Review: The Gambler

4/10 - When did Marky Mark turn into Kevin Bacon?

I'm not sure why I was supposed to watch The Gambler. Did people think it was a good movie? Is it a comedy? Is it a drama? It's like a movie that just came into existence and disappeared just as quickly. Which makes sense because even after seeing it, because I still have no idea why this movie was made.

From what I gather, this was a remake. That's important because in the context of 2015, this is an irrelevant movie. I can't see this movie getting made on spec right now and getting any attention. It's a movie with an irrelevant story about irrelevant characters for today.

The plot rundown is something about Marky Mark being a rich baby who has a wicked job as a professor but gambles away everything he earns, and screws around with one of his students.

I think the biggest take away from The Gambler was how much I am becoming skeeved out by Hollywood. The very talented Brie Larson plays the young innocent love interest. And while their relationship was somewhat inappropriate within the story, because he is a teacher and she is a student, all I could think about was the idea that she was probably birthed with "Good Vibrations" playing in the delivery room. This age gap is becoming so common, and the more I see it the more awkward I find it. It's easy to look at the context of each relationship in each movie individually and justify the age gap as being part of the story, but it's something that happens so often it's really a gross trend that I'm not a fan of.

Back to the movie itself, I can't decide if I think Marky Mark gives a good acting performance. With a lot of unintentional condescension, I found myself impressed that he could spout out long poetic lines while his literature professor character lectured his class. There were no scenes of him running with a gun while explosions were going off in the background. which is pretty much the only reason he does movies anymore. I totally loathed his character though, and I largely attribute that to his utter lack of charisma and charm.

Jessica Lange, on the other hand, is a gift to the world. Although she is not a major character, all of her scenes come into sharp focus with her presence. Frankly, this movie is worth watching for the pleasure of watching Lange slap the Froot Loops out of Marky Marks mouth.

Overall The Gambler about reckless people making poor decisions, without any consideration for the consequences of their actions. There's nothing sympathetic about a character with an endless supply of cash who's problems come from gambling that money away, especially considering the state of the American economy today. I actually found that the higher the stakes were, the less I cared about the outcome of story. As interesting as some of the set pieces and scenarios were, they were so underutilized with a plot that cannot possibly resonate with the audience.


IMDb - The Gambler (6.1)
Wikipedia - The Gambler
Rotten Tomatoes - The Gambler (46%)
Amazon.ca - The Gambler

REVIEW: The Imitation Game

Best Picture Nominee
Best Adapted Screenplay Nominee

8/10 - Like a paint-by-numbers Oscar flick

In 2014 Graham Moore won the Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay for The Imitation Game. This was the first movie he had produced into a feature film. His short but moving speech revealed his own struggles as a kid, not having a place in the world.

"When I was 16 years old, I tried to kill myself because I felt weird and I felt different and I felt like I did not belong. And now I’m standing here and, so, I would like for this moment to be for that kid out there who feels like she’s weird or she’s different or she doesn't fit in anywhere. Yes, you do. I promise you do. You do. Stay weird. Stay different."

A beautiful speech that gives insight into how he was able to create such a fantastic script. The Imitation Game is a film about the life of pioneering computer scientist Alan Turing. His brilliant mind ostracized him socially, compounded by the fact that he was openly gay during a time when homosexuality was illegal. Turing gets recruited to help crack the Nazi enigma code and help save his country. The same country that cruelly punishes him for being gay. Moore may not have experience working as a military code-breaker, but his own life experience helped create a remarkable tragic figure on screen.

The Imitation Game really is a remarkable film, if almost too polished. It creates a lovely balance of intriguing character with high stakes intensity. This simply is a display of Cumberbatch's talents to create a nuanced character. If you ever heard the advice, "don't show the work" this is exactly what makes Benedict Cumberbatch's portrayal wonderful. Every moment embraces this character effortlessly. I was also surprised by Keira Knightly as well, who has never been a memorable actress to me. The film also has a good share of twists and unexpected surprises that makes it more than just a character study.

If there is a flaw in The Imitation Game it's the film's total lack of flaws. Turing says the right things at the right time, and it lost some appeal to me for that reason. Here's the scene where he says something funny. Here's the scene where he does something heroic. Here's the scene where he says a wise proverb. It's a difficult thing to criticize because if I was writing a movie I would want to create a script as tight as this was. However, some charm lost as the overall effect is very much the Hollywood standard without a unique flare.

Like Interstellar, this is a movie that seems to be plagued by a public need to identify inaccuracies. I stand by my belief that this is a movie. It's not a history lesson, nor a biography. Movies have no obligation to be accurate. They only have an obligation to entertain people, largely through fictional stories. If The Imitation Game was a launching point for you to research the life of Alan Turing or his achievements, or the enigma code, or the history of gay rights then the movie did a fantastic job.

I'm not sure if I think this was the year's best picture. As much as I enjoyed the historical fiction of Alan Turing and the Enigma code from The Imitation Game, I don't think it pushed the boundaries of storytelling the way some other films did this year. It certainly is a fantastic film, worthy of being seen and talked about, but a bit too much of a replication of The King's Speech and other historical films to be a stand out for me. Everything about The Imitation Game screams that it was made to win awards. Perhaps it should win them, but I don't value that very much as a movie-goer.


IMDb - The Imitation Game (8.1)
Wikipedia - The Imitation Game
Rotten Tomatoes - The Imitation Game (89%)
Amazon.ca - The Imitation Game

REVIEW: Interstellar

10/10 - Epic is a really good word for this movie

Christopher Nolan is a director that built his name on action adventure movies that brought audiences to new worlds with imaginative concepts. Coming off films like The Dark Knight and Inception, the expectations for his sci fi space opera were quite high.

Interstellar is a journey that takes the audience from a dystopian future to the limits of outer space. It's the ultimate cowboy movie, throwing a good ol' farmer into a new territory, looking to claim land for the US of A. This whole film has the feel of being bigger than this movie, bigger than it's story. Perhaps even bigger than Nolan could wrangle. It is a fantastic cinematic experience though, perhaps the best of the year. It hands the ability to infinitely discover the universe to the audience. Interstellar truly feels like a masterpiece, worthy of a grand scale.

The story itself is about Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) a NASA engineer turned farmer who struggles to raise a family during an environmental crisis. Coop gets recruited to join a mission to explore a nearby wormhole, as they believe nearby planets could help save the dying Earth. It's a mission to provide a future for the son and daughter he leaves behind.

What sets Interstellar apart is that it doesn't just tell a story, it shares an experience. We tend to break films down into categories, in order to decide whether they were worthwhile. Story, acting, special effects, audio, what was good and what was bad? In any film, Interstellar included, those specific areas can be picked apart and examined as a contributing part to the film as a whole. In this film, I was so enraptured with the rabbit hole we had been thrown into, that it seemed rather irrelevant to pick apart the individual areas of technical design. The overall effect was so powerful and storytelling so innovative that I felt as though I was a part of the mission the astronauts were on.

For the sake of the review, I'm obligated to share those criticisms. The emotional story was a bit uneven, and I left with more questions about Coopers family then I had answers. At some points conversations felt long, and claustrophobic.

The biggest issue seemed to be the trouble in bridging the science fiction elements to an audience of people without physics degrees. Part of that comes from the desire to tell a story with an explanation grounded in reality but also, science fiction in film seems to arise a bizarre sense of entitlement for scientific accuracy. I get where this comes from, we want to trust and believe in the universe so that story lives on. I can only presume some journalists didn't get the "fiction" part of "science fiction" because I've read a thousand articles desperate to point out minute scientific inaccuracies.

Frankly, we need a better outlet to explore our fascination with great movies, than to credit or discredit the film with educational tidbits of astrophysics. "Debunking" the scientific accuracy only serves to undermine the outstanding achievements of this film.

From beginning to end, Interstellar is an outstanding movie. It utilized every aspect of film making to give the audience an experience never seen before. From the silent explosions in space, to the shocking affects of gravity on a new planet, Interstellar pushed the limits of what humans can experience by putting it on the big screen. If there is ever a film worthy of putting down your phone and offering it your fullest attention, this is it.

IMDb - Interstellar (8.7)
Wikipedia - Interstellar
Rotten Tomatoes - Interstellar (72%)
Amazon.ca - Interstellar

REVIEW: Life Itself

8/10 - It eluded us then, but that's no matter - tomorrow we will run faster...

Life Itself (2014)

In 2013 when Roger Ebert passed away, something interesting happened. There was undeniably a massive loss felt by many people who Roger had touched, but the wave of grief went far beyond his friends, family and colleagues. There was a struggle to articulate why his loss was so profound. Ebert was a pop culture icon as a film critic, his job and his work is something that's largely impersonal. For example, I've read at least a hundred film reviews this week for different movies and I don't think I could even give the name of one off hand, let alone tell you anything about their personal life. For so many of us, Roger Ebert represented something different. His work cultivated a personal relationship with the public that separated his job from his life.

That's what made Roger special. His job was to give opinions, but he gave us honesty and sincerity. He was a passionate person, and wasn't ashamed to be outspoken and vulnerable. That quality is rare. His gift for writing that reaches deep down to the heart of the matter, made him stand out. In a culture that has rejected poetry and fine arts, movies have become our outlet and reflection of selves. Ebert brought an art back to that medium. He elevated what films were and reminded us that while we go to be entertained, we are writing our own historical narrative and searching for humanity.

The documentary Life Itself was released in 2014 but it took me some time to come around to see it because I anticipated I would be crying throughout. The film is based on Ebert's own memoir that was released in 2011 of the same name.

Siskel and Ebert: At the Movies

The documentary began filming in 2012, and is filled with new footage, his own stories and jokes, exerts from the book, interviews from friends and family, pictures and old clips. It chronicles Roger Ebert's life from a young man with the gift of the gab, to his cancer treatment and dealing with having his voice literally taken away from him. It's an insight into his life with Chaz, Gene Siskel and At the Movies, and the ups and downs of his life.

Although there isn't a lot of terrible revolutionary information or shocking new scenes that I've come to expect with contemporary documentaries, there is a lot to enjoy about this film. Particularly, admiration for his generosity and tenacity. It wouldn't be a interesting film if he was portrayed as a saint and nothing else, however it's easy to see how he became such a likable figure even at his worst.

At 2 hours, Life Itself was a longer documentary than I was expecting, but I recommend it wholeheartedly. It is, without question, a movie designed to pull at your heartstrings, but I might venture to guess, that's the reason most people see it anyways. I'm not sure if there will ever be a critic so renowned as Ebert, and this is certainly a tribute to his legacy.

Two thumbs up.

IMDb - Life Itself (8.0)
Wikipedia - Life Itself
Rotten Tomatoes - Life Itself (97%)
Amazon.ca - Life Itself

REVIEW: Big Hero 6

7/10 - Way to go Disney, you didn't totally mess this one up!

Disney's Big Hero 6

After ripping apart Frozen for the past year I was hesitant to even approach Big Hero 6 fearing it would be the far stupider step child of an already dumb family. What a terrible metaphor. I digress, Disney animation has cranked out some pretty poor family films in the last few years, with movies that have lots of shelf appeal and no substance. Big Hero 6 looked to be about the same. And after hearing Doug Loves Movies refer to the infamous "YEAAAAHHHH SCIENCE" line ad nauseum I was expecting something along the lines of Wreck It Ralph. A movie painfully paint-by-numbers.

So, when I put on Big Hero 6 it was because I was looking for something wafer thin, and as light and fluffy as a cloud. To my surprise, it's actually not a bad story.

Hero, a robotics-loving/prodigy kid. His older brother, Tadashi is working on a robot project of his own at his university, a personal healthcare robot named Baymax. Some spoilerish stuff happens and the group of friends band together with their robotics know-how to save San Fransokyo.

First of all, San Fransokyo. That's where they live. A semi-futuristic version of San Francisco meets Tokyo. That also means many of the main characters are Asian inspired white people. There's something about white washing the characters that doesn't sit well with me. It would have been nice to see some racial diversity in a Disney movie, aside from aliens and talking animals. It doesn't really help that all the friend characters are themselves MASSIVE cliches.

Main Cast from Disney's Big Hero 6

The robotic lead, Baymax is like someone made a robot out of a Wii U. It's got none of the
functionality you actually want in a robot, and it's "non threatening hug-able" appearance is accompanied by soft lights and synthetic tones. It's an inflatable Wii Fit game.

Once you get past that, the fantastic performance by Scott Adsit makes Baymax a great character. His actions are a reflection of the person who did the programming and that's a delightfully fresh approach to robots on film.

I really enjoyed the overall story arc and the approach to themes in this film. It's a collision of violent vengeance with compassion and healing. Although there are some annoying cliches that come with an "origin story" the superhero aspect is somewhat of a b-plot. It's an excellent adventure movie along the lines of How to Train Your Dragon. It's charming with a lot of humanity.

Big Hero 6 also won the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature this year so congratulations! You beat The Lego Movie because it wasn't nominated.

• IMDb - Big Hero 6 (8.0)
• Wikipedia - Big Hero 6
• Rotten Tomatoes - Big Hero 6 (90%)
• Amazon.ca - Big Hero 6