While I consider 'ParaNorman' my favorite title in the LAIKA collection, 'Kubo and the Two Strings' provides that potential coin-flip for yours truly, in that I might consider it the best LAIKA film. It's my opinion that a "best" and "favorite" are separate entities - the "best" being the film you'd recommend anyone watching, and "favorite" being the one that you have a personal attachment with. I think this one gets overlooked far too much, and it's powerful stuff for those of us who don't tend to hide the emotion we get from a good story. The directorial debut of one, Travis Knight ('Bumblebee'), 'Kubo' is the story of a 12-year-old boy named, well, Kubo (Art Parkinson), whose left eye was taken from his grandfather, the Moon King (Ralph Fiennes), Setting the stage for what's to come, the film lets you know right away that it's not messing around. Kubo takes care of his Mother through the nights, who is evidently suffering from Alzheimer's. He makes a living for them, playing his two-stringed shamisen (a Japanese string instrument, similar to a guitar) for the local villagers, and creating origami magic from his music. The paper and his words tell the tale of a samurai warrior named Hanzo; his father. He never finishes, however, as his Mother warns him not to stay out after dark due to the Moon King, and her two sisters, Karasu and Washi (both Rooney Mara) will get him and take his remaining eye. Kubo learns of the Bon Festival, where the living pay their respects and speak to the dead. Kubo goes to try to communicate with his father, and find out who he really was without all of his warrior glory. This keeps him out late, and Kubo is attacked by the two aforementioned sisters. With the sisters and his grandfather hot on his heels, going after his other eye (it is eventually explained why), Kubo ends up living out his own story, finding himself on a journey to find his father's magical armor, and fighting alongside a protective Monkey known as "Monkey" (Charlize Theron) and a bumbling samurai beetle known as "Beetle" (Matthew McConaughey). I know, unoriginal names, but wait until the end because there's even a reason for that. While 'Coraline' is the obvious fan favorite, I still consider this one to probably be the best overall. There's so much imagination and magic with so many underlying grown-up themes, it's one I feel the whole family could watch and get something out of, quite easily. Although, as LAIKA goes, I have to warn that there's some petty creepy stuff going on in this film - like a kid whose grandfather took his damn eye when he was a baby, and wants his other one for whatever the hell reason (again, explained eventually). So, like the whole "button eye" thing in 'Coraline', I could see things getting uncomfortable for the young ones. Still, that creepy plot-line aside, there's plenty of really beautiful animation, and awesome set pieces (including an underwater eye garden... Jesus, what's with LAIKA and eye stuff?), plus this has a really catchy soundtrack, using the shamisen. There's even a half-decent cover of 'While My Guitar Gently Weeps' during the end credits. It earned two Oscar nominations, including Best Animated Feature and Best Visual Effects, losing them to 'Zootopia' and 'The Jungle Book', respectively (both well-earned). Finally, it's the highest-ranked LAIKA film on Rotten Tomatoes with a whopping 97%. So maybe all of that means very little nowadays, but one can still look at that and say that the film is, overall, well-liked. Accolades aside, I personally love it based on how much imagination was put into it. I consider it the idea of an anime-style film, but using LAIKA's stop-motion model. While that idea might turn a few people off, I just think it adds to the creativity of it all. Watching this film, at least for myself, is kinda like sitting through someone else's dream. It's beautifully shot, the characters are fantastical, the sets themselves are incredibly dream-like at times, and when it's all over, that cover song sends you off with a bit of a lullaby tone. It's a wonderful film, it gets deep, and I highly recommend checking it out if you're in the mood for a really cool adventure.
0 Comments
In the grand scheme of the LAIKA collection (at least the 6 full-length stop-motion features), I think it's safe to say that this one's likely my least favorite of the bunch. That's saying a lot about how much I enjoy LAIKA studios' creations though, because I still like this one quite a bit. It's just a touch more low-brow and gross-out than the others. LAIKA likes to play with horror elements, while maintaining a light-hearted, comedic tone - this one uses gross-out stuff. 'ParaNorman' was a modern B zombie movie, 'Coraline' is a bit of a 'Body Snatchers' thing, and 'The Corpse Bride' is a little more of an old school 'Bride of Frankenstein' deal (very loosely). That's how I see them, anyway. They all seem to be a bit of a love letter to older styles. The rest will be covered as the reviews for the month continue, but this one is a neat way of doing the reverse fear factor, where the real person to fear is scarier than the "threat" at hand - which, by the way, 'ParaNorman' already did, but there IS more morality to this than just that. Based on the children's novel, 'Here Be Monsters' by Alan Snow, the film tells the tale of a human boy known only as "Eggs" (Isaac Hempstead Wright) who is raised by a community of creatures called Boxtrolls. These creatures come out at night, after curfew, in a town called Cheesebridge. They basically come into town, steal a bunch of seemingly useless stuff, and retreat into their underground home. What they steal helps their community function, and the mean no harm to anyone, least of all Eggs. The town hates them, however, and accuses them of stealing a baby referred to as the "Trubshaw Baby", who we realize from the get-go is Eggs. The town villain, Archibald Snatcher (Ben Kingsley) wants nothing more than a White Hat, which is a high class status symbol that will allow him to sit at a VIP table and taste cheese - even if it does make him react, shall we say, negatively. Lord Portley-Rind (Jared Harris) strikes a deal with him that if he can exterminate all of the "evil" Boxtrolls, he will receive his own white hat. Everything happens very quickly, earning the movie extra points for fast set-up that one can follow very easily. One by one, the Boxtrolls get captured, and before long, Eggs sets out into the light where, with the help of Rind's daughter, Winnie (Elle Fanning), he hopes to rescue his underground family, and bring to the attention of all the townsfolk that Boxtrolls are not to be feared. I claim this one as my least favorite due to a few things that are easier to nitpick about it. The big one, for me, is how the hell Eggs can speak English when he was raised from his baby years by a bunch of grunting, gibberish-talking trolls. There's a few other things, but none of it actually ruins the movie for what it's trying to do. It's like bowling and picking up a spare rather than getting a strike. It's good, but a little adjustment would have made it better. Again, nitpicks. The fact of the matter is, it's aimed at kids, so it works just fine. But maybe that's part of my personal disappointment as well. Up until now, these movies had a genuine creepiness to them, and this is where LAIKA starts to lighten things up a bit. There's more to appreciate here than criticize. The animation and the underground Boxtroll home provides the viewer with a strange and twisted fictional world straight out of a dream. 'Coraline' did it better, but still, this is a well-detailed film with well-detailed sets and characters. The voice acting is great, too. Snatcher is assisted by three people who, in my opinion, really make the film; Mr. Trout (Nick Frost), Mr. Pickles (Richard Ayoade) and Mr. Gristle (Tracy Morgan), all doing great voice work for their respective characters, including Morgan, which means a lot coming from yours truly. Last time I heard him do a voice, he butchered Captain Caveman in 'Scoob'. Then there's the Boxtrolls themselves, voiced primarily by Steve Blum, Dee Bradley Baker, Pat Fraley and Fred Tatasciore - voice actors whose resumes are so huge they're ridiculous. I suppose I look down on this one a little more because I feel like it borrows from things that LAIKA has already done, specifically the moral of unnecessarily fearing something, which 'ParaNorman' did better. But that's also what 'ParaNorman' was all about. This film goes deeper by also giving us a moral about status and whether or not someone really needs it to be happy. So I guess it's easy enough to overlook my nitpickiness on this one, because it's one of those films where as soon as you see a flaw, it's forgiven by something it does well, and the good really does outweigh the bad here. It may not be my favorite in the collection, but it could easily be yours if you give it a chance. This month, I thought I'd leave an area for some light-hearted material by taking a look at the LAIKA library. In case some of you are wondering about the missing LAIKA titles, here's my review for 'Coraline', and as far as 'The Corpse Bride' goes, I figured it would be best saved for a Tim Burton Month, whenever I decide that will be. We kick things off this month with my favorite film from the studio, 'ParaNorman' - a film I have a strangely deep connection with, but I'll get into why in a bit. Norman Babcock (Kodi Smit-McPhee) is a strange child. People on the streets see him talking to imaginary people, and his family and peers grow weary of his stories that consist of his strange ability to communicate with the dead. That's not so much in a Ouija, seance form as a 'Sixth Sense', straight up talk to them form. His father (Jeff Garlin) and sister, Courtney (Anna Kendrick) give him a particularly hard time with it, as he insists that he has convos with his grandmother, right there in the living room, as she watches B movies with him. However, soon, he makes a friend who accepts him for who he is, named Neil (Tucker Albrizz). Just when things are starting to look up for Norman, his deranged hobo-ish and dying uncle, Mr. Prenderghast, warns him about protecting his town from a witch's curse. Now that his time is almost up, he has to pass the torch to Norman, who he knows can communicate with spirits, and can therefore keep the curse at bay by reading a bedtime story at the witch's grave site. Upon reading from the book he gets from Prenderghast, however, he unleashes a horde of zombies who begin advancing on his hometown of Blithe Hollow. Now it's up to Norman, Neil, and Courtney, along with the aid of school bully, Alvin (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) and Neil's big brother, Mitch (Casey Affleck) to put a stop to the zombie invasion, and put the witch to rest again. Going back to what I mentioned before about having a deep connection with it, I've always felt a few things about it. I feel like the child version of me can relate to Norman a lot in this, being the misunderstood outcast who's seldom taken seriously. But more than that, without going into it too much, my relationship with my Dad felt very similar to Norman's with his, and I had just lost my father a month before this was released. Something about it really spoke to me, and even taught me a thing or two, and one could say it even offered a bit of closure. Odd coming from a film like this, but that's how it all felt when I first saw it. Putting me and my stuff aside, however, there's plenty for anyone to like here. Neil is an extremely likable character who you really urge Norman towards, because he doesn't see him as a loser or a freak, and he's ever in his corner through the whole movie. His big brother is hilarious, being a sort of meat-headed jock type, with a lot of dumb moments. But what really makes his character is a twist about him in the end you don't really see coming. Everyone has a moment or two here though, it's a lot of fun watching such an odd team up once the film gets going. Perhaps the film's best overall message is to not judge a book by its cover, to keep it plain and simple. It's a theme that keeps popping up here and there, not limited to Norman's odd ability, and having people accept him. I like to tell people who are new to it, that it's essentially 'The Sixth Sense' for a younger audience, and instead of relying on scares, it relies on well-timed comedy. I highly recommend this title as a family watch for the Halloween season, being that it made my 20 Family Friendly Halloween Classics list in 2017. There's a lot here for just about anyone watching, complete with comedy, creepy atmosphere, funny characters voiced by talented actors, and it might even make one take a good hard look at oneself. Check it out. It's my highest recommendation on the LAIKA list - yes, even over 'Coraline'. Back when this movie was released, I remember not really liking it. But in my search for sporty movies to look at and recommend while sports were gone (welcome back, sports - I'll clearly remain as out of touch as ever), I came across 'Goon' as being one of the best ranked hockey movies out there. I got curious, and decided to check it out again for the first time since its release. I also figured I could recommend this as a "rage" movie - something to channel your frustrations through with plenty of on-screen violence; in this case, the frustration sports fans have felt during this pandemic. I guess I'm a little late, but here we are. While there's still bits and pieces of it I think are pretty low brow, I actually enjoyed it much more this time around. I caught myself laughing quite a bit, and recognizing various faces that I didn't pick up on before, such as the 'Swearnet' gang ('Trailer Park Boys'). I also didn't quite pick up how authentically Canadian the film is, with its lead being one of the few American actors. I'll cover that as the review goes on, but for starters, the crew behind it includes Director Michael Dowse (London, ON) and writers Jay Baruchel (Ottawa, ON) and Evan Goldberg (Vancouver, BC). The film centers on Doug Glatt (Seann William Scott) of Orange, Massachusetts, who can't quite figure out where he fits in. He feels he lacks the intelligence to become a doctor like his adoptive father (Eugene Levy - Hamilton, ON) or his gay adoptive brother, Ira (David Paetkau - Vancouver, BC). He further lacks the passion for anything special, like his friend Pat (Baruchel), who hosts a cable call-in show called 'Hot Ice'. In the meantime, due to being a heavy hitter, Doug makes his living as a bouncer. Here we learn how funny things get, as much of the film's sense of humor is about him being so tough but with a friendly, child-like demeanor when it comes to diffusing situations. One day, during a hockey game, Doug gets into a brawl with one of the Orangetown Assassins players. When coach Rollie Hortense (Nicholas Campbell - Toronto, ON) sees what he can do, he offers him a tryout for the team as its enforcer, regardless of whether or not he can actually play the game. We learn very quickly that he can't really, but he learns enough to get by, and be the team's muscle. He hits so hard, however, that Rollie soon passes him off to his brother, Ronnie (Kim Coates - Saskatoon, SK), who coaches the Canadian Farm Team, the Halifax Highlanders. Doug's role in the game is to protect the recently traumatized Xavier LaFlamme (Marc-André Grondin - Montreal, QB), victim of a vicious hit by Ross "The Boss" Rhea (Liev Schreiber). Since the hit, LaFlamme has been a nervous wreck about playing, and lost all of the drive that was leading him into a promising NHL career. However, while relishing in his new role, and seemingly finding a place, Doug still has to prove himself to his team, his coach, and a girl named Eva (Alison Pill - Toronto, ON). Hardest to impress may boil down to his own non-violent family, and of course, Ross "The Boss", who you pretty much know is gonna be his "final challenge". I think the important takeaway from this, for myself, was the fact that Doug felt he didn't have it in himself to be what other people wanted. However, he found himself doing something he loved, and to him, it meant protecting people, and doing good in that sense. It might be a somewhat twisted look at things in this case, but the message is that there's a lot of us out there who are trying to find that special something, and we might be able to find it in the last place we think to look. More importantly, if you want something bad enough, don't let anyone stand in your way by telling you you're letting them down by not following in their footsteps. While I still don't love the movie, I definitely enjoyed it more this time around. Its sense of humor is pretty rowdy at parts, especially when it comes to Baruchel's role, and it can get grating. There's also this really weird mix of homophobic humor in there, where I don't fully know how to take it. It often makes whoever is saying it look stupid, anyway, Doug's adoptive brother is gay, and one of the most likable characters in the film, and it's actually a homophobic crack that leads Doug to the brawl that gets him into hockey. So when it was all said and done, I'd probably say it's still passable. But check it out if you need some sort of outlet for your anger and frustration through this Pandemic. It was a strange breath of fresh air for me, perhaps it will be for you, too. Before we get started, I should probably point out that the Adam Sandler version of this is the one I'm more familiar with. This comes as a Screening Suggestion to fans of that version, as it's essentially the same exact movie, beat for beat, but was released 30 years earlier. It's kind of amazing how identical the two are, while the differences are very little. So, if you know the Sandler version, you know the plot. But for those unfamiliar, I'll play fair. Ex football player, Paul Crewe (Burt Reynolds) starts to lose his grip after he's caught shaving points from a game, and booted from the league. After a few bad decisions, which include getting drunk behind the wheel of his girlfriend's car and leading the police on an awesome car chase, he eventually goes too far and finds himself arrested. When Crewe is sent to prison, the warden, Hazen (Eddie Albert), picks him to coach the prison's semi-pro team of guards. He's face with a double-edged sword though, and refuses, upon the secret demands of the head guard, Captain Knauer (Ed Lauter), which lands him in the prison work force. One day, Crewe and Warden Hazen have a chat about the prison football team. Hazen takes Crewe's suggestion of a "tune-up game" to heart, setting Crewe on a mission to recruit a convict team for the guards to knock around, while he plays quarterback. The hitch is as simple as early parole for Crewe. While recruiting his team, Crewe meets an arrangement of colorful convicts; primarily, Caretaker (James Hampton) - a man who can get anything, and helps a great deal with assembling the team. Alongside them is another ex football player, Nate Scarborough (Michael Conrad), who knows a thing or two about recruiting a good team. Then there's Pop (John Steadman); a kind of father figure - an aged convict with decades of experience, who may or may not also have the role of Crew's guide. It always used to fascinate me that the '05 Sandler version was so lowly rated while the '74 version was rated so high. If you're looking at the Tomatometer, '74 has a rating of 79% while '05 is only 31%. I never could wrap my head around that low rating, rather than perhaps a few dated racial bits. But I finally discovered that the real reason was that it's a simple carbon copy of this film, 30 years later. Probably to bring the story to a new generation. But the thing is, to make a remake work, you've gotta do something different. I promise, if you've seen the '05 version, you've already seen this version. But with that said, I still say it's worth taking a look at the original. Some of the more racy stuff is a little more acceptable for the time period (though both contain a few stereotypes that may just be for no one), but beyond that, it's just seeing the original. Try to imagine if the only version of 'Psycho' you saw was the 1998 carbon copy of it, starring Vince Vaughn, or the only version of 'A New Hope' you saw was 'The Force Awakens' - you just need that original in your life at some point, if only to decide which version you might like more. For me, while the Sandler version has its moments, It may very well be this one that takes the cake on being the better movie, if only for the reason that the '05 version just stole it, altogether. Continuing Sports Month, this week we take a look at the only sport I ever really got into, personally, basketball. This one is based on a true story, and once again may be a film that tinkers with dates, and the overall unfolding of events. But the tale of Coach Carter's method is still real, and historically, he stands as a figure who stood up and fought for young minds to achieve full potential rather than waste away. Taking place in 1999, in a poor area of Richmond, CA, Ken Carter (Samuel L. Jackson) ends up visiting his old Richmond High School, where he once played on the basketball team, the Richmond Oilers. While the Oilers are on a bit of a losing streak, Carter soon accepts a job as their coach, in hopes to make them straighten up and fly right as a team. It's a bit of a 'Dangerous Minds' scenario. His players come from broken homes, give him bad attitude, and perform poorly both on the court, and academically. Among them, Kenyon Stone (Rob Brown) who may be looking at an early family life with his girlfriend, Kyra (Ashanti); Jason Lyle (Channing Tatum), who may be a student heading down the wrong path; Timo Cruz (Rick Gonzalez) who struggles between proving himself and quitting out of frustration; Worm (Antwon Tanner) who tends to act as a sort of class clown, and needs straightening out; and eventually, Carter's son, Damien (Robert Ri'chard) who wants nothing more than to prove himself to his father. Carter owns up to being a coach for them, not just on the court, but in life as well. A contract is assigned to each student that demands things like a dress code, respectful behavior, and maintaining a 2.3 GPA (around a C+). Attitudes shift soon enough when, under Carter's coaching, the team rolls through the basketball season undefeated. However, once the coach learns of their class slacking, punctuated by the faculty's lack of faith in their success, Carter locks his players out of the court, while running undefeated, until they can meet his assigned quota. As I mentioned before, I find this one to be something on par with a title such as 'Dangerous Minds'; a "true story" where a teacher comes in to set things right for a classroom. Just replace teacher with coach, and classroom with gym. There's also hints of something like 'Boyz n the Hood' here, as the neighborhood is pretty broken, and worse, there's no faith put in these kids to go anywhere. Carter ends up being exactly what they need, and it's altogether inspiring. He's a man who stands up for his beliefs, and will not give in when people try to keep him down. The critic consensus is that it repeats the same things we've seen before (again, 'Dangerous Minds'), and seems formulaic. However, Samuel L. Jackson's performance here stands out enough to make the film enjoyable. It's equally enjoyable seeing a few familiar faces in some of their early work - namely Channing Tatum in a role where he's not dancing. But you may also pick up on Rob Brown, who was also in 'Finding Forrester', 'The Dark Knight' and currently plays Edgar Reade on 'The Blind Spot'). Robert Ri'chard, one may remember as Blake from 'House of Wax', which came out the same year. One might recognize 'Rick Gonzalez' from 'Arrow' or 'Old School', and Ashanti's fame speaks for itself. Though it never went on to win any Oscars or Golden Globes, it has been recognized by the BET Awards, Black Movie Awards, Black Reel Awards, Image Awards and others for Jackson's performance, and the directorial skills of Thomas Carter. As far as my own opinion, I remember considering it to be in my Top 10 of 2005, somewhere behind 'Revenge of the Sith', but ahead of 'Goblet of Fire'. My big takeaway from this was the thought that while you're being punished for not following through, the "punisher" is doing it because they believe in you. It's just a push in the right direction, and while everyone around him is deeming him as "ridiculous" or "holding them back", his team sees very clearly that he believes they can accomplish something while even their own parents don't seem to have any faith that they'll make it. The film can currently be found on Netflix (Canada), so if you want a solid, motivational film, it's a good place to look. My only real precautions before heading into it are the forewarning that it runs a little long (2h, 15m), and to try not to read into the history and accuracy of everything too much. The importance of the film has more to do with the message it's conveying, and any true story that gets the movie treatment will be brushed up with a little more drama and exaggeration. At the risk of beating a dead horse, treat it just like a 'Dangerous Minds' for a new decade. Imagine a time when movie magic didn't consist of crazy CG special effects, amazing camera work or uncanny makeup, but existed in a sort of reality where budget barely entered into it quite as much as a great story, lovable characters, and the concept of something like Heaven without being preachy about it whatsoever. 1989's 'Field of Dreams' fits the bill perfectly, and it's easily one of the greatest feel-good films ever made. A corn farmer from Iowa named Ray Kinsella (Kevin Costner) lives a happy, down to earth life with his wife, Annie (Amy Madigan) and daughter, Karen (Gaby Hoffmann). One day, while working in the field, he hears the famous words "if you build it, he will come". He takes it as a sign to build a baseball field, in the hopes that the late great "Shoeless" Joe Jackson will come back to play. The whole thing is fulfilled within the first half hour or so of the film, and like something from a dream, Joe Jackson (Ray Liotta) and seven more of the 1919 White Sox come to play, but they lack a ninth player to complete their team. Soon, the voices continue, and Ray is lead to reclusive author Terence Mann (James Earl Jones), who he hopes will help him understand the meaning of the voices that he similarly hears. For the record, I'm not the biggest sports fan in the world and know very little about whatever historical inaccuracies there are in the film. That goes double for certain characters here based on real people. But this is one of those films where inaccuracies hardly matter, because the real meaning behind the film is much deeper, and to overanalyze the facts means missing the point. But to dictate the point also means to spoil the end of the movie, so I'll just ease back, even though it's one of those spoilers that's barely a spoiler anymore. What the film does better than anything is provide its viewers with a crazy amount of magic. but does so without it being corny. It's the kind of magic you feel when you meet your favorite celebrity for the first time, or get exactly what you want and then some from a movie you were looking forward to all year, but then it blends that with pure nostalgia. I dare even say that when it comes to baseball memories, in this point in time where sports have all but disappeared, it will tug at your heartstrings even harder than it did before (if you've seen it - if not, I recommend getting on it). This movie is good enough to get three Oscar nominations for Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay and its memorably dream-like score from James Horner. On top of all that, it was actually selected in 2017 to be preserved in the US National Film Registry by the Library of Congress for being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". I dunno what else has made that list, particularly, but that does go to show how strong and timeless this story is, with an ending that is bound to bring on some waterworks. Up until this point, we've been exploring some of Jack Nicholson's most noteworthy roles. Yes, I skipped of his portrayal of the Joker, but I figured 'Batman' belonged on another list somewhere. One thing for certain is that he tends to lean towards tough, often playing characters who one wouldn't dare mess with. But what happens when we take that tough guy routine and try to strip it away from him? 'As Good as It Gets' may be the best result of this, showing us that even the tough guy can have a sweet side - even if he does have to learn it. Melvin Udall (Nicholson) is an obsessive compulsive writer of romantic novels. Despite his fans seeing his writing as great material, in actuality, Melvin is a rude bigot who seems pretty set in his ways, even if it does mean alienating people along the way. However, when his gay neighbor, Simon (Greg Kinnear) is brutally beaton, he soon finds himself looking after Simon's dog, and developing a soft spot. This is only eventually magnified when he starts falling for the only waitress who will tolerate his crap, Carol (Helen Hunt) whose whole world is her ever-ill son, Spencer (Jesse James). As the film unfolds, for as much as we probably hate the character of Melvin (introduced as a homophobic touch-me-not man who puts irritating puppies in garbage chutes) he starts to grow on us over time. The more he comes to terms with certain things, the more we appreciate his willingness to learn - even if every time he learns something, he fudges it up with a whole new lesson he needs in life. And that's kinda what the movie is about; one intolerable man slowly learning what it takes to be tolerable, if only for a date. This one hasn't exactly been swept under the rug, but it seems to only ever be mentioned in passing anymore. It's not something that seems to stand out to people as one of Jack's best performances, even if it was one of three of his wins (the others being 'Terms of Endearment' and 'Cuckoo's Nest') out of twelve total nominations. Hunt also won for her role in this, and deservedly so. The chemistry between these two is actually pretty interesting, providing us with somewhat of a Devil meets Angel scenario. The film was also nominated for Best Picture, Supporting Actor (Kinnear), Original Screenplay, Editing and Original Score. The problem that year was that it went up against 'Titanic', and history indicates what an Academy legend that one is (11 wins out of 14 nominations). But if you were looking for a much more down to earth romantic story for the time, this beat out 'Titanic' by quite a lot in my humble opinion. Sorry to the fans, but 'Titanic' was good for so many other reasons - the romantic story was very standard. This is, however, one of those movies that I wonder would fly with so many people today. It's not quite on par with something like 'American Beauty' (a great film for the time which has aged horribly), but there are bits and pieces of dialogue that kinda make you wonder, and a large part of that is homophobic. With that, however, one needs to see it through to fully judge, as so much of it is about Melvin becoming a better person. So I'm gonna go ahead and still recommend it, based on that. And hey, if nothing else works, bear in mind this comes to us from director James L. Brooks - the guy who gave us 'The Simpsons' along with Matt Groening and Sam Simon. As Jacked Up June continues, I thought I'd bring up a title that doesn't seem to get talked about much anymore. Although Jack is a bit more of a side character, with nominations for Best "Supporting" Actor here, it's one of his scarier portrayals of a character since playing Jack Torrence in 'The Shining'. He actually kinda steals the show when he is on screen, and that's saying a lot considering the other performances in the film. When a Private is attacked by two other marines and eventually declared dead while in hospital, an investigation is conducted by Lt. Commander Jo Galloway (Demi Moore). She believes the attack ensued on account of the Private potentially going over the head of Base Commander, Col. Jessup (Jack Nicholson), threatening to reveal something terrible, and requesting a transfer She believes it to be a possible "Code Red"; a type of illegal hazing brought at the request of Jessup. Galloway's superiors deny her the case, but soon recruit Naval lawyer Lt. Dan Kaffee (Tom Cruise), who would sooner plea his cases out than defend the two Marines involved. This leads Galloway to warn him that if he plea bargains, it will ultimately lead to Jessup getting away with murder. He decide against his usual approach, but he's missing one crucial piece of evidence - undeniable proof that Jessup gave the order. This is one of those intense court room dramas, with great performances all around. It may be one of few movies where Jack can almost be matched by the comedic, but serious Tom Cruise, or the by-the-book character of Galloway, portrayed by Demi Moore. I'm not usually one for court room dramas, often finding them a little complex for my taste, but this one has great balance to it, allowing you to breath between takes of Jack, who excels here at making the audience uncomfortable - in a good way. 'Batman' fans know he makes a great villain, but this is when his portrayal of a villain is serious, and it even gets a bit scary at points. Nominated for four Oscars that year, it unfortunately lost all; three of them to 'Unforgiven'. It suffered a similar all-out loss at the Golden Globes, with five nominations. With that, I would definitely consider this a somewhat underrated classic. It doesn't even make IMDb's Top 250. Of course, it's not without a few bumps. While I maintain that there are great performances all around, there are bits and pieces that could be considered scenes of overacting. But to me, that's about where it ends, and even that's a very minor detail. My final opinion is simple. I think it's a solid and suspenseful story all the way though, and it really doesn't take much to get into it, especially when you see some of the somewhat surprising roles these players take on. If you haven't seen it yet, just know that it's a prime example of a classic, early 90's title, back when not everything needed effects to reel in an audience, and the art lied much more in the acting. One of the best-known roles for Jack in existence has to be Jack Torrence of 1980's 'The Shining'. This is a movie the author of the original source material strongly dislikes due to it being so far off from the book, but we all love it so much because Jack is so awesome in it. Surprisingly, it's even seemingly been put ahead of the book in popularity. I actually tend to use this as a "shining" example of a film no one really complains about due to its differences from the book its based on. It proves the point that sometimes we just have to separate the book and film as different things altogether in order to appreciate the film for what it is. Though, with that said, 99% of the time the books are better. Our story here has two main focuses. First, we have Jack, a writer and recovering alcoholic who takes his wife, Wendy (Shelly Duvall) and son, Danny (Danny Lloyd) to the Overlook Hotel, as Jack takes a job as winter caretaker. This will mean being shut in for the season with very little outside contact due to a lack of costly winter road maintenance. Seeing it as an opportunity to work on his novel, Jack welcomes the experience with open arms. However, this hotel has a nasty past, and quite literally speaks to Jack in all the wrong ways, playing on his alcoholic cravings and writers block. Soon enough, we find him losing his grip, chopping down doors and announcing his arrival in the style Johnny Carson. The second side to the story is Danny, who harbors a special psychic gift. He learns that he's not alone on this when he meets the facility's chef, Dick Hallorann (Scatman Crothers) who shares his gift. With the hotel already having a shady past in which the former winter caretaker lost his mind and murdered his family, Dick tells Danny to use his special gift to call on him if there's ever any trouble with his Dad. Of course, whether you've seen this before, or have only seen the 'Simpsons' Halloween segment, 'The Shinning', you know how it all goes. Kubrick does a fantastic job here for the time with his visuals and overall mood setting. There's something genuinely uncomfortable about this movie, and so much of it comes from the choice of cinematography. It's a fine example of a film that shows how even the subtle set-up of a certain angle is enough to be creepier than it would be from another angle. There are a lot of wide shots used here to subtly show the presence of the hotel, which really ends up being another character in the film. They bring it back for 'Doctor Sleep', but it's not quite as effective as it is here. Danny, cycling his trike through the hallways before running into those twins is still iconic, and one of my favorite creepy shots. It's even to the point where when I'm staying at a hotel, late at night, I get a bit weary walking the halls. What really nails this movie to the horror history books, though, is Jack's performance. He has always been a great actor, but there was so much here that had him cranking his performance to eleven. Even shots of him being quiet and seemingly calm have him either delivering sarcastic tones or just plain looking crazy. Few people can give that look to the camera that says "yes, I'm crazy, what are you gonna do about it?" but the front runners are Anthony Hopkins in 'Silence of the Lambs' and Jack in 'The Shining'. Had the Oscars been looking in horror's direction back then, he probably would have at least gotten nominated. You'll be one of two minds on this movie. You'll see it for the psychological work of horrific art that it is, or you'll side with Stephen King and lean more towards the book-like telling. If I'm honest, I actually DO like the miniseries more than most. For being something that came straight to TV, it's just fine. But I also don't particularly meet these in the middle. If I wanna throw on a good, creepy horror movie to have a great ride with, I have to lean towards Stanley Kubrick's vision. The miniseries is more to throw on if you want something new or different to check out, but other than Steven Weber's performance as... John Torrance?... it's pretty blasé. And even then, who can hold a candle to Jack's performance as a crazy person?... That is, other than maybe Heath Ledger or Joaquin Phoenix, anyway. To close off this exploration into some of Carrey's best dramatic performances, I went with one of my favorite love stories, 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind'. It's an interesting and imaginative look at how our minds work while in the midst of a bad break-up. That includes things like lashing out about something, but not meaning it, and of course, the willingness to erase someone from your memory altogether at the time. As the film opens, we meet the shy and introverted Joel Barish (Carrey), who impulsively boards a train to Montauk one chilly Valentine's Day. By chance, she meets the whimsical and free-spirited Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet), and they form a relationship just before the opening credits introduce us to the tale of tragedy ahead. After a rough break-up, Joel comes home to a surprise - some card reading that Clementine has erased him from her memory. As a result, Joel seeks out Dr. Howard Mierzwaik (Tom Wilkinson), inventor of this technology, to undergo the same process. However, as his memories of Clementine begin to disappear, he starts to realize that fond memories are something that come out of every relationship, and might not be something to throw away as though it was yesterday's trash. Through a secondary story arc, we are introduced to a few of Mierzwaik's employess who "oversee" the whole process. Stan (Mark Ruffalo) is the expert, so to speak, until he brings in his coworker, Mary (Kirsten Dunst), leading to a bit of unprofessionalism. But helping Stan is the creepy Patrick (Elijah Wood) whose pretty much playing Frodo the pervert here. As the film rolls on, we learn that he intends to take over Joel's identity as Clementine's love interest, using her memories with Joel as a reference point. I will be the first to admit that there's not a whole lot of straightforwardness to this one. The execution is an artsy one, and you might find yourself a bit confused as to what exactly is going on. But I will say that you kinda have to sit through that confusion to get your head together as the film comes together, nearing the end. I'd say it's a bit worse than something like 'Inception' for that, so if the whole "in the mind" thing isn't for you, you might stick with 'Truman Show' or 'Man on the Moon' as your best Carrey Drama. With that said though, I tend to lean towards this type of imaginative material, and I'm always fascinated by dream-associated material. Truth be told, I confuse much more easily with things like political thrillers and, you know, real life stuff. So I may be a bit bias in my opinion about how good this is. But if you are in the midst of a rough breakup, or having some kind of problem, wanting to forget about someone, I recommend trying this out. While it's confusing for a while, just pay attention. It ends in such a way that allows the viewer to embrace the chaos of a situation as opposed to keeping things straight and narrow, which can still lead to problems. It all ends with one word, and to me, it's one of the most powerfully emotional words to end something on. Some may not agree, but the same word is used in a certain super famous story-based game, and it was strong there, too. But check it out for yourself, and see if you agree or disagree. When it comes to Jim Carrey's dramatic roles, there are a few to chose from, but 'The Majestic' tends to land at the bottom of people's lists. To be perfectly fair, the film resembles plenty that came before it with a lot of its ideas, and has been deemed unoriginal by many. But if I'm just recommending a movie based on a performance, for me, this is definitely one of Carrey's best. So, before I get into it, just know that I'm basing this Screening Suggestion more on that than anything else. That said, to be perfectly honest, I do enjoy this for what it is. Our story takes place back in 1951, and centers on Hollywood screenwriter, Peter Appleton (Carrey), working for HHS Studios. Things are going well for him, overall. He's dating the lovely starlet, Sandra Sinclair (Amanda Detmer), and he premiers his latest film at the Grauman's Chinese Theater on a double-bill with 'The African Queen' (a real-life classic). By the way, his film stars the one and only Bruce Campbell (the actor of the adventure flick is unnamed, but c'mon, it's Bruce Campbell) as Roland the Intrepid Explorer. It's a brief glimpse, but a fun little tidbit for us Campbell fans. Anyway, getting back to the point, it all soon comes to a halt when he's accused of being a Communist due to attending an antiwar meeting in college that he claims he only attended to impress a girl. This all puts his career on the rocks, leading him to drink some heavy liquid on the rocks, and eventually crash his car into a river with no rocks. He awakens, washed ashore, in a small village that pines for its many lost World War II soldiers. He is found with amnesia, forgetting everything about his past, and is mistaken for one of the town's lost soliders, Luke. Most convinced are Lukes sweetheart, Adele Stanton (Laurie Holden) and father, Harry Trimble (Martin Landau). Will he be able adjust to Luke's former life, convinced that he is Luke? Or will his own former life unexpectedly catch up with him? Easy enough to predict, but it's fun to think of the scenario. So, you may be wondering where exactly the title comes from. Once Harry takes "Luke" in, he brings him to a run down, abandoned theater that they used to run together before Luke went to war. Much of the film has to do with the restoration of the theater, and bringing back the good old picture show to the town. The whole time as an audience member, you kinda sit there knowing how it's all gonna play out. A Hollywood writer with a well-known film out there, suffering amnesia, helps to open a theater? Bottom line, the film is predictable. It also enjoys manipulating your heart strings, so it's not gonna be for just anyone. However, it manages to make the Screening Suggestion list mostly based on Carrey giving a good dramatic reading the whole way through. He does a great job here with what he has to work with, and it's kind of a shame no one looks in this direction when it comes to his performances because the rest of the film is okay at best. It's also a good way to see some of Frank Darabont's original dramatic work. He has his share of dramatic adaptations, including 'The Green Mile' and 'The Shawshank Redemption', but if you're curious to see him execute his own dramatic story, it's a good place to look. Another fine example of Jim Carrey flexing his acting muscles is his portrayal of the late Andy Kaufman in 1999's 'Man on the Moon'. It turns out that Jim Carrey was doing a deep dive with this role, perhaps taking his method acting a touch too far. For further information, check out 'Jim & Andy' on Netflix. It's all about his work on this project, and it's some interesting stuff to say the least. Getting back to the film at hand, however, here we have a biopic on the comedic career of Andy Kaufman. The film covers a brief glimpse into his childhood up to his stand-up, but most of it takes place in the days he starred on 'Taxi' ('78-'83), and the days leading up to his passing of a rare type of lung cancer. I never knew much about Andy Kaufman before this movie, as he passed when I was just about a year old. My parents watched 'Taxi' when it was on in syndication, but I didn't really pay attention (my mistake). But this film showed me what his sense of humour was like. Instead of being the guy who would come out and tell a joke or two, he would go for genuine audience reactions and eat it up - even if that reaction was to "boo" or get angry or upset. Along the way, he creates and portrays a character known as Tony Clifton, who would be a trashy personality that would endure a good number of years in secret. If Andy Kaufman and Tony Clifton needed to be in the same place at the same time, Bob Zmuda (Paul Giamatti), a writer and friend to Andy, would take on the role. Together, those two would really tear it up when it came to getting some sort of a reaction from audiences that wasn't a laugh. It's the idea that messing with people is funny, as long as no one really gets hurt. Kaufman was managed by George Shapiro (Danny DeVito - who is an interesting casting choice when you see the two side by side), and Shapiro's going along with so much of his material helped him to become a huge success before the days of 'Seinfeld'. He was also good friends with Andy, and one of a very select few to know Tony Clifton was just a character Andy played. He was also executive producer on this film, so you have to imagine things are pretty accurate here. Kaufman's brand of humour isn't particularly up my alley. I might compare him to someone like Sacha Baron Cohen, coming up with things like 'Borat' and 'Bruno'. That "mess-with-people" comedy was never something I really got into. I've watched and enjoyed the 'Jackass' movies, but they're mostly just messing with each other to make us laugh. When things offend people or get too intense (even sometimes kinda scary) it's not really for me. But if it's your cup of tea, clearly you're not alone. Kaufman kinda paved the way for that kind of thing, so you have him to either thank or blame. For me, this is another one I manage to meet in the middle, but I know others who would and do love it. It goes to show that a lot of good laughs for people come from the reaction of other people in a situation where they don't know how to react. In a sense, Kaufman perfected this, and I'll give him credit for being able to pull it off. On top of that, Carrey does an awesome job here, but I have to say what may be more fascinating than the actual film is the documentary, 'Jim & Andy'. Again, it's on Netflix so I recommend going over, checking it out, and then watching this with new eyes. Back in the days before 'Black Mirror', this was a film that sort of toyed with the idea of an alternate reality that uses accessible (or almost accessible) technology. It further toyed with a "big brother" sort of idea, but instead of all of us being watched, one of us is being watched, and it's all part of an elaborate, long-running TV show. The show's concept is to take a child from birth named Truman Burbank (Jim Carrey) and air his entire life on TV. His life takes place in a massive sound studio, providing artificial everything it takes to convince Truman that it's all real. However, when a stage light falls from the sky, it sets into motion a series of strange occurrences that suggest to Truman that something truly bizarre is happening in his life. That's really all there is to it, in a nutshell, and despite a few odd CG effects (for 1998), the film still totally holds up. It gets us thinking, and the idea that such a thing could be real is sort of brought to the forefront, although it probably worked better in 1998 than 20-plus years later. Nowadays we have shows like 'Black Mirror' that we compare things like this to, as it sits at the top. But unlike 'Black Mirror', this isn't really a cautionary tale. To me, this is much more of a metaphor about the escape from our everyday, strange reality. Despite the set-up, Truman is just an average, everyday, normal guy. He's married, he works for an insurance company, and his daily life is altogether similar to most. However, the idea of free will is often questioned here, as the show's creator and executive producer, Christof (Ed Harris), essentially plays God through all of this. As he mentions in the beginning, Truman has complete control over his actions and decisions, but things are also controlled. If he's not "meant" to do something or go somewhere, Christof gets his crew to stop him. This is best illustrated by instilling the fear of the ocean inside him in a truly traumatizing way (which also makes him stay put). A lot of people didn't know what to make of 'The Truman Show' upon its release, as it was Jim Carrey's first real step away from his comedic antics. The year before, 'Liar Liar' was released, though, which was a solid combination of his comedic and dramatic skills, so speaking for myself, I never minded him stepping forward to try something new. Nowadays, however, the film has seemingly gained a bit of a cult following, and is seen as a better story now than it was before. Also, One thing I didn't realize (so I'll share it here) was that this was inspired by a 'Twilight Zone' episode from the late 80's called 'Special Service', so that may very well be worth checking out. My humble opinion is that it's one of Jim Carrey's finest films. We get a fair share of comedy from him here, but he also shows us that he can take things seriously. In retrospect, it's hard to picture anyone else in the role. Despite a few nay-sayers back when it was released, it currently has extremely positive reviews and has become a classic of sorts. I'd probably say that it was ahead of its time, but now is the perfect time to watch it. You gotta love Scorsese's work. If there's one thing you can say about it, it's that he's got range. He has given us just about everything ranging from family friendly adventures ('Hugo') all the way to intense thrillers such as 'Shutter Island'. As far as all the in-between, just look at his IMDb page, as I could be here all day listing off his wonderful work. 'Shutter Island' is Scorsese's take on a pyschological thriller, all while maintaining that crime-related story he's so well-known for. It's just that in this case, it's a creepy mental institution on an island as opposed to, say, the familiar streets of New York. some of the main draws to this film are among the many names attached to the project. Aside from director Scorsese, it's also helmed by the talents of Leo DiCaprio, Mark Ruffalo and Ben Kingsley, with great side roles for names like Max von Sydow, Michelle Williams and Jackie Earle Haley. So it's pretty star-studded, and that's not even mentioning a few more perfectly recognizable faces. One might not place this at the top of their Scorsese list, but I can say with all honesty that it's well worth a watch. You just have to sort of ditch the idea of it being a typical Scorsese film. This is one that seemed a little more experimental, teetering on light horror. For a real quick plot breakdown, things open up in 1954, where U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels (DiCaprio) and his new partner, Chuck (Ruffalo) have been assigned to investigate the disappearance of a potentially very dangerous patient. The assignment takes place on Shutter Island, where the US government runs an institution for the criminally insane. Based on his own past experiences, Daniels soon becomes weary that the institution may be doing some pretty abysmal stuff behind closed doors. The film takes a few twists and turns, and keeps you guessing as to what the outcome might be. Is the government facility corrupt? What really is going on with certain prisoners? Is there more than meets the eye to the institution, or less? With all this guess work, though, I might recommend that you don't bother with the trailer before heading into it. It doesn't happen often for me, but this was one case where the trailer showed me everything I needed to know to call its ending. So upon seeing it the first time, I can say I was a bit disappointed. But with that said, it's still a perfectly solid film with a dark and imaginative atmosphere. If you're not into all the gangster related material Scorsese cranks out, this is a cool change of pace that shows us how dark and mysterious he can get. On the other hand, if you really like typical Scorsese material, this could easily be seen as a little too different for your taste. Here, he plays with things like horror elements and makes sure everything atmospherically dreary and dark. Even through the day, it's all clouds and storms. It's safe to say that the overall feeling of the film matches the poster perfectly. On top of that, the performances and dialogue are all great, and it's a neat one to go back and watch now when some faces may be more recognizable. It may not be Scorsese's crowning achievement, but considering his filmography, that's not a stretch either. It's still a really good flick. Back in February of 1991, this film was released to mass praise from audiences and critics alike. It struck a chord with audiences as a very intense thriller that borders on horror (much like 'Seven', which would come later, and owe a lot to this film). Meanwhile critics couldn't deny how good it was with its twists, turns, atmosphere and incredible acting. It went on to receive 7 Oscar nominations, winning 5, including Best Picture, Director, Lead Actor (Anthony Hopkins), Lead Actress (Jodie Foster) and Adapted Screenplay - a clean sweep of the top 5 categories, which, at the time, had only gone to a couple of dramas in the past; 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest' ('75) and 'It Happened One Night' ('38). This was unprecedented for a movie of this type, as most fans ultimately consider it a horror movie of sorts. So what gave such a twisted movie such praise? The film opens up with FBI trainee, Clarice Starling (Foster) as we see her tackling an obstacle course in a creepy forest, giving us a nice visual portrayal of her character without saying a damn thing. You can tell from the get-go that she's independent, tenacious, and on-guard, but knows she can hold her own. This and the fact that she doesn't spook easily are pretty much cemented when she is assigned to a particularly creepy project. She is assigned to interview former psychologist and cannibalistic killer, Hannibal Lecter (Hopkins) to try to get into the mind of an on-the-loose killer known as "Buffalo Bill" (Ted Levine). Bill has been going around, abducting young women, and cutting the skin off their bodies. Much like Leatherface of 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre', he is also based on real-life serial killer Ed Gein. Anyway, FBI Special Agent Jack Crawford (Scott Glenn) believes that Lecter will be able to divulge information about Bill that will help the FBI track him down and capture him. The catch to these interviews is that Lecter often ends up playing mind games with Clarice, having her divulge some of her personal life information in exchange for information that may lead to Bill. This makes for some of the more intense moments of the film, and it's easy to see in both Hopkins and Fosters cases why the won those acting awards. Hopkins showed an incredibly dark but sophisticated side, pretty much forever turning Hopkins into Hannibal the same way Robert Downey Jr. is basically just Iron Man now by default. Foster on the other hand gave horror/thriller fans another strong female protagonist, strong for her mind and determination more than anything else. Foster's character was somewhat refreshing in that sense. My humble opinion is that she's probably the best female protagonist since 'Alien' (but that's perfectly debatable). Even by today's standards, one can't really deny that she's well-established in the hall of fame for best female protagonists. This is one of those movies that I would recommend to anyone who's a fan of horror, thrillers and intense murder mysteries, as this is a sort of crown jewel. Horror fans see it as being an immense leap forward, and Hannibal Lecter is widely considered one of the best villains out there, let alone horror villains. On the other hand, if you're a fan of crime thrillers, and looking for something a little more intense, this is a great watch. Even if you know all that happens without seeing it, you should still give it a look, because there's more than just good story and acting here. The film was further nominated for Best Sound and Film Editing, and it really shows. But it could easily further qualify for categories like Original Score with its ominous overtones; Cinematography, as the overall atmosphere of this film is so genuinely dark and creepy; Production Design based on the asylum scenes alone. This really is a gem of a film overall, and it lends itself to multiple viewings based more on its entertainment value than the idea of looking for clues. If you haven't checked it out yet, give it a shot. Just be weary that some of the asylum scenes can be a little intense if you're sensitive. It's unfortunate that this movie has had its ending spoiled to the point of it not being a spoiler anymore. Pretty much everyone knows how it ends by now. Some may have seen it coming (or so they say), but luckily for myself, I was one of many who was kinda blown away, and definitely had to re-watch it. The first time around was a great ride that left you questioning the mistakes the movie must have made. The second time is almost better, though, as you realize the writing is pretty damn tight. Malcolm Crowe (Bruce Willis) is a child psychologist who, through a bad experience with one of his patients, finds himself wanting to do right by helping a troubled boy, Cole Sear (Haley Joel Osment). In a side story, Malcolm also gets so caught up in his work that he starts to have trouble with his wife, Anna (Olivia Williams), who seems overlooked. Cole lives his life in fear, both of the bullies at school, and of his deep dark secret; he sees dead people. He keeps this from everyone, including his mother (Toni Collette), leading the kids at school to dub him a "freak", and his mother to genuinely worry about him. But being that his secret seems so outlandish, he keeps it to himself, confiding in Dr. Crowe to help him through his fears and find some sort of solution. Going back to the watchability of it, a lot of people will probably pass this off as something you see two or three times to pick up on things that lead to the twist, but then put it down because it just doesn't have that impact anymore. However, I still deem this perfectly watchable for multiple sittings, as the film represents so much more than one of Hollywood's greatest movie twists of all time. Potential spoilers ahead, but as I mentioned before... can this even be spoiled anymore, today? If you look at Cole's situation, his big lesson is that he eventually has to face his fears, whether he wants to or not. These ghosts can really represent anything the viewer may fear, but must face. It could be a surgery you have to go through, a place you have to move to for work, or a final test you have to take to graduate. I find this movie to mostly be about facing your fears head on, and it's no coincidence that I really started to take to horror movies right after watching this. On the other side of things, you have Dr. Crowe. My big takeaway from his side of things is also pretty simple, and that's to do what you need to do before you pass on. Part of that lies in helping Cole, allowing him to forgive himself for failing his previous patient (the same one he had trouble with at the beginning of this review). But part of it is also to do with his wife, and just getting that time in with your spouse while you can. So, even though this one is 20 years old now, and everyone knows how it ends, it still ends up going on my list of film recommendations as a lot of the writing cleverly brings out other aspects of the world around us, and how we deal with it as individuals. This film is absolutely Shyamalan at his best, so if you wanna check out any of his movies, this is like the 'Empire Strikes Back' of his collection - complete with spoiler you probably already know going into it. For our first title of suspense, I thought I'd take a look back to one of my first little toe-dips in the macabre. I rented this one with a friend when I was around the age of 13, once it was released on video. At this point in my life, a lot disturbed me, but for some reason I really wanted to see this movie. I did NOT do horror back then, but for me, this just kinda teetered on what I considered horrific. 'Seven' actually marks a pretty big jump in personal growth for me, as the first film I wanted to see, knowing that I might get freaked out by it. I did watch 'Freddy's Dead' a few years prior, but the choice to watch that was based on peer pressure. This had the premise of using the Seven Deadly Sins in its plot, which morbidly interested me. It made me finally want to take a peek behind the veil of morbid curiosity. This one features two homicide detectives; Somerset (Morgan Freeman) is on the edge of retirement, and Mills (Brad Pitt) who strangely transfers to the film's setting - a dark, bleak, unnamed city that is a perfect reflection of the dark subject matter of the film. Together, they work on tracking down a serial killer who only goes by John Doe (Kevin Spacey) whose M.O. is to use the Seven Deadly Sins against his victims. One by one, Doe's victims are tortured and killed in some truly gruesome and memorable ways. The kills are done off-screen, and all we really see is a variety of silhouettes and shadows, pretty much always faceless. Yet the memory of what you don't see, and how horrible it must actually look, really sticks with you. It's something I'd use as a prime example of less being more. The Sloth victim was a touch of nightmare fuel at the time, and we get to see a lot of him... but he's still kinda faceless. Maybe I'm reading too deeply into it, but I find keeping the victims faceless lends itself to allowing the audience to take a look at themselves. Could they have been one of John Doe's victims in this situation? It's very impressive film making from director David Fincher, who we now probably know best for 'The Social Network' and 'Fight Club'. Fincher excels in the gritty, and this film is absolutely no exception. It's the kind of film I'd say you might feel like you need a shower after watching. In some ways, this is a lot like the 'Saw' movies, but without the torture porn aspect. Instead of seeing the torture, we imagine the torture - again, so much more potent. A lot of themes are similar as well, having to do with self-reflection. If you're watching this, knowing nothing about it, it'll probably make you think. Fair warning though, the ending is not a happy one! I thought I'd wrap up the month of February's Screening Suggestions somewhat appropriately, covering a film that takes place at the beginning of February, directed by the great Harold Ramis, who sadly passed six years ago, just yesterday. This is a title that hardly needs an introduction, and ends up on a lot of favourite lists. I once considered this one to be good, but slightly overrated, and didn't quite get what made it so special. Nowadays, however, it's easier to shed a positive light on it when the core themes really start to click with my adult mind. We meet Phil Conners (Bill Murray) who works as a weatherman for the Pittsburgh station, WPBH-TV. Generally seen as cynical and egotistical, he reluctantly works a job in the small, real-life town of Punxutawney, Pennsylvania. Here, with his crew consisting of the station's new producer, the beautiful Rita (Andie MacDowell) and cameraman, Larry (Chris Elliot), they cover the February 2nd Groundhog Day Festival. Being that this is his fourth time covering the same fluff story, Phil wants to be in and out of the town quickly. But the weather has different plans, and a blizzard snows them in town for the night. Upon waking up at his bed and breakfast on what he believes to be the next day, Phil soon realizes that he's reliving the same day. Passing it off as a bad case of déjà vu at first, he wakes up on the same day again, and again. Realizing this, he first sees it as a gift where he can get away with anything without having to suffer any consequences, but soon finds his lows when he sees the day inescapable and hopeless. Soon enough, he falls for Rita, and uses his constant time loop to do anything in his power to impress her and win her over. With this, he often learns the hard way that actions have consequences. Each day, he goes about things in different ways, learning what works and what doesn't. This curse to repeat the same day, multiple times with multiple outcomes, also ends up being a gift. With it, he can learn a lot, not only from his mistakes, but how some simple decisions can turn a horrible day into a fantastic day, and that's the real takeaway from this. Speaking personally, I find this to be a big lesson for how to live your best life. This starts out being a horrible day for Phil, but as he repeats it, he gets to know the people of the town, Rita, Larry, and even himself. I also take it as a great appreciation for something along the lines of the multiverse, and could see this as Phil living the same day in a different universe every time he wakes up - every universe being a new opportunity, and every decision he makes creating a new reality for him to wake up to. That's just a consideration. There's nothing wrong with the idea of a time loop, if you prefer. Either way, the point that your decisions can influence your happiness is there and clear. And so, we wrap up the feel-good month of February on a high note. The more I see this movie, the more I like what it's trying to do. In it's own way, the story is completely timeless, and even for a 1993 movie, it works very well today. The time loop's estimate is debatable, but coming from Ramis, himself, he mentions it spanning anywhere from 10 to 40 years. In the spiritual sense, he could be stuck in this loop for a full 10,000 years in relation to the Buddhist culture, which suggests it takes that long for the soul to evolve to its next level. So it's honestly anybody's guess, but I feel like 10,000 years must be a stretch to get one day perfect. In the end, the mere hour and 40 minutes the film takes to tell the story is all that's needed. This is one for the soul, especially on one of those bad days. Remember, we get tomorrow to improve ourselves, and this is a film that begs us not to take such things for granted. I tend to give a lot of credit to any actor who can embrace their inner child to actually play a child, and play it well. Robin Williams tends to come to mind when he pulls it off in 'Jack' (underrated, but perhaps needs a revisit), but the only man who arguably did it better was Tom Hanks in 'Big' - an Oscar nominated performance from 1988 that has yet to be topped. He nails everything from the way he talks to his subtle mannerisms. It's very evident that Tom Hanks had a lot of fun with this role, and did his homework in some way before pulling it off. Josh (Hanks/David Moscow) is an average boy living an average life. He hangs out with his best friend, Billy (Jared Rushton), and has a crush on a girl named Cynthia (Kimberlee M. Davis). In a line-up for a carnival ride, he attempts to try to break the ice with Cynthia, but he's told he's not tall enough for the ride. In his frustration, he wanders over to a Zoltar fortune telling machine that "grants wishes". He wishes he was "big", and the next day, he wakes up as a full-grown adult. Freaking out his own mother (Mercedes Ruehl), Josh realizes he can't go home to figure things out. Instead, he seeks Billy's help, which eventually leads them to New York City, where he can lay low until he can find another Zoltar machine to hopefully reverse his wish. This is where he finds out immediately that there's much more to the adult life than meets the eye. In killing his time, he manages to find a data entry job for the famous FAO Schwartz toy store. Here, he develops a few new relationships where his adulthood is often tested. His boss, MacMillan (Robert Loggia), sees him as the perfect man child to test the company's toys. The toy making team-leader, Paul Davenport (John Heard) has a strong dislike for him, as he seems to constantly undermine him. Finally, his coworker, Susan (Elizabeth Perkins) likes him and his open mind, but he's still 13 on the inside, and not quite in touch with those things yet. As the story unfolds, it's a great case of Josh learning a lot about what it means to be an adult, but it equally covers all of these adults and how they would typically deal with a kid's mind. MacMillan embraces it, especially as a toy store owner, Paul is obviously very annoyed by it, and Susan, though it's not quite as obvious in her situation, kinda meets it in the middle. She finds his child-like mind frustrating at times, but that frustration he causes is all part of his charm. This is perfect for any kid going through those difficult stages of puberty. I remember it well. We wanted to do what adults could do (in more ways than one), and in many ways, this is the film to show them that things aren't necessarily all they're cracked up to be. It's also a good way to show these kids that it's important to embrace your childhood while it lasts. It's a very short time in your life that you might take for granted. |
Categories
All
Archives
September 2022
|