Review: 'Interstellar'

'Interstellar' is that experience you wish to get every time you walk in to a movie theatre, which sadly only happens a quarter of the time. The film may exceed its grasp, yes, but it's for something you're willing to cling on to. It may contain elements we have seen in countless films prior, but somehow it finds a way to make it feel fresh. That's one of the many brilliant aspects that makes Christopher Nolan 'Christopher Nolan'.

Our ambitions as a human race are so grand that it's a true wonder we haven't continued in our expeditions of the cosmos. As one character notes in the film (and I paraphrase) 'We spend less time looking up to the stars and more time to the dirt.' If we are meant to learn and to grow in this mortal existence on this tiny planet Earth, why do we remain in destroying our reputation with warring conflict on other nations? Why do many people refuse to believe and wonder at the fact that mankind has flown to the moon and back? Are we alone in the universe? When will we continue in our explorations for answers to our age-old questions?

The film's musical score is a genuine treat for the ears. Listening to it, I had no choice but to reminisce flying over desert landscapes and soaring through nighttime city skyscrapers as depicted in 'Baraka' (1992) and 'Koyaanisqatsi' (1982), the latter being composed by Phillip Glass. So when I saw that the score for 'Interstellar' was done by none other than Hans Zimmer, I was pleasantly surprised. With a reputation for booming scores recently, equipped with cellos, trombones and horns of every kind, the introduction of Glass's euphoric-styled organ was mesmerizing.

To say anything about the plot would ruin surprises the film has in store for you, you the tiny insignificant viewer in this infinite universe of ours which we haven't even begun in scratching the surface of.

Also, to compare this movie to that of '2001: A Space Odyssey', like other critics are, would be like comparing a lake to an ocean. There may indeed be similarities, but what this film does is play out more as a legacy of the filmmaking traits Like that of Stanley Kubrick. This movie, quite honestly, reminded me more of 'Contact' (1997). And that movie's co-star, Matthew McConaughey, may only be a coincidence. Or maybe not.

Lastly, see 'Interstellar' in IMAX. If it's filmed on IMAX cameras, made for projection on giant sized screens and earthquaking surround-sound, then you wouldn't limit the experience for your living room, would you?

My rating: 3.5 / 4

Review: 'Dawn of the Planet of the Apes'

The opening scenes of this new film bares certain resemblance to the opening sequences of '2001: A Space Odyssey' (1968), such as witnessing the daily routine and behaviors of ape life. And how there is no dialogue as well. At least nothing audible to us.

Much to my surprise, and satisfaction, there didn't seem to be as much action in this movie as there was character driven sequences and emotional moments of conflict. How would you respond to apes having greater access and accountability to a world you believe should have greater dominance over? Or would you want to share the world with them and find just some ounce of peace?

'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' was a brilliant re-imagining of the Apes franchise. It was one of my favorite films that year it came out. And 'Dawn of the Planet of the Apes' is a very good continuation on this new tale of social commentary in science fiction. Some of the most terrific motion-capture performances to date have come from this movie with the people playing the apes, especially Andy Serkis, one of cinemas modern acting legends.

Another thing I really admired was that there really were no majors bad guys, and/or no side had any more evil intentions than the opposing side. They're all just living in this dangerous world, fighting for their survival and doing what they believe to be right for the good of their own species.

In my brief, paragraphed review for 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' back in 2012, I wrote: 'This film is the epitome of a summer movie: Thrilling, sad, exciting and, most important, engaging. What I loved about this film was its steadiness.' I stand by that statement with 'Dawn'. The filmmakers behind this franchise, unfortunately, seem to be some of the only few left who understand what makes a movie not just enjoyable, but memorable. It's a real shame that Michael Bay still gets a free pass, especially in making Transformers movies that I believe have been brainwashing today's generation of young kids. The fact that the latest Transformers has also been having the highest rising ticket sales so far this summer is all the more hurtful.

Sorry I got on my soap-box there. I only wanted to prove my point on how differently the apes are doing this summer. Sure they had a big opening three day weekend, with over several dozen million dollars in receipts. But that is miniscule compared to what the new Transformers made, with over one-hundred million dollars in just 3 days! You have got to be kidding me!!

People, I know we can do better than that. We're smarter than that.

This summer, go see a film that will be worth your while, like 'Dawn of the Planet of the Apes' or 'How to Train Your Dragon 2', and not one that will treat you like you have the mentality of a six year old. 

My rating: 3.5 / 4

Review: 'How To Train Your Dragon 2'

Dreamworks and Pixar seem to be the two leading studios in computer animation these days. And both have very different, albeit unique, styles as well. When you look at a Pixar movie, you can almost tell that there is a Disney-like quality to the characters. With Dreamworks, they've basically started from scratch. So I guess, in some ways, that makes them significant.

With Dreamwork Animation's latest film, 'How To Train Your Dragon 2', they've proved themselves to be one of the best there is when it comes to family entertainment today. Not only is their animation at the highest peak it's ever been, with some of the most realistic looking earthly elements (ice, water, fire, smoke), they've managed to not lose track of the characters we grew to love from the first movie, which are why we're here in the first place. Of course, there are fun sweeping action and adventure sequences, but occasionally there are some fairly tender moments as well, bringing a deeply human element to these cartoon creations.

Once again on the animation, it is so good that there moments that made me think if really was looking at either animation or something real. Just one example, very simple yet effective; When characters walk out from shadows into light, and vice versa, it feels like they're really there. Their motions are similar to that of a real flesh and blood being, with only the occasional cartoonish fluctuations and movement. 

I also would like to just take this moment and express how much I love the character of Toothless, the dragon. I don't believe I've ever wanted a pet dragon more in my life than I did while watching this dragon in both this film and its predecessor. He's the perfect dragon pet, if ever there was such a thing. He's loyal, gentle, and extremely playful. But also, when he needs to be, fierce and greatly protective of his owner. Toothless is both charming and cool, all in one.

How good is the movie, in comparison to the first one? I would honestly have to say that it's just as good, not better. But hey, not all sequels are better than their original. In fact, most tend to be worse. So in the case of 'How To Train Your Dragon 2', it's riding a fine line.

My rating: 3 / 4

Review: 'Chef'

Jon Favreau appears to be another one of those artists who goes with his gut and makes whatever it is he wants to make, much like his character in this movie. And if that means going from Iron Man defeating terrorists and cowboys fighting aliens, to a small movie about a struggling chef starting off fresh; then by all means, have at it. I enjoyed what I was served.

Carl Casper, played by Jon Favreau, is a chef who cooks both for the love of cooking, and for something to pay the bills. But mostly for the love of cooking. If you don't find any hint of passion in what you are doing, then what's the point of even doing it. That's what Carl comes to realize for himself. With that, he quits his job at a fine-dining restaurant, buys a food truck and starts off from scratch, cooking what he loves to cook.

The screenplay for 'Chef' feels very fresh and new in many circumstances. The characters are lovable, without being too heavy-handed. There's very few cliches involving circumstantial changes of the plot, there are no villains or so-called 'bad guys' (aside from a certain food critic). It's just a very simple yet really affective story, with some really good looking food.

I myself have worked in the restaurant business for a number of years, and a fair amount of what you see in the first half of this movie is pretty accurate, especially when it comes to the behavior of the chefs and cooks in the kitchen, when the night is hot. Jon Favreau himself said in an interview about the movie how many other movies about restaurants and chefs always look and feel all so happy-go-lucky. And he said (his words, not mine) that that was a bunch of bull$#!+. Now, I don't know if I would go so far as to say that about other movies trying to do some good. But I will agree that it's (the restaurant business) never always fun and games. It has it's down times aplenty. The best you can do is to make the most of it, and hope for something good in the end. You really could say that for just about anything in life. 

My rating: 3.5 / 4

Review: 'Godzilla' (2014)

If you may recall back in my review of 'Pacific Rim', I mentioned how that movie reminded me in many ways of the Godzilla movies from my youth. Well, almost a year later, we got the Godzilla I didn't think I'd be dying to see... until that first teaser trailer a few months back. Holy Smokes. At the end of that trailer, when that giant mass of destruction emerges from beneath that cloud of ash, soot and who knows what else, then lets out his earth shattering roar (which received an incredible re-imagining from the sound department) I had to sit down after watching it. And I was already sitting down in the first place.

This new Godzilla brought back a shipload of good memories for me, from the early generation Godzilla movies (1954 to mid 1970's), Godzilla 1985... And yes, regrettably, even the 1998 Roland Emmerich version (gasp). Let's just leave it at that.

Elements of this movie are both an homage to the original films, yet at the same time rather fresh and new. In many ways, this movie is like a direct sequel from the very original film, 'Gojira', from 1954. A key clue to this is the name of Ken Watanabe's character: Serizawa. The same name belonged to the doctor in 'Gojira', who created the one chemical weapon that could destroy Godzilla. The question(s) is if Watanabe's Serizawa is a descendent from the original. My guess is he is, since they never actually reveal so in this movie.

The biggest surprise about this movie, and it's a great surprise, is that: SPOILER ALERT: Godzilla is not actually the bad guy (or bad monster; you decide). Oh no. SPOILER AGAIN: There is actually another monster, wreaking havoc all over the world. This makes for an even better movie than expected. By the looks of the trailers, it looks as if it's only Godzilla causing all the destruction, making him exactly as he was from the '54 movie. That would have been interesting, but this film took the alternate approach. This movie went for the classic 'Godzilla versus insert-monster-name-here' approach. Those were always the most fun, after all, when Godzilla was the one who saves the day.

Godzilla was my hero in my childhood. Many other kids chose Batman, Superman, Comic-book heroes galore. Even the Transformers toys got a bigger reputation, before those trash movies of theirs. But as for me, it was always Godzilla. And hopefully, with this new re-introduction to American audiences, young kids will look up to the King of the monsters as well.

It may not have as strong a storyline as it should, unfortunately, which keeps me from giving it a higher rating. But as far as entertainment goes, this is pure, solid king-sized gold. Especially for a Godzilla fan.

Oh, and I should mention that I saw this movie in IMAX 3D. Hands down the best decision on how to see this movie! When Godzilla's foot descends from above and stomps on the ground, it literally feels like he's right in front of you. And when that roar of his is let out, your seat will vibrate like almost never before in a theater. See this movie on the Godzilla-sized screen!

 

My rating: 3 / 4

Review: 'Captain America: The Winter Soldier'

The first Captain America film wasn't all that impressive to me, whether by the story, the character, or both. Thus making Captain America himself one of my least favorite of the Marvel superheroes. After viewing this new film though, my opinion of him may have actually changed, for the good.

The latest movie in the Marvel movie canon, 'Captain America: The Winter Soldier', may in fact be the best of the franchise since 'The Avengers'. It's that good, to my surprise. The last Marvel film, 'Thor: The Dark World', was pretty underwhelming and generic (I'd rate it at  2.5/4). So given the fact that I felt pretty much the same way about the first Captain America movie, I had little enthusiasm for this new one. Thankfully, I was treated with a brand new dose of character and story, topped off with plenty of action and excitement to be left satisfied.

This takes place what seems to be a year or two after the events in 'Avengers', and Steve Rogers (Captain America), played by Chris Evans, is still trying to readjust to this new modern world after being frozen for several decades. A couple of familiar faces are there to help him through everything though.  Black Widow is back (Scarlett Johansson), along with Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). Every day is just another day at the office for them, taking down pirates on cargo ships, protecting civilians and the likes, all that good stuff. But all that changes when SHIELD, the government operation the team works for, is compromised. What Captain America believed he was supporting has now turned against him.

One of the more surprising things about this movie is the villainous role which is played by none other than Robert Redford. I say it's surprising for merely two reasons. One: Being a firm advocate for independent cinema (he runs the Sundance Film Festival), this is probably Redford's biggest movie he's ever been a part of, on a big Hollywood blockbuster level. Two: I can't really remember the last time Robert Redford hasn't been the protagonist in a film. Now all of a sudden, he's the one pointing the gun in the direction of our hero, so to speak. Now I'm not saying this to talk down upon Redford, because I'm not. I'm very fond of Redford as both an actor and filmmaker, and I enjoyed seeing him in a role like this. I at least have never seen this side of him before. And he seemed to really enjoy doing it.

The action in the movie didn't feel too overwhelming, and it looked as though a lot of it was actually shot on location, instead of being digitally created in a computer as most action films these days. Because of that, it felt kind of like an action movie from the 1980s to the mid '90s. That was the time of the best action movies, in my personal opinion. 

'Captain America: The Winter Soldier' is a fun, exciting and, even at times, smart action flick, and treats it's intended audience properly.

My rating: 3.5 / 4 

Review: 'The Lego Movie'

What a clever concept, for the most part. Throughout most of 'The Lego Movie' I was in awe of the animated visuals and story, even despite how confusing and silly it got at points. There are references to Lego's throughout the decades, Lego products that nostalgic adults will recognize more than kids (and vice-versa), and an interesting hint to an individual whom the legos refer to as 'the man upstairs'.

I remember for my eleventh birthday, I received the one of a kind 'Steven Spielberg' Lego Studios Movie Maker Set'. What an AWESOME set it was. It was compatible with a little Lego camera which allowed you to take both pictures and video. With it, I was able to create some stop-motion animated shorts and have some of the greatest fun I ever had as a kid. Twelve years later, we now have the theatrical release of 'The Lego Movie', which by the looks of it is both stop-motion & computer animated. And it looks really good either way. Everything is Lego: The water is Lego, the dirt is Lego, the clouds and smoke are Lego. There's so much imagination on the screen, you'll have to look twice to see what it is you've missed.

The whole movie's plot, from the very first minute, unfolds like a little kid's fantasy would roll in his head, as he plays with his toys in his room. That at first can be a little distracting, by how goofy and absurd the characters are, and even annoying. But after a while, it really starts to make sense and becomes pretty clever. It achieves that status near the end, when... well, I'll just refer you to the end of paragraph one, above ('the man upstairs').

Kids will really enjoy this movie, trust me. And with the right audience, even adults who at least were around Legos sometime when they were a kid will like this movie too.

My rating: 3 / 4

  

Review: 'American Hustle'

I was deeply surprised by how underwhelmed I was as the end credits to 'American Hustle' rolled. I usually can get into a good story, no matter how complicated it gets at times. And here it didn't work out some of the time, for me at least.

The story: Irving Rosenfield (Christian Bale) is a brilliant con-artist. He has an assistant who's also his girlfriend, Sydney (Amy Adams). They both get caught by FBI agent DiMaso (Bradley Cooper) who decides to go in over his head and play along in their cons. And from then on, it turns into a mess of double-crossing, secret identities, betrayals, and affairs to name a few. This all turns what should have been a simple plot into a convoluted puzzle.

I didn't know who has conning who, who was the criminal and who was the good guy. Now some may make the argument that that was the intention of the screenwriter, to not make you know who to root for or trust. Well, I can understand that. But I think it could have been made more aware of if the pacing wasn't so slow in one segment of the movie, and then heavily rushed in the next segment. I just felt confused half of the time.

I'm not saying this is a bad movie. I'm just saying that there are some things and events in here that are structured very badly that kept me from enjoying the progression of the story. This all really baffles me, it really does. I have seen movies that have had far more difficult story-lines and plot elements and that I have loved nonetheless. I mean, most of Christopher Nolan's films have been like that for me and he's still one of my favorite directors of this century.

Hey, at least the acting is great, and the costume and set decorations look great. Seriously though, almost all leading performances in this movie are worthy of award nominations, they are that good. Bale, Adams, Cooper, Lawrence, Renner, they all do great work with what they've got. Also, much like last year's 'Argo', I did really feel like I was watching something taking place in the late 1970's. The look and style of everything felt authentic; The hair styles and clothing, the furniture, everything.

Like I said before, it's not a bad movie, I just didn't enjoy it as much. I'll definitely have to watch it again sometime. Maybe I'll like it a lot better the second time around, but for now, judging on my first viewing basis... Well, you know.

My rating: 2.5 / 4

Review: 'The Secret Life of Walter Mitty'

We all daydream. I remember my daydreams vividly from when I was a kid, to the ones I've had within the last week. Walter Mitty's daydreams are no different from ones I've had and, I'm sure, many others as well. And you know what, that's one of the few things this movie really got right. There are scenes and moments from 'The Secret Life of Walter Mitty' that are mirrored almost directly from real life, with little romanticization. Those daydreams of being a hero, beating up the bully you've always despised (in the most epic of ways), or those first awkward conversations you have with a girl you really like. All these things are a delight to see accurately represented on screen; We've all been in those situations, and understand what it's like. So when it comes time for our hero to 'stop daydreaming, and start living', it's almost reassuring in a way that the same thing(s) can even happen to us in our own future, so long as we allow it to happen for ourselves.

Walter Mitty (Ben Stiller) works for Life Magazine, in the department of film development. Many things are happening around him in his life: A new girl (Kristen Wiig) has caught Walter's eye, the magazine is under the threat of shutdown (moving on to the digital age), and he's helping his mother out with some new living accommodations. To add the icing on the cake, so to speak, a roll of film from legendary photographer, Sean O'Connell (Sean Penn), has been shipped to Walter, with a missing negative. Walter must break out of his little secret world of dreams in order to find both the film and himself.

I admired this movie. I love it when you anticipate something to be good and turns out it actually is, instead of being an underwhelming experience. The passion for life and living life to it's fullest was depicted really well in this film. People who say the film has got very little to do with the original short story, or that it's very inconsistent with what it's anticipated to be, I'm just glad that there is still a story here which I can follow and be inspired by.

One really cogent and significant thing about this movie, from a technical standpoint, was the fact that it was shot on film and not digital. With the movie's actual story centered around the old fashioned ways being the best way, it was all the more appealing. Everything looked grand, luscious and desirable. That is, ironically, everything outside of Walter's fantasies. I give major props to the director of photography, Stuart Dryburgh, who I believe deserves an Oscar nomination for cinematography. His images and visuals are astonishing, beautiful and yet surprisingly simple, for the most part. Half the time, when Walter was on his journeys, it reminded me in many ways the look of 'Never Cry Wolf' (1983); both films would let the images and landscapes speak for themselves, without letting the camera do all the work, tricks and all. With no computer imagery or green screen tricks, the actual location shots with the main character is really a sight to see.

There's been a lot of talk and rumors that this might be the last time Ben Stiller appears on screen, as he possibly retires from acting, and transitions into full-time directing. Either way, after seeing this movie, I can't wait to see what he has in store next.

My rating: 3 / 4