Category Archives: Movie Reviews – P

REVIEW: “Paddington”

by

18

PADDINGTON poster

“Paddington” is a film that was never on my radar, that is until I noticed the waves of positive reviews coming from overseas. Suddenly I found myself paying attention to its United States debut. The film is based on the classic children’s literature series by Michael Bond. “Paddington” was announced eight years ago with Colin Firth set to voice the cuddly brown bear with a penchant for marmalade. The film finally began shooting in 2013 with Firth out and Ben Wishaw taking his place.

You remember the story of Paddington Bear, right? Forced to leave his home in the jungles of darkest Peru, Paddington, part of a special species of intelligent bears, sets out to find a new home. Many years earlier his family was discovered by an English explorer who told them they would always be welcome at his home in London. A desperate Paddington hitches a ride on a cargo ship and arrives in London where he expects overflowing kindness and of course a new place to call home.

PADDINGTON1

But things couldn’t be more different for this gentle and optimistic bear. He quickly finds that the people in London are as cold and unpleasant as the weather. Pushed aside and brushed off, Paddington begins to lose faith. But then he meets the Brown family. The wife and mother Mary (Sally Hawkins) and the youngest child Johnathan (Samuel Joslin) are both kind-hearted and compassionate. They convince the reluctant husband and father Henry (Hugh Bonneville) and their grumpy daughter Judy (Madeleine Harris) to let Paddington stay one night and then help him find the explorer who his family met in Peru several years earlier.

“Paddington” almost feels like two different movies. On the one side you have Paddington, his relationship with the Brown family, and his ‘fish out of water’ adjustments to life in the big city of London. This is the bulk of the film and it’s where “Paddington” absolutely sparkles. There is such a well conceived mixture of fun, playful slapstick and intelligent, heartfelt warmth. The film has a few big, wacky scenes, but they work because director Paul King doesn’t bury the material with the constant barrage of loud, frantic slapstick we get from most animated features. He always pulls back and then gives us scenes that humanize the story and the characters (even the bear).

Another reason these moments are so effective is because Paddington the character isn’t irritating, juvenile, or superficial. He’s charming, well mannered, and surprisingly genuine. It’s easy to love him and sympathize with his situation while also laughing at his well-meaning antics and the circumambient British wit. There is also enough substance and authenticity to his story and his relationships to give the movie a subtle emotional pop that I never saw coming. I was moved by an early train station scene inspired by a post-World War 2 reality and a one-word line of dialogue from Paddington himself near the end was absolutely perfect.

PADDINGTON2

But then there is that other movie I mentioned. Unfortunately King and co-writer Hamish McColl felt the need to shoehorn in an antagonist played by Nicole Kidman. A short side-story unfolds telling us of how Kidman’s mad taxidermist is intent on catching and stuffing Paddington. It’s silly, over-the-top, and it ultimately distracts from all of the things the movie does so well. The movie also follows a pretty predictable blueprint and it employs one of my least favorite narrative shortcuts – the big ‘this is the moral of the story’ speech at the end. These are all noticeable flaws, but thankfully they don’t kill the movie.

I could spend time talking about the fine performances from the tender-voiced Wishaw, from Hugh Bonneville, and especially Sally Hawkins. I could talk about the amazing job of mixing stunning CGI effects with live action. I could talk about the cool and artistic visual flair that Paul King brings to the film. There is so much I loved about the movie. Sure it has a few hiccups, but “Paddington” is such a welcomed treat. It’s head-and-shoulders above most of the PG-rated effects-driven family movies that we often get. Talk about a smart and entertaining surprise. Now pass me the marmalade.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “The Purge: Anarchy”

by

11

PURGE POSTER

The first “Purge” movie was a strange mixture of intriguing ideas and wasted potential. It was built upon an absurd concept, but one that could have been explored in an assortment of compelling ways. Instead it turned into a preposterous and heavy-handed mess. Now we have a sequel titled “The Purge: Anarchy” and it offers an interesting contrast to the first film. It examines some of those provocative possibilities I wanted from the first movie. Unfortunately it also makes some of the same frustrating mistakes that may not completely undermine the film, but it does keep it from being as good as it could be.

One beneficial thing about the entire Purge series is that it doesn’t revolve around a specific character or group. This allows it to tell new stories and dive into new ideas. In “Anarchy” we are introduced to three personal storylines. Eva (Carmen Ejogo) is a waitress who is struggling to support her teenaged daughter and terminally ill father. Shane and Liz (Zach Gilford and Kiele Sanchez) are a young couple on the verge of splitting up. Leo (Frank Grillo) is a man tormented by a past tragedy. He loads several weapons and heads out just as the Purge is about to begin. As you can guess, their lives intersect on the night of the Purge.

Film Title: The Purge: Anarchy

Now for those unfamiliar with the idea, the Purge is an annual nationwide event where all law enforcement, fire, and medical services are unavailable and all crime (including murder) becomes legal for a 12-hour period. The idea is that the Purge acts as a catharsis of sorts for the citizens of this new America. In reality it’s used as a means of government-sponsored selective population control implemented by the totalitarian New Founding Fathers. It weeds out the poor and more undesirable sections of the population making the world a better place for the rich and affluent.

The whole concept is still absurd, yet writer/director James DeMonaco does offer up some intriguing metaphors and biting social allegory. It’s probably not as audacious or provocative as it thinks it is, but it does ask a few good questions and it doesn’t mind pointing fingers at specific problems. When DeMonaco has these things under control they actually add a slightly unnerving and effective undercurrent to the film. Unfortunately he doesn’t maintain control and soon the movie commits the same annoying mistakes as the first film.

This is really frustrating because I was onboard with what DeMonaco was going for. But he doesn’t know when to dial it back and he soon begins to bludgeon you to death his class warfare message. Again, earlier in the film we see this used effectively. Later DeMonaco jettisons all subtlety and tact instead choosing to drown us with heavy-handed preaching on the evils of wealth and upper-crust white people. He also goes beyond the class messaging and into an arguably tasteless direction. There is a sequence where an underground Black Panther-like movement has a gunfight with the guards of a psycho rich group. Now perhaps its the current sociopolitical climate, but the scenes of white people and black people in a violent, bloody shoot-out divided strictly on racial lines came across as senseless and borderline insensitive (not to mention dumb).

The film’s complete lack of any craftiness or interesting nuance during these later scenes had me rolling my eyes and checking out. I don’t think filmmakers should be bound to subtlety when relaying a message or point, but they can wound their story and smother everything else in the film. You can also lose your grasp on telling a good story and that is the case with “The Purge: Anarchy”. The narrative suffers. The characters suffer. The effectiveness of the message suffers.

PURGE1

All of that is truly a shame. “The Purge: Anarchy” wasn’t a great film from the start, but it was surprisingly entertaining. Frank Grillo gives a really good performance and I found myself caring about him and the other characters. But whether it’s due to DeMonaco’s lack of self-control or a conceit he has regarding his central message, the movie flies off the rails and turns into a silly and potentially distasteful joke. Despite the movie’s blundering detour it does get back on track just in time to provide an unexpected satisfying ending.

“The Purge: Anarchy” had a small $9 million budget yet it pulled in over $110 million at the box office so you know another sequel is coming. Hopefully the next installment can capture what this film did well while avoiding the annoying flaws that this film embraced. There is potential here for a biting look at some relevant social and political issues. We see that in “Anarchy”. But it may take someone besides DeMonaco in the driver’s seat before we get it. As it stands “Anarchy” is much better than the first film. It’s just frustrating when you realize it could have been even better.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

REVIEW: “Prisoners”

by

21

Prisoners poster

There isn’t an ounce of Hollywood spectacle or flash in “Prisoners”. Instead Canadian director Denis Villeneuve (in his American movie debut) creates an intense and methodical thriller rooted in an uncomfortable realism. The story is bleak and unsettling and hope, much like the cold wet weather, deteriorates as the movie takes one emotion turn after another. It’s powerful stuff brought together by an impressive and capable director, a phenomenal cast, and a really strong script.

The story revolves around the abduction of two young girls in a working class Pennsylvania town. The parents, Keller and Grace Dover (Hugh Jackman and Maria Bello) and Franklin and Nancy Birch (Terrence Howard and Viola Davis) go through a whirlwind of ever-changing emotions and developments. Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal) is a determined yet complex officer with a stellar reputation for solving cases. Paul Dano plays the chief subject who has the mind of a 12-year old. Melissa Leo plays his mother. The story features several misdirections and twists, each effecting these characters in an assortment of different ways.

prisoners1

You can’t talk about “Prisoners” without focusing on the stellar cast. Jackman gives the performance of his career. He peels back the layers of conflicting emotion and exposes a vulnerability that I’ve never seen from him. He causes you to feel sympathy for the character while also making you shudder at his actions especially when the chief suspect is released for lack of evidence. I also feel this is some of Gyllenhaal’s best work. I’ve always been mixed when it comes to his acting prowess but he’s so good here. Sporting a threatening neck tattoo and slouchy top-buttoned shirt, you always get the feeling he has some baggage he’s struggling with.

There is also a great sense of place throughout the entire film. The rain, snow, and cold weather plays an ever-present role and the locations set things firmly in a blue-collar Northeastern environment. The great cinematographer Roger Deakins gets a ton of credit for that. His camera seems perfectly in tune with the moods of each scene and he gives us several unforgettable shots. It’s his first work since “Skyfall” and he once again shows that he is a true master of his craft.

Prisoners2

“Prisoners” can at times be uncomfortable for a variety of reasons. Of course the child abduction aspect isn’t something anyone is comfortable with. But there is a sly cleverness to how the movie deals with human nature particularly the thirst for revenge. We see how the emotionally compromised can be consumed by their sorrow and resort to terrible things. But is there a time when certain tactics are justified? Are their instances where you would do the same thing? These are interesting questions and the movie lets you decide the answers yourself.

“Prisoners” offers some slick foreboding, crafty twists, and a satisfying ending. An A-list cast masterfully handles the material and the look and tone of the film is just right. The sharp direction works in conjunction with a smart script to create a visceral experience that will stick with you. It does get a tad heavy at times and the running time is a bit long, but it still is one of the better and more intense thrillers of late.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Play Time”

by

10

PLAYTIME POster

“Playtime” may be one of the most difficult movies to categorize or review and it may be a difficult movie for some people to process. French filmmaker Jacques Tati is known for focusing more on people and communities and allowing his stories to be told visually through their interactions. He was much more interested in visual comedy through observation than presenting a structured narrative. With “Playtime” he takes this unique style and amplifies it. But with this film he has a different intention and much bigger expectations that may be hard to appreciate at first glance.

“Playtime” was Tati’s most ambitious project and at the time it was the most expensive movie in French history. It never made its money back at the box office and eventually drove Tati into bankruptcy. Much of the high cost went into the enormous set built by the filmmaker. Money issues made constructing the set drag out almost 4 years. But if you’ve seen the film it’s impossible to not be in awe of what Tati created. His set included an airport, skyscrapers, apartment buildings, office complexes, a downtown area, and several busy city streets. All of it represented the new futuristic Paris that Tati often spoke against in his films.

PLAYTIME1

This is also a movie intended to fade out Tati’s popular Mr. Hulot character. Tati was growing tired of him and used this as an opportunity to move on to something new. But some believe this is one reason the movie wasn’t as well received by the public as hoped. Mr. Hulot was incredibly popular with audiences and his limited appearances in this picture didn’t sit well with some viewers. But honestly, Mr. Hulot is only a cog in Tati’s big machine. This was never meant to be a Mr. Hulot picture in the same vein as “Mr. Hulot’s Holiday” or “Mon Oncle”.

“Playtime” does incorporate several of Tati’s signature techniques in filmmaking and comedy. The gags often hinge on timing and some of them require careful attention or you just might miss them. There is no meaningful dialogue in the picture. Instead the voices of people are simply part of the important background noise that we hear throughout the film. Sound has often played a significant part in Tati’s films and it’s no different here. Everything from the loud heels clicking on the cold, hard floors to the flatulent noises from the hip office chairs has a distinct and intentional sound.

 

The movie is broken down into sections. It begins in what resembles a hospital but we soon find it’s an airport. It’s here that we are first introduced to some of the film’s reoccurring characters including a tour group of women from the United States and of course Mr. Hulot. From there the movie moves into Tati’s vision of where Paris was heading – a city of long, congested, assembly-line like streets with matching skyscrapers made of steel and glass. The city’s traditional beauty and history is gone replaced by a cold and sterile modernist future. Tati does give us quick looks back at the city’s glory but they are cleverly shown reflections seen in glass doors. The reflections of the Eiffel Tower and of the Sacré-Cœur Basilica on Montmartre hill are visions of a Paris that Tati sees as disappearing in the real world.

PLAYTIME2

Mr. Hulot is lost in this new world. The second big section of the movie takes place in an office high-rise where Hulot is set to have a meeting. Tati makes the place incredibly impersonal and goes to great lengths to portray the building’s futuristic technology as silly and pointless. There is a great scene that illustrates this right after Hulot enters the office building. He’s met by a little old doorman who sits him down while he calls upstairs. To do so the old fella has to work an overly complex intercom system, all the time grumbling to himself as he carries out his perfunctory, everyday duties. He refuses to let Hulot leave his seat, making him wait and wait until the executive he’s there to meet finally arrives from upstairs. But the executive moves him into an office 10 feet away from where he’s been waiting and has him sit down and wait longer. The doorman, the intercom, and the long wait were for the most part pointless.

Hulot ends up getting lost and he stumbles upon a trade show happening in another part of the building. This is where the next section of the movie takes place. It’s followed by some time spent gazing into an apartment complex before heading to an evening at a nice restaurant. Most of the film’s second half takes place in the restaurant. Hulot ends up inside but we really see very little of him. Instead we’re introduced to the new series of characters including a loud and obnoxious American businessman, a clever doorman, an embarrassed waiter who has ripped his pants, the antsy owner, a drunk, the aforementioned tour group, and a number of other people.

The restaurant sequence is a pretty impressive thing to behold. We watch as the night starts slow but as the crowd increases and several mishaps occur, things liven up. There’s really nothing else to the scene. There isn’t a deeper story angle to latch onto nor is there one central character to follow. It’s pure observation as the camera steps back and moves from one section of the restaurant to another. We simply watch everything as if we were sitting on a stool in the corner of the room. It’s unlike anything I’ve seen. It’s a bold and inventive experiment but it’s also laced with some really funny gags. And it doesn’t stop there. There’s a really good drugstore sequence and some time spent on the congested city streets before zipping us back to the airport.

PLAYTIME3

You can’t watch “Play Time” and not be impressed with the skill and the craft of Jacques Tati. And while it certainly has some funny moments, it lacks the playfulness of the previous Mr. Hulot films and I have to admit I missed that. The shelving of Hulot is obvious as Tati intentionally loses him in the concrete, glass, and metal world he created. In fact, at times it seems that Tati is rubbing it in our faces by occasionally throwing out men who walk and dress like Hulot but we find out they are not. By shortening the screen time of his beloved character he forces us to look at the bigger picture that he’s painted on his personal canvas. He makes us look beyond what we’re familiar with and what we expect.

There is nothing conventional about “Play Time”. It’s an ambitious project that also has that signature Tati humor. But it’s nothing like the filmmaker’s previous work and that took some adjusting for me. And personally speaking, this film just didn’t resonate with me like his other work. Staying with the movie can be a bit of a challenge and the humor is spread out and more subtle. But the craftsmanship behind this film can’t be questioned and the sheer scope of the undertaking is incredible. There is so much going on throughout this picture and for a movie with no substantial plot or direction that’s a pretty amazing accomplishment.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Prince Avalanche”

by

30

PRINCE

Good luck trying to classify David Gordon Green’s “Prince Avalanche”. Green directed and wrote the screenplay for this odd little independent film that is part drama, part comedy, and part offbeat character study. It was inspired by an Icelandic picture titled “Either Way” only here it takes place in an isolated woodland area in Texas. It’s a 2013 film that didn’t get much press and brought in less than $200,000 during its very limited release. But now word of the film is starting to ease out and that’s a good thing.

Paul Rudd plays the starched, tightly wound Alvin. He’s a highway worker who hires his girlfriend’s airheaded but well-intentioned brother Lance (Emile Hirsch) to help him paint yellow traffic lines on a long stretch of isolated roads. The roads wind through a forest area that has recently been ravaged by wildfires. This is the dreary, near apocalyptic landscape where the entire film takes place. We just follow along watching Alvin and Lance go through their workday. We sit with them at their camp enjoying a plate of grilled fish and coffee. The story is truly that simple but Green is quite clever in how he opens up these characters to his audience. It’s amazing what all we pick up just by listening to their many conversations.

AVALANCHE

There are a number of pleasant but telling scenes early in the film. It becomes clear that Alvin and Lance are distant. In many ways they’re very different people and they obviously don’t have a longstanding relationship. Watching the slow-moving male bonding is good fun and it tosses in several well-conceived laughs. But it also connects us to these characters so that we are invested once things get rough. And they do get rough. The two personalities clash and some humorous scenes follow. But these problems end up revealing a lot to each one about themselves. That’s when the true meaning of this film surfaces.

This is a slow and meditative story that spends a lot of time on simple observation. Just watching and listening. Both Rudd and Hirsch are fantastic They both unwrap these two characters exposing their charms and faults with great clarity. Alvin is a man who desperately needs to break out of this lonely world he has created for himself. In it he sees what he wants and ignores important elements to life. Lance needs to realize he is no longer a child. He has to grow up and take responsibility. These two very different men with very different problems are actually in a very similar boat.

“Prince Avalanche” is an independent film through and through. David Gordan Green adapts and directs this light but crafty picture that made me laugh often. But it also develops two really good lead characters who despite their eccentricities are very human in more regards than you may think. This is a tightly made film that has heart and humor. I really appreciate that.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “The Place Beyond the Pines”

by

50

PLACE Poster

The title may make it sound like a high-minded ethereal exercise, but “The Place Beyond the Pines” is actually an ambitious movie that is one part cautionary tale and one part complex family drama. The film reunites its star Ryan Gosling with director and co-writer Derek Cianfrance who previously worked together on “Blue Valentine”. This is certainly a different kind of movie with many more layers and a much broader vision. That doesn’t always equal a better movie but in this case Cianfrance definitely takes a step up and his new film almost reaches the lofty heights it aims for.

“The Place Beyond the Pines” can basically be broken down into three parts. First we meet a motorcycle stunt performer named Luke Glanton (Gosling). He’s a tattooed, chain-smoking loner who goes town to town with a traveling carnival. During an annual stop in upstate New York Luke learns he has fathered a child with a local waitress named Romina (Eva Mendes). He decides to quit the carnival and stick around hoping to take care of son, but with no money or job that becomes difficult. He strikes up a friendship with Robin (Ben Mendelsohn) a local mechanic with an affection for robbing banks. A few bad choices later and Luke finds himself in a pretty tough spot.

PLACE BEYOND THE PINES

Luke’s story connects to that of a young local police officer named Avery Cross (Bradley Cooper). The second part of the film focuses on Avery after he is injured in the line of duty. He struggles with the actions that led to his injury and the “hero” tag that he has been given. As he recovers he fights to stay connected to his wife and young son. He also faces a battle between his moral conscious and some shady goings-on by his friends on the police force.

The third part of the film jumps ahead 15 years but to tell anything else about it would be doing a disservice to the viewer. Suffice it to say this is a film about two men, two families, two fathers, and two sons whose lives are veritably intertwined. The three segments each have their own unique tone and feel to them yet the connection between all three is always there. This was a bold approach to storytelling and I certainly can appreciate Cianfrance’s ambition. But the risk would only work if all three segments were equally good and unfortunately that’s not the case.

My favorite of the three “chapters” (for lack of a better word) was the first one which focused on Gosling’s character. This was a good surprise for me because unlike many people I’m not sold on him as an actor. We get a lot of his normal routine here – brooding, emotionless stares, and a lot of mumbling. But it actually fits a lot better with this character and Gosling does throw in a few variations that we rarely get from him. The story is compelling and features a gritty realism. I loved Mendelsohn here and Mendes is very good as well.

Place2

I also liked the second act which focused on Bradley Cooper’s character. It’s drastically different but deeply connected to what we’ve already seen. The contrasts in the lives of these two men are jarring yet there are similarities which I will let you sort out for yourselves. It’s during this chapter that the film does begin to slow down a bit but it still maintains a strong dramatic pull. But the final act tries to be a little too clever and the contrivances that are employed are all too obvious. There are parts of the final third that do work but as a whole the story becomes less interesting and it’s here that I began to feel the trudge of the movie’s 140 minute running time.

So what do I make of “The Place Beyond the Pines”? Ultimately it was a better movie than I anticipated but not one that fully meets its own high expectations. The camerawork is fantastic and the performances are solid across the board. Also, I never begrudge a filmmaker from making bold choices, but I don’t feel Cianfrance quite knew when to pull back the reins. In the end the film felt a little too cocky and indulgent for its own good. While that brought the movie down a bit it certainly didn’t undo the good qualities that we see particularly in the first two acts.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS