American Hustle (2013) Review

AMERICAN HUSTLE (2013)
Director: David O. Russell

Writers: Eric Singer and David O. Russell

Producers: Bradley Cooper, Eric Singer, George Parra, and Matthew Budman

Editors: Alan Baumgarten, Jay Cassidy, and Crispin Struthers

Cinematography: Linus Sandgren

Music: Danny Elfman

Starring: Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper, Jeremy Renner, and Jennifer Lawrence

Runtime: 2 hours 18 minutes

Rating: R (language, sexual content, brief violence)

Genre: Crime, Drama

Release Date: December 20, 2013

Intro: It's Oscar season, one of the best seasons of the year behind baseball season. It's great because during this season, there are always movies premiering that will most likely receive Oscar nominations, which means there is often a plethora of good movies out to see. American Hustle is one of this year's batch, and after it got rave reviews, I got interested. American Hustle is a fun and enjoyable crime movie on the outside, but it's the supreme acting, subtle but great directing, the engaging script, and the interesting incorporation of the soundtrack on the inside that elevate the movie to an Oscar-worthy level.

Plot: Conman Irving Rosenfeld (Bale) and his British partner-in-crime and mistress Sydney Prosser (Adams) are forced to work with an FBI Agent (Cooper) to pull off a sting operation by using good guy New Jersey politician Carmine Polito (Renner). It's based off the Abscam scandal in the 70s.

Things People May Find Objectionable: There's a lot of swearing in the form of f-bombs and a LOT of cleavage shots, especially with Amy Adams, which they push quite a bit. I'll let you decide whether this is a good or a bad thing. I'm just letting you know it's there. Also, there's really only one violent scene, and it it's over quickly and isn't that gory.

What was Good:

     -Acting: This is perhaps the best part of the movie and what makes it work so well. It features fantastic performances from whole cast, as everybody disappears into their roles. Often times, subtlety makes the performance, especially for Amy Adams, as she excels in her role, but does it less obviously than some of her cast members. Christian Bale gives the best performance in my opinion. He is absolutely dead-on with his role, as he portrays his character perfectly. Jeremy Renner, Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence are also great. I really can't talk enough about the acting here. It was superb. Without a doubt in my mind, at least one of the cast members is going to win an Oscar for their role in this movie.

     -Directing/Cinematography: Fantastic. It's not as grandiose, obvious, or flashy as some other directing, but it's very subtle and does a great job of showing the emotions and tension behind the characters. Showing the feelings of the characters and highlighting the acting is where it succeeds the most, in my opinion. It makes me want to see more of David O. Russell's movies.

     -Music/Score: Mostly 70s music was used for the soundtrack, and it really fit the movie well. They use some great stuff including Steely Dan, Elton John, Chicago, and Paul McCartney. Not only did the music give a sense of the era, but the soundtrack was incorporated into the action. The best instance of this is during a tense scene where the fates of the characters are uncertain. "Live and Let Die" plays and the action on screen is edited based off the lyrics and rhythm of the song. It's really cool to see a soundtrack incorporated so well into a movie, and it perfectly elevates the tension. 

Christian Bale's character was based off real life conman
Mel Weinberg who worked with the FBI

     -Script: The script was good. I thought it was very well-written. The dialogue definitely keeps the movie going. The voiceovers were really interesting, as they shift to different characters at points. It's kind of reminiscent of the same technique used in Goodfellas, where Henry's wife is characterized through her voiceover, as it tells how she felt about Henry and why she was attracted to him. I think this is a great way to establish characters and their relationships with one another.

     -Humor: The movie is very funny at times. There are some good comedic moments. You will laugh. Jennifer Lawrence and Christian Bale are especially funny, as they both absolutely nail their slightly insane characters. The movie almost floats into the comedy genre, though I'd hesitate to call it a conventional one.

     -Characters/Emotional Involvement: Pretty good. While you may not feel emotionally connected to every character in every situation, you do end up caring for them at the end. The characters are definitely not flat either. For most of the movie, the main characters are fleshed out and you understand their motives and positions, and sometimes you understand just how stuck the characters are in their situation and sympathize with them because of it.

Worth Noting:
     -Story: The story gets a little confusing at times and you can get a little lost, but in the end it all makes sense. Just go along with it, and you'll be able to understand everything at the end, even if it isn't immediately clear. Otherwise, the story is good and definitely interesting. It keeps you hooked, that's for sure. To be honest, I hadn't heard of Abscam before watching the movie, but now I understand how interesting the source material is. I'm glad somebody made a movie based off that story.

     -Intelligence: This is definitely a smart movie that requires you to think somewhat. Morality here is ambiguous and left up to interpretation. The movie also sticks with you, to be sure. It's not one you can go see and then forget about a couple hours later.

The Verdict: American Hustle is one of those movies that is as entertaining as it is well-made. The acting is phenomenal, the directing is subtle, but fantastic, and the script is entertaining and well-written. I would imagine the movie will be up for numerous Oscars this year, and I'm pretty sure it will win at least a couple. I'd highly recommend seeing this one. You get two for the price of one: an entertaining movie and a well-made piece of cinema. If you want a quality movie to see this Oscar season, I highly suggest checking out American Hustle.

Liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page. 

Kick-Ass 2 (2013) Review

KICK-ASS 2
Director: Jeff Wadlow

Writer: Jeff Wadlow

Producers: Trevor Duke-Moretz, Pierre Lagrange, Mark Millar, Stephen Marks, John Romita, Claudia Schiffer, Brad Pitt, and Matthew Vaughn

Editor: Eddie Hamilton

Cinematography: Tim Maurice-Jones

Music: Henry Jackman and Matthew Margeson

Starring: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloe Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Lindy Booth, Olga Kurkulina and Jim Carrey

Best Credit: Cinna as "Eisenhower." Cinna is a dog.

Runtime: 1 hour 43 minutes

Rating: R (strong violence, pervasive language, sex content, brief nudity)

Genre: Action, Crime, Superhero, Comedy

Release Date: August 16, 2013

Before Watching the Movie: You should probably see the first Kick-Ass movie before watching this one, as a lot of references are made to things that happen in it. If you don't have time, it would be a good idea to read a spoiler-filled synopsis of the first one.

Intro: So I start college in about a month. While I have a long summer, I have to contend with having a lot of friends leave and fewer people to hang out. So I got excited when the people who are actually still here want to hang out. So we decided to see a movie. I was kind of hoping to see either Elysium or The World's End, but since we'd seen Kick-Ass 1 at a recent movie night, my friends chose to see this. I enjoyed the first one, so I went in went in with an open mind. Kick-Ass 2 proves that lightning can't strike twice, as it fails to deliver in the same areas its predecessor is able to pull off, as it has excessive violence and backstories and character development that seem unnecessary.

Plot: After the events of the first Kick-Ass movie, Kick-Ass/Dave (Taylor-Johnson) has started a movement for everyday citizens to become masked vigilantes. His counterpart, Hit-Girl/Mindy (Moretz) has begun high school and is having problems fitting in. Meanwhile, grieving millionaire and former sidekick of Kick-Ass, Red Mist (Mintz-Plasse), has decided to avenge his father and become the world's first supervillain.

Things People May Find Objectionable: Oh God, where to begin. There's really a bit of everything in this one: craptons of swearing, craptons of violence and gore, and one scene with brief nudity. This is definitely not one to take kids to. If you're uncomfortable with violence and swearing, don't see this one.

What was Good:

     -Humor: The movie was at least good in this department. The first part of the movie is pretty funny and there are some really funny moments. However, as the movie becomes more dark and serious, it begins to fail and becomes a lot less fun to watch. The movie probably would've functioned best as purely a comedy. I felt this way when watching Kick-Ass 1 as well, but it was actually able to pull it off.

     -Acting: I gotta say, the acting was pretty good. I usually have a bias against child actors in their performances, but Chloe Grace Moretz is really pretty good as Hit-Girl/Mindy. The other actors do a good job as well. I mean, no Oscar performances here, but the acting is solid.

     -Directing/Cinematography: It was alright, I guess. I really liked the choices of color for all the characters and sets. It kept it very interesting. Also, the action sequences weren't all that bad, as you can tell what's going on for the most part. It wasn't Kubrick or Hitchcock-level directing by any measure, but it wasn't bad.

What Could Have Been Better:

     -Pacing: The movie gets off to a good start, but from the middle to the end, it drags quite a bit. It felt much longer than it actually was while watching it. I was surprised looking on IMDb and seeing how short it actually was. I could've sworn this thing was 2 and a half hours even though it was just under 2. 

Something the filmmakers should really learn

     -Violence: Any movie with this amount of violence walks the line between something insanely fun and watchable like the stuff Quentin Tarantino is famous for and something that just seems like it has excessive and unnecessary amounts of it and becomes old. While it's predecessor managed to walk the line fairly well, Kick-Ass 2 falls on the other side. While some violence was fine, it seemed like the movie just had an excessive and gratuitous amount. After a while, it got to the point where it got old and I got tired of watching it.

     -Story: I really liked the basic premise of the movie and its predecessor. It's a great, refreshing take on the superhero genre. If they had stuck with just the whole average guy becoming a superhero part of the story, I think the story would've been better. At times, I kept thinking, "Did you guys really have to go there?" or "Did we really have to see that?" or "Is this really necessary?" A lot of the plot, especially the emotional, character moments seemed unnecessary. I mean, they fit the plot ok, it just seems like they could've told the same story without them.

     -Characters/Emotional Involvement: I got really tired of the movie's attempts at this, really fast. The character development and emotional parts of the movie really dragged on, and a lot of it I felt was unnecessary to the story. I'm not sure if I cared about the characters or not, but I got tired of the attempts to develop them.

     -Script: Like pretty much the whole movie, the script started out ok and then went downhill when things begin to get serious. The only bits of good writing were in the opening like 20 minutes when the movie was still trying to do comedy.

The Verdict: Though it is entertaining at times, especially with its humor, Kick-Ass 2 fails to pull off what Kick-Ass 1 was able to. A movie should be fun to watch unless it's trying to make a statement by being hard to watch. The movie really isn't that fun to watch, nor does it make any profound statements. This movie doesn't have enough redeeming qualities to make me recommend it. If you're interested in movies like Kick-Ass 2, I recommend watching Kick-Ass 1 or something by Tarantino instead.

Liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page.

Insomnia (2002) Review

INSOMNIA (2002)
Director: Christopher Nolan

Writer: Hillary Seitz (based off screenplay from original Swedish version)

Producers: George Clooney, Steven Soderbergh, Kim Roth, Charles Schlissel, and Tony Thomas

Editor: Dody Dorn

Cinematography: Wally Pfister

Music: David Julyan

Starring: Al Pacino, Hilary Swank, and Robin Williams

Runtime: 1 hour 58 minutes

Rating: R (violence, language, brief nudity)

Genre: Crime, Mystery/Suspense, Film Noir

Release Date: May 24, 2002

Intro: On the downside, I have been sick this last week. On the upside, I've had the chance to watch some movies I wouldn't normally have time to watch. Insomnia was one of these (the reviews of the others to come within the next month or so). It's one I've wanted to see for a while because I like Christopher Nolan and I am a film noir fan. According to stuff I'd read, this was both. Insomnia is a good, enjoyable movie and a complex psychological thriller, but it isn't up to the standards Christopher Nolan has set for himself through movies like Memento, The Dark Knight, and Inception.

Plot: Two L.A. homicide detectives, Will Dormer (Pacino) and his partner (Martin Donavon), are sent to a small Alaskan town during the time of year where the sun doesn't set to investigate the savage murder of a teenage girl. While tracing the suspect (Williams), Dormer's partner is shot and killed, presumably by the suspect of the murder. As a local detective who idolizes Dormer (Swank) is put on the case of the murder of his partner, Dormer begins to find out more information about his case and that of the one he's following. As the two cases become increasingly intertwined and the murder suspect seems all too nice and compliant with Dormer and the police, the more and more the morality of the situation becomes twisted.

Things people may find “objectionable”: The main thing here would be language, as f-bombs are dropped here and there throughout the movie. There is also a brief nudity shot or two when the detectives are looking at pictures of the victim. These couple shots are brief and not in a sexual scenario and are not an integral part of the movie and they're over in the first 10 minutes, so they are very easy to skip. And of course, there's some shooting and blood here and there, but there isn't a lot of either. Just in a couple scenes.

Ratings: I've decided I'm done with the numerical ratings system. I'm going to try this new system of just addressing things by category instead of ranking them. I think the numerical rating system was too  arbitrary and wasn't a good representation of how well I liked the movie. Anyway, let's try this.

     -Directing/Cinematography: Good, but Nolan has done better. There was some interesting lighting, but nothing striking and nothing that really stuck out. I'm not saying this is bad, but it wasn't as good as it could have been. I think Nolan really becomes great as a director more through his vision than through the shots and lighting he uses. However, for the movie he was given much less free reign than his other projects, as he was remaking a Swedish film, so I think this is why Insomnia isn't up to par with some of Nolan's other projects.

     -Acting: As always, a great performance from Al Pacino. I don't think it's possible for the man to give a bad performance. Robin Williams, though he'll forever be a comedy man in my mind, actually does a pretty good job as the murder suspect. It's kind of hard to accept this at first, since the character of Finch is completely opposite from his comedy work. Hilary Swank also does a good job. This is definitely a strong point of the movie

     -Story: An interesting story and a great base for a psychological thriller. I would definitely like to see the Swedish version at some point to see what the original story is like. It's one of those nice stories where there are no good guys, but at the same time there are no bad guys. It's a very interesting relationship that is explored a lot in the movie.

     -Script: Pretty good script. It wasn't earth-shattering, but it worked. 

For lack of a better picture, here's the cool
Swedish poster for the movie. I haven't
a clue with the birds, C's, wrenches,
watchtowers, and die mean, though.

     -Characters: One thing this movie does well is present good, complex characters. The character of Will Dormer is very complex and a good portion of the movie focuses on the psychology of the character. Finch, the murder suspect, is another interesting character, and his motivation and reasoning are very interesting parts of the movie.

     -Special Effects: None to speak of, but then again, not really needed.

     -Music/Score: Ok score. It works, but I didn't think it was anything special and/or powerful.

     -Power/Emotion: Makes you feel psychologically more than anything else. I found myself caring more about the characters' motivations than the characters themselves. However, you do feel bad for Dormer with his inability to sleep and his trying to wrestle with his increasingly complicated situation.

     -Adrenaline: More of a slow, tense adrenaline than anything else. There are a couple intense fight/chase scenes, but most of the engagement comes from the slow, atmospheric and psychological tension.

     -Intelligence: Makes you think a lot, especially psychologically. The movie is driven by the psychologies of the characters, and what really makes you think are the motivations and the thoughts of all the characters and the justifications behind all their actions. The psychological aspect is one thing I love about Christopher Nolan movies, and this one is no exception.

     -Humor: This is one thing that always bugs me a bit about Christopher Nolan. In all of his movies I've seen (which is all but his first film and The Prestige), there is hardly any humor at all, as he prefers a deadly serious tone. I mean, he usually gets along fine without humor, but I think his movies could benefit from the occasional comic relief or witty line.

     -Best Credit: Chris Guthior as "Uninformed Officer."

     -Final Score: Don't get me wrong, Insomnia is a good movie. It succeeds mostly due to its interesting psychological plot, gray-area morality, and good acting. Having said that, this still does not rank among Christopher Nolan's best. If you're a fan of film noir, cop films, Al Pacino, or psychological thrillers, I recommend seeing Insomnia. However, if you're looking for a classic Christopher Nolan movie, check out Memento, The Dark Knight, and Inception instead. So in other words, unless you're looking for why Christopher Nolan is famous, I recommend Insomnia.

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook page.

Drive (2011) Review

DRIVE (2011)

Director: Nicolas Winding Refn

Writer: Hossein Amini (based on book by James Sallis)

Producers: David Lancaster, Bill Lischak, Linda McDonough, Peter Schlessel, Jeffrey Stott, and Gary Michael Walters

Editor: Mat Newman

Cinematography: Newton Thomas Sigel

Music: Cliff Martinez

Starring: Ryan Gosling, Bryan Cranston, Carey Mulligan, Albert Brooks, Oscar Isaac, and Ron Perlman

Runtime: 1 hour 40 minutes

Rating: R (bloody violence, language, some nudity)

Genre: Crime, Drama, Action

Release Date: September 16, 2011

Before Watching the Movie: Though not necessary, it might be good to familiarize yourself with the movie A Fistful of Dollars beforehand. it doesn't help or hurt your viewing, but it was interesting to me to draw parallels between the movies, since I found many.

Things people may find “objectionable”: This is definitely not a movie I'd take small children to. First of all, there is quite a bit of swearing, as the f-bomb is dropped on numerous occasions. There is also one scene that takes place in the back of a strip club where there is some nudity and BWC shots. (If you are unclear on what a "BWC shot" is, read the objectionable section from my review of Starcrash). Also, and most prevalent in the movie is the violence. The violence is intense, brutal and bloody, as well as surprising. Some of the most violent moments happen out of nowhere and can really catch you off guard. If you have a hard time handling brutal violence in movies, this one probably isn't for you.

Intro: Today was the first real rainstorm in Southern California in probably 4 months. Home alone in the morning (I had a random day off school), I decided I wanted to watch a film noir-esque movie, or one that would complement the dark and gloomy rainstorm outside. I perused Netflix and came across Drive, since I remembered it got good reviews when it came out last year. My choice ended up being a good one, especially on a rainy day. Drive is a well-made, stylized update of 60s and 70s Man with No Name classics like A Fistful of Dollars with brilliant cinematography, sometimes slow, yet relentless tension, and a very good usage of music.

Plot: A mysterious and quiet Hollywood stunt driver and garage mechanic (Gosling) one day falls for his neighbor Irene (Mulligan), who is a single mother with a young boy and a husband in prison. The Driver (Gosling's character's name is never mentioned) becomes closer to Irene and her son Benicio until one day Irene's husband, Standard (Isaac) is released from prison. After the Driver sees Standard beaten up one day, he finds out Standard owes a mobster in repayment for the protection he received in prison. This prompts Standard to ask the Driver to help with a robbery of a pawn shop so they get the money. The Driver agrees because he wants what's best for Irene and Benicio, which is their father and husband. When the robbery goes wrong and the Driver is left with a million dollars in his car, the mob starts coming after him and he soon realizes that Irene and Benicio are targets of the mob. The Driver must try to protect Irene and Benicio from the mob while not getting himself killed and controlling his rage issues.

Ratings:

     -Directing/Cinematography: 10/10. Brilliant cinematography and direction. The movie is full of interesting shots and lighting. The lighting was probably the best part. The lighting made a huge difference in the movie. Every scene is brilliantly lit and it always represents the mood of the scene. The lighting also helps create a gritty, retro feel that really helps contribute to the style of the movie. O think this would be a good movie for aspiring cinematographers to watch and learn from, since the filmmakers make it work so well on so many levels. Why did this not win an Oscar for cinematography? It wasn't even nominated!!! Why??

     -Acting: 9/10. Ryan Gosling, though he is seen by many as a heartthrob, can actually act. He really does a good job in his role as the Driver, and this will likely be the role he will be remembered for. The Driver reminds me a lot of The Man with No Name from Sergio Leone's western classics with Clint Eastwood, and Gosling seems to understand this and plays the character similarly to the way Clint Eastwood did. The rest of the cast gives solid performances as well.

     -Writing: 8/10.

          -Story: 8/10. The story was nice and twisted and dark and for the most part, well told. The only problem I had with it is that in the second half of the movie, the screenwriters seem to forget to include Irene and Benicio and the characters barely show up in the second half, even if they are trying to be protected by the Driver.

          -Script: 8/10. Pretty good script. Definitely solid, but it didn't stand out to me as much as the visuals did.

There are tons of fan-made posters for the movie, and I think many of them are better than the poster they decided to use. Here are a few that stood out to me. The middle one is my favorite of these.

     -Special Effects: 8/10. Not many special effects to speak of except the gunfire and blood. Still, the gunfire and blood look realistic.

     -Music/Score: 10/10. The music was used very well in the movie. Though some of it wasn't my favorite, the filmmakers nonetheless use it very effectively to convey the mood of different scenes.

     -Power/Emotion: 7/10. The movie definitely packed an emotional punch on me, as I can't seem to get it out of my head. In any film noir (I'm counting this as one), it can be hard to care for characters because it is usually hard to distinguish whether the character is good or bad. I went through that with the character of the Driver. I felt for him, but I couldn't confirm or deny my feelings until the end. Even while deciding if he's good or bad, I definitely had some sympathy for him, as he seems lost in life through a good portion of the movie.

     -Adrenaline: 9/10. Though the tension builds rather slowly for the first half of the movie, it almost never goes away. Afterwards in the second half of the movie, the tension ramps up and becomes unrelenting until the end. This uncertainty of the character of the Driver made the tension build and I think this was one of the main reasons I found the movie captivating.

     -Humor: 1/10. Humor is really the last you'd expect in a movie like this, and there's just about as much as you'd expect. Other than the occasional comic relief, the movie is dead serious the whole time.
     -Best Credit: John Pyper-Ferguson as "Bearded Redneck"

     -Final Score: Drive is a very style-driven movie and I think you have to tap into this to fully enjoy it. Since I am a film noir fan and a fan of Leone's Man with No Name Trilogy, I think I was able to do so. Even if you don't get or don't like the movie, it's really hard to ignore the fantastic cinematography and lighting. I'd recommend this to anyone who can take brutal violence and I'd especially recommend this to aspiring directors and cinematographers, as I think they can learn a lot from this movie. In short, this definitely was a great, gritty, rainy day movie.

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook page.