an Oscar winner! Can DC now claim victory over Marvel in the superhero movie genre? Not even close.
Back to the Kimmel vs Damon bit, when Damon came out with Ben Affleck to present he was announced as “guest”. Any time Damon would try and speak Kimmel had the orchestra play him off. Everything about it worked. Hilarious.
Asghar Farhadi wins his second Foreign Language Oscar for “The Salesman”, a film that still hasn’t opened around me. He remains one of my favorite working directors and I love seeing him honored.

Those are just a few random thoughts on what was a really weird night. As usual the Academy had several hits and misses, but still the art took center stage. How about we do it again next year?

5 Phenomenal Movie Dogs

February 24, 2017 by Keith Garlington

Who doesn’t like dogs? Sure, some of us may be more of a cat person than a dog person, but it’s hard to deny the charms of cute canines. The same applies to the movies. Even the biggest sourpuss has to enjoy it when movies use dogs well within their stories. Today I’m looking at five of my favorite movie pups. Obviously there have been many so to cut down the choices I’ve left out some obvious ones. Benji, Old Yeller, Toto – some names too obvious to mention. I also ruled out dogs that were the stars of their movies. Because of that I wouldn’t call this the definitive list, but there’s no denying that these five movie dogs are absolutely phenomenal.

#5 – Pard (“High Sierra”)

In Humphrey Bogart’s fantastic crime thriller “High Sierra” the cute little puppy Pard was more mischievous than helpful. Funny thing is Pard was played by Bogie’s own dog Zero. Pard brings such a fun injection of energy but also plenty of heart. That’s especially evident in the film’s inevitable but moving final scene. That alone seals Pard’s place on this list.

#4 – Fred (“Smokey and the Bandit”)

The road comedy “Smokey and the Bandit” is fun for several reasons. One is Jerry Reed’s character Snowman and his Basset Hound best friend Fred. It’s said Burt Reynolds personally chose the dog to play Fred because of its unruly attitude. It was a key personality trait because Fred’s unruliness is part of his hilarious charm. And also the great chemistry he has with Reed.

#3 – Milo (“The Mask”)

While you may be able to argue against “The Mask” as a movie (I still happen to enjoy it), you can’t argue against the film’s little Jack Russell terrier named Milo. He’s cute, adorable, and one heck of a four-legged comedian. Look no further than the scene where helps his owner Stanley (Jim Carrey) bust out of prison. It’s a hysterical moment that by itself makes Milo worthy of this list.

#2 – Flike (“Umberto D”)

Sure dogs can be cute and funny attention-getters. Many movies have used them that way. But in “Umberto D” by the great Vittorio De Sica, its dog is simply a companion – faithful, loving, and a true lifesaver. Flike certainly has his adorable moments, but what makes him so wonderful is his steady presence by his owner’s side even through difficult circumstances. Their relationship is sometimes heavy with sadness but it’s often tender and heartwarming which ultimately is what the owner desperately needs.

#1 – Jack (“The Artist”)

There is another Jack Russell terrier that absolutely had to make this list. Jack was not only adorable but was also a bona fide hero in the Best Picture winning “The Artist”. Jack was wonderfully played by Uggie and there was a campaign to get him recognized by the Academy. In the film Jack’s companionship proves to be vital and in the film’s big climactic scene Jack is a pivotal player. Sadly Uggie died in 2015, but I’ll always remember this energetic little scene-stealer.

There you have my picks for five of the best movie dogs. Obviously there are a number not included. What would have made your list? Please share your thoughts in the comment section below.

REVIEW: “Paterson”

February 21, 2017 by Keith Garlington

“Paterson”, the beguiling new film from Jim Jarmusch, is certain to be criticized by some as slow and mundane. They wouldn’t be wrong. But the great joy of the film lies in Jarmusch’s unfettered assurance in his story and in the way it should be told. And when a true craftsman is confident in what he’s creating, you can bet there is purpose and meaning hidden in the film’s every corner. So it becomes our duty to look deeper into the supposed minutia and see what he is trying to convey. That’s always been part of the allure of Jarmusch’s films.

“Paterson” is no different. It’s a cinematic poem about a poet and the everyday life that inspires his poetry. To understand the film we must understand the man. And to understand the man we must understand his life. To do that Jarmusch takes us through seven ordinary days for a man named Paterson (played by a perfectly subdued Adam Driver), a bus driver from (poetically) Paterson, New Jersey.

Paterson’s life is one of routine. Each morning he wakes up around 6:15, snuggles with his wife Laura (Golshifteh Farahani), and eats a bowl of cereal before walking to work. When he gets home they have dinner then he walks their cantankerous English bulldog Marvin (an absolute scene-stealer). While out, he stops at a corner bar where he treats himself to one beer. We usually leave him staring into his half-empty or half-full mug, depending on how his day went. The next morning this creature of habit gets up and does it all over again.

But it’s the spaces in between this daily routine that give the film life – the collections of seemingly small things that make even the most ordinary day unique. Jarmusch fills these spaces with an assortment of the simplest conversations, observations, and interactions. He never feels compelled to manufacture melodrama or conflict. Instead he allows life to happen without any dramatic prodding. And it’s these modestly presented moments that give Paterson his identity.

With his soulful face, tempered emotions and unassuming presence, Driver couldn’t be better suited for Jarmusch’s low-key vision. His Paterson eases through life, accepting and embracing what it has to offer. That mindset feeds into his poetry which he pieces together during the quiet moments of his day. I’m not the guy to say whether his poems are good or not, but where they come from and what they reveal about Paterson is far more important than their quality. His poetry is a window into one of Jarmusch’s running themes – appreciation for the little things. I mean he wrote an entire poem about a box of matches.

Even his relationship with Laura reflects a gentle, relaxed perspective. They delightfully compliment one another despite their noticeable differences. Look no further than their creativity. Paterson’s poetry is personal, and he keeps it tucked away in his notebook. Laura’s creative ambitions are flaky but earnest, and she doesn’t mind sharing it with anyone. Paterson is dedicated to poetry despite his lack of confidence. Laura goes with her artistic flavor of the moment. It may be cupcakes, interior design, or country music guitar. Yet both are equally supportive of the other. Some of the film’s sweetest moments have Paterson taking in Laura’s excitement and then offering encouragement. Again, no spectacular artificial tension. Just life.

“Paterson” is indeed about appreciating the little things. It’s also about the convergence of art and everyday life. It’s even a tender story of love and contentment. As in his previous films, Jarmusch’s approach is minimalist yet subtly robust. His structure resembles stanzas of a poem, and they are filled with relaxed easygoing rhythms that sweep you through from start to finish. You’ll notice other Jarmusch signatures – his quiet off-beat sense of humor, his compelling use of location, and the fascinating mellow harmony with which he works. If you are a fan of his films like I am, “Paterson” will be an absolute delight.