A Brief Review of a Movie

This is the first year that I have considered the fact that my favorite male lead performance of 2014 is not necessarily the best male lead performance of 2014. There are many more films to be released in 2014 yet including most of the "Oscar bait," however, so far, my favorite performance is by J. K. Simmons as the angry, ruthlessly vulgar bandleader in "Whiplash."

Eddie Redmayne, though, as Stephen Hawking, in "The Theory of Everything," surpasses Simmons as far as making me forget that I was watching an actor's portrayal. As Stephen Hawking, Redmayne flawlessly invokes all of the physical decline of Hawking while still invoking Hawking's sense of humor and early anger about his motor neuron disease which rendered him unable to speak and walk at a very early age. The joy of watching director James Marsh's film, based on Jane Hawking's book, "Travelling to Infinity: My Life With Stephen Hawking," is watching Hawking and his young wife continue to pursue his theories, not allowing his illness to impede his intellectual progress. This easily sounds like the plot of one of those 1970's and 80's "Disease of the Week" made-for-tv movies, as Siskel and Ebert would refer to them, however, "The Theory of Everything" excels not only with the performance of Redmayne, but also with a finely tuned deftness in storytelling. One of many aspects of the film I enjoyed was the fact that, before any instrument was developed to assist Hawking in communicating, no character in the film that I can remember, utters any words expressing doubt that Hawking could continue on with his work, despite the fact that he could no longer walk or speak easily. It is as if he did not have a malady of any kind. His brilliance and his steadfastness overtook how he looked in the minds of his colleagues. I also appreciated the fact the the film does not ignore the fact that, despite his illness and declining condition, Hawking is still a sexual creature as are we all. As he states in the film with a wonderfully wry smile when asked by one of his college friends if he still can function, "It's a different system."

Felicity Jones is fantastic as Jane Hawking, a character I admired because of her desire to stay with Stephen even though they met and married before his illness established itself. She knew the healthy Stephen Hawking and remained married to and supported and cared for him for many years following their marriage.

Their marriage ended in divorce after 30 years, however, one may surmise in the film that it was not an easy decision for either party. The scene in the couple's bedroom during which the subject of their separation is broached is very well done and displays the awkwardness and difficulty of ending an established relationship, something of which, in the best of circumstances, is always difficult to explain to outside parties and cannot be easily summed up or capsulized. This is part of the depth of this film. It is not simply a tour of the life of Stephen Hawking and his achievements, but it is a deeply emotional journey we take (yes, that's a cliche--sorry) with these two characters. While the film is more of an "English major" movie than a "Physics major" movie, meaning that more focus is on his relationship with his wife than on his achievements in physics, there is enough time devoted to his work in physics to satisfy me.

"The Theory of Everything" is a powerful, emotionally involving film, yet not at all sappy. The emotions emoted by the actors in the film are genuine. The performances are outstanding. The script is well-paced and never gets bogged down in one thing or another. Marsh, whose documentaries, the vastly overrated "Man on Wire" and "Project Nim" were both annoying and frustrating in their lack of subtlety, creates a film here which is a remarkable achievement in subtlety in filmmaking. "The Theory of Everything" was the cinematic equivalent of somebody I could get along with very easily--subtle, intelligent, funny at times, and honest. If you have some time, I recommend you see this wonderful film.

Big Hero 6: Endgame

I was not expecting to like "Big Hero 6" as much as I did. The prospect of eating pancakes during the 9:00 AM showing of this film during its opening weekend was much more exciting than seeing the film, which looked interesting from the trailer, but, as I have not had much luck enjoying Disney animated films in the past, I was not expecting much. I am not a huge fan of animation, especially Disney animated films, as they rarely spark any emotional response from me and leave me cold. Not only did I enjoy the pancakes at the movie grill I attended, but I also enjoyed the film.

Hiro is a young man who loses his big brother, Tadashi, in a fire at a center at which Tadashi is participating in a robotics competition. Tadashi has created a medical companion robot called Baymax. Baymax is the primary reason to see "Big Hero 6." Baymax is a very funny character and a character full of life, to use a tired cliche. It helps that the film is genuinely funny and very sweet without being sappy, nor does it revert to childish humor or humor dependent on a knowledge of current pop culture, a trend that recent animated films seemed to have fallen back on in the past few years. "Big Hero 6" does not try too hard to be funny, and for that, I am pleased. Perhaps my enjoyment of Baymax, and therefore my enjoyment of the film was due to the fact that Baymax was not an animated representation of a human being. Animated representations of people, with few exceptions as in the great 1987 Japanese animated film, "Grave of the Fireflies," do not generate any emotional involvement in me. Baymax, rather, was a robot, something to which, in a live-action movie, one would not expect to develop a strong emotional response. In the case of "Big Hero 6," Baymax is the reason to see the movie as I developed an appreciation for Baymax and the emotional ties he represented to Hiro.

After the death of his big brother, Hiro, like his brother, a whiz at robotics and things technological, begins again the development of Baymax. Conflict arises when an evil businessman wants Baymax for his own and Hiro and a group of friends have to keep Baymax from being stolen away from them. There were enough funny moments involving Baymax to keep me engaged and laughing. Towards the end, the film does get a bit too "action-y" as Hiro and his group of friends battle to save Baymax from clutches of evil. The film has a satisfying ending and along the way, delivers a very nice nod to a famous person you will probably know. What I suspect made me enjoy "Big Hero 6" more than the average lifeforce-draining Disney animated movie is that it is a collaboration between Disney and Marvel as "Big Hero 6" is a Marvel property and Disney owns Marvel Entertainment. Perhaps there was some "Marvel-ization" of the script as most films based on Marvel characters tend to include some witty dialogue and humorous situations. Aside from this, the film creates some genuinely touching moments between Hiro and Baymax and between Hiro and Tadashi early in the film. Give it a shot and I think most will enjoy this fun and, unexpectedly for me, emotionally-involving animated film.

I Had a Pin-terest In This Movie

I had not heard of the 1988 horror film, "Pin," until I read one of those "14 Most Whatever Things That Will Make You Eat Cabbage and Want to Ride a Horse. Really, It's Actually That Awesome. Just Wait Until the Man Starts Singing. It Will Make Your Shoes Fly Off Your Head"-esque posts on Facebook. The list had something to do with 20 "Weird" Movies That You May Not Know. Indeed, I did not know about "Pin." Based on the description of the film, I located a dvd of "Pin," and enjoyed what I saw.

"Pin" is written and directed by Sandor Stern who, previous to directing this film, wrote the screenplays of "Fast Break," the basketball movie starring Gabe Kaplan and the 1979 version of "The Amityville Horror." Prior to "Pin," he directed the pilot episode of the CBS tv series, "Cutter to Houston," and the tv movie, "John and Yoko: A Love Story," among other credits. Since "Pin," Stern has written and directed a menagerie of horror films, none of which have I seen. I have seen "Fast Break." I remember it appearing on the CBS Sunday Night, or possibly, Tuesday Night movie in the early 80's. The story of "Pin" revolves around a doctor (the always interesting to watch Terry O'Quinn, who you may know from the very good film, "The Stepfather" and the tv show, "Lost," not the classic Al Adamson kid's film from 1981, which has been criminally removed from Netflix instant streaming) who uses a life-size human body model, which he names Pin, in his office, presumably to point out various ailments of his patients, but also serves as a parental reinforcement. Pin speaks, telepathically, to the children of the doctor and to the doctor. Pin is a member of the family, even though it is a medical tool. Yes, we have entered the fun world of the strange, bizarre, and unique in the world of cinema. Events happen which I will not give away. Pin continues to "live" with the brother and sister, Ursula and Leon (Cynthia Preston and David Hewlett) into their college years. Ursula understands that Pin is not a person, however, Leon has trouble comprehending this fact and treats Pin as a member of the family. Hilarity ensues and disturbing things occur involving Pin, Ursula and Leon and Bob and Carol, and Ted and Alice.

"Pin" had enough strangeness going on to keep me interested throughout. The performances by Preston and Hewlett are well done also. They both do a nice job of acting with a human body model and with each other, interpreting the uncomfortable dynamic between Ursula and her slightly off brother. Presumeably, there is a "Pinocchio" motif at work in the film, however, it seems to be hidden well and rarely referenced in the script. This is fine, as "Pin" works very well as simply the story of siblings and the weird presence of this "Pin" in their lives. I think you should pin it to your list of obscure, unique films to seek out and watch.

Whiplash Delivers Quite a Jolt

When reading this, please kind in mind that this is being written without the benefit of reading glasses. The fun of watching "Whiplash" comes from watching the dynamic performance of J. K. Simmons as Professor Kingsfield from "The Paper Chase" times fourteen. In "The Paper Chase," the film and the tv series, John Houseman's Professor Kingsfield, is a bit of a stone-cold teacher who does not tolerate incorrect answers due to lack of preparation on the part of his students and will scold his students in front of God and Kirk Cameron. In "Whiplash," Terence Fletcher, the bandleader/drumming instructor played by J.K. Simmons is a vulgar, unhappy asshole, but a fun asshole to watch. Fletcher would even tell you that he is a vulgar asshole. Simmons' performance is a lot of fun to watch, even as Fletcher yells obscenities at his students and brings some of them to tears with his insults. I understand that this is not some people's idea of entertainment, but I loved it.

Flether's goal is to make his players at the Shaffer Conservatory the best they can be, not a surprise in a film about drumming and the drive to make oneself as great as possible. Miles Teller is very good as Miles Nayman, the student Fletcher hears drumming in a practice room one morning and invites to try out for the school jazz band. "Whiplash" is the kind of film that demonstrates how I enjoy individual performances more than the overallness (I know that's not really a word) of any given film. Simmons is so charismatic and funny as he breaks down the young musicians he is trying to improve. Fletcher seeks perfection in them, not only for the students, but also for his reputation as an outstanding jazz conductor.

Another attribute of "Whiplash" are the absolutely energy filled, stirring jazz/drum performances that are featured throughout the film, including a fantastic ten or so minute finale. This film has a perfect ending, not simply as in I liked how the story ends (which I did), but in this case I mean that, technically and aesthetically, I love how the film concludes.

The only issue I have with the film is that I do not think that Fletcher would be able to get away with 95% of what he does and says in the film in our modern world of social media and lawsuits. Eventually a student would have recorded him verbally abusing somebody and posted it on You Tube. This is a certainty. This would seem to be a fairly large problem at the core of the film, the plausibility of any of this even having a chance of occurring, however, that doubtlessly being the case, the performance by Simmons and the powerful drama set forth by the intelligent script by Damien Chazelle, who also directs the film, made me learn to stop worrying and love this movie.

Thanks Be To Bill Murray

"St. Vincent" is a very pleasant film starring Bill Murray as Vincent, a man of whom we learn a bit about during the course of the film, who is "befriended" by the boy who lives next door. Said boy, Oliver, played very well by Jaeden Lieberher, is a likeable character, not precociously delightful or mischievous, but more adult-like in his actions, which I appreciated. Oliver's mother, Maggie, played well by Melissa McCarthy, who it is nice to see not playing "the funny fat one," works hard at a hospital and needs somewhere for Oliver to stay after school. Vincent reluctantly agrees to babysit Oliver (for a fee) while Maggie is at work. Along the way, Vincent takes Oliver on trips to a racetrack, intervenes in a fight Oliver finds himself him with some school bullies, and introduces Oliver to his stripper girlfriend. After reading such a description, I normally would have found myself overwhelmingly not interested in seeing this film, however, the events in the film are presented in an intelligent way, so as not to distract from the sweetness at the core of the script. There are no gross jokes, no gross situations involving poop, semen, pee, or any other bodily fluids. Vincent is an angry, vulgar man, but he is likable, especially as we get to know more about him. By no means is Vincent perfect, but as portrayed by Murray, he is someone you will probably enjoy watching. Chris O'Dowd, who you may recognize from the British tv series, "The IT Crowd," has a wonderful supporting role as one of Oliver's teachers, Brother Geraghty. O'Dowd brings authority and humor to what easily could have been a throwaway role. It was nice to see the extent of the importance of his character to the film. In his first feature film, director Theodore Melfi, shows that he is capable of handling this task with ease and does not give in to the temptation of taking this material and story and turning it into a series of cheap jokes and incidents involving toilets. Instead, his film is engaging and smart. Not that toilet humor can't be funny if done intelligently (it can be done), but the course that "St. Vincent" could have taken could have been quite annoying and ridiculous. "St. Vincent" reminded me of films like "Little Miss Sunshine" and "The Way, Way Back," so if you enjoyed these films, I suspect that you will enjoy Bill Murray's latest film also.

Not Quite a Treasure, But Still a Bit of Fun

I am a sucker for movies with a gimmick or with any kind of kitsch value. “Treasure of the Four Crowns,” the 1983 3-D film that shamelessly rips of “Raiders of the Lost Ark” is very enjoyable even in 2-D as I watched the newly released dvd of the film. “Treasure” is on a new 4-movie dvd set along with the 1982 movie, “The Final Option.”

“Treasure of the Four Crowns” was Ferdinando Baldi’s second and last 3-D movie, following the 1981 film, “Comin’ at Ya,” which sounds like it could have easily been the title of the 3-D porn film, but that film was a 3-D spaghetti western. I recently saw “Comin’ at Ya” in a re-release back in 2012. The 3-D in the restored Real 3-D version of that film was pretty good, making for a fun experience. “Treasure of the Four Crowns” is not so much a good movie, as it is a fun experience for those who enjoy nostalgia from the 1980’s, especially the very narrow realm of 3-D cinema of the early 1980’s. Please continue reading this even if your interest in 3-D films of the early 80’s is minimal, if that. Or Manimal…………. “Treasure of the Four Crowns” tells the story of J. T. Striker (Tony Anthony) and the group of five he assembles to procure said four crowns of the film’s title from a castle somewhere in Spain. There are, of course, many obstacles to the procurement of these crowns, one of which is a flying key which tends to melt half of one’s face. The opening 20 minutes has no dialogue, which is fine, and introduces us to Striker by watching him elude one obstacle and flying sword after another. Soon enough, we meet the members of his intrepid team as he assembles them just short of classic Blues Brothers style. Unfortunately, “Four Crowns” contains no Aretha Franklin or Ray Charles numbers. The enjoyment I gained while watching “Treasure of the Four Crowns” was from imagining what it would have been like to have many, many different objects thrust at me from the screen, such as birds, glass, a feather, a burning stick, and a female trapeze artist. “Four Crowns” throws enough things at the audience to have probably made it worth seeing when it was originally released, given that the 3-D was decent enough in the theater you attended.

I saw only one of the handful of 3-D movies that were released in the early 80’s upon their original release. I saw Jaws 3-D in 1983 at the General Cinema Irving Mall 1-3 with my friend, John. This was the same day my grandmother bought a 1978 Chevy Nova for my parents. Quite a monumental day it was. In my later years, I have seen “Comin’ at Ya” as noted above, “Friday the 13th Part 3,” “Parasite,” “Metalstorm,” “Amityville 3-D” and “The Man Who Wasn’t There.” The latter titles I have only seen in 2-D.

I enjoyed those films, as I enjoyed “Treasure of the Four Crowns,” as artifacts of a brief period in cinema history. You will not grow as a person or gain any insight into life by seeing these movies, but if you are interested in this particular subgenre, the new 4-movie dvd set which includes “Four Crowns” will be a purchase you will want to make.

Richard Linklater Has Been Anxiously Awaiting My Endorsement, So Here it Is

As an impressive achievement in filmmaking, Richard Linklater’s new film, “Boyhood,” succeeds tremendously. As a record of a boy and his family’s journey through twelve years of struggle and success, it succeeds even more so. Linklater’s film, made during a span of twelve years, using the same performers for the roles of the boy, his sister, his mother, and his birth father, impresses. As the boy, Mason, Ellar Coltrane delivers an excellent performance as the film seamlessly transitions from one year in the boy’s life, starting at the age of 6, to his first year in college at age 18. If you were unaware that the film was made over the course of twelve years, you may not even notice how smooth the transitions from one year of filming to the next transpire. “Boyhood” is not solely about Mason. The film also documents the struggles of Mason’s mother, played wonderfully by Patricia Arquette. We meet her as a late 20’s-ish college student who is a single mother to a woman who marries a jerk of an alcoholic college professor, to becoming a college professor herself.

As well, we watch as Mason’s birth father (Ethan Hawke) goes from an being aimless musician to an early 40’s year old man who eventually finds a steady career. Hawke’s character is a likeable one and a loving father, if a bit of a flake throughout a majority of the film. Lorelei Linklater, the director’s daughter, delivers a very good performance as Mason’s older sister, Samantha. Though her story is not the focus of the film, I was pleased that her character was not delegated to a background character, as would have been easy to do. One minor criticism of the film is that most of the men in Arquette’s life are assholes of one variety or the other. Of course, this part of the story structure allows the character of the mother to move from city to city, giving her and her son new life experiences. Still, the “jerk stepfather” trope is pretty tiresome and the audience has no choice but to dislike this guy, as well they should. The only “good guy” in her life is Mason’s father, however, it is only late in the film when he begins to display responsibility, likely added to his life by his second wife and a new child. Simply put, the men in “Boyhood” are not representative of what anyone wants to see in anybody. They are flawed beyond redemption of their sole volition. Though his character is a reprehensible ass, Marco Perella, delivers a great performance as the aforementioned college professor who marries Mason’s mother. There is nothing redeeming about this character at all, however, Perella portrays such a lack of redemption wonderfully. I really hated this guy, though, I kind of saw the direction of his storyline coming. I knew that less than halfway through the movie, Mason’s mother would not live happily ever after with that guy and that he would be exposed to be a jerk in some way or another. Maybe I just couldn’t relate to the instability of the mother character’s life since my parents have fortunately had a stable marriage for 45 years. I was just lucky. I understand that not all children are born of happy marriages and that single parenthood is almost as prevalent as two-parent family structures. My favorite scene in the film occurs near the end when, while the family is at lunch, a waiter reveals something to the mother. This scene made we smile quite widely. I wish there had been more scenes like this, however, the entire film as a whole, made me smile, especially after its satisfying conclusion which includes some gorgeous cinematography in Big Bend National Park.

“Boyhood” succeeds in many ways, most of which is by its seamless transitions through time as we watch these characters age twelve years. It is a true cinematic achievement, which should not be forgotten when Oscar nominations are announced. The film has a true “indie” feel, with its location shooting in Texas and New Mexico, lack of big-name actors with the exception of Arquette and Hawke (similar to Steven Soderbergh’s 2005 film, “Bubble,” which you should see soon), and its simple, yet compelling storytelling aided by a great script and great performances. Keep in mind that the film is 165 minutes. It does not feel like a long film, however, if you do not have the patience for long films, try to put aside those feelings for this film. You may also want to empty your bladder before the film begins, preferably before the Fathom Events trailers start up, if not a little before then. Mine is just one of many positive endorsements of "Boyhood," so if you are of a mind to wait until I have said so (as so many people are, of course) let it be known that Linklater's film is well worth your time, whether you are able to get to it at the theater or watch it when it is released on dvd or blu-ray.

Shatner, 1970's, Kid's Movie, Dramatic Pauses....A Whale of a Tale

I did not know what to expect from the 1977 children's film, "A Whale of a Tale" starring William Shatner other than at least one great Shatner pause. Said Shatner pause from this film can be seen in the above clip. This is actually a collection of pauses, all in a brief 23 seconds. When I put the vhs tape I own into the vhs to dvd dubbing machine, I had no idea the extent to which I would be moved by greatness while watching this unknown kid's movie.

"A Whale of a Tale" was not as bad as I thought it was going to be, to borrow a phrase from my friend, KenAngryPuppyFilms. The film, directed by Ewing Miles Brown, tells the tale of Joey (Scott C. Kolden), a boy who wants to work at Marineland, a water park in Southern California. Marineland, a park similar to Sea World, located on the Palos Verdes peninsula in Los Angeles operated from 1954-1987. Thanks for the info, www.moderndayruins.com. Incidentally, Scott C. Kolden, since his acting career in the 1970's, has been a working sounds effects editor in Hollywood since the early 1990's. He has an impressive list of credits on IMDB. Good for him!

Joey is befriended by Louie (the usually crazy-haired comedian, Marty Allen, a staple of 70's game shows such as "The Hollywood Squares"), a fisherman who works at Marineland as a getter of whales. Allen's hair is, for the most part, restrained in this film. I do not know much about whaling, so I do not know if the treatment of the whales in this film is humane or not. Everything looked fine to me, but, since this film does not include any scenes detailing the ins and outs of whaling or other aspects of life on the sea like that one big book about the big whale does, we do not learn that much about whale capture from this film. I hate being decieved by a vhs cover box. So common back in the vhs era. That girl in the bikini never showed up in the film either.

Louie introduces Joey to Dr. Jack Fredericks (Shatner), a marine biologist at Marineland. Dr. Fredericks allows Joey to work at Marineland, giving him dull, repititive jobs to do, hoping that Joey will get bored and stop coming to the park. Alas, the opposite occurs. Joey's zeal for more interaction with the whales and this thirst for more knowledge of the world of marine biology increases. Dr. Fredericks recognizes this and allows Joey to stay. I liked this part of the script. Dr. Fredericks understands that Joey's interest in the whales could be the birth of a passion for his field and encourages Joey. 

Despite the absence of whaling lessons or women in bikinis, "A Whale of a Tale" is a fairly straight-forward film. I expected many more scenes involving hindrances to characters trying to accomplish what they wanted to get done. There is one scene in which Marty Allen gets pushed into the water by a sea lion and alleged zaniness ensues. This scene hurt for a few seconds. Several minutes of running time are devoted to filmed accounts of the whale show at Marineland, which, for nostalgia's sake was of interest for a bit, however, after the 8th whale had jumped out of the water, I was ready for more of Shatner. Though not to the Fred Olen Ray-esque extent of time fill variety, scenes of 2 or 3 whales doing tricks goes a long way.

Joey's Aunt Meg (Nancy O'Conner) expresses concern about all the time he is spending at Marineland to Joey's mother, Anne (Abby Dalton). You may remember Dalton from her time on "Falcon Crest" in the 1980's. As expected, Anne meets Dr. Fredericks. Even in a kid's film, Shatner's character gets laid, even if it is just implied that the possibility for said action is inevitable, due to his character's charm.  Nothing can stop the man! Maybe it was in his contract in the 70's and 80's that every character he plays, no matter the film, has the quality of being able to get the girl with absolutely no hindrances in his way.

In the third half of the movie, Joey runs away, or more precisely, boats away after his mother tells him that he can no longer work at Marineland. Joey is lost at sea. Dr. Fredericks, being the confident soul that he is, gathers a search team headed by zany Marty Allen and the search for Joey commences.

"A Whale of a Tale" is a pleasant film, worth watching for the presence of Shatner, the gorgeous Abby Dalton, a look at Marineland, a now gone memory of an interesting period of time, and for the uncomplicated structure of the story. It's not on dvd, however, you may be able to find a copy of it on vhs on Ebay or Amazon. I did not feel that I had had my 90 minutes stolen from me by this movie.

"The Beast Within": They Don't Make Cicada Movies Like They Used To

Without a doubt, the 1982 film, “The Beast Within” is America’s best movie about a teenager who turns into a cicada/human hybrid. Warren Beatty’s “Reds,” released the previous year, may have something to say about it, but I’m sticking with this one. Despite the absence of Jack Nicholson as Eugene O’Neill, “The Beast Within” has plenty to recommend it.


Ronny Cox delivers a fine performance as Eli MacCleary, the father of said teenager who has bug DNA in him. One evening in 1964, Eli and his new wife, Caroline (Bibi Besch) run off the road in a small town in Mississippi. They have their dog with them in the car. Said dog is let out by Caroline and in her search for the dog, Caroline is attacked and impregnated by a monster, that we later learn (or have probably already figured out) is also a cicada/human monster. The son who they raise into his teenage years becomes very sick. Eli and Caroline go back to the small town in which the attack occurred and start asking local officials if they have any information about the attack or the attacker. Not surprisingly, there are townspeople who do, indeed, know more than they are willing to divulge. The son, young Michael MacCleary (Paul Clemens), is summoned back to the same town by his Spidey-sense, or perhaps Cicady-sense to not only find his real father, but also to kill some humans. By now, it’s obvious that this isn’t a Kurosawa movie, but it does not aim to be one. “The Beast Within” is a good example of a low-budget horror movie that aims no higher than what it is. It delivers some good horror scenes and it delivers one heck of a good makeup/effects scene near the end of the film. If you have seen this movie, you know what I am talking about. If you haven’t seen it, remember that the teenager is part cicada. Transformation scenes were pretty popular in the early 1980’s horror world. “The Howling” (1981) and “An American Werewolf in London” (1981) contained very effective man to wolf transformation scenes. The scene in “The Beast Within” is more troubling than anything else, but it’s the good kind of troubling.

The story is well told, the pacing is just right, and the performances are good, not great, but good. Director Philippe Mora, who previously directed Dennis Hopper as best he could in “Mad Dog Morgan” and would go on to direct “Howling 2” and “Howling 3: The Marsupials” (Kangaroos??) leads the proceedings with ease and maintains a steady pace throughout, providing enough backstory to make it all make good horror/cicada-human monster sense.
It is fun to watch films from a wide variety of genres. I can easily watch a double feature of a Woody Allen movie and then a movie about giant animals like "Night of the Lepus," the gold-standard of giant rabbit movies. If you are the one reading this blog, I hope you enjoy these little reviews that cover different genres and do not focus on simply one kind of film. There are plenty of blogs that focus on just horror movies or just sci-fi films. Variety is a good thing, so said Eugene O’Neill, or maybe it was Jack Nicholson who said that, or perhaps one of the kangaroos said it. Whoever said it was correct. “The Beast Within” is now available on blu-ray from Shout Factory. The disc contains two commentary tracks, one with director Mora and star Paul Clemens, the other with writer of the film, Tom Holland (“Fright Night,” “Child’s Play”). The regular-ray version is still available as well. “The Beast Within” is entertaining for a movie about a cicada-human. If you don’t expect anything more than that, you might enjoy it. If you attempt to dissect it like it’s a giant cicada……..anyway, just remember that it does not aim high other than aiming to entertain and it succeeds at that.

Peace Doesn't Get Much of a Chance in "August: Osage County"

Watching an excellent ensemble cast working together in a film can be as satisfying as listening to a band or an orchestra working together to create a wonderful piece of music or watching an outstanding football team work together to win a game. In “August: Osage County,” director John Wells (“The Company Men,” Showtime’s “Shameless”) has assembled a brilliant ensemble cast to tell, admittedly, a story with a familiar set of circumstances involving a rural Oklahoma family and their secrets involving love, hate, pain, misery, all that fun stuff. The film is written by Tracy Letts, based on his Pulitzer Prize and Tony Award winning play.

At first, seeing this film did not appeal to me. I was not interested in watching a movie about a “dysfunctional” family full of quirky, but lovable, people who all get along and love each other despite each other’s quirks. Fortunately, this is not the type of scenario created in this film. The playing of Eric Clapton's, "Lay Down Sally" during the opening credits made me feel even more tretipatious about my decision to see this movie. This song, when used in films, is usually used to direct the audience's attention to the fact that we are in the South. It's a song stereotype. It sounds country and twangy, so it is used oftentimes in films that take place in the South. I lost a little lifeforce. It turns out, however, that this song plays a role not only in the final scene, a powerhouse moment in the film, but throughout not just as soundtrack filler.
In “August: Osage County,” most of the characters are hateful, angry, mean, bitter, profane, deceitful, just all around unpleasant people. Normally, this might be something I would have no interest in seeing, however, the fantastic cast pulls this material together to make a thoroughly watchable and compelling tale of a family full of secrets and hate, created, as we find out early in the film by matriarch Violet Weston (Meryl Streep in a brilliant performance), in large part due to her reliance on prescription medication. It is no secret that an overuse of prescription medication, especially when not closely monitored by one’s physician, can lead to serious mental health issues. Violet appears to be, especially when “in rare form,” under the influence of many medications which influence her body chemistry.
I say all of this about prescription medication and its effect on one’s mind to emphasize that I do not think that the character of Violet is, at her core, a horrible person, but, rather, is under the influence most of the time of the cocktail of drugs she is taking and her addiction to said drugs. I don’t think the film addresses this issue as much as I just have in these last few sentences, however, it must be addressed so as not to dismiss the character of Violet as just a mean, old bitch who hates everyone. Whatever Letts wants the viewer to think of Violet, Meryl Streep gives an outstanding performance in the role and owns every scene she is in.

Not to be overlooked is the performance of Julia Roberts as Violet’s daughter, Barbara Weston. Barbara, her husband from whom she is separated (Ewan McGregor), and some other members of the family gather at the beginning of the film to attend the funeral of the patriarch of the family, Beverly Weston (I know. Beverly is usually a female name, but just go with it). Beverly passes away so the family gathers at his and Violet’s home in Osage County, Oklahoma to pay their respects. Beverly is played very nicely by Sam Shepard. The remainder of the film consists of learning about the other characters, the burdens they keep inside, the anger they feel, and the way they deal with their burdens and anger.
For some, this may be an uncomfortable movie to watch, however, I was compelled throughout by the wonderful performances, not only by Streep and Roberts, but also by Julianne Nicholson, Benedict Cumberbatch, Chris Cooper, and Juliette Lewis. Not one false note is hit by any of the performers in the film as they create characters that are not necessarily pleasant, but do remain interesting.
The uncomfortableness one may feel in watching “August: Osage County” is similar to the way one may feel watching a David Mamet play, or a film based on one of his works, films like “Oleanna” (1994) and “Glengarry Glen Ross” (1992). Check out these two films if you have not already. In “Oleanna,” you watch a college professor and his student in an ever-intensifying discussion about a grade the student received. One may not instantly seek out this film, and it would be difficult to talk most into seeing this film from my description of it, however, the passion of the performances in that film, as with the passion of the performances in “Glengarry” and Terry Letts’ film herein discussed in this review, make these films completely worth your time. Something else that helps this film is the fact that the anger inside some of the characters is legitimate feelings of mental anguish, not petty arguments, but tangible issues with which one may be able to relate. The characters in the film do not just throw insults at each other for the sake of cheap laughs. The emotions in the film are not at all contrived or cheaply written.
One word of warning should you decide to see this film: “August: Osage County” is not a quirky, folksy “Steel Magnolias”/”Fried Green Tomatoes”-esque slice of life, feel-good movie. The only way one may feel good is the way I described having felt good having watched great actors give brilliant performances. I remained interested in the story the film presents throughout. The performances in “August: Osage County” and the fact that, despite the resentment and bitterness most of the characters feel, and the conveyance of these emotions onscreen, are so well done, making this one of my favorite films of 2013. I am a sucker for films with strongly written characters and a reliance on script and character development over effects and other tricks that filmmakers sometimes use to disguise the fact that they have nothing interesting prepared. "August: Osage County is entertaining and soulful in its anger and bitterness, an anger and bitterness that will leave a positive film-going impression on me.

The Story is Familiar, The Performances are Above Average, Ain't That American Hustle?

People being conned by people who are being conned. This is not the most original concept for a film and by the end of “American Hustle,” my opinion of this fact was unmoved. David O. Russell, who has made some very good, edgy films in the past (“Spanking the Monkey,” “Three Kings”) has assembled a fantastic cast, however the events portrayed in this Russell directed film are moderately interesting, at best. What stands out in “American Hustle” are some of the performances, especially those of Amy Adams and Bradley Cooper. Amy Adams, who can also be seen in and delivers the best performance in Spike Jonze’s, “Her,” is beautiful and sexy as hell as the partner in con-artistry to Irving Rosenfeld, played well by Christian Bale. Adams plays Sydney Prosser. Sydney meets Rosenfeld at a party sometime in the mid-1970’s. They bond after discovering mutual interests, namely Duke Ellington, and as they soon find out, conning people out of money. The notion of a film about con artists already had me losing interest in the story the film was presenting by the 20 minute mark. What held my interest in the film for the duration of the 138 minute running time were the performances and some late points of interest and a surprise (or at least a surprise to me) guest star who shows up about ¾ of the way into the film. I sat up in my seat at this point as the appearance of this person and the story gets kicked up a notch and maintains an amount of interest through the end of the film.

My main problem with “American Hustle” is that, and for comparison’s sake, I am going to compare it to last year’s “Argo,” “Hustle” is too long. Length does not usually bother me (I hear you chuckling) if the story in a given film holds my interest. I already knew that it was not the story presented in “American Hustle” that was holding my interest, but, rather it was the performances. “Argo” ran 105 minutes, 30 minutes shorter than “American Hustle,” and “Argo” felt much more compact, every scene in “Argo” felt important, unlike in “Hustle,” in which there are some scenes, especially in the first 30 minutes, that feel superfluous, and no, I don’t feel sick. It is not until the second half of the film that I felt any amount of adrenaline rush, and it wasn’t really even that much of a rush. I did appreciate the fact that, like “Argo” used the 1970’s era Warner Brothers logo at the beginning of that film, “American Hustle”uses the 1970’s era Columbia Pictures logo at the beginning of this film. “American Hustle” does get more interesting the more the story is fleshed out, the more the details are explained, however, because I am not given to seeking out movies involving con-artists, the mob, FBI guys, etc, this film did not resonate with me. It is a good, well-made film, however, I do not see myself wanting to see it again, other than to, perhaps get another look at Amy Adams with her sexy 70’s hair.

It is stated at the beginning of the film that, “Some of this actually happened,” specifically ABSCAM, the massive FBI anti-corruption operation conducted by the FBI in the late 1970’s. Here is a video from ABC News from February of 1980 that explains all about ABSCAM:

 Feb. 2, 1980: FBI Abscam Probe | Video - ABC News

While “American Hustle” does not tackle the inner-workings of this operation, it does incorporate it’s characters into and does, at one point, acknowledge that Bradley Cooper’s FBI agent character, Richie DiMaso is part of this operation. The film is not about ABSCAM, but is about how a couple of small-time con-artists get hustled into helping DiMaso’s investigation and the interaction of these characters with each other. I did learn more than I knew going into the film about ABSCAM and the fallout of it all.

“American Hustle” does use music well and places some fun 1970’s songs well throughout the film. The songs used are a pretty nice mixture of familiar and unfamiliar tunes from that decade. The music in the film adds spark to the film. I must say, though, that the best usage of a song from the 70’s in a film released in 2013 was the usage of the 1978 Hot Chocolate tune, “Every 1’s a Winner” in “Frances Ha.” That film is set in modern times, however, the use of that song in that film is a winner for sure.
"American Hustle" is not nearly as good as "Argo," the Best Picture winner for 2013, the film to which I have compared it. I would not place "American Hustle" on my list of Top 10 films of this past year, however, it is fairly entertaining and is worth a blu-ray or regular-ray rental from your nearby Redbox.