REVIEW: St. Vincent

8/10 - What are you waiting for a paper invitation? 

This is one of my favorite movies of 2014. It's also probably my favorite Bill Murray role of the last 10 years. It's also probably going to get reviews saying it's mediocre and predictable. Even so, I don't care, St. Vincent just hits me in the right way.

The rundown is this: Bill Murray plays Vincent, a misanthropic asshole who smokes and drinks, hangs out with prostitutes and has lost all him money gambling. His new neighbor Maggie movies in with her kid Oliver. Vincent ends up hanging out with Oliver, watching him after school while Maggie works long hours trying to support her family as a newly single parent.

I'm just going to say this now. If you are the least bit cynical or go in expecting beginning to end belly laughs, you'll be disappointed. Fortunately I'm a big softy deep down, so coming of age combo-love your family drama is right up my ally.

What I found refreshing about St. Vincent is that the characters are not trapped inside the vacuum of the protagonists journey. All the characters in this film come from different backgrounds, and have different conflicts in their lives, different with points of view, and all grow and change by the end. No one is a villain for the sake of being bad, or good for the sake of innocence. It's almost the opposite of Chef, where there were clear character roles and good things happened making the audience feel good. In this case, the character roles fluctuate and major obstacles come up in an unexpected way. But it still makes the audience feel good. 

Like I said, Bill Murray is fantastic. It's nice to see actors out of their comfort zones, and Bill Murray has fallen into this trap of playing characters almost exactly like himself. While his charm does a huge favor in this role to make an unlikable character more palatable, Vincent is something out of the ordinary for him. Melissa McCarthy too. I can't remember McCarthy ever playing a straight role. She's a mom, a nurse, she's struggling, she's real. For someone who normally play's characters so over the top they are basically cartoons, this is a fresh revelation. When I read the script I was in total disbelief that Naomi Watts would work in her role, and she definitely changed my mind. It's a great cast who really surprises. I think it's a real credit to writer/director Theodore Melfi who got the best out of this pool of talented actors. 

I'm a big fan of St. Vincent. It might be a bit paint by numbers, a bit cliche, and a bit saccharine but I like a movie that doesn't shy away from those elements. It's easy to be critical of a movie that relies on sentimentality but that doesn't take away from the quality of the story. At the end of the day I was rooting for the kid, laughing at the jokes and enraptured by the ending. Isn't that what we watch movies for?

IMDb - St. Vincent (7.3)
Wikipedia - St. Vincent
Rotten Tomatoes - St. Vincent (77%)
Amazon.ca - St. Vincent

REVIEW: The Interview

6/10 - Yeah yeah, Sony Hack, terrorist threat, controversy, blah blah. Don't care.

You know what's weird? The thing that stood out to me the most about The Interview is the production value. Really outstanding sets, costumes, graphics. Great editing on quick montages. Good music, lighting, cinematography, everything. Scenes that could have been bland were spruced up with a healthy budget to create great visuals.

I don't care much for the actors, jokes, or story though.

I will confess, this is another movie where I read the script before seeing the film. Perhaps that deflated some of the story and comedic elements? You can judge.

I feel like this is The Hobbit of comedy. All the elements are there, to make a funny film. On paper it should work. But with too big of a budget and too much confidence it's lost the whole reason people wanted this movie to begin with. They thought they were making another Jump Street or This is The End but instead they ended up with something messy and boring.

The Interview is a perfectly mediocre film about regular schmucks getting thrown into international espionage. James Franco plays an exaggerated Ryan Seacrest type entertainment reporter, and Seth Rogan plays himself? Is Seth Rogan best buds with Ryan Seacrest? I'm not sure. I think in this film Seth was supposed to be a producer or something, but he really just played himself. It opens with some really hilarious scenes showing Franco interviewing celebs and uncovering the best juicy gossip. I'd watch a whole movie of just that. Then they get thrown down a rabbit hold of interviewing the dictator of North Korea and being fuck ups about it.

I'm not sure what exactly turned me off from this movie but I think it's somewhere in the combo of unmemorable jokes and a weak plot. At the end of the day this concept lends itself to some serious political satire. I'm not sure if making fun of Kim Jong-Un in a pre-school way is really sufficient. I also found in the script, there was greater emphasis on the fact that as the dictator of North Korea the population was suffering inhumane atrocities, and they were heavily manipulating their image for the these two media representatives. The final cutting of the film doesn't go near the oppressed people aspect, perhaps because it's a mood killer, but then it's harder justify Kim Jong-Un as the ultimate enemy.

I also found myself frustrated that The Interview is self aware enough to comment on the use of women solely for male seduction, and yet every woman in the movie is only there to seduce a man. What can you do?

I think the best things to take away from The Interview are Randall Park and Diana Bang. Both actors were great in their roles and were quite funny. Something that isn't easy when this film is a vehicle for Franco and Rogan to be funny.

So The Interview gets a big pass. If you saw the trailer you probably saw about as much memorable material as their is in the whole film. It's not an offensively bad comedy like We're the Millers, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone out there enjoyed this film. It's just not my cup of tea.

Wikipedia - The Interview
IMDb - The Interview (7.1)
Rotten Tomatoes - The Interview (51%)
Amazon.ca - The Interview

REVIEW: Boyhood

Best Picture Nominee

Original Screenplay Nominee

8/10 - You can film yourself aging while you watch this movie, too!

Boyhood is what I'm calling the clear front runner for this year's Best Picture race. For cinematic innovation it's deserving. Considering how the last decade has gone for movies (badly) it really is a triumph of filmmaking. You will notice however, it's not getting a perfect score because if I'm being honest it's kind of boring and I'll never watch it again.

For those few people unawares, Boyhood is Richard Linklater's latest film. It's a literal coming-of-age drama that follows a young boy, Mason and his family over the years until he departs for college. This is fresh on the heel's of Linklater's successful third installment of his Before series, Before Midnight. The Before series brought audiences into brief moments that were decades apart. Boyhood assembled a film crew for a few scenes every year for 12 years, culminating in a three hour movie concentrate of what childhood looks like. It's almost a polished version of what some of the mumble-core (Ugh I hate that word) movies have tried to accomplish. Drop the viewer into the mundane reality of life, not the elevated fantasy that most films portray.

That leaves my paradox. Watching the cast, namely Ellar Coltrane, literally go through boyhood is the hook. If you were to describe this movie, as I did, you would only talk about that part. But the time between filming is not the point of the movie. There is a real plot. Which isn't about Ellar growing up. Except it sort of is, it's about Mason Jr. growing up. The family goes through a lot of changes. It's about his parents separation, their new relationships, the step children, the ups and downs of puberty. It really is a pseudo documentary that seems to only observe the life of a boy in relevant periods of time, culminating in great personal growth for all the characters and illustrating the struggles and hope in every day life.

I can't quite decide where I land on Boyhood. To some critics, this film is a revelation. And as someone who watches a lot of movies I totally get that. Boyhood breaks the standard movie mold, really pulling on the heartstrings of certain generations (Like those with kids Mason's age or those kids who are Mason's age.) I think many people will leave feeling satisfied with the nostalgic quality of this film. On the other hand there really isn't much of a tangible story to follow and the extremely long three hour time frame is going to turn off many movie goers. This is a film so raw in concept, very humble and endearing, and yet it's inaccessible to so many people. The sentiment I've heard about this movie is "Yeah, I've heard about it. No I'm not going to see it." Which is sort of a shame that this is where we've landed. I'm not going to lie, the lack of "story" is a big turn off for me, too.

Regardless of whether it's an underrated masterpiece, or an overwrought eyeroll, I wish we had more movies like Boyhood. The last few years have made me quite frustrated with the movie scene. There are award dramas that come out at Christmas, Summer action movies, early Spring comedies, and very little innovation. It's all become quite safe. Audiences are being told to anticipate their movie purchases years in advance regardless of whether the film will be any good, and lower budget movies are being swept under the rug. I'm glad that movies like Boyhood and Birdman are doing so well this season. Nothing against Selma or The Imitation Game but they are literally only funded because of the award season cash in. It's nice to see a passion project come to life every once in a while. This is a good passion filled movie. Let it recharge you.

IMDb - Boyhood (8.3)
Wikipedia - Boyhood
Rotten Tomatoes - Boyhood (98%)
Amazon.ca - Boyhood

REVIEW: Wild

9/10 - Not nominated for Best Picture or Best Director? What an oversight. 

Last night I cleaned my kitchen. Took a nice hot bath. Made a cup of tea. Got in my PJ's, with blankies and my puppy on the couch, ready for snuggles. Then I turned on this movie and was unable to look away. 

I highly recommend anyone else who wants to watch this film to do the same. Not only was it a nice Sunday night, this movie is highly deserving of your focus and attention. And you will probably also need something to snuggle. 

Wild follows the story of Cheryl Strayed as she hikes across the west coast of the United States via the Pacific Crest Trail. It's a story of her learning to deal with her past, as the journey on the hiking trail reflects the journey her life took to get to this point. You might even call the hike the b-plot because the "flashbacks" are really the focus of the film. 

As a screenwriter, I also read the script, which wasn't nominated for an Oscar (I'm supposed to be reviewing those movies right now.) I have a ton of appreciation for a script that's entire purpose is to illustrate an internal struggle. That's not an easy thing to do. There was no voice-over narration saying "Hi, I'm Cheryl and today I started hiking!" or massive physical transformation. It's a story about a woman reflecting on her life, fondly remembering love, and regretting mistakes, dealing with deep soul-crushing pain, and avoided memories of heartache. There's a movie in here that follows Cheryl chronologically, I'm sure. That's not this movie. Wild isn't about what happened to her in the past, it's about her dealing with it in the present. 

The only major difference from script to screen I noticed was the hike itself. The script seemed to emphasize more the difficulties of the hike, but that's difficult to express on screen and if more hiking had been included in the final cut of the film I'm sure someone would have made a Lord of the Rings joke about her hiking to Mordor. 

There is really something wonderful about the relatability of Cheryl in this film. Women are so often portrayed as either strong and cold, or weak and flirtatious. This is as close to the female "every-man" as I've seen on screen. Her character reflects the way people are composed of contradictions. She's a character full of love, compassion, and empathy, but also makes selfish and impulsive decisions. She struggles to deal with things that are hard to deal with. She doesn't have the answers. She has to make hard mistakes to figure out who she is. So rarely are women given the opportunities to see those stories told on film, even though this one made for one fantastic film.

Reese Witherspoon is vulnerable and raw, but also optimistic. She brings so much dimension to this already complex character. Laura Dern is undeniably charming, as she often is on screen. Her moments in the film are brief but haunting. I've always felt like she was an underrated actress. I think Jean-Marc Vallee brought out some quality performances from the cast. 

So yes, I highly recommend Wild. It fits somewhere outside the normal convention of film. It's a drama that isn't agonizing. It's a female-driven film that doesn't dwell in romance. It's a biographical memoir told in an unconventional way. This is what I like about independent films. Sometimes going just a few steps outside of the 'expectations box' can lead to wonderful things. 

IMDb - Wild (7.4)

Wikipedia - Wild

Rotten Tomatoes - Wild (90%)

Amazon.ca - Wild

87th Annual Acadamy Awards Rundown

Here are a selection of the nominees from this years awards. I'll try to review as many of these as I can and see what shakes out. I'm already predicting a few categories: Boyhood for Best Picture. Many of these, I've also read the screenplays for so perhaps that will work into my review. Worth nothing that Gillian Flynn was shut out of the nominations for Gone Girl. I was also quite surprised Wild wasn't nominated for Best Picture.

Best Picture

American Sniper

Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Boyhood

The Grand Budapest Hotel

The Imitation Game

Selma

The Theory of Everything

Whiplash

Adapted Screenplay

American Sniper (Jason Hall)

The Imitation Game (Graham Moore)

Inherent Vice (Paul Thomas Anderson)

The Theory of Everything (Anthony McCarten)

Whiplash (Damien Chazelle)

Original Screenplay

Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (Alejandro G. Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. & Armando Bo)

Boyhood (Richard Linklater)

Foxcatcher (E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman)

The Grand Budapest Hotel (Wes Anderson)

Nightcrawler (Dan Gilroy)