Author Archives: Keith Garlington

REVIEW: “Man of Steel”

by

67

Man of Steel Poster

Perhaps no 2013 movie has been more hyped or more scrutinized prior to its release than “Man of Steel”. Maybe it’s the talent that’s been assembled both in front of and behind the camera. Maybe it’s the heartfelt desire of fanboys like me for a good quality Superman movie during this current age of superhero cinema. Whatever it is, “Man of Steel” seems destined to disappoint on some levels for some. Well it’s finally arrived and for me it didn’t disappoint even though its a film that I needed to digest first.

This is certainly a different Superman movie than any of the others that we’ve seen which means it will definitely have to dodge its share of criticisms. Some will surely have issues with the different tone of this film and others will struggle with the creative liberties that do strip the picture of some of the things that the other Superman movies leaned heavily on. But when looked at as a clearly distinct Superman picture I feel it holds up quite strongly on its on. I certainly don’t want to discount the problems others may have with the film, but I think it’s a movie that offers a unique vision laced with fun summer action while also showing a level of respect for the source material.

David Goyer and Christopher Nolan put together the story and the directing reigns were handed to Zack Snyder. Their Superman universe starts by placing us into a crumbling planet Krypton. It’s a vision of the planet unlike any we’ve seen before and we get some interesting doses of their society, political structure, and more importantly the danger they’re facing. Due to some ill-advised planetary resourcing, Krypton is on the verge of destruction. Understanding his planet’s fate, Jor-El (wonderfully played by Russell Crowe) and wife Lara (Ayelet Zurer) shoot their infant son Kal off the planet destined for Earth. With him is a codex which will ensure the survival of the Kryptonian race. We also meet the megalomaniacal rebel General Zod (Michael Shannon), an old friend of Jor-El’s whose more violent solutions for survival seriously clash with the society.

man of steel 3

From there the movie jumps ahead 30 Earth years or so. Kal-El (Henry Cavill) now named Clark, is a wanderer who works as everything from a crab fisherman to a truck stop waiter. Along the way he has left behind numerous stories of his superhuman heroism. Now the tale of his arrival on Earth is familiar enough and the film doesn’t waste a lot of time going back over it. As a baby he’s found by Ma and Pa Kent (Diane Lane and Kevin Costner) and raised on their farm in Kansas. We see glimpses of his childhood through a series of very effect flashbacks. I have to say I loved this approach and each jump back into Clark’s past offered an interesting look at the different struggles and hardships he faced. Costner and Lane both give fabulous performances and inject some real emotion into the story.

As you probably guessed Zod and his followers track Kal to Earth and seek him out hoping to regain the codex and restore Krypton in their own genocidal way. It’s here that Clark must either embrace the destiny set before him and protect his new home or watch the human race be destroyed at the hands of his fellow Kryptonians. Through this we get a lot of mulling and conversation about whether or not the human race is ready to accept a super alien species. That’s soon tested after Clark saves the life of the spunky Lois Lane (Amy Adams) who insists on finding out more about her hero.

This Lois Lane is quite different than the versions we’ve come to know and this leads to one issue that I know some will have with the film. There’s a wild inversion of events that takes place in “Man of Steel” than definitely effects the relationship between Lois and Clark. For me, their romance has always been a crucial function that makes his whole story work. Because of the chronological tinkering, I found their romance to be lacking. But it isn’t completely ineffective. Adams gives a nice performance. It’s just that her Lois feels so different than others. She’s also much more out of the element that we’re used to seeing her in. Overall it didn’t seriously bother me but it didn’t always feel right.

la_ca_0416_man_of_steel

While the Lois character may have raised questions, I had none when it came to Michael Shannon’s Zod. From his first moments on screen he comes across as unstable and menacing. Shannon goes after it and I never doubted him for a second. I also really liked Antje Traue as Faora, Zod’s loyal second in command. She’s dry and super serious and she perfectly compliments Shannon’s performance. In movies like this it’s crucial to have a strong villain and Shannon brings that. Many of my favorite scenes feature him and none are better than when he makes his first appearance on Earth.

I’ve mentioned many of the performances but the real question mark for me was Henry Cavill. Could he capture the man of steel in a convincing way? The answer is yes. I liked Cavill here. I do think he’s helped by the screenplay which rarely asks him to do too much. But during the small scenes where he’s needed to exhibit some range he succeeds. This was a big deal because a poor performance from him could have derailed the entire production. Cavill has the look, the physicality, and the commitment to sell the character.

There’s no denying that “Man of Steel” sports a much more serious tone and it lacks the lighthearted playfulness of the other movies. This has proven to be a hurdle that some just can’t get over. In many ways I welcome it. “Man of Steel” gives us a much more serious Superman story but it’s not without its share of funny moments. It just chooses to spend its time delving into some things we’ve rarely seen in the other films. I appreciated that and it’s one of the key things that keeps this from feeling exactly like every other Superman movie we’ve been given.

Man of Steel 1

And of course you can’t talk about “Man of Steel” without getting into the action sequences and special effects. This is where Zack Snyder’s fingerprints really show up. The film looks fantastic and it features some really fun science fiction. Everything including the space ships, Zod and his crew’s wicked armor and air mask apparatus, the destruction of buildings and vehicles, it all is beautifully crafted and realized by Snyder’s keen stylistic eye. And we see that eye at work a lot in this film. There is a ton of action here but most of it is pulled off to great effect. Snyder shows off his effects with skill except for in the big finale. It’s here that about 5 minutes of crumbling buildings alone could have been left on the cutting room floor and the movie would have been better for it.

So how do I summarize all of this? Amid “Man of Steel’s” booming action sequences and sky-high expectations lies a very good Superman reboot that I think shines in its uniqueness. Yes, a few of its directional choices don’t work as well as I would have liked and the final action sequence can be a bit numbing. But this has all the ingredients of being a franchise I can latch onto. I also appreciate that it steered the material away from cartoony and ventured to give us a more stern and grounded story. And I like that it brings the character back from the waste that Bryan Singer left him in. “Man of Steel” gives us someone bound by morals and committed to truth and justice. In other words, “Man of Steel” gives us Superman. All if this led to an experience that I found most satisfying and I’m anxious to see what lies ahead for this franchise.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

5 PHENOMENAL MOVIE GEEKS

by

32

movie_theatre - Phenom 5

I think all of us have a little nerd in us. Maybe that’s why nerds have done so well on the movie screen. Throughout the years filmmakers have given us a great variety of nerds and/or geeks in a wide range of films. They have been lovable losers, saviors for superspies, and seekers of revenge on a college campus. So this week I’m giving nerds and geeks their due. I’m looking at five phenomenal movie nerds or geeks that make their film all the more better. Now I am fully aware of the fact that there have been many nerds throughout movie history so I would be foolish to call this the definitive list. Still, there is no denying that these five movie geeks are simply phenomenal.

#5 – EGON SPENGLER (“Ghostbusters”)

111EGON

Anyone who grew up in or is familiar with the 1980s knows all about “Ghostbusters”. It was a fun comedy with a great cast that was followed by sequels, toys, and a cartoon. As pertaining to this list, it’s safe to say that none of the guys were what you would call “cool”. But there were two mega-geeks in this film and it was tough choosing which one to include. Sorry Rick Moranis, I’m going with Harold Ramis and his Egon Spengler character. Egon is a perfect geek. He’s socially awkward. He has the thick glasses. He has the brains and a clear science addiction. But he’s also hilarious and a ton of fun to watch.

#4 – CLARK KENT (“Superman” – 1978)

111CLARK

Was he just a good actor or did he have a split personality? Whichever it is, Clark Kent was certainly a convincing geek. We all know the story. Clark Kent is really Superman’s secret identity. He’s a goofy and sometimes bumbling oaf. Even more, aside from a comb-over haircut and a pair of horn-rimmed glasses, his geekiness is the only thing that hides his true Man of Steel identity. And the fact that no one can figure out his secret is either a testament to their stupidity or to how big of a geek Clark really is. Christopher Reeve certainly sold it and I think his Clark Kent is perfect for this list.

#3 – KIP DYNAMITE (“Napoleon Dynamite”)

111KIP

Okay, you have to be a big-time geek if you beat out Napoleon Dynamite as the biggest geek from that movie. Kip Dynamite may be the wackiest and most peculiar person on this list. But he may also be the most hysterical character in all of movie geekdom. Whether it be his delusionary aspirations to be a cage fighter or his hunky presence in the internet chat rooms, Kip will have you laughing out loud in every scene he’s a part of. His wardrobe, hairstyle, and mannerisms all scream “GEEK”, but it’s his zany eccentricities that makes him such a fantastic character and one of film’s greatest geeks.

#2 – MAX FISCHER (“Rushmore”)

111MAX

I was late catching up to Wes Anderson’s “Rushmore” but man, I’m glad I finally did. One of the great things about “Rushmore” is that it gave us the great character Max Fischer. Max is a geek through and through as evident by his affection for wacky extracurricular school clubs and his general offbeat approach to people and circumstances. Jason Schwartzman along with Anderson’s sharp and witty script develop a movie geek who can be hilarious but also has a darker side underneath. I love these layers to the character and Max Fischer has to be on this list.

#1 – TED (“Sixteen Candles”)

111SIXTEEN

Anthony Michael Hall could have legitimately captured three spots on this list. He was an amazing geek in “The Breakfast Club”. He was as nerdy as they come in “Weird Science”. But for me, the text book movie geek is his character Ted in “Sixteen Candles”. In fact, his character isn’t even given a last name. He’s simply known as Ted the Geek. From his very first scene, Ted steals the show. His coolness, a fantasy that exists only in his mind and in the minds of his “dudes”, is always on display which leads to one memorable movie moment after another. I laugh every time I see him and for me Ted is the quintessential movie geek.

So there they are. Now you know my top five movie geeks. So who did I miss? What movie geek would you put on your list? Please be sure to leave your comments below and list your favorites.

REVIEW: “Before Sunset”

by

29

BEFORE POSTERIn 1995 writer and director Richard Linklater introduced us to Jesse and Celine, two young twentysomethings who – by one spontaneous act – end up spending one night together roaming the streets of Vienna. The two open themselves up to each other and fall in love. The movie ends with Jesse heading to the airport to catch his flight back to the United States and Celine catching her train to Paris. Both agree to meet back at the same station on a set day five years later but as they go their separate ways they, and we, wonder if they will ever see each other again. That movie was “Before Sunrise”. That’s brings us to 2004 and “Before Sunset”, a sequel directed, produced, and co-written by Linklater that tells us what happened to these two fascinating characters.

Ethan Hawke returns as Jesse and we find him at Shakespeare & Company in Paris doing a signing for his new book. Jesse seems successful. His book has taken off and Paris is the last stop on his European promotional blitz before heading back home in the states to his wife and child. While being interviewed we discover that his new book is based on his romance in Vienna 9 years earlier. We also see in the corner of the bookstore Celine (Julie Delpy). Celine, now living in Paris, had come across the promotion of Jesse’s appearance. After finishing his last interview Jesse sees Celine in the corner and the two meet again. Jesse has a few hours before his flight so they slip out and walk through Paris, catching up, reconnecting, tapping into old feelings, and second guessing their life choices.

“Before Sunset” pretty much follows the same formula as the first film. It’s an extremely talky movie and the two main characters are the centerpiece. We see the awkwardness of them first meeting again and their reflections on their night together and the reunion that was to take place five years afterwards. But it doesn’t take long before we see evidence of the same chemistry that had drawn them so close together before. The conversations flow naturally – at first as if getting to know each other again then later like two soul mates pouring their hearts out – and we never doubt that there is a real connection between these two characters.

BEFORE1

In the first film both were young, energetic, and open. But as the movie moved along we found they each had their own worries and insecurities. Jesse took solace in seeing himself as not belonging which in turn gave him a sense of freedom. Nine years later, even with his success as a writer and a wife and child, Jesse still feels as if he doesn’t belong but the byproduct that he once saw as freedom has now become a stranglehold. In the first film Celine was witty, optimistic, and open-minded but yet with her own reservations about things. Nine years later her optimism has turned to pessimism; her open-mindedness has become cynicism and distrust. While she’s still as witty as ever, she has changed the most of the two and it’s clear that she’s wrestling with some overwhelming inner feelings. She’s bitter and forlorn and even a bit neurotic when her emotions get the best of her.

“Before Sunset” isn’t as romantic as “Before Sunrise” but in a very real way it gives the first film a more forceful emotional punch. Their decisions, particularly at the end of the first movie, became life altering choices. Even smaller decisions such as not exchanging phone numbers turned out having monumental effects on the courses of both their lives. This gives the audience several good lessons and points to ponder and Linklater feeds those ideas throughout this film. And while the first film focused on the blossoming of love, this film showed the endurance of love, albeit a now unattainable love. We also see both Jesse and Celine shackled with their own personal and emotional baggage.

There’s a lot to like about this film but like it’s predecessor, the writing is really what makes this movie so special. Linklater once again worked with Kim Krizen to develop the story and Hawke and Delpy both contributed a lot to the screenplay. Like before, you can clearly see the collaborative effort of the four writers in not only creating two fascinating characters but in presenting a large amount of dialogue that we the audience never lose interest in. A lot of that is also due to Hawke and Delpy’s incredible performances. Both are extremely comfortable with the characters and the material and their own influence into the story translates strongly on screen. Also impressive is their ability to handle these long dialogue-soaked takes. There’s an enviable skill in being able to nail a long take. These two performers do it over and over again.

Before 2

In “Before Sunset” Linklater uses Paris instead of Vienna but uses it in a slightly better way. The beauty of Paris isn’t thrown in our faces. Instead it playfully lingers in the background injecting itself at just the right moments (as only the City of Light could do) giving the movie a more romantic feel. It’s not forceful or overdone. The movie was filmed in just 15 days and the very few locations used around the city were perfectly appropriate for the long tracking shots and framed still shots that Linklater incorporates. Another fun and interesting production note – Delpy also wrote and performed three songs for the film.

This is a movie that might not be for everyone. Those unable to withstand long sequences of just two people talking are going to struggle with this picture. But they’re also going to miss out on a fabulous film. The more I think on it, the more I view it and the first movie as inseparable. “Before Sunrise” clearly made the sequel possible but the sequel gave the first movie a real feeling of consequence. These two didn’t just go their separate ways from Vienna. They changed the courses of their lives forever and not necessarily for the better. It doesn’t have the romance of the first film and it’s ending left a little to be desired. But I still find these characters mesmerizing and easy to invest in. Now bring on the third film!

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Midnight in Paris”

by

43

MIDNIGHT POSTER

Without a doubt the romantic comedy is one of the weaker movie genres and has been for years. But sometimes we get a special gem that reminds us of just how fun these types of movies can be. “Midnight in Paris”, written and directed by Woody Allen, is a crash course in the art of making a romantic comedy. It is loaded with heart and feeling and doesn’t trudge down the same path as so many failed films of this genre. It’s a movie that captures the magic of it’s location and the inner workings of it’s characters. It’s clever and unique while maintaining a true romantic feel and sense of humor.

“Midnight in Paris” opens with a picturesque three-minute montage focusing on the beauty of Paris, France. It gracefully moves from one exquisitely framed shot to another, showing us historical landmarks, museums, cafes, and more all set to the lovely “Si Tu Vois Ma Mere”. It elegantly sets up the city of Paris as not only a central character in the film, but an enchanting and magical force whose influence is seen throughout the picture. In many ways Woody Allen is celebrating Paris. He wants us to love the city and appreciate the mystique of it’s rich history just as much as his main character does. Allen’s desire works. I was instantly grabbed and found myself totally lost in what I was seeing on the screen.

Midnight1

While Paris is at the heart of the story, the main character is Gil Pender (Owen Wilson), a hack Hollywood screenwriter who is visiting the city with his fiancée and her parents. Gil loves everything about Paris and to this day regrets his decision not to move there when he had a chance several years ago. He feels he was meant for more than writing screenplays but he struggles with confidence. He doesn’t feel comfortable in today’s world and believes he would be a better fit in the 1920s. His fiancée Inez (Rachel McAdams) is a spoiled momma’s girl who spends more time insulting Gil than supporting him. There is clearly a disconnect between the two. He loves Paris and she doesn’t. He’s working on a novel that he thinks will change his career and she thinks he’s wasting his time. He enjoys the small details in life while she would rather milk it for it’s benefits.

While in Paris they run into Paul (Michael Sheen), Inez’s old friend and self-proclaimed expert on everything from art to French culture to fine wines. Inez seems infatuated with Paul’s knowledge regardless of how many facts he gets wrong in his efforts to impress everyone. Needing to get away, Gil takes off on a late night walk. After getting lost, he is picked up by a group of partiers in an old classic car who magically transport him back to 1920s Paris. Here he meets many of his literary and artistic heroes such as Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Picasso, and Stein. He also meets the lovely Adriana (played wonderfully by Marion Cotillard) who he grows more attracted to with each midnight visit.

The fantasy turn of Allen’s story did feel a bit out of the blue at first but it didn’t take long before I was enthralled with what I was seeing. Gil’s golden age is recreated flawlessly from the music and atmosphere to the careful attention to detail. I loved seeing these authors, painters, composers, and filmmakers of old fleshed out through some fantastic performances. Tom Hiddleston and Alison Pill are absolutely brilliant as F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald. I also loved Marcial Di Fonzo Bo as Picasso and Adrien Brody as Dali, both in smaller but fun roles. And then there’s Corey Stoll as Hemingway who steals many of the scenes he’s in. The supporting cast is such a wonderful ingredient to the film’s charm.

MIDnight2

But in terms of acting it’s Owen Wilson that really blew me away. In many ways he plays a character that really fits him. We’ve seen elements of this performance in other roles of his but here everything is perfectly measured and controlled. Even though Woody Allen has stated he gave Wilson a lot of room to work, it’s clear that Allen has a solid influence on his performance. I’ve been really lukewarm concerning most of Wilson’s past work but he really, really impressed me here. He dials it back a bit and never allows his performance to drown out the material.

“Midnight in Paris” does call for the audience to just buy into it’s fantasy angle and if you struggle with that you may struggle with this picture. It also turns out to be fairly predictable in places. But these small gripes do nothing to kill the magic of this picture for me. This is certainly a love letter to Paris, but it’s also a lesson on living in the present. Allen reminds us that the golden age so many long for isn’t that different from where we are now. It’s a beautiful film both visually and structurally and it moves along at an almost poetic pace. Better yet, “Midnight in Paris” is a film that gives us hope for a struggling genre. I love this movie.

VERDICT – 5 STARS

5 STARSs

5STAR K&M

REVIEW: “Drive”

by

42

DRIVE poster

The opening scene of “Drive” is a slick and stylistic introduction to what the rest of the film aims to be – a tense yet deliberate car driving action picture. The opening scene happens to be one of the film’s best and its one of the few scenes that could be called memorable. But that’s not saying “Drive” is a bad movie. It has several things going for it. But underneath the crafty and stylish surface lies a fairly simple and conventional action thriller. From its lead character to the story development, everything moves along at a pretty measured pace with a straightforward narrative. Yet in the end I never connected with it like many others have.

Ryan Gosling plays a movie stunt driver who moonlights as a getaway wheelman for an assortment of shady characters. He’s only refered to as “the driver” or “the kid”. Gosling’s dialogue is sparse and he is required to reveal his character mainly through expressions and actions. We never get any background information on him and his character really isn’t fleshed out all that well. But in a way I liked that. I liked drawing my own conclusions based on his associations, occasional turns towards violence, and his compassion for Irene (Carey Mulligan), a neighbor from his apartment building with whom he begins a relationship. Their relationship consists of several scenes of the two looking and grinning at each other along with the occasional afternoon drive. Irene is raising her young son while her husband is away in prison and the driver is instantly attached to them both.

Drive1

Mood lighting + a toothpick = The Goz

Their growing relationship hits a speed bump when her husband Standard (Oscar Isaac) gets out of prison. Standard genuinely wants to turn his life around but some old debts make that a little hard. The driver agrees to help Standard mainly due to his affection for Irene and her son. Albert Brooks is good as mob guy Bernie Rose who, along with his partner Nino (Ron Perlman), are tied into Shannon (Bryan Cranston), a garage owner who supplies the driver with getaway jobs. Brooks’ character is the prototypical mob “bad guy” but with his own idiosyncrasies. He provides some fantastic scenes but unfortunately he all but disappears through the middle of the film. That’s a shame because I would love to see him get a little more screen time.

As I mentioned, “Drive” and its story are pretty straightforward. There’s not much that broadsides you nor is there anything that calls for your extra attention. There’s nothing especially unique and there aren’t any big surprises with the exception of a couple of brutally violent scenes that can be quite jarring. Speaking of the violence, it’s implementation into the movie is actually quite strange. The more graphic scenes of violence tend to involve lower level characters but what should be the more important scenes seem to be depicted through shadows, quick cut-aways, or far off camera shots. I feel this was obviously a stylistic choice but I found it more puzzling than engaging.

DRIVE2

A look we see about 150 times in “Drive”

Speaking of style, “Drive” looks fantastic. Director Nicolas Winding Refn cleverly uses light and camera angles to give the picture its own unique look. The driving scenes from inside the car look great with Refn transitioning from one camera angle to another with an artistic flare. And yet with all he’s trying to do, he never loses control of his camera whether in a high-speed car chase or a conversation at the dinner table. I also loved his use of sound. Many times he cuts the music and just let’s the natural sound effects carry the scene. “Drive” is just an all-around technically impressive picture.

While it seems I’ve been a little hard on “Drive” and it’s almost run-of-the-mill action movie storyline, I was drawn to many things in the picture. The opening scene does an amazing job grabbing its audience and immediately getting them involved. And while the story may lack a real feel of originality, I see it more as an homage to not only several particular films but to a specific style of movies. I also found myself interested and invested throughout. I think the performances are uniformly strong. Gosling is given the most restrictions but he manages to do a nice job. Carey Mulligan is wonderful as always and Brooks, Cranston, and Isaac are particularly good. Like I said, there’s plenty to like about “Drive”.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Take Shelter”

by

40

Take Shelter poster

“Take Shelter” is a beautiful and tender yet painful and unsettling drama written and directed by Jeff Nichols. It’s a near flawless exercise in enigmatic but measured filmmaking anchored by an unforgettable Oscar worthy performance from Michael Shannon. Nichols brings a haunting realism to his examination of mental illness and it’s because of our genuine relatability to his believable and organic characters that the journey is so heart-wrenching.

Shannon plays Curtis LaForche, a loving husband and father who begins to experience disturbing dreams and hallucinations. His dreams always start with an approaching storm and as he teeters on the edge of insanity, the storm becomes more and more of a reality to him. Curtis is different than so many of these characters we have seen before. He’s not an bad man. While he does struggle to keep his grasp on reality, he also recognizes it and takes several sensible measures to curb it. He genuinely loves his family and his greatest fear is that the same mental illness that effected his mother will effect him and those closest to him. As the storm from his dreams melds more into Curtis’ reality, he begins working on an old tornado shelter in the backyard. It’s this project that brings his troubles to the surface and it’s the family he desperately hopes to protect that may pay the ultimate price.

TAKE Shelter1

Shannon is simply brilliant in this film. There was no other performance that year that grabbed me and moved me the way he did in “Take Shelter”. There are so many elements to his character and Shannon sells them all. In some scenes you hurt with him as he fights the coming storm. Other times you can’t help but fear him as he loses ground in the war for his sanity. The entire film hinges on Curtis’ character and without Shannon’s captivating work the movie would have flat-lined.

Jessica Chastain beautifully portrays Curtis’ wife Samantha. She’s given much more to do here than in her earlier film “The Tree of Life” but she’s just as mesmerizing. Samantha is a loyal and devoted wife and mother. She’s a woman of faith with an unwavering love for her husband even as things get more complicated. In many ways she is the more sympathetic character in the film. Not only is she the gentle voice of reason, but she must deal with the changes in her husband while taking care of their hearing impaired daughter. She truly is a remarkable woman and Chastain is magnetic in every scene she is in. It’s impossible not to be drawn in by her authentic and subtle performance.

“Take Shelter” moves at a very deliberate pace, slowly developing the story but never getting weighted down by the subject matter. The main characters are so well written and their unfolding relationship keeps things grounded while also raising the stakes. Nichols also does a fantastic job capturing the details and nuances of small town middle America. It’s little things like embroidered pillows and Lion’s Club luncheons that stand out for those like me who are familiar with this part of the country.

Take Shelter 2

My one problem with “Take Shelter” is its vague and ambiguous ending. Sure it leaves things open for all sorts of interpretations but I’m not sure that’s the best approach for this type of story. I can think of a couple of places close to the end that would have made for a stronger and more moving finish if only Nichols could put down his pen. It’s not that it’s a terrible conclusion to an otherwise great film, but it’s confusing and I would be lying if I said I knew exactly what took place.

“Take Shelter” paints an intriguing picture of an embattled man losing a war within himself. It presents such an authentic family dynamic that makes the consequences of Curtis’ potential fall so much more devastating. It can sometimes be a difficult film to watch but it’s thoroughly rewarding. Shannon and Chastain both deserved Oscar nominations for their work in what is one of my favorite movies of the past few years.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS