REVIEW: Trainwreck

8/10 - Is The Dogwalker also a movie? I'd watch the hell out of that. 

2015 was the year of Amy Schumer. Her show Inside Amy Schumer went into its third season, winning a Peabody Award. She hosted the MTV Movie Awards, and opened for Madonna on her latest tour. She had a stand-up comedy special on HBO, and in the middle of all that, she wrote and starred in this film. I assume in 2016 she'll take a nap then do it all again.

Trainwreck is a return to form for comedy director/producer Judd Apatow. It's about a party-girl slash commitaphobe, Amy (Schumer) who finds herself falling in love with celebrity sports doctor, Aaron (Bill Hader). It feels like a very successful marriage of Schumer's brand of raunchy comedy, and the character stories that Apatow is drawn to.

While Amy's character might seem familiar to those who watch her show, it's a refreshing change of pace for romantic comedies. Even the most die hard rom-com fan has to admit, the all-work-and-no-play trope has really run it's course for women in these movies. Turning the tables put Amy's character in the front and center as by far the most interesting person in the film.

What came as a surprise was the amount of heart in the movie. Comedies lately don't seem to even need a story, just a loosely stitched together series of events. When Bill Hader's character begins dating Amy, I was waiting for the film to go off the rails. Maybe influenced by Judd Apatow, the story stayed realistic instead of veering into improvised lines. both Schumer and Hader showed refined dramatic chops. Hader was the perfect charming boyfriend, and Schumer showed a lot of vulnerability in her relationships, especially the scenes with her father, Colin Quinn. Just more proof that these two are big movie stars in the making.

The athletes that crossed over into acting for this film were some of the funniest cast members. John Cena plays a dimwitted boyfriend of Amy's with some of the best lines in the whole film. LeBron James plays a fictional version of himself who could star in his own spin off.

One of the best takeaways from Trainwreck is Tilda Swinton. She is absolutely unrecognizable as Amy's boss and magazine editor Dianna. Apparently her character was inspired by Vogue Paris editor Carine Roitfeld, but it reminded me of a toxic combination Anna Wintour and Janice Dickinson. Tilda has been transforming herself on screen for years, but this transformation is so dramatic it should up up there with Charlize Theron in Monster.

If Trainwreck had been a funnier movie with over the top comedy sketches it would be a great disservice to the talent in the film. It's an old story told in a new, refreshing way. Definitely a standout for 2015.

IMBd - Trainwreck (6.5)

Wikipedia - Trainwreck

Rotten Tomatoes - Trainwreck (85%)

Amazon.ca - Trainwreck

REVIEW: Aloha

3/10 - Perfect movie to leave on the TV for your cats when you go out. 

I really like Cameron Crowe, even though his movies aren't pushing the limits of filmmaking. At his worst he captures heart and sincerity in his movies, and that's better than most. I also really like Emma Stone, who doesn't. Bradley Cooper, yes please. Rachel McAdams another delight. Bill Murray?! Are you kidding, sign me up for this film.

None of those talented people could save Aloha. It's a shallow snooze-fest with nothing worthwhile to say. Halfway through I was wishing someone would buy a Zoo.

Aloha follows Brian a military contractor (Bradley Cooper) as he dicks around on Hawaii going between millionaires who want to exploit the Hawaiian resources (Bill Murray and Alec Baldwin) and the native Hawaiians, inexplicably represented by Emma Stone. Brian's ex-wife is also there with her new husband (Rachel McAdams and John Krasinski) where they do some stuff with their kids.

There is very little about Aloha that doesn't feel contrived. I've come to expect Cameron Crowe rom-coms to feature very little conflict and represent more personal journeys, and this is almost an attempt to do the opposite. It's so story heavy that it doesn't play to any of Crowe's strengths and it just an incomprehensible bore. Even Bradley Coopers character doesn't come across as likable, and all the other characters seem to exist solely as predictable roadblocks. The story becomes a diluted cocktail of American military pride, astrophysics, Hawaiian culture, and romantic feelings, where none of those story points fully come through, and all them them become weaker in combination.

I can't even sign off on this film representing Hawaiian culture despite the name. There's the obvious Emma Stone controversy that I can't add to, other than to agree that she was a terrible casting choice and her character does Hawaii a disservice.

Perhaps I'm disappointed with the film because I had hoped that beyond the initial kick back the film faced, there might be something redeeming about it. I couldn't find anything to make this movie worthwhile. There's no major trainwreck moment, it's just the kind of movie that makes you want to netflix and nap.

IMDb - Aloha (5.5)
Wikipedia - Aloha
Rotten Tomatoes - Aloha (19%)
Amazon.ca - Aloha

REVIEW: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Best Picture Nominee

Best Original Screenplay Nominee

3/10 - I don't like this movie. 

I literally don't know how to review a movie so polarizing, when I'm on the hate side. Actually it's not even polarizing. It's pretty much unanimously acclaimed. I just straight up don't get it. 

I've enjoyed a few Wes Anderson movies, like The Life Aquatic and Fantastic Mr. Fox. They were ok. I get the two two dimensional stylization. I understand that some people love it and think it's the bee's knee's. I'm on the side of loathing one word defined characters and paper thin plot lines. 

The Grand Budapest Hotel is about some random stuff that I didn't care to follow. I swear to god, I watched this movie twice and that's the best I can come up with. A bunch of white guys run around, some of them have guns. I don't know what to say. It was like watching a foreign film without subtitles. 

For me, I simply cannot connect to an endless stream of identical characters who all look and behave the same. Compound that with my utter lack of interest in following the story of these people and I'm done for.

I've watched a lot of movies. I've seen a lot of weird stuff. I usually try to get the weird stuff, and understand the point of view, even if I don't like it. This movie... The Grand Budapest Hotel is a brick wall. This is going to a concert to see a band and getting a puppet show. 

This is not the movie for me. I hope it loses everything. Sorry not sorry. 

IMDb - The Grand Budapest Hotel (8.1)

Wikipedia - The Grand Budapest Hotel

Rotten Tomatoes - The Grand Budapest Hotel (92%)

Amazon.ca - The Grand Budapest Hotel

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: Chef

6/10 - Are you hungry? You will be...

Chef is part passion project and part paint by numbers. Writer and director and star Jon Favreau created this film about how leaving his job as head chef in a well respected restaurant brought his family together to help him launch a food truck.

It's actually quite a good film. There's plenty of heart with a touching relationship between father and son, and lots of support from the friends and family in the supporting cast. It's beautifully shot with exquisite scenes of cooking that will certainly leave any audience drooling, I also like the integration of technology in this film. Often movies that try to utilize social media come across like an advertisement. In this case, the web is part of the universe we all live in, with both real implications and the ability to walk away from it. The focus stays on what's important, without getting too involved in tricky explanations.

I cannot say I particularly loved this movie. There's something bizarre about the plot that frustrated me as a viewer. This is meant to be a story about bottoming out, and finding what's really important. He embarks in a much smaller venture, cooking out of a food truck with his family. My problem is how he got to that point. Jon Favreau doesn't seem to like conflict. Scene after scene, characters are trying to lift up Carl, characters that shouldn't help him are going out of their way to help him.

There's a point halfway through the film where Favreau's Iron Man buddy makes a one scene appearance as the eccentric ex-husband of Carl's ex-wife. After some circular discussion, Chef Carl Casper walks out with a food truck. Seriously. Someone is going to have to explain that to me. It's like a bizzaro-world version of the Ex-Wives Club formed in the middle of this movie and through the magic of cinema, Carl got to move forward with his dream.

That's exactly the sort of thing I hate seeing in a movie. An entertaining scene is still not good if it's pushing forward an illogical plot. What's the message being presented here? Carl didn't have to work to get what he wanted. Was it meant to illustrate that buttering up to the first husband of his ex-wife is the same as relying on family? It's just so disjointed and improbable to me that it makes me out of the movie.

For a film written by, directed by, and starring the same person, it's surprisingly well paced. There's a lot of charm and chemistry between the cast which bails it out of some of the more improbably exposition scenes. It's a movie universe you want to live in, for more reasons then just the food.

IMDb - Chef (7.3)
Wikipedia - Chef
Rotten Tomatoes - Chef (88%)
Amazon.ca - Chef

REVIEW: Let's Be Cops

4/10 - Near unwatchable. 

You know what I hate? A film that has a good premise but doesn't know how to get to that setup in a realistic way.

In this case, the concept is the guys from New Girl run around as cops. Great. How do we get there? A pretty piss poor series of events. It's the plot a 8th grader would write - One is a video game developer who has cop uniforms because... he wants to make a cop video game? And the cops just hand over uniforms for that sort of thing. Then they make their own cop car. For real. They just get a car and make it into a cop car. That's a thing, I guess. Deadbeats who can't get their lives together decide to realistically fool the cops with little to no motivation.

The best thing I can say about this movie is it puts some scenes of fun things to good music.

There are some delightful cameos that I won't spoil. Natasha Leggero is on of my favorites, she's a gem. The casting in general is quite well done. Jake Johnson and Damon Waynes Jr. are really fun together.

But for real, don't see this movie. I can't imagine what kind of train-wreck this would be if it didn't have such a great set of leads. The plot is virtually non-existent. There's nothing original about the scenarios they find themselves in. Everyone plays their lines mildly funny but there really is nothing inherently funny about the story.

What's actually a little worrisome about this film is how similar the story is to the 2013 buddy real-cop movie The Heat. If the intention is to write a movie about idiots pretending to be cops, it's should't culminate with them actually being great cops. Even 21 Jump Street didn't have any moments of them being great cops. This movie is just a mess. No intention, no story, no great moments, no great laughs.

IMDb - Lets Be Cops (6.7)
Wikipedia - Lets Be Cops
Rotten Tomatoes - Lets Be Cops (19%)
Amazon.ca - Lets Be Cops

REVIEW: Butter

4/10 - I guess Butter carving sounds interesting. But it isn't. 

Butter is a great movie on paper. It's got a great cast, likely due to the great script. In fact, the script is so good it won a bunch of awards as a spec. On paper, it sounds like a fantastically funny, heartwarming, complex story.

As a movie it's pretty meh all around.

It's not politicial enough to be a biting satire. It's not funny enough to be a comedy. It doesn't follow through with it's attempts to be smart. This is a film overflowing with potential that falls flat on it's face.

As much as I love Jennifer Garner, and think she's actually quite funny in the role, it's the wrong casting. Her character is a larger than life scheming southern belle, who's hunger for power has corrupted all morals. Jen's southern accent wafts in and out, and is just too unlikable.

Somehow that's representative of all that goes wrong with this movie. The choices made in the production of this movie weren't necessarily wrong, but they weren't big and bold enough. Everything feels a little wishy washy. I have a suspicion that a lot of the smaller story lines were neutered to make room for the main story.

For example, Olivia Wilde's character Brook is a stripper. She seduces the home grown and wholesome Bob Pickler in a moment of weakness. Then she stalks him for the rest of the movie, demanding her money. In order to extort the money, Brook joins the butter carving competition. As interesting of a monkey wrench as she is, her character just collapses upon itself by the second half of the movie. Her paper thin character has no where to go so she disappears.

At best, Brook is intended to be a foil for Laura. Brook comes from nothing, and is able to make the moral choice in the end with every reason not to. Laura is privileged, and makes awful decisions. But it's a totally ineffective comparison because they have no business being in the same movie together. Their story lines don't ever meet or impact each other in any significant way.

What's frustrating is that the setup is there for so many great potential story lines, but practically all of them dwindle away into nothing. Without any follow through the movie is nothing but a drag.


There are some great moments that I can appreciate as a writer. When the signups are happening for the butter carving competition, there is a long rope maze of an entrance way. As each character enters the room to sign up, they tackle the rope maze a different way. It's a subtle detail, and I find it delicious to reveal character that way. Unfortunately the one thing that scene doesn't do is make me laugh.

Butter is a good movie if you want to see what goes wrong in a script from page to screen. It's not enough to rely on selling points like big characters and an unusual setting. Without a worthwhile story, and maybe even more importantly, without jokes this movie is a big miss.


IMDb - Butter (6,3)
Wikipedia - Butter 
Rotten Tomatoes - Butter (33%)
Amazon.ca - Butter

REVIEW: The Monuments Men

4/10  - Like Ocean's Eleven during WW2! I bet no one has made that joke yet...

George Clooney can pitch one hell of a movie. When George is explaining how great this movie is going to be, everyone listens. Hell, based on the trailer I was sold. Unfortunately he's a better seller then closer. This movie sucks. Big time.

It's difficult to pin down exactly the failure of a film like The Monuments Men. Technically the direction is beautiful. The cast is pretty solid all around, maybe not idea for the roles in my opinion, but memorable characters nonetheless. It's hard to fault the writing when it's based on a true story, and it's quite an uplifting unbelievable story. But you know what? I'm going to blame the writing, sorry Georgie.

The script is lacking any suspense, and frankly any direction. The narrative is so filled with self worth and nostalgia that it looses the audience halfway through. It's as if the pride of telling this particular story is supposed to make it an inherently better story. I actually think this story would be great if told by the right person. The threat of Nazi soldiers bearing down should be paramount. But it's not just you their after, the value of the cultural heritage that they would also destroy. It's a story with mountains of potential.

What really happens in The Monuments Men is quite dull. There are two obvious plots that are laid out like train tracks at the beginning. There are some illustrious men recruited for this covert mission. The reputation of these men lies solely in your ability to recognize them as actors and attribute them a reputation you feel is worthwhile. Then the value of the art is somehow minimized as well. One particular statue is given personal emotional value, which I suppose should raise the stakes for all the art, but that doesn't really happen. Converse to the intention of giving the art more meaning it seems to actually lose meaning as the story progresses. The movie's ultimate downfall is it's lack of opposition. This is clearly a worthwhile mission, and the enemy in this case seems to be apathy. No one wants to help these guys save the art. There might be a war going on that's keeping them occupied, but who knows really, they're a bunch of jerks for not helping. Some Nazi's sort of get in their way, but it's all a big shrug. They show up and get it done.

One of my favorite films in recent history is Argo, another loose adaptation of factual events. Like in The Monuments Men it's quite obvious how the ending will turn out if you've paid attention to history at all. Argo manages to make the audience compelled to the great characters through giving them high stakes and great motivations. Another film that might compare is Ocean's Eleven which also plays a fast and loose game with the audience of high stakes for a big payout. The failing of The Monuments Men lies entirely in it's inability to raise the stakes. Had this been a nail biter at the end, many other flaws could have been forgiven. This movie is like getting halfway through Oceans and watching Danny Ocean lay out the plan to film the vault ahead of time and steal the money pretending to be the SWAT team. There would be no reason to watch the ending. No suspense. No intrigue.

This has been a bit of a hot-topic lately but I'm also way over the all white male cast thing. Along with The Grand Budapest Hotel, The Monuments Men is a film with a notably large cast, meant to be a ensemble. When you lineup an ensemble cast and it's all the same race, gender, and age range, that's disappointing. I'm sure the argument for historical accuracy could be made, but let's be honest. The Cate Blanchett character is a throwaway meant to represent nothing but a female prize who needs to be saved. It's all just a little too safe and easy. Is it really that scary to change the point of view everyone once in a while? The movie, like the cast, is just too bland.


IMDb - The Monuments Men (6.1)
Wikipedia - The Monuments Men
Rotten Tomatoes - The Monuments Men (32%)
Amazon.ca - The Monuments Men

REVIEW: Bad Words

7/10 - It's good to be funny. 

Perhaps this is just my perception at the end of award season, but the movie industry has swung so far in the direction of big movies. Comedies have to be the funniest movie ever made. Action movies have to be about the end of the world. Drama's have to be the most dramatic movie ever. It's become a contest for extremes, which can be okay, but leaves little room for small budget movies.

Bad Words is one of those movies that doesn't fit into the extremes. It's a lower budget film, that's just funny. It's not the funniest movie ever, it's not the craziest or most original. It's enough to just be funny. Personally I think that makes it worth seeing, because most comedies can't even get that right.

This film is Jason Bateman's directorial debut with this comedy about a foul mouthed 40 year old trying to win the nation's eighth grade spelling bee. Being a fresh new director who has acted in plenty of uninspired films, Bateman really sets his flag post with Bad Words making sure every shot it is a little bit different than normal. With lens flares, moving cameras, and coloration this movie had a distinct texture that developed the mood and excitement. I was happy to see the direction add to the film and the comedy. It goes a little bit overboard at times, but I would rather see experimental direction, than not enough.

In the film, Bateman's character Guy is that too smart for his own good character. He's far more manipulative than mean. Guy is the anti-hero who battles the adversity he created himself. It's somewhat of a fantasy fighting against the establishment, or authority. It's like when you re-enact an argument in the shower, and you think of how amazing it would be to tell people how you really think, well this movie is that reality. He's picking a fight with people, who didn't even know he was angry with them. As a premise this would verge on irritatingly dumb if the jokes didn't land.

I suspect for an "adult" comedy due to language alone, this is going to disappoint a few. This is not a movie that should compete for vulgarity against other recent R-rated comedies. For others it will be predictable. This is the perfect example of a movie that will get critically panned for reasons that I cannot deny, and yet it still was an enjoyable movie for me.

I was thrilled with the array of characters, Kathryn Hahn finally being recognized in a diversity of roles. Allison Janney is spot on as the spelling bee administrator. My only real complaint about this movie is that I wished these minor characters had more rounded out storylines. None of the minor plots seem to come to a resolution, only the main plot does. I do, however, wonder if they need to. I wanted to see more Allison Janney because I love her as an actor, and I wanted to see her have one final scene in the movie, but that doesn't necessarily mean the story called for it. I also wanted the hilarious Ben Falcone to have a funnier role, since he is a talented comedian, but again that didn't detract from story. Perhaps it's not the movie industry who demands more and better, maybe it's me too.

IMDb - Bad Words (7.1)
Wikipedia - Bad Words
Rotten Tomatoes - Bad Words (64%)
Amazon.ca - Bad Words

REVIEW: Blue Jasmine

Best Original Screenplay Nominee

8/10 - Way better than expected. 

This review was a long time coming. It was one of the first Oscar nominated movies that I watched, but I've been stewing on how to phrase my review for a long time.

First and foremost, I've never liked Woody Allen movies. I typically don't relate to that slow, cerebral uncertainty that fuels his many dozens of movies. After 2-3 that did it, I stopped watching his movies. Maybe I judged his body of work prematurely, because this was quite a great movie, but I'm still not particularly interested in watching more of his movies.

The other reason to preface this review would be because of the controversy that has surrounded Woody Allen during this years award season. I'm not interested in dancing with the veil that the morals of the individual should have some reflection in how we perceive their work. I found myself quite frustrated with the fact that over and over again Cate Blanchett would get on stage, having won awards for this movie, and praise the great female roles that were being written, and over and over again she would be overshadowed by media coverage of a 20 year old scandal.

So. Having said that. Blue Jasmine is a movie about a rich woman going poor. That's too simplistic of a definition for a movie this complicated, but there it is. Under the surface layer, this film is about a woman who has protected herself in layers of narcissism, and her need to rebuild relationships. There are some terrific performances supporting the infallible Cate; Alec Baldwin, Louis C. K., Sally Hawkins, and Bobby Cannavale. It's a stunning cast that scrambles around Jasmine as her world unravels. This movie is not just about social class, but it's about empathy and understanding of individuals for whatever position they are in. It's of the typical Woody storytelling, with lots of talking and big characters. This movie explores fantasy and reality, what is selfish and what is selfless. It's quite engaging and interesting, if not a bit dull at times. I had a hard time understanding what was happening to the characters, but some of that was probably intentional.

Although Blue Jasmine was nominated for Best Original Screenplay, it strikes me as a Best Picture nominee. This is a filmmakers story, not on the page but in the eye. The Academy Awards recognized this work with the Best Actress statue going to Blanchett. I'm of the opinion that this award belongs to Allen. This was the best female character written, this was the best female driven film this year.

IMDb - Blue Jasmine (7.4)
Wikipedia - Blue Jasmine
Rotten Tomatoes- Blue Jasmine (91%)
Amazon.ca - Blue Jasmine

REVIEW: Delivery Man

BLOGGER NOTE: Yeah, this wasn't an Academy Award Nominee. The weekend of the awards, I smashed my laptop, thus putting the breaks on any unnecessary computing. I have a few more Oscar nom reviews to do, but it might take a little while longer than I intended. In the meantime, here's something completely different.

6/10 - More like "Meat Truck Man" amirite? 

Delivery Man is based on a french movie called Starbuck, that a good reviewer might have watched before writing a review. I'm not a good reviewer. 

The mixed reviews for Delivery Man are accurate. It's a great concept with a great cast, but I kept thinking there are so many missed opportunities in this film. Missed chances for comedy, for a more dynamic plot, for more interesting characters. One of the reasons I think writer/directors are not always a great idea. This was well written, and well directed, but a separate voice might have improved this film tremendously. 

Here's the plot rundown: Vince Vaughn as David Wozniak, donated sperm under the pseudonym Starbuck for many years, and then 20 years later all the many hundreds of kids he helped produce decide to try and find him. 

The first 10 minutes of this movie are so dreadfully boring that you might wonder if you accidentally started watching a real life documentary about depressing jobs in America. I went on Wikipedia to double check that it was, in fact, meant to be a comedy. Typically, Vince Vaughn spearheads comedies that cater to his strengths, fast talking absurd situations. Surprisingly, this is neither and I wished it was. Despite Vince Vaughn being naturally funny, and Bobby Moynihan playing his younger brother, nothing is particularly funny until Wozniak's friend Brett shows up, played by Chris Pratt. Somehow the movie gods shined upon his role because he injects the first moments of laugh out loud comedy. Chris Pratt really shines in this movie being effortlessly hilarious in a movie so nuanced, more seasoned comedians fell flat.

Cobie Smulders play's Wozniak's girlfriend, Emma, a cop. My first gut reaction is to throw my arms in the air, overjoyed by the fact that Emma is a cop. She is casually playing a role typically reserved for males on screen, showing that her character has her own life with consequences, and it's not the butt of a joke. That being said, Cobie is hilarious and she doesn't get the chance to make a single joke in the whole movie. She's a buzzkill, ruining the momentum in every scene she's in. It's not really the fault of Cobie who is a great actress, but rather the fact that David's life with Emma represents the serious steps toward adulthood and responsibility and that's not so funny. Every scene does not have to be comedic, but they do have to be entertaining. 

I was also quite put off by the fact that every one of the kids in this movie who David helped create, considers him their "real" father, or "biological" father, or something to that effect. Granted the movie proposes that of the many hundreds of children that David helped create, only a smaller percent chose to actively investigate his identity. I also understand that this movie is about David accepting fatherhood through very extreme circumstances. However, I was desperate for someone to stand up and remind those kids that they had their own real parents. Not adoptive parents. Parents. These kids had families that choose to have kids and choose to get pregnant through this method. At what point is it okay to imply that real parents who raised these kids are not as important as someone who provided the DNA but never wanted kids themselves. Again, that's not the point of the movie. I just felt like it was a strange message to put on the screen, pretending that their real parents don't exist. Also, can we talk about why his kids are 80% male?

I've been doing quite a lot of complaining, but this isn't really a bad movie. Many of these complaints stem from the fact that this feels like a great movie in disguise. With some more polish and punchier jokes, it would be a great comedy. This is a movie about family and fulfilling the desire to be a better person. It's quite heartfelt and there's nothing wrong with a movie that can put a smile on your face. This is one of those movies that tries to discover the unbridled optimism in everyday life, and that's why I go to the movies. 

IMDb - Delivery Man (6.4)

Wikipedia - Delivery Man

Rotten Tomatoes - Delivery Man (39%)
Amazon.ca - Delivery Man

REVIEW: The Wolf of Wall Street

Best Picture Nominee

Best Adapted Screenplay Nominee

8/10 - Self indulgence is the name of the game

Oh my god this movie is so long. Some movies feel long but you don't mind because it's good. THIS IS SO FUCKING LONG.

The Wolf of Wall Street is Martin Scorsese's adaptation of Jordan Belfort's autobiography, apparently in real time. From his lowly start, to becoming a wealthy stockbroker, to a drug addled criminal mastermind, Belfort's story is gripping. It really is an amazing story, with some amazing story telling.

You'll definitely need camping or survival gear if you want to sit down and watch this film. At a staggering 3 hours, this movie is longer than all The Lord of the Rings and all the The Hobbit movies released so far, save for Return of the King which had an addition 20 minutes of various endings. That's incredible. Literally awe inspiring that someone thinks audiences have that kind of attention span. I honestly don't want to give this movie praise in fear that others will emulate this incredibly bloated version. The most frustrating part was the amount of times I reflected on how unnecessary that scene was to the movie during my first viewing. Stephen King said "To write is human, to edit is divine." and I really view these Peter Jackson-esque overblown movie monsters as being an Icarus-like fall from grace. Not every shot filmed is gold.

Getting past the length, however, leaves a fantastic story. There's something about the "based on a true story" line that gives a movie permission to go wild an know the audience is going to be there with them. The ease of which a movie can exaggerate for the sake of story or aesthetic is problematic sometimes because audiences become desensitized to it. How do you make Leonardo DiCaprio seem humble and broke when audiences are fresh off of seeing him as the titular character in The Great Gatsby? Having a greater grasp on the gravity of the situation gives the audience a different perspective. Theatrics aside, this film is about the characters.

Jonah Hill is incredible and I hope he wins an Oscar for this role. Dicaprio is on point, as usual, carrying the weight of the film. It's hysterically funny at times, and gut wrenching at others. I could continue to write another 1500 words on my thoughts of this film, from the outstanding supporting cast, to the overuse of morally bankrupted characters in movies. This movie leaves me conflicted, so I'll save it for another time.

Frankly I'm on the fence about Wolf, it's better than most films, but not even close to being the best.What do you think?

IMDb - The Wolf of Wall Street (8.5)
Wikipedia - The Wolf of Wall Street
Rotten Tomatoes - The Wolf of Wall Street (77%)
Amazon.ca - The Wolf of Wall Street

REVIEW: Philomena

Best Adapted Screenplay Nominee

9/10 - Philomania is a movie I would like to see

Perhaps it's the business of naming movies. American Hustle sounds sleek and sexy, and made lots at the box office. Philomena is an uncommon name and I have no idea what it's supposed to mean or be about. I'm not ashamed to admit, if it hadn't been an 'awards movie' then I never would have watched it.

For the ignorant, like me, Philomena tells the story of an old woman, the titular character, played by the always astounding Dame Judi Dench who has spent 50-year search for her son. A writer, played by Steve Coogan becomes involved, trying to write a story about her experiences having her son at an Irish convent, and her inability to find information about her child who was adopted against her will.

This is absolutely an Oscar-worthy movie, but likely won't win anything, because typically comedies are never credited as much as they should. There are some moments that made me cry from laughter. Although it deals with some heavy issues, it never becomes preachy or self-righteous. This is a character story, and the two leads portray carefully crafted people who are so deeply flawed and still charmingly real.

It's a gripping movie to watch. Never did I anticipate where the story was taking me. There are moments that feel like plot devices, and I think there are many who will interpret an attacking message by the end of it. I wasn't one of those people, because it felt to me that both the characters and the film tried to separate the teachings of religion with those who make choices on behalf of religious institutions. Particularly with an Irish setting, this can be dangerous territory, but I think its best to view movies like this as a character piece, not a political statement.

The script was adapted by Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope from the book about the real life Philomena, written by Martin Sixsmith.  Few movies have the kind of power that Philomena does. It's truly worth your time.

IMDb - Philomena (7.8)
Wikipedia - Philomena
Rotten Tomatoes - Philomena (92%)
Amazon.ca - Philomena

REVIEW: Thanks for Sharing

6/10 - Candlelit romance and sex addiction

Based on the title, poster, and leads, I assumed this was a rom com about people in New York falling in love... which isn't wrong. But it's also about sex addiction. With some drugs and alcohol mixed in, too.

There is a bravery about this film that gives it some legs. I appreciate the originality injected into an otherwise cliche backdrop. (I am really starting to hate movies set in New York, there are other cities in the world, filmmakers. Maybe start checking them out.) Regardless, AA has developed its own sets of cliches. I thought none of them were used here, to my great relief.

The main story in Thanks for Sharing is about the relationship between Adam (Mark Ruffalo) and Phoebe (Gwyneth Paltrow) as they navigate their new relationship, having to overcome the hurdles of Adam's sex addiction. I don't know if I have an appreciation for the rom-com spin on an otherwise dramatic film. At the film's opening, Adam has been "clean" for 5 years, and hides his addiction from Phoebe who once dated an alcoholic and swore off dating another addict. Then they have beautiful charming dates. Perhaps Phoebe is too perfect for a film of this nature.

The cast really made this movie. During my brief Jobs review I said Josh Gad was great. In Thanks for Sharing he is outstanding. Truly, I found myself frustrated that his character wasn't the lead. He was both ambitious and self loathing. The best scene in this film is early in the movie with Josh Gad's character Neil is alone in his apartment, wanting to start the 12 steps but just spiraling out of control and into old habits. It's heart wrenching to watch. Tim Robbins and Patrick Fugit spend most of the film pushing and pulling at each other in a strained father-son relationship that's agonizing. Even Alecia Moore is able to get right to the core of hurt and pain.

As a character Adam is introduced as being vigilant, that he cannot go easy on himself. As if he is constantly aware of the monster under the surface. He lives a life of restraint and repetition. This would be extraordinarily fascinating if it was adequately displayed, but I don't get that feeling from Mark Ruffalo. His character is most frequently relaxed, joking around, comfortable, anything but ever-vigilant. Perhaps it's because his performance is overshadowed by Tim Robbins who play's Adam's mentor, and is the definition of a hard ass. I was desperate to see that struggle for self control that the other addict's showed. I wanted to see that intensity early in his relationship to show the depth of it's importance. It all went a little bit wishy washy because it was all too casual. It just stopped short of really hitting home.

Like the critical reviews, this film is a mixed bag. There are some brilliant performances and some mediocre ones. There are some scenes of incredible writing, and some that are tremendously boring. In retrospect it's a quality film that's worth watching all the way to the end, even if it's a bit long. I do have an appreciation for a film that explores some territory that isn't often shown in

IMDb - Thanks for Sharing (6.5)
Wikipedia - Thanks for Sharing
Rotten Tomatoes - Thanks for Sharing (49%)
Amazon.ca - Thanks for Sharing

REVIEW: The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

9/10 - I really really really really liked this movie (a disproportionate amount)

Ever wonder why movies do stupid things like having the main character wake up from a scary dream by jumping up, breathing heavy, and sweating? It's one of those things that doesn't actually happen in real life. Movie makers have to do those sorts of stupid things to illustrate the internal crisis that's going on. This is one of the reasons we see very similar characters frequently. Characters need to be able to demonstrate their emotions and intentions so that the audience can see these things, otherwise we end up with the "bad guy monologue" and other cliches.

Extroverted characters are therefore, the norm. They are the people we expect to see in movies, and to a certain extent, idolize for their ability to be comfortable in those situations. 

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty is about the opposite: someone who is deeply introverted. A concept which I love.

There are many critics who disliked this movie, and I will admit it has some faults. There is a jump in tone from the type of comedy in certain parts to the thoughtful reflection in other parts. It also draws people into the mystery element that makes the audience start trying to "solve" the ending instead of enjoying the film. I'm guilty of doing that myself. Many critics also disliked the concept of the film, a shy man jumping into fantastical experiences, but I could not disagree more.

To me, this is a beautifully shot thoughtful piece, but as an audience member you need to be along for the ride. Much of this movie involves the inner workings of Walter Mitty's head, something I expect a lot of naturally extroverted people will not appreciate as much. The quiet moments of this movie are so saturated with emotion that I never once was bored, and immediately wanted to watch the film again.


Ben Stiller is most noteworthy for me, not as the title character, but as the film's director. Again, this is a beautiful film. The mundane existence of Walter at the film's opening is encapsulated perfectly as he sits in his quiet bleak apartment, balancing his checkbook. The stunning images at the Life magazine offices, frame a movie that depicts an urban city with wonderment. The evolution of the images are powerful and uplifting. Stuart Dryburgh the Director of Photography deserves more awards than I could possibly name.

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty captures something that isn't as simple as the day-dreamer gets to live his dreams. The inherent relatability in Walter's character is that he has accepted the responsibilities of adult life with fantasy being the only reprieve. We are often unaware of the simple things that make us the most happy, the small conversations, friendships, left behind passions.

What resonated most with me was the fact that once Walter decided to go on this journey, he was unaware of the impact it would have. Despite the surreal nature of visiting paradise, Walter's brain functioned as it always functioned, he had a job to do and went about doing it. In that lies a tremendous truth, that even during awe-struck moments we are all still people living our day to day lives. It's difficult to appreciate the grand nature of the things we experience in life without a little phone call to reflect every now and again on our "been there done that" sections.

I really enjoyed The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, but I don't expect everyone to. Part of this movies appeal comes from it's opposing nature to most action/adventure movies being released. This kind of story is almost the antithesis of Gravity being that they are both about spectacular, extraordinary events happening, but in this, the explosion isn't the most important part of the scene. I suspect this film ultimately became a passion project for some people, because it goes against what a blockbuster adventure movie typically does, but the passion it had stayed with me.

IMDb - The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (7.7)
Wikipedia - The Secret Life of Walter Mitty
Rotten Tomatoes - The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (50%)
Amazon.ca - The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

REVIEW: The English Teacher

8/10 - The scarlet organza has more oomph than the voile.

Having expectations is a powerful thing. You can expect greatness and force that perspective, or find grave disappointment. The opposite is also true, people tend to remember the films that should have been atrocious and surprised them as better than what they really are.

Having not watched a trailer or heard a synopsis, I only knew of The English Teacher from another bloggers year-end countdown list, and the poster with Julianne Moore.

If you want to establish some expectations, here's a summary. The English Teacher is about a woman's simple life becoming enraptured in the production of a former students big-city play.

Having had no expectations about this movie, I can honestly say it was a beautiful and charming. It will likely end up on the boring side of the scale for most, but there was nothing disappoint about this for me.

Character is the element most neglected in Rom-Coms. (See Admission with Tina Fey and Paul Rudd for an example of character that relies entirely on the actors charm and camera charisma.) In this case, Julianne Moore is a treasure. She brings out subtle elements Linda Sinclair that make her beyond interesting. There is usually nothing more boring than a movie introduction that attempts to show how normal and boring their lead is. In this case, its fascinating. She is every well intentioned English Teacher I've ever had, with her dowdy glasses and matching cardigan set. And yet, very quickly she surprises me. God do I love it when a character surprises me. I love it when characters keep secrets and get passionate, and loose control. That's why this is a good movie. She's a great character.

It's also well directed, and funny and endearing, and has a great supporting cast. Nathan Lane is a dream, and is impeccable, as always. My personal favorite is the tag team Principle/Vice-Principle duo of Jessica Hecht and Norbert Leo Butz. Bringing in theater actors to portray ignorant adults with no theatrical affiliation putting on an original production is brilliant.

I rarely find the need to comment on outstanding direction, but this has some great shots and moves the film along during the first half with snappy dialogue. These are techniques I would normally attribute to a seasoned director, but this is Craig Zisk's first feature film he has directed.

If you have an appreciation for subtly and great characters, then I wholeheartedly recommend this movie. In fact, I will likely place it on my best of 2013 list, like the blog I first saw it on. It's surprisingly funny and smart. If you thought, for example, Pacific Rim was great, then maybe skip this one.

"When I was divorced the soul patch just fell right into place"

IMDb - The English Teacher (5.7)

Wikipedia - The English Teacher

Rotten Tomatoes - The English Teacher (42%)
Amazon.ca - The English Teacher

REVIEW: We're the Millers

3/10 - How come it's so hard to make Jason Sudeikis famous?

This movie sucks.

There is nothing about this that's funny, original, vaguely interesting or memorable. I'm having a hard time coming up with adequate words to explain how bad this is, and yet it has been a box office smash. I am deeply concerned for the state of comedy when regurgitated garbage is a runaway success.

Plot Summary: these four people are all shady, and of poor circumstances, and have to pretend to be upper middle class suburbanites, for pretty contrived reasons. Here's where this plot fails, it relies on the comedy being about exaggerated stereotypes (as seen in the one-word descriptors on the poster) and yet none of them come close to portraying that stereotype.

Jason Sudeikis plays the cleanest, most organized drug dealer you have ever seen. His character is deeply unbalanced, as he tries to maintain likability but also portray a scumbag. The "Jim from The Office" charm of looking into the camera to be cute doesn't work when his inconsistent role flutters between cool guy, asshole, and dad. I get that this role is meant to be a vehicle to launch Sudeikis, but his character seems to have facts instead of characteristics. There are things that we are told about his character, but that doesn't mean he has to continuously portray them as an actor. They are simply facts.

Equally as ambivalent is Jennifer Aniston, who plays a stripper. She never gets naked, just putting that out there. As a stripper, you would think that she too should be at a low point in her life, maybe she's also a drug addict, or can't feed her baby, I don't know you can choose your own stripper cliche. Fortunately she seems to act like stripping is in the same ballpark as being a secretary, or in sales at Best Buy. To be blunt, she's a prude even at her most sexually charged, and isn't that just a little pathetic?

As for the kids, one is a runaway or homeless or something unexplained, and the other is a kid living in the building who looks up to Sudeikis like a role model. Regardless of where they come from or what the situation is, these kids were essentially kidnapped and brought across an international boarder. Didn't that seem like a red flag to anyone?

My biggest criticism is that it's flat out lazy. This is a movie that wants to be raunchy and crazy, but comes across as being out of touch, and unoriginal. It's predictable in the worst kind of way, with every recycled trope of the genre being featured at some point. Since it's about drugs, they accidentally befriend a DEA agent. Since they drive an RV, it breaks down at some point. Cursing is often a punchline, and that's never enough to carry a film. Don't get me wrong, I like a raunchy comedy, but this is tame enough to bring my parents, and grandparents. It's dated material, and the jokes don't add any substance to the movie, they're just there to kill 90 minutes.

This is a superficial movie. It has a story that could have real potential, Breaking Bad has certainly shown audiences that drug culture doesn't have to remain a stereotype. Characters are so shallow that despite all of them coming from an impoverished situation, it's never once discussed. Worst of all, no one ever smokes the drugs. What a shame.

Don't waste your time on this unless you think a few dick jokes and a shot of some ballsack is worth your hard earned money.

IMDB - We're the Millers (7.2)
Wikipedia - We're the Millers
Rotten Tomatoes - We're the Millers (47%)
Amazon.ca - We're the Millers

REVIEW: The World's End

8/10 - Well it was a lot of fun, wasn't it?

Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg bring another fun adventure movie that's sort of, but not quite like, the other movies they've done. 

Just like the other movies in this alleged "trilogy" (a status I don't feel should automatically imply a level of quality) The World's End stars Shaun, I mean Gary, who is an every-man facing unconquerable alienation, this time with aliens. As in the previous two movies (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) where everyone else became a zombie, and everyone else became a murderer, in The World's End everyone else becomes some sort of robot alien thing. As with the other two movies, the social outcast Shaun/Nicholas/Gary/Simon must harness the power of friendship to fight against the literal social pressure and save the day. 

The World's End was good. Comparatively it is much more matured then their previous efforts. I worried that this movie would become repetitive and boring when at the launch their goal is to visit twelve pubs, something that doesn't lead to fascinating new adventures. Most of the comedy felt fresh, and the action never became monotonous. It was exciting and engaging, with a unique story that still felt grounded in character. There were in-jokes to let the audience feel smart, and the pacing allowed a huge number of events to occur without the stretched out feeling that Hot Fuzz had. It was unpredictable, not random, and just a lot of fun.

I wish there had been more women in this movie. I don't know how else to say this when I repeat it at almost every movie review. I don't know why it's such a complicated task. Perhaps when you take a boy's club like Edgar Wright, Simon Pegg, and Nick Frost, they want to reflect what they know, and what they know is their own friendships. Almost every character was married, and had major relationships with women in their lives, yet there were no women with significant roles. None of them were full characters and only one appeared on screen. Honestly, why is this considered acceptable? 

I thought the ending was a bit off. It was fine, just clunky and obvious. I wanted the subtext to be sprinkled throughout, but there were large chunks of the movie where the character's growing stories were forgotten in lieu of action sequences, and in order to make up for that there were long explanatory passages that were being shared like it was an instruction manual. In fact, the movie opens and closes with an unmemorable history lesson. Granted, these are subjective kind of issues that took me out of the movie, but maybe wouldn't bother everyone. It just all feels jarring and abnormal for some, otherwise great, storytellers. The major problem that may have snowballed was the antagonist. They are passive and have no motivation. When you don't have a force that can outsmart or out fight the protagonist, these problems happen. 

Having said all that, The World's End really did meet my expectations. Maybe it didn't surpass them, but that's okay because it was still great. It's worth seeing several times, because without questions there are details that are meant to be picked up on during your second or third watch. It's fun and original, and will be a nice addition to the blu-ray collection. Give them your money, they need it for beer. 

IMDB - The World's End (7.7)

Wikipedia - The World's End

Rotten Tomatoes - The World's End (90%)
Amazon.ca - The World's End

REVIEW: 3, 2, 1.... Frankie Go Boom

5/10 - Yes, that's the real title. I assume someone was on mushrooms when it was chosen.

This movie left me disappointed. I felt like a soccer mom, rooting for my kids team, but they still got pummeled.

Frankie Go Boom shares the story of a young man who becomes an internet laughing stock at the hands of his brother. Twice. It's supposed to be a heartwarming story about a man learning to live with his dysfunctional family, finding love after getting his heart broken, and doing so while playing dress-up as a vulgar comedy. It unfortunately fails on all three fronts.

I will say that this is absolutely not a horrible train wreck. It's entertaining and might even by hysterical in the right mindset. The cast is a fantastic ensemble for a lower budget movie. I think every actor improves on the character that was written in the script. It has some unfiltered and unedited moments of comic inspiration, but that just isn't enough.

Lizzy Caplan and Charlie Hunnam are fine as Lassie and Frankie. Just fine. Chris O'Dowd is still quite funny and charming, but I suspect he was put on a leash.

I think that Frankie was trying to go for the Little Miss Sunshine vibe of being sweet and optimistic despite the chaos. Sadly, aside from one climactic moment of real emotion, nothing about this feels optimistic or charming, or even relatable by the end. I don't really ever believe anything important is at stake. The ending just sort of happens, the same way characters just sort of appear and disappear in the movie. All and all it just feels wishy-washy. There are great ideas but it never goes for the jugular. This movie has the balls to put Ron Perlman in drag and feature a blowjob nightmare, but it still doesn't make me laugh or feel fresh.

I would love for other writers to weigh in on where they think Frankie goes wrong, and how they would have done things differently to make it better.

IMDb - Frankie Go Boom (5.6)
Wikipedia - Frankie Go Boom
Rotten Tomatoes - Frankie Go Boom (41%)
Amazon.ca - Frankie Go Boom