REVIEW: X-Men: Apocalypse

Have you ever gone out and purchased just one heck of a marvellous cheese?  I'm not talking just about your generic cheddar, but let's say it's aged ten years.  Or even, and one of my favourites, jalapeño havarti.  Now it's a blessing to have such a wonderful treat, but what you have on your hands can be instantly ruined and rendered moot.  If you slice it up and put it on the cheapest hotdog you can find, accompanied by a stale bun, you may have just as well used something else.  What you have done is wasted that cheese.

I understand that it is not the greatest analogy, especially for those who don't roll the dairy, but that is how I felt when it came to the main villain in X-Men: Apocalypse.  What the film makers did was take Oscar Isaac, who is one of the best acting talents of today, and put him in a roll that could have easily been filled by anyone.  There was nothing about Apocalypse that allowed for any subtle nuances from Isaac, who was destined to just deliver monotone lines and show limited facial expressions.

Does that mean the movie as a whole is bad?  Not at all.  What it does mean is that the main source of tension in the film drags and adds little energy, which does affect the film as a whole.

As the movie begins, we find director Bryan Singer hurling visuals at us, almost as though the movie is setting a tone that it is going to flex its CGIed muscles throughout.  It felt a little overkill and distracting, especially when it went into a Monster Energy Drink lead-in to the opening title.  There was worry, I am not going to lie about that.  I asked, 'what have I gotten myself into?'  Luck would have it that the computer generated pace of the opening sequence was disingenuous to the tone of the rest of the movie and things died down until the third act when it turned once again into visual effect soup.

They looked pretty enough, but they were massively abundant and took away a lot of the intimacy that the story deserved.  The cast of characters involved was deep, and the talent selected to play each part was well thought out.  Each of the X-Men felt like there was some attention paid to them to create heroes that we could root for.  The same could not be said about the mutants that were enlisted by Apocalypse to help him.  For whatever reason, the man needed help.  Even though he was near all powerful.  His character and the reasoning for his actions were most certainly underwritten, once again making me ask why Llewyn Davis (or, to use an example that may be better known, Poe Dameron) himself was cast for the role.

It was the quieter moments of the film where I felt the true story was being told.  There were enough of them to make me happy, and I enjoyed the inclusion and story of Cyclops (Tye Sheridan) and Nightcrawler (Kodi Smit-McPhee).  Both are incredible young talents who brought depth to their characters enough to stand properly alongside other brilliant cast members, such as James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, and Jennifer Lawrence.

Possibly the most underplayed aspect is the time period.  It is set in the 1980s, and we are more shown that, rather than truly feeling it.  The previous movies focused greatly on playing into the emotions and feelings of their times, giving the viewer a rich environment in which to watch the story roll out.

Ultimately, there are enough decent aspects of the film to bring even keel the downside of a villain that lacks charisma and understanding.  It is not the strongest of the new X-Men movies, but it does hold a character of its own.  During a summer that is filled to the brim of special effects spectacles, it is X-Men: Apocalypse's shortcomings that will keep it from being too memorable.

Rating - 2.5 out of 4 stars

REVIEW: The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2

When sitting down to watch The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2, it was very difficult to not think of of a television show where the opening would have the narration, 'previously on a very special episode of Blossom.'  The reason being, the first half of the film ended so abruptly without a conclusion that it could own as an individual film.  Normally in a film series the movies should still have an element that makes them viewable as a stand alone feature, but that was not the case in the cinematic division of Suzanne Collins final book in the Hunger Games series.

It points to a bit of a fad, and problem, in modern movie story telling.  Franchises, especially ones that are extremely successful, are difficult to come by.  The solution to this by studios is to bleed the content as far as they can.  The trilogy, as we once knew it, is dead.  Even The Avengers have a ridiculous two part third movie.  I call it ridiculous because there is no main source material that they are sticking with, so why not just make two more movies instead of creating a part one and a part two?

What this exhausting extracting of material leads to is films that feel like they have more in them than is needed.  The best example was the completely unnecessary Hobbit 'trilogy' which did everything it could to recreate the success of the Lord of the Rings series from a singular book that was written in a much different tone and could not translate the same way.  It was obnoxious and downright boring at times.

I personally really liked the first half of Mockingjay, as it was a good character story about the pressures faced by Katniss Everdeen.  The main issue was that blunt ending.  However, when watching the recently released final chapter, the problem of dividing the book into two parts became even more clear.  There were many scenes that felt like filler to justify the two hour plus run-time, and these scenes did nothing to service the central tensions that faced young Everdeen.

Director Francis Lawrence, who also directed the first part of Mockingjay, shows a very talented hand when it comes to building anticipation and delivering on action sequences.  There is one scene in particular where Lawrence plays on the typical Hollywood builds to jumps and leaves them dangling. This leaves the viewer to believe that something may end up happening, but never being able to settle down and guess when everything will hit the fan.

It is this skill that would have made for a very concise and exhilarating feature film if perhaps they had forgone the idea of breaking the novel into two movies.  Everything would have flowed much better, including the music.  The score was such an emotional power in the first part, but it lacked the opportunity and delivery in the second part.

Of course, there was one incredible constant across the entire series, and that was the performance of Jennifer Lawrence.  It is difficult to believe that this young lady in her mid-twenties has won an Oscar and has been nominated for two others.  In teaming up with director David O. Russell this year for the film Joy, it is almost a forgone conclusion that she will be receiving another nom.  Her performance as Katniss has kept pace with her nominated roles, where she is the pure conduit for the audience in experiencing the emotional ups and downs of the film.

Overall, it is a decent film.  The sad part is that the best thing that I am saying about it is decent.  It is a long way from the incredibly successful Catching Fire, but it serves well as a finale.  Unfortunately for audiences, it could have been tighter and would have been better packaged as one epic film instead of two separate parts.  It also would have saved the viewer money by only asking them to pay for one ticket instead of begging for them to pay for two.

Rating - 3 out of 4 stars.

X-Men: Days of Future Past

Last week I sat down to write about Godzilla and found that a minor hurdle that I had to enjoying it was getting past a very mundane plot that occupied the first thirty minutes of the film.  And, like a virus coming around for a second go at a drained and exhausted human body, X-Men: Days of Future Past took plot issues to a whole new level and gave me my second assault from within the past week.  If audiences spend the entire film thinking too much, stocks in Tylenol would see a significant jump as thousands of movie goers would attempt to quell their brain-drain headaches.

Every movie, especially time travel movies (which this one is), will have plot holes in it, and action films such as this require an expected suspension of disbelief.  The issue with this movie is that the suspension of disbelief needed does not come from having to allow for the fact that there are mutants with crazy powers, but that everything you have been told from previous X-Men movies may or may not fit with the tale you are watching.  X-Men: First Class was a wonderfully fun film which had the appearance to be a reboot over a direct prequel, as elements were introduced that did not fit with the previously established trilogy.  That is fine and good, but X-Men: Days of Future Past links the two together, meaning that all anomalies from the past versions should somehow fit with the future version, and it is just a mess of mental catastrophe wading your mind through the maze of inconsistencies.

Let me now pause to enjoy the aforementioned Tylenol…

Alright, I am back on track.  If you were to spend all of the running length of this film straining to put all of the pieces together of what you are being told by director Bryan Singer and writer Simon Kinberg then you would miss out on a visually stunning and fun adventure.  I won’t downplay the inconsistency factor, but the film is good enough that you are able to look past it.  If you look at the Batman trilogy by Christopher Nolan you will find a massive amount of improbabilities and plot holes, but the experience is engrossing enough that it is easy to pass them by.  It is very similar with X-Men: Days of Future Past, which relies on a stellar cast of talent playing mutants, all of whom have their own personal battles that they are trying to get through.

The future of mutants and humans is in jeopardy in the future, and the X-Men use the powers of Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page) to transport Wolverine’s (Hugh Jackman) mind into his body in the year 1973.  He then must find the young Professor X (James McAvoy) and his old friend turned enemy, Magneto (Michael Fassbender).  Along the way we get to see new mutants and ones we have already met as they attempt to track down Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) whose actions may lead to the bleak future that they are trying to avoid.  It sounds a bit like Terminator, but instead of Kyle Reese naked and with no weapons landing in the past, we Wolverine, naked and with temper… this sort of thing bodes well for entertainment.

Just like the first film, I felt the largest strength to be the performances and relationship between McAvoy and Fassbender, both of whom play their characters perfectly and exhibit full, powerful emotions, as well as Fassbender being able to show strength and danger using only facial expressions an posturing.  Magneto really has to be one of the most cinematic villains in history, because there is so much you can do with him that creates a sense of awe when seen on the big screen.  Bryan Singer crafted numerous magnificent moments with Magneto that alone are worth seeing the film for.

One aspect that I was very happy with in X-Men: First Class was their use of the F-word.  This may sound very silly for me to bring up, but in a PG-13 movie they are only allowed one use of the word.  Just like any other aspect of the visceral and storytelling experience, language means a lot.  So many times when studios only have one opportunity to use a strong word that sums up many emotions it is just inserted in a throwaway moment.  First Class used it at an appropriate time, with appropriate characters that created a great deal of humour, but was so true and sincere to the moment.  X-Men: Days of Future Past ties in its use of the cuss word with the previous film, not for humour but for an understanding of character.  I do applaud them for making the most of the one shot they had at using that word, because it made an impact in the story.

The action scenes were a visually stimulating experience, and one in particular included an enormous amount of humour.  While it was not an overly funny movie, the humour fit perfectly with the character and situation involved without being out of place and overly slap-stick (even though it was rather slap-stick).  Once again, Singer showed an awareness of what works, with whom, and when.  One downside to his choice of visuals was at times inserting grainy perspective shots from bystanders to the action who had cameras.  I do understand that the intent was possibly to instill the understanding that the mutants were now caught on tape, but it had a tendency to work against the flow of what was unraveling.

If you are an X-Men fan, or just a fan of solid summer action flicks, you will most likely get all of your money’s worth out of X-Men: Days of Future Past.  Or, if you are like me, you are sitting on a stock pile of Scene points and will have the option of seeing it for free.  But, if you completely act like me, you will not figure out how to redeem the points and, for the second week in a row, pay full price for a movie you could have gotten for free because you don’t understand tech.  I am not completely blaming this on Bryan Singer, but I am considering writing a strongly written letter.

Rating – 3 out of 4 stars

American Hustle

After missing a post last night because of falling asleep too early (due to an anxiety attack and the drowsying effects of anti-anxiety medication), I am back in full force to talk about American Hustle, a movie that opened in theatres today.  I will be very straight forward and blunt in the fact that this is a movie that I have been anticipating for the last ten months.  Ever since I saw it listed on IMDB, and knowing nothing other than the title and who was involved, it has been my most anticipated film to see of the entire year.  Originally, it was to open in wide release on Christmas day which, while being the ultimate Christmas present, would have been hard to explain to my family why I needed to step out for a few hours.

As with anything that has a lot of personal excitement and anticipation, it is extremely hard for the event to live up to the expectations that the mind can create.  Over the past few months, while continuing to count down the days and stare at the calendar, I have been attempting to clear my head for this movie so that I was able to view it purely for what it is, otherwise it would most likely not live up to what I expected it to be.  The very opening scene of the movie, Christian Bale with a pot belly, skillfully and meticulously crafting his comb over to hide his bald head established a deep and rich feel to the tale that was about to unfold.  It was becoming everything I had hoped for… and then it changed.

The movie is directed by David O. Russell (The Fighter, Silver Linings Playbook) and is about the Abscam operation in the 1970s.  Bale plays Irving Rosenfeld, a con-man who is roped into helping F.B.I. agent Richie DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) along with his partner in crime, Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams).  Also in this film are Jennifer Lawrence, Louis C.K., and Jeremy Renner, a very deep and talented cast indeed.  Russell, along with Eric Singer, wrote the screenplay for this film.

Now, when I had said that after the initial scenes the movie ‘change,’ I am referring to a tone and pace adjustment that is kicked off as the film goes into flashback mode to establish the characters.  At times it felt a little clunky and forced, and I began to worry that this film which was Hollywood’s early Christmas present to me would in actuality be a lump of coal.    I do not necessarily believe that the mere fact that there were flashbacks were to blame, but more so the entire construction and delivery of about a fifteen to twenty minute section of the film.  I was still entertained, and was still enjoying it, but I was not hooked and there was no magic.

At that, I have said the only negatives that I can find possible to say about this movie.  It is easily my favourite film of the year, and was worth every moment of anticipation that has passed over the past ten months.  The skill of this movie is in the characters, who are multi-dimensional beings, all with strengths and failings, alienting and sympathizing aspects, who bring the story to life.  The more the movie progresses, the more we know the characters, and the more we become invested in every decision, every action, and every risk that they take.

This is really where David O. Russell is one of the best in Hollywood.  It is an amazing fact that his film last year, Silver Linings Playbook, had an actor nominated for every single one of the performance awards.  He seems to be able to create such vivid characters and allow the actors to fully embrace and take over their qualities that actor and character become one in a seamless and glorious marriage.  This is what hooked me to Silver Linings Playbook (my favourite film of 2012, I should add), and the art of this mastery is elevated even further in American Hustle.

As far as the acting goes, it is brilliant right across the board.  If it was not such a competitive Oscar year, it would be easy to assume that once again there would be a representative from this movie in each of the performance categories.  The reality, however, is that probably will not happen due to the depth of options this year, but the quality on display in American Hustle is such that it would not be a huge shock or disservice if that were to happen.  There was not one, at least to the best of my recollection, awkward acting moment where the delivery seemed flawed, forced, or merely just a line read from the script for the cameras. 

At the same time of all of my praise, this is not a typical type of movie.  It is about con artists, F.B.I., and very dangerous unsavoury folk, but it does not rely on the standards typical of that kind of film.  While most would indulge in gun-play, cat and mouse scenes, fights, car chases, and even a possible explosion or two, this film uses any gritty element so sparingly that it hardly seems to exist.  The reason for this is because everything ultimately comes down to the characters and the chaotic whirlpool that their lives become during all the unfolding of the operation, and it is engaging with brilliant moments of hilarity.  The humour is not from jokes forced into the script, but comes from these quirky and messed up people as they try to make their way through the mess around them.

As I mentioned, it is far and away my favourite movie of the year.  I will not say that it is the best movie of the year, but I had an incredible amount of fun viewing this film and was immersed in the craziness to a joyous extent.  While I was watching it, there was a young couple that walked out after having talked a lot and it seemed that this was not their cup of tea, and that’s going to happen.  It is not a hyped up explosive movie, but a tale that relies on getting the audience to become invested in the characters and care about what outcomes await them.  It is near perfect at this, and it executes it with many moving, crazy, and hilarious moments along the way.

Rating – 4 out of 4 stars

Winter's Bone

Ah, the days have been up and down with today seeming to be more on the side of the latter.  While I am not deep within the hold of anxiety or negative emotions today, it would seem more like I am constantly teetering, and I don't know if that is worse or not.  It seems to be rather emotionally draining to be on constant edge of a breakdown, and it was not too long into the day that I declared this day as a write-off, and I waived my obligations to anything productive or motivating.  I almost was not going to blog, but then forced myself into it.

The movie that I am talking about today is a very atmospherically drab film called Winter's Bone, and it stars Jennifer Lawrence as Ree Dolly, a seventeen year old girl who is looking after her younger brother and sister, as well as her mentally ill mother.  Her father, a meth cooker who has not been around very often has put the family house and property up as part of his bond.  Ree is informed by the police that if he does not show up for his court date, they will lose the house.

The conditions that the Dolly family live in are extreme poverty, constantly unsure of where the next meal is going to come from.  The loss of the house would essentially put the family homeless in the woods of Missouri.  Ree then realizes that she herself must track down her father and ensure that he shows up to court.  In the process, we see her travelling on foot first to her uncle Teardrop (John Hawkes) and then heading further and further to more and more unsavoury people.

In each of the places she goes, she always seems to be greeted by the women of the homes, who seem to act as emissaries for the men.  The movie really shows this lifestyle as one that is run by violent and dangerous men, and the women know to stay out of their business and what their role is.  Now, this is not me and my personal view that a woman should 'know her role,' but a definite theme of the environment which is crucial to the tale.  The reason why is it so important is because we are following a lone, unprotected, teenage girl who is willing to go to any and all lengths in this male-dominated subculture to ensure a future for her family.

I had mentioned that it is a drab movie, and that comes from it always being shot on overcast days.  It is in the fall, so there are no leaves on the trees, making the entire world around Ree seem cold, harsh, and hopeless.  The physical environment sets a good backdrop for the plight of the protagonist, and we get some good visuals of her plodding through it all, with each step getting further and further from home, and with each step getting closer and closer to more dangerous men.

It is not an uplifting story by any means, but it is a touching one.  The performances of Jennifer Lawrence and John Hawkes are amazing (both of them got rightly nominated for Oscars), and the locations that surround them are so well done that it makes their universe real to the viewer.  I do complain that there are not enough movies about strong female leads, and Winter's Bone takes a very different look at the concept, and one that is not done in the typical, flashy Hollywood style.

Rating - 3.5 out of 4 stars