Category Archives: Movie Reviews – B

REVIEW: “Boyhood”

by

36

BOYHOOD POSTER

“Ambitious” is an adjective that is probably overused by many when reviewing movies. As a result many well-known and prominent movie critics steer clear of the word and often view it as a negative description of the film. Their idea is that many people excuse a film’s faults by hiding them under ambition. That may sometimes be true, but I’ve never prescribed to that reasoning nor do I avoid using the word when it accurately describes a film. There are plenty of examples of movies that have combined great ambition and great storytelling. “Boyhood” is one such example.

Let’s talk about the film’s ambition. Writer and director Richard Linklater has shown himself to be one of the great modern American filmmakers. In “Boyhood” he gives us a coming-of-age drama unlike any you’ve seen before. Filming spanned twelve years starting in 2002 and the same cast was used the entire time. They were brought back to shoot scenes periodically throughout those twelve years in hopes of capturing an accurate physical representation of aging. It also allowed the cast to grow with their characters making the film’s time transitions all the more realistic. This is an extremely ambitious project.

 

BOYHOOD1

But it isn’t just the clever and innovative approach that makes this a good film. It’s Linklater’s simple but beautifully conceptualized vision for presenting a young boy’s life from preadolescence to early adulthood. There is no distinct streamlined plot. Instead we are introduced to a young boy named Mason and we experience his complicated, topsy-turvy boyhood with him. Linklater doesn’t ask us to dissect or wrestle with the material. Instead he seeks to show us the complexities and minutia of real life. He wants us to invest in Mason and let his circumstances strike an emotional chord. We laugh with him. We fear for him. We worry about him. Essentially we grow up with him.

Mason is played by Ellar Coltrane, a relatively unknown actor who was 7-years old when filming began. Coltrane has a quiet reservation about him that we consistently see in every stage of Mason’s life. It’s an acting quality that gels nicely with Linklater’s vision for the character. When we first meet young Mason he is living in Texas with his older sister Samantha (played by Richard Linklater’s own daughter Lorelei) and his single mother Olivia (Patricia Arquette). His father Mason, Sr. (Ethan Hawke) reappears after over a year doing his own thing in Alaska.

Mason’s life has its share of obstacles and it starts with his parents. His mother works hard to provide for Mason and Samantha. She moves them to Houston where she finishes her degree and gets a good job. But her loneliness leads to bad choices which effect her children. Mason, Sr. is a flaky and irresponsible father who won’t get a job and doesn’t always provide a mature fatherly influence during his time with his kids. In a sense Mason and Samantha’s time with their father is an escape. Mason, Sr. clearly hasn’t been a good father, but he loves his kids and they recognize his good intentions. As the film harmoniously moves along we learn more and more about these characters and we watch them and their circumstances evolve.

BOYHOOD2

At times “Boyhood” feels like a series of random moments sewn together to form a beautiful whole. We often move from scene to scene without any narrative connection between them. But that’s okay because the film is about the journey. We literally watch Mason (and Coltrane) grow up before our eyes. One minute we see a young boy laying on the couch asking his father about the existence of magic and elves. An hour later we watch a 16-year old get into his Toyota pickup. It’s such a visually satisfying trip through time brought to life through Linklater’s brilliant approach, Sandra Adair’s impeccable editing, and the cast’s unquestioned commitment.

Speaking of the cast, I’ve talked about Coltrane being a great fit as Mason and he only gets better as he transforms from a first-grader to a college freshman. But Patricia Arquette is the one getting a ton of attention and rightly so. This is a such a strong and honest performance , significantly better than when I first saw her years ago in “A Nightmare on Elm Street 3”. She doesn’t offer an ounce of pretense and she never overplays her scenes. And as you would expect Ethan Hawke is really good and you never doubt the truth he brings to his character.

BOYHOOD3

The only performance I struggled with came from Lorelei Linklater. In her defense she is considerably better by the end of the film but by that time we rarely see her. Prior to that I felt she was forcing her performance and she looked like a young actress who was having every line, every look, and every expression drawn out by the director. I also struggled with these odd and sometimes clunky political sequences that pop up several times. At first they feel like a natural extension of a particular character. Later the politics and characterizations seem forced and very heavy-handed. This stands out mainly because Linklater is such an instinctive and precise writer.

Those things aside, what is it that great movies do? They challenge us. They cause us to reflect. They cause us to appreciate. They cause us to feel. “Boyhood” did all of that for me but not in a casual sense. It is a coming-of-age story but it also looks at other things like parenting – the sacrifices of good parenting and the consequences of bad parenting. As a father, that hit home for me. The film had me looking back on my own childhood, but also thinking about my 13-year old son and the life he is living. Walking out of the theater I wanted to hurry home, give him a hug, and tell him that I loved him. Some may call that corny. I call it being moved by a very good movie.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

(Fun observation for “Dazed and Confused” fans: Pay close attention to the brief scene in the liquor store. The clerk is played by none other than David Blackwell. He played a very similar convenience store clerk in “Dazed”)

REVIEW: “Blue Ruin”

by

13

BLUE RUIN POSTER

I’ve come to realize that I’m attracted to movies that employ a more visual form of filmmaking. By that I mean movies that rely heavily on the camera to tell their stories. These types of films often feature sparse dialogue, revealing imagery, and very unique performances from their leads. They tend to speak to many of our senses as an audience and I like that. We get a lot of this in “Blue Ruin’, a deeply engrossing revenge thriller from Jeremy Saulnier. Revenge movies are a dime a dozen which is why “Blue Ruin” is so refreshing and satisfying.

Saulnier is a cinematographer at heart, but he has one other feature film to his credit – 2007’s casually titled “Murder Party”. In “Blue Ruin” he takes a much different approach and the result is a film worthy of attention and consideration. Saulnier serves as writer, director, and cinematographer, and he gained funding after a successful Kickstarter campaign. The movie turned some heads at the Cannes Film Festival and soon found a distributor and a limited theatrical release. Thank goodness for that because “Blue Ruin” is a fantastic film.

BLUE RUIN1

The story centers around a man named Dwight (Macon Blair). He’s a vagrant living out of his beat-up Pontiac Bonneville in a northeastern beach town. Through a series of informative scenes we see him finding meals out of dumpsters and breaking into homes to bathe. But sprinkled in are tiny clues that seem to indicate that Dwight’s situation wasn’t always this bad. Things take a dramatic turn when he learns that a double murderer is being released from prison as part of a plea deal. There are clear connections between the two which sends the movie down a tense, violent, revenge-fueled path.

To reveal anything more about the story would be to strip it of one of its greatest assets – unpredictability. One of the best things about “Blue Ruin” is that you never know where things are heading. Dwight isn’t a tough guy by any stretch and most of his actions seem spontaneous and compulsive. And since we literally spend the entire movie with him, we’re always uncertain and constantly on edge. You never get a sense that Dwight has thought beyond the moment and the film never tips its hand to the audience. Therefore our journey is dictated by every action the capricious lead character makes.

Another of the film’s strengths is the unquenchable tension and suspense. Much of it is credited to the above mentioned air of uncertainty that permeates the entire story. It is also due to Saulnier’s great work with the camera. When watching the film there is no doubt that he is a filmmaker who knows the artistry behind good cinematography. His strategic handling of imagery, the use of northeastern landscapes, and the framing of numerous shots not only serves his visual style, but it amps up the suspense. Regardless of whether he is shooting a closeup of an expressive face or one of the film’s few sudden bursts of violence, the movie looks great.

Blue-Ruin2

Then there is the performance from Macon Blair, an actor with only a handful of credits to his name. I recently listened to a discussion about whether a better known and more experienced actor could have added to this character and movie. Personally I think that would have overthrown everything the film was going for. Blair’s tepid and reserved performance is an absolute perfect fit for what the character needs. The supporting cast is small but very good. Even Jan Brady herself, Eve Plumb makes an almost unrecognizable appearance.

“Blue Ruin” is a small-budget film that does more things on the screen to enthrall an audience than most blockbusters. Jeremy Saulnier is a revelation as both a filmmaker and storytelling, and Macon Blair has me interested in what he will do next. I love being taken for a ride and not knowing what lies ahead, especially in a movie centered around deep, moody suspense. “Blue Ruin” took me for that ride and I was completely invested until the very end.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Bonnie and Clyde”

by

16

BONNIE poster

The 1967 crime drama/biopic “Bonnie and Clyde” wasn’t the easiest movie to get made. There were numerous squabbles between the film’s producer and star Warren Beatty and Warner Brothers over everything from budget and shooting locations to the size of the film’s release. Once it did hit theaters it faced a new wave of controversies mainly aimed at the films depiction of violence. “Bonnie and Clyde” is said to be one of the first mainstream American films to use graphic violence therefore opening the doors for the waves of cinematic bloodshed that would follow. At the time some critics railed on the film, but it would go on to be a box office hit and it’s now viewed as a true motion picture classic.

As with many movies like this several liberties were taken for dramatic reasons. A number of people contributed to the script but David Newman and Robert Benton did most of the heavy lifting. Their script strips down the true Bonnie and Clyde story while still creating a vivid and absorbing tale. There is no backstory at all. The film opens with Faye Dunaway’s Bonnie Parker sultrily moving about her upstairs room when she notices Warren Beatty’s Clyde Barrow attempting to steal her mother’s car. She confronts him but after a brief conversation they are on the road and story of Bonnie and Clyde has begun.

BONNIE1

Now could the story have gone deeper into their backgrounds and motivations? Probably so, but I think the film gives us what’s necessary for the type of story it’s telling. We learn that Bonnie is a waitress who is unhappy with the seemingly meaningless life she lives. She waits tables, she gets occasional dates from passing truckers, then she goes home – rinse and repeat. But you also get the sense that she is wooed by Clyde’s charms and visions of grandeur. Of the two characters, Bonnie is the most intriguing. Throughout the film you get glimpses that she does want more in life. She has visions of what happiness should be yet she has no one to cling to but Clyde.

The two Depression-era outlaws take off on a crime spree that starts with a few smalltime holdups. They pickup a simpleton named C.W. Moss (Michael Pollard) and the three begin hitting banks. This is also when their crimes go from simple bank robberies to killing. Clyde’s brother Buck (Gene Hackman) and his shrill and reluctant wife Blanche (Estelle Parsons) joins up with them and the Barrow gang is formed. Amazingly every one of the cast members I’ve mentioned so far received Academy award nominations for their performances. Interestingly enough, Parsons (in what may be the lesser performance of the group) was the only one to win. It’s worth noting that, while he didn’t get an Oscar nomination, Gene Wilder shows up in what is his feature film debut.

“Bonnie and Clyde” toys around with several other interesting themes. There are several well-placed jabs focused on how the media manipulates news stories for their own interests. This goes hand-in-hand with law enforcement who began attributing bank robberies and killings to Bonnie and Clyde even though they had nothing to do with them. This interesting little twist asks the question of who is more responsible for the pair’s dubious rise to fame? As a result their mythos grew larger and larger from town to town and much of that is due to what was being put out in the papers and by law enforcement.

Bonnie2

When writing about the film, the great Roger Ebert noted a particular scene where an upset Bonnie is walking through a wheat field and Clyde is chasing after her. The camera pulls back and gives us a longshot of the field just as a cloud is passing over the sun. In an eerie moment of foreboding, the cloud covers Bonnie and Clyde hinting at what lies ahead for them. This is the pre-CGI era and chances are it was a freak act of nature. Still it’s a tremendous example of Burnett Guffey’s brilliant Oscar-winning cinematography. The film looks amazing and I wasn’t surprised to read that it was influenced by the French New Wave. In fact one of my favorite directors Francois Truffaut was originally asked to direct the film but declined. Arthur Penn got the job and he incorporated that slick and stylish French influence.

“Bonnie and Clyde” was a cultural phenomenon upon its release and it has earned its ‘classic movie’ title. While the supporting cast is great, the cinematography is amazing, and the bluegrass score sets a perfect tone, it’s the two leads who anchor the film. Dunaway is skittish, hopeful, and beautiful and Beatty, an actor I can generally take or leave, is charismatic and completely believable. We buy into them from the start and that is why the journey we take with them is thrilling and unforgettable.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Blue Caprice”

by

15

BLUE CAPRICE POSTER

If you remember the Beltway sniper attacks in October of 2002 you remember the terror that it brought to the Virginia, Maryland, and Washington D.C. areas. The sheer random nature of the killings made them all the more unsettling. “Blue Caprice” is the directorial debut of Alexandre Moors and it gets its name from the 1990 Chevrolet Caprice that killers John Allen Mohammed and John Lee Malvo used throughout their killing spree. It’s an impressive debut for Moors as he veers away from so many of the usual trappings that we sometimes get with pictures like this.

“Blue Caprice” puts its focus on the relationship between Mohammed and Malvo. It takes a few odd liberties with their stories, but it also effectively gets into their heads and tells things from their twisted points of view. It shows them first meeting in Antigua. Malvo is shown to be a lonely boy. Left alone by his mother, he is taken in by Mohammed who is first perceived to be a loving father of three. But we get hints that he is not what he seems. The film skips ahead to Mohammed and Malvo arriving in the Tacoma, Washington area. It’s here that the film peels back the layers of Mohammed’s insanity and Malvo’s emotionless violence.

Blue CAPRICE1

Moors does so much right with this film. It’s raw filmmaking which perfectly serves the story and the perspectives. It’s also undeniably atmospheric and the film maintains a cloud of chilling discomfort as we witness a slow mental collapse. Mohammed and Malvo are men fueled by hate and seeking to avenge their self-viewed victim status on the world around them. The entire film builds upon these two damaged psyches and the suspense burns hotter as we know exactly where their anger will end up taking them.

Another huge reason the film works so well are the two lead performances. Isaiah Washington is nothing short of brilliant in his depiction of Mohammed. He never goes too far or pushes the boundaries. He’s always in perfect sync with the film’s deliberate pace and steady tone. It’s a great performance. I also really liked Tequan Richmond as Malvo. It’s a more understated performance and it could be argued that he isn’t asked to do a lot. But Richmond tells so much of his character’s story in his silent moments. It also helps that he works extremely well with Washington.

“Blue Caprice” is a bit of a slow burn and that may turn off some people. Personally I think that works in the film’s favor. There are a couple of moments where I questioned the movie’s intention and I wanted more from the ending, but ultimately “Blue Caprice” succeeds because of its great direction, two strong central performances, and an atmosphere and tone that does the story justice. It grabbed me early on and never let me go.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Broken City”

by

16

Brokenposter

Lost in the corpulent backlot of 2013 movies is “Broken City”, a political/crime thriller that features a fine cast and a common but still interesting idea. The film marks the solo directorial debut of Allen Hughes who is known for his past works with his brother including “The Book of Eli” and “Menace II Society”. An underperformer at the box office and generally panned by critics, “Broken City” is looked at as a movie that squanders its potential. But is that a fair criticism? In a nutshell, yes it is.

For me, the biggest problem with “Broken City” reveals itself early and persists through the entire picture. There is practically no fire or energy shown in any facet of movie. In a story that should generate plenty of emotional spark, all we get are dry characters, dry scenarios, and a dry ending. There is rarely a charge of life anywhere to be found and the movie seems to wallow in lethargy. It’s hard to pinpoint the exact blame. Is it the direction from Hughes? Is it Brian Tucker’s script? Could it be the actors who seemingly have no interest in what they’re doing?

Broken1

Mark Wahlberg stars as a former New York police detective named Billy Taggert. Seven years after being forced to leave the department following a controversy and PR nightmare, he works as a struggling private detective. Things get complicated when the New York City Mayor Nicholas Hostetler (Russell Crowe) hires him to find out who his wife (played by Catherine Zeta-Jones) is having an affair with. Little does Billy know that by taking the case he would be catapulted into a complex political web involving the mayor, his opponent for the upcoming elections (Barry Pepper), and the police commissioner (Jeffrey Wright).

There is a pretty familiar formula that the movie uses while still trying to do a few things of its own. Unfortunately a lot of time is wasted on superfluous side stories that are never fleshed out to the point of being interesting. The best example of that involves Billy’s aspiring actress girlfriend (played by Natalie Martinez). Her character and their struggling relationship seems shoehorned in to try and add some humanity to Billy. She is present for a short time and then completely drops off the map. It’s also one of those movies littered with lucky timing and all sorts of conveniences. Whether Billy is pulling up just as someone throws out a suspicious bag of garbage or whether he is never spotted while supposedly hiding in plain site.

Broken2

While the characters are mostly flat and dormant, there are moments where that approach really works. Crowe and Wright have some great back-and-forths generated from the internal rivalry of their characters. Their verbal jabs are stinging and these two great actors have a lot of fun with the animosity. Wahlberg doesn’t get those types of moments. He spends the entire movie stone-faced and rarely shows one ounce of emotion. I’m not sure if it is how he is written or how he was directed, but his character could have been so much better with just an ounce of charisma or personality. That toned down approach turns out to be a problem for every character.

“Broken City” does featuring some great cinematography that captures a variety of New York City flavors. And again, there are a few moments of good crisp dialogue particularly between Crowe and Wright. Unfortunately the lack of zest and the wasted time spent on half-cooked characters doesn’t elevate the film past its already formulaic structure. It’s really a shame because a movie with this strong of a cast could have been better. Instead it’s a forgettable, below-average thriller that deserves its spot in the backlot of the 2013 movies.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

REVIEW: “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid”

by

23

BUTCH POSTER

After its release in 1969 “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” made a lot of money and garnered a lot of critical praise. It’s been called the ultimate buddy movie and some give it credit for reinventing the Western genre for a new generation. It received a total of seven Academy Award nominations, winning four of the golden statues and it has been lauded by many as a bonafide classic. But over the years there have been a few critics who have looked at the film through a more critical lens. Could it be that “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” hasn’t aged well or are there some legitimate issues that have always been there?

For me “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” is a terribly uneven film in several ways. It features several great and truly memorable moments but it also has stretches of redundancy which grinds things to a halt. Then there are lines of dialogue that are crisp and snappy but others that are glaringly lame or simply don’t feel like they belong in a western of its time. This movie rides a tonal roller coaster which made it feel a bit scattered and difficult to take seriously.

Butch1

Paul Newman was a megastar at the time and he was intended to be the centerpiece playing Butch Cassidy. This annoyed Steve McQueen who was set to play Sundance. After a disagreement over who got top billing, McQueen said adios which opened the door for a young Robert Redford. This turned out to be Redford’s star-making role and his performance was the standout. Newman is obviously a fine actor but surprisingly I didn’t see the usual charisma he brings to a role. Newman certainly has his moments but I feel he could have offered more especially considering the substantial investment in him.

Things certainly start off on a high note. We get a great scene showing Sundance being accused of cheating at a card game (a scene which features Sam Elliot’s big screen debut). There’s also a fun bit where Butch and Sundance return to their gang’s hideout and face a small mutiny (In the movie they were called The Hole in the Wall Gang because Cassidy’s real gang name The Wild Bunch was the title of the Sam Peckinpah film also due out that year). After squelching the uprising, the gang takes to holding up trains. The first robbery goes well but after botching their second attempt in a hysterical sequence, Butch and Sundance find themselves being pursued by an über-posse put together by a wealthy railroad tycoon.

Up to this point everything is popping. The movie sets itself up well and with the exception of the well-known bicycle scene filmed to B.J. Thomas’ “Raindrops Keep Falling on My Head” (which I feel is overly long and oddly out of place), it’s impossible not to be taken in by the story. But then the movie hits a wall. We get a long, drawn out series of shots features the pair on the run from the posse of all posses. We see them riding across the Badlands, running up rocky cliffs, and then stopping to see if they have lost their pursuers. With a near mystical-like presence, the posse is always in the distance. We go through this cycle several times before finally moving in a new direction.

Butch2

Realizing the severity of their wanted status, Butch and Sundance round-up Etta (played by Katharine Ross), a young lady with an unusual relationship with the boys, and the three head to Bolivia. Once there the story follows almost the same blueprint as the first half – some really funny moments, some memorable scenes, and a dull stretch. And that is what makes “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid” such a hard film to score. It has those times where it’s an absolute blast. It has its funny moments and the chemistry between Newman and Redford shines at certain points. Conrad Hall’s Oscar-winning cinematography is outstanding and it’s hard not to be smitten by the look of the film as a whole.

Unfortunately it’s hard for me to overlook the inconsistencies found in “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid”. There are some obvious missteps which make me question how this film can be considered an all-time classic. But it certainly isn’t a terrible movie and I definitely recommend seeing it. Redford’s star launched from this flick and it still made a significant mark on movie history. It’s just not a movie that will find its way into my pantheon of all-time favorites.

VERDICT – 3 STARS