Over-stylized like a bad moustache: The Grand Budapest Hotel

Just a quickie one this week folks.

One of the biggest contenders for the Academy and winners for the Golden Globes was about to be taken off HBO, so I decided to watch The Grand Budapest Hotel over last weekend. And I mean that literally. I dozed off the first time I tried to go through it, and ended up having to break the one hour and forty minute movie into 2 viewings.

First, my opinion on the director and his breadth of work so far. I’m traditionally a huge Wes Anderson fan, with Bottle Rocket, his first major release, marking the low point and Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou at the high. His direction and editing, while consistent, changes enough with his chosen subject matter that it never feels stale. Recently I was most surprised by The Fantastic Mister Fox, which so seamlessly captured his signature style in an animated format it was almost an art form.

Then the hype machine started grinding for Budapest, and this large man started having some questions….

Long story short, I don’t feel that it deserves the heaps of awards that are being dumped on it, especially winning over Birdman at the Golden Globes. In fact, I think Anderson’s previous effort MoonriseKingdom out performed this one in every aspect. That’s not to say it’s a horrible movie. It’s entertaining, well shot, and has some solid performances (Here’s looking at you, Ralph Fiennes and Saoirise Ronan), but it’s overshadowed by an assault of Anderson’s style. It feels like he went way over the top in all aspects, from every character being over the top quirky, to his repeated shot style, and so many reused actor cameos that even Tim Burton would blush.

Lastly, I really didn’t feel like there was any overall message that struck out to me. So a prompt and fashionable posh befriends a below-the-line social outcast? Not really treading new water here. 

Again, while some aspects of it were good, this didn’t strike me as the kind of movie to kill it during awards season.

Final Letter Grade: C+

50 Miles to Montgomery: Selma

First and foremost: Happy (belated) MLK day! For those who were wondering this is actually celebrating a representation of his birthday, which is actually January 15th. However, since it’s a national holiday and *insert your political, banking, or illuminate opinion here*, we celebrate it on the 3rd Monday in January. Coincidentally, my roommate had…”found” a copy of Selma over the weekend, and we decided it was appropriate to pop it in Sunday evening.

I have to admit I’m not the biggest biopic fan. The last few years have had some massive nods towards this genre (The Kings Speech and Lincoln standing out for me) and these have generally gone by the wayside for me. I’m not a big history buff, so the fact that there is a lot I will miss in the 2.5+ hours plus these kinds of films generally run makes them not jump to the top of my “must see list”. Frankly, when I saw the first trailer for Selma I wasn't too fired up for it, almost for these exact reasons. As the Oscar hype swirled around David Oyelowo performance and Ava DuVernay direction, I decided that this would be a good one to break the dry spell.

I first have to say that the two positives above are spot on. Oyelowo has been a phenomenal character actor (I specifically remember him doing a great job in the underrated Jack Reacher), and he clearly steals the show. Interestingly, there are pretty big segments that don’t have him in the forefront, and each time it cuts away you immediately want him back in the picture. He has an understated confidence and power that completely captures your attention on the team. At first I thought it was going to paint him in a perfect light, showing him as a fearless leader without a chink in his armor. Again, I’m no history, but from what I’m heard the movie has a much more realistic portrayal, a man struggling with infidelity and self-doubt. It’s an interesting take on the figure, and you can clearly see Oyelowo put a lot of time and thought into this role. I’m sure fans will comment on Oprah’s character too, but to me she just felt a little stock. Not a bad performance, just nothing ground breaking.

The other performance that really stands out is Tim Roth as the racist and heartless Gov. Wallace. He could have easily turned in a stereotypical “good ole hater boy” role but again comes across as much more subtle. You can see how he could lead the people and authorities in Montgomery (and for that matter across the state of Alabama) on his crusade. It’s a delicate performance that could have easily gone over the top, but again Roth nails it.

I wasn’t familiar with the director before this, but her work here really stands out. The specific scene that draws my memory is the scene of the attack on the bridge. It would have been easy to make this exploitative and over the top, but the great work with the obfuscation of the tear gas makes it seem even more intense. The horses riding in and out of the melee is a pretty scary sight, and the officers with their gas-mask donned almost look like Stormtroopers or something out of World War One.

While the movie excelled on several aspects, it dragged on others. Selma reeeallllyyy takes its time, having long stretches of characters debating about actions or showing the hardships of the time. I understand that it is important to document the time period, but with a movie so focused on a single character it felt that it wondered a little bit from its purpose.

And I think that may be the biggest gripe I have with Selma. Dr. King is such an interesting character you want to see more of his speeches, more of his issues with his wife, more of everything. I think that DuVernay was not necessarily trying to make a MLK biography and was trying to paint a broader picture of racism at the time and location, but I feel that the latter is more well-known and documented than the life and times of MLK. Like the Joker in The Dark Knight, every time King left the screen I was a little sad.

Overall, it’s an interesting take on a massive historical figure and the impact he had on the US. If it was tightened up a little bit and had more of the amazing Oyelowo, it would have been one of the best biopics I’ve seen and maybe one of the best movies of the year. Even with its negatives, it still is worth a view just to see the parts that really shine.

Grade: B

Been A Long Time, Shouldn't Left You....

Movie Recap: Holiday Season

Howdy and hello fellow movie attendees!

I took a quick glance and saw that the last post I dropped on this here blog was in July 2013! While that may seem a little inconsistent, there’s probably a good reason for that. (For the 3 people that came across this blog by accident, I was in a different continent and 2 different cities in that time span).

As always when the calendars turn to a New Year, its customary to start a few goals/resolutions. I won’t bore you with the majority of mine, but a big one is getting this back up and running. I’m going to mostly focus on what I feel I do more-than average, which is movie reviews obviously, but I may pepper in a few thoughts and quips about other media that I consume.

For starters, I thought I would drop a few quick reviews of movies I've seen since my return to the City of Wind. Most of these are Golden Globe/Oscar nominations and winners, so I’ll throw a few thoughts in about that.

Without any further ado, let’s start the reviews!

Nightcrawler: This one flew completely under the radar for me when abroad, but upon my return had landed on more than one most anticipated lists. And for good reason! Jake Gyllenhal completely delivers on his role as the sociopath Lou. It’s an interesting take as its not too over the top but not under- performed, as many little choices make a huge impact. I believe Lou blinks about 4 times on screen the entire film which gives a very surreal and inhumane aspect to him. Additionally, his flat monotone voice rarely changes tone or pitch and gives him a Terminator level of emotion.

A phenomenal acting performance can be wasted with the wrong plot, and this movie hits home in this regard. The idea of media being driven by blood and violence just for ratings is an interesting idea, and certainly one that most people (myself included) wouldn't necessarily pay attention to. Bill Paxton’s “If it bleeds, it leads” foil to Lou shows how bodily harm and death can just be good business for the people that can stomach it, and the debate between the two producers about how to present a triple homicide brings up some interesting ideas about what media does and doesn't tell us.

My roommate told me not to see this movie alone or else you would feel like a total creep leaving, which I think is a great summary for the feeling and themes of the movie. Just remember: “If you want to win the lottery, you have to make the money to buy a ticket.”

Final Score: A-

Birdman: The Golden Globes took place last weekend, and (unsurprisingly to me) Michael Keaton won Best actor for his “Michael Keaton” expy in Birdman. An aging actor who can’t get out of his own shadow for playing a superhero? Obviously it rings close to reality, which would be fine but a little gimmicky in the wrong hands. Luckily, this is a much deeper movie about the differences between film and stage, attempting to reinvent yourself, and the pressures of being successful in your art.

The first thing I have to bring up is the direction and cinematography. The continuous one-shot style (called a “oner” in the industry) works incredibly well, showing the mounting tension and stress brought on by having so many egos jammed under one roof. I’ve heard some other reviewers call it “Preachy” and full of itself but I didn’t get that feeling. The performances seem genuine, the concept fresh, and the execution hitting its mark.

I could see how people wouldn’t like the ambiguity of the ending and of Michael’s “alter ego”, but I think it added to the surreal vibe and narrative style that comes with a stage play. The idea of watching actors perform as other people with specific feelings itself is somewhat of high-level concept that be can be deconstructed, so why hold back on bending the fourth wall?

Final Score: A

Whiplash: Another one that snuck under the radar for me, I originally had no interest in seeing this “Jazz Drumming” movie. I missed the Miles Teller rush and only saw him as the stereotypical “bad jock guy” in the horrible Divergent. After seeing a trailer, my interest grew, and I have to say the movie itself completely blew me away!

J.K. Simmons (Another deserved Golden Globe winner) does an amazing job in this role as a music teacher that is more R. Lee Earney than Mr. Setti (My band teacher in 7^th grade for those playing the home game). The editing is tight, the drama real, and the slow breakdown of the main character comes across as completely believable. Similar to a movie like Black Swan but completely ground in reality, it is a dramatic and shockingly tale of someone who is willing to give up everything to achieve greatness.

Final Score: A

Foxcatcher: I could sum up this review in a sentence: “Above-average movie with great performances that I never want to see again.”

Obviously, this being a slower-paced character study will have the movie drag at certain parts, but this movie really, REALLY takes it time. This allow us to wallow with the characters, played amazing by both Channing Tatum, Mark Ruffalo, and (both surprisingly and unsprisingly) Steve Carrel, and will it’s amazing to see how they relate to the world and each other, a pretty picture is does not paint. Bleak in story and cinematography, any potential hope spots are crushed under the baggage carried by Carrl and Tatum.  I watched this alone in the theater, and really wished I had someone else to share the sadness with. Add it to the list to not watch by yourself!

Final Score: C

Inherent Vice: The last film on the list is also the most incomprehensible. I knew going in that the combination of Thomas Pynchon and P.T. Anderson would probably leave more than a few questions unanswered, but man there was a ton of loose ends this movie didn’t tie. And I was really paying attention!

The best way to describe this is imagine the complexity of Chinatown told through the hazy vision of a drugged out hippie trying to be a PI. How he manages his drug/drinking habits is also hard to follow, as he never seems to take any sort of payment for his work (in fact, the one time its offered he all but turns it down immediately). As always with Anderson the Cinematography is excellent and the performances well done. Joaquin Phoneix continues his incredibly bizarre range of emotions and acting styles, and Josh Brolin steals the show as the wannabe Actor/Cop Bigfoot.  At times a comedy, at times a thriller, and all times a psychedelic trip, Inherent Vice may be a confusing ride but it’s a fun one.

Makko Pannakako!
Final Score: B

Welp, I’m exhausted. Keep tuned as I’m trying to get one of these up every. Damn. Week!

-Tuck Nasty