Nov 30: Men in Black 3

"Agent J travels in time to MIB's early years in the 1960s, to stop an alien from assassinating his friend Agent K and changing history."

Directed by: Barry Sonnenfeld, Rated: PG-13, 106 minutes

It's hard to believe it's been ten years since we last saw Agent J and Agent K. In 1997, we were first introduced to the rather unusual duo of Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones. Since then, Smith has become a megastar and Jones has begun to find the humor in his old age. Repairing them at this point in time seemed damn near impossible, with both of them going off in their own directions, but of course, in Hollywood, anything can happen (and of course it does). With Men in Black 3, we see a return to a world filled with intergalactic aliens, secret organizations, and even a little bit of time travel. However, we aren't treated to 90 minutes of Tommy Lee Jones but instead are gifted with the incredible talent of Josh Brolin emulating the man to absolute perfection.

Seriously, it's terrifying how exact he is in emulating Jones. 

Boris the Animal (Jemaine Clement) is an alien terrorist that's on a path of revenge. He's an alien that has smaller aliens living inside his arms and after Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) severs one of them, Boris is sent to a prison on the moon. There, he's locked away for 40 years until he manages to escape and more motivated than ever to get back at K. So he steals a time traveling device and takes a first class ticket to 1969, where he lost his arm and where he plans to kill K before it can happen. Agent J (Will Smith) figures out Boris' plan and time jumps into the past as well, and vows to save his partner from a most certain death. In 1969, J runs into a much younger K (Josh Brolin) and comes to realize that the man was always a bit uptight, but had a thing for a woman and eased back when it came to pie. Together the partners must stop Boris from changing history and of course, protect each other from you know, dying. 

While he's not as gruesome or sinister as Edgar, Boris does prove to be memorable, even if he's not the most developed of villains. 

Men in Black 3 is far above it's predecessor and gives the first film a run for its money. While the first two movies focused heavily on the effects and wide variety of aliens, MIB3 focuses on the two characters we have grown to love. Even through their adventures already, J was never able to understand or even learn a lot about K and MIB3 not only answers a lot of questions, but makes you appreciate the two's relationship even more. It's complex but very much a father-son relationship and while Tommy Lee Jones isn't on screen as much as you'd hope, Brolin still manages to deliver on those complexities. Yes, the film has a hell of a lot of humor throughout with Will Smith reminding us why he's the megastar we all love on countless occasions  but MIB3 actually has some moments of real drama that are genuinely sad. It's really interesting that a film so many of us have waited for really turns out to be vastly different than the first two installments, but still gives us what we want in its own little way. After this many years since seeing the two fight aliens, I guess it's about time we get to know them a little better.

We are also given the chance to see the continually amazing Michael Stuhlbarg as the all-knowing-every-possibility alien, Griffin. 

While the film is far from perfect, Men in Black 3 still manages to be much better than a majority of the blockbusters that roll in and out of theaters. The movies does not have as many aliens or creatures or even explosions and guns as the first two, and instead takes a more mature approach to a story that all of us can feel for. It's a character study disguised as an action comedy and it surprisingly works. It's not a game-changer by any means but it's smart in that the filmmakers knew how invested we were in these characters and that at this point in time, we really just want to see more of them, even if its not shooting giant alien bugs with even larger guns. Director Barry Sonnefeld returns us to a world we're glad to be in, and even better, reminds us it's a place we'd love to stay. For me, I'm excited to see more of J and K, even if it's just them sitting at a diner and talking for 90 minutes. At least there is pie.

The Good:

seeing what J and K are up to after ten years of doing God knows what

The Better:

and along with that reunion, being reminded that the world that MIB exists in is not only fun and entertaining, but has thousands of stories that can be told over and over

The Best:

being surprised by a more character-driven drama than anything else- something quite unexpected

Overall: 7.5/10

Discussion Question:

Should the Men in Black franchise carry onward or is this installment a nice end to a rather successful trilogy?

Trailer:

Nov 27: Brave

"Determined to make her own path in life, Princess Merida defies a custom that brings chaos to her kingdom. Granted one wish, Merida must rely on her bravery and her archery skills to undo a beastly curse."

Directed by: Mark Andrews and Brenda Chapman, Rated: PG, 93 minutes

Pixar is falling to pieces. It's a sad fact and I hate admitting it but it's true. Ending with one of its greatest films (Toy Story 3), Pixar has seemingly came full circle and now everything afterwards is just not really worth it. Cars 2 is a disgrace and is a sequel no one but kids and merchandisers asked for. If Pixar ever showed signs of slowing down it was with Cars 2, and all hope for the animation studio regaining its composure was put into this year's Brave. Unfortunately, the film is a complete mess and doesn't feel like a Pixar classic at all. It's unimaginative, horribly paced, and probably one of the more childish movies I've seen from the studio. Brave is a generic waste of time and I am so disappointed with Pixar.

She must have so much hair in her food...

Merida (Kelly McDonald) is a young princess (because we don't have enough of those already) who's rebellious and lives her life against the grain, never wanting to do the training her mother (Emma Thompson) wants her to do and never wanting to become the queen she's destined to be. Luckily, her rather rambunctious father (Billy Connolley) allows Merida her moments of freedom and time with archery, something she's very good at. After a fight with mommy, Merida runs off into the woods and encounters a witch. She tells the hag that she wants her mother to change and the witch conjures up a little tart to present to mom that will most certainly make things a bit different around the dinner table. Unfortunately for Merida, the changes are a bit too drastic for her own good, and a curse is placed upon her mother, leaving Merida with only 48 hours to stop it before it becomes permanent.

Believe it or not, there's very little of this that actually happens in the film. 

Brave never feels like something that sprung from the minds and imaginations of the once-genius animators at Pixar. The story is the same story we've seen hundreds of times before, disguised as something just a little bit different. With lush, very realistic scenery and terrific visuals, Brave at first glance is something special. However, as the film drags on, even that luster begins to fade and you can tell what parts were given more attention than the rest. Merida's hair is rendered really well and the bright orange color contrasts well with the green of Scotland, but at times, you can tell it's the only thing that was paid attention to. A large part of the story features a bear and after the animal is introduced, it sticks out as something poorly made, and the fur on it's back looks neglected compared to Merida's fiery mane. It's a shame more attention wasn't paid to the details because once you notice one, it slowly drives you insane.

Oh my God! There's a poorly rendered bear right behind you!

If the hit and miss visuals weren't enough to scare you away, Brave lacks any imagination in the story it tries so hard to tell. The pacing is awful and jumps from family melodrama to stupid kid humor in the blink of an eye. In it's more fun moments, Brave tries to pack in as much jokes as possible, all of which are far from being THAT funny. Sure, there are a couple of chuckles in the mess, but they are far from enough to save the film. As for the actual story, there's very little originality in it and from the very beginning you can predict where it's headed. By the movie's conclusion, you feel no satisfaction as you've seen it all before and are more happy that the whole thing's over than anything else. Pixar may be owned by Disney (who's still putting itself back together), but there are few excuses to allow such mediocrity from the studio. With a streak has strong as the one it has, a film like Brave coming out of nowhere and really disappointing is almost unforgivable.

Luxor Jr. is a little dimmer these days...

Brave is a hard film to really breakdown and review. As a stand alone movie, it's above average and has technical moments worthy of praise. As a Pixar film, it's terrible and one of the worst they have made (it gives Cars a run for its money if that tells you anything). It's a movie that's completely lacking any imagination or thought and the magic we're promised in this fairy tale is almost non-existent. Our heroine is hard to root for and her actions are more careless than anything else. Very little depth is put into her and the rest of the characters and any emotion we're supposed to feel is shallow, if anything. However, I won't recommend staying away from Brave, as I know many people will see it regardless  but I will warn you that it's far from anything else we've seen from Pixar. Here's hoping that next year's Monsters University will restore some of the faith I have lost. Mike and Sully can't let me down. Right?... 

The Good:

visuals that create a vibrant world set in a very green wilderness (but has moments of blah)

The Bad:

a predictable story that does nothing new with the princess/fairy-tale story

The Ugly:

Pixar completely losing itself in the past couple of years and very little hope or signs that it's repairing itself

Overall: 6.1/10

Discussion Question:

Where does Brave rank in Pixar's filmography?

Trailer:

Nov 25: Life of Pi

"A young man who survives a disaster at sea is hurtled into an epic journey of adventure and discovery. While cast away, he forms an unexpected connection with another survivor ... a fearsome Bengal tiger."

Directed by: Ang Lee, Rated: PG, 127 minutes

Ang Lee has proven time after time that he's a master storyteller. Luckily for us, he is also just as incredible with a camera, and manages to bring each of his stories to life in the most beautiful ways possible. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is the film that put him on the map and a fine example of his ability to blend the dramatic and beautiful. At first, you'd think it's just a run-of-the-mill kung fu movie with swords and what not, but its story is genuine, heart-breaking, and much more complex than what you'd expect. Then Lee decided to tackle a superhero with Hulk, a movie that was confused with itself and didn't know where to go. Even then, Lee managed to tell a very dramatic story (too dramatic for a superhero) and the look of the film was still superior to most. Then came his masterpiece in Brokeback Mountain, a movie that focused solely on the relationship between two lovers with a gorgeous backdrop of the American ranch lands. What easily could have been a disaster (and parodied to death), Lee turned into something more beautiful than you could ever imagine. With this year's Life of Pi, Lee has elevated his talent to new levels, employing the use of 3D and a lot of special effects to get the job done. However, just like all of his other works, the beautiful imagery plays second fiddle to the story at the heart of the film.

Pi Patel (Suraj Sharma) is a young man from Pondicherry, India who is book smart (school is boring to him) and curious about every kind of religion. He tastes each faith, looking for his favorite flavor and becomes a very well-rounded individual over time. He's not above you or me, but he's very in touch with God(s) and never loses his faith. When his family decides to move to Canada, they board a freighter carrying all of the animals from the zoo they owned, including a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker (his name was a clerical error). On its way across the Pacific, the freighter capsizes and poor Pi is left alone in a lifeboat with Richard Parker and must figure out a way to keep the beast at bay and find rescue. What unfolds is an incredible story of survival, religion, love, and the beauty and dangers of nature as well as all of creation. It's much more complex than your ordinary survival tale, but is also quite simple in the ideas behind it.

First-time actor, Suraj Sharma gives one of the better debut performances I have ever seen. He's a young man that's tested over and over again, by his family, by nature, and even the God(s) he so adores. Yet, he never gives up faith and realizes that everything happens for a reason and that he needs to accept it no matter what. Life of Pi manages to be a story about faith without ever feeling like it's forcing its ideas or beliefs in any direction. It's a simple story about a man never giving up, and the source of his hope just happens to be rooted in Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, and even a bit of Judaism. You don't need to understand any of the faiths to understand it's the driving force behind every aspect of Pi's life. Sharma manages to convey a real balance between conviction and naivety and in his actions he's never arrogant or self-righteous. He's just like anyone would be in his situation- scared, alone, and even more frustrated with his situation but manages to pull himself together to get things done, be smart about it, and survive. With Sharma on the screen for the majority of the film, he needs to be something special, and it goes without saying that he deserves a nomination for Best Actor.

Pi is a boy transformed by a tragedy and Sharma is compelling in the transition from boy to man. 

The story of Life of Pi jumps between present time (where Pi is played by Irrfan Khan), Pi's childhood, and the time he spent on the lifeboat. Even though we know that Pi survives and that his older self is the one telling the audience the story, we still fear for the boy. Danger is constantly biting at his heels, either from the harsh weather of open waters or from his partner in surviving, Richard Parker. Many bits of discussion leading up to this film was the fact that the largest part of the story, a tiger and a boy co-existing on a lifeboat, would be damn near impossible to film, at least convincingly. However, Ang Lee utilizes breath-taking special effects and visuals to not only create a real, breathing Bengal tiger, but craft beautiful paintings around the two characters for the entire film. Richard Parker never feels like an animated animal that is added to the screen to fit the story, but he becomes a real character with his own personality and even his own fears. He's the supporting cast to Sharma's titular character. Along with the tiger, the rest of the film is packed full of imagery and visuals you could only dream of. As I stated, the entire movie feels like a series of paintings and, as the audience, we're walking through the gallery as an even more beautiful story is told. Our souls, our minds, and our eyes are all gifted with amazing pictures and words and the entire film will leave you in awe. Unlike films like Avatar or Transformers, where the visuals tell the story, Life of Pi utilizes the special effects to only give a grander scale to what's unfolding on screen. Even without the imagery Life of Pi would be successful, so all the beauty we see only accentuates the story, never taking away from it.

Seriously, the entire movie looks like this and it's breath-taking. 

On a technical aspect, Life of Pi is extraordinary. It's a beauty to behold and humbles you in a way you wouldn't think a film would be able to do. It reminds you of how gorgeous nature can be and shows you that you can do a lot more with a camera than you could ever imagine. It takes you on a journey to a world you could only think of in your dreams and imagination, and then makes you realize it's that of the world we actually live in. Life of Pi is incredibly well acted and is as packed with as much emotion as possible in its 127 minute run-time. Luckily, the film never feels preachy and the delicate subject matter it treads upon is never ruined or disrespected. It raises a lot of questions about what you would not only do in a similar situation, but about how you live your life, your test of faith, and makes you value the things and people around you like never before. While it's not a life-changing experience, it's something that comes very close and shows us that there are unending stories to be told on an even more unending scale. Ang Lee presents us with a beautiful story with amazing special effects. The filmmaker takes us on a ride across oceans and existences and leaves us with the facts to decide on what to believe. 

The Good:

heart-wrenching emotion strewn with bits of humor that makes the film all the more human and relatable

The Better:

terrific visuals that make the film one of the most beautiful movies I have ever seen and completely redefine any expectations I have for 3D

The Best:

incredible performances from an entire cast of mostly unknowns, with an exceptional debut performance from Suraj Sharma and a terrific outing from the always amazing Irrfan Khan

The Oscar Chances:

Nominations for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Sharma), Best Supporting Actor (Khan), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Visual Effects, and Best Cinematography

Overall: 9.4/10

Discussion Question:

Would you have the willpower and/or the faith to survive for so long?

Trailer:

Nov 21: The Expendables 2

"Mr. Church reunites the Expendables for what should be an easy paycheck, but when one of their men is murdered on the job, their quest for revenge puts them deep in enemy territory and up against an unexpected threat."

Directed by: Simon West, Rated: R, 103 minutes

I was never a fan of The Expendables. The first film is a poor excuse to get a bunch of over-the-hill action stars on screen together and doesn't even try to tell a story. It's sequel, The Expendables 2 repeats a similar pattern but injects it with more humor, more action, and an actual story, even if it's still very weak. Unfortunately, when a sequel to a horrible film is just a tad bit better than its predecessor, it's still a bad movie, even when Chuck Norris makes an awesome appearance.

Not everyone on this poster is on screen that long...

Barney "Steroid Pumping" Ross (Sylvester Stallone) is the leader of a mercenary group known as The Expendables. Touring the world, saving people or doing the dirty work for cash, the group has developed a bit of a reputation.  Mr. Church (Bruce Willis) is in a nice position in that Ross and his men owe him a very large favor. Church sends the team to a foreign country (I already forgot where) to acquire the map to a plutonium mine that's sitting pretty in a crashed Chinese aircraft. Unfortunately for Ross, the villain, Vilain (Jean Claude Van Damme and yes his name is Vilain), shows up just as The Expendables are leaving and kills one of them while taking the map for himself. As any roid-raged man would, Ross swears vengeance for his fallen comrade and vows to track down and kill Vilain.

As silly as he is, Vilain kicks a knife into someones heart. Yes, you read that right. 

Director Simon West (Con Air) manages to create terrific action sequences that are both entertaining and badass. The body count is at an all-time high and the bullets, knives, and fists of our heroes murder everyone in their paths. It's fun to watch, yes, but there aren't as many action sequences as you would hope for. They pack quite a punch when they do occur, but the filler in between each explosion and decapitation is just white noise. Yes, I complained that the first film didn't have a story, but this time I around I wanted a bigger balance between the two. We don't need to hear back-stories or vulnerabilities about the characters as much as we just need to see them continue to rape the living shit out of every bad guy around. And we also need to see a lot more from everyone. The Expendables 2 turns into a Stallone and Jason Statham festival of who's manlier, and the second tier stars never really get a chance to shine. Jet Li, for instance, is around for about five minutes before he parachutes off the grid. Chuck Norris, who has a great introduction, lingers around for just as long, popping up for just another scene later on. The two legends, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis also only pop up for a brief moment, which is far from what you'd expect after seeing them plastered everywhere in the movie's advertisements. It's also a sad fact when Terry Crews, Randy Coutre, and even Dolph Lundgren become just footnotes to the movie, as they really don't have any genuine "look-at-me!" awesome moments.

Do not deny me more Old Spice. 

The Expendables 2 is a tricky film to give a real rating to. It's over-the-top and full of action, yes, and it's just as cheesy and full of one-liners as you'd expect, so it does deliver on those promises. But, as a film merely on its own, it's severely and disgustingly flawed. The bits of story thrown at the meat parade (non-sexual kind) are lacking and any emotion we're supposed to actually feel for these chiseled men out of their prime is missing just as much.  When more focus is put on this aspect, you need more behind it to keep things interesting. And, if you don't have that, but then juice up the movie with a lot of fluff, your audience is left terribly bored when shit's not exploding. I can't say I was expecting more from the film, as again, it IS The Expendables 2, but I still know it's missing something. As the franchise grows and more AARP member actors enter the fray, maybe some masterpiece will come out of it... yeah, right. 

The Good:

action sequences that kick a lot of ass and a few moments of Chuck Norris and Jean Claude Van Damme

The Bad:

those sequences are far and few between and the fluff between everything drags on for far too long

The Ugly:

knowing the idea behind these films was never really great to begin with, and the continuation of the franchise can only lead to worse things

Overall: 6.0/10

Discussion Question:

Should these movies even exist or has Stallone just lost his marbles?

Trailer:

Nov 20: Two Days in New York

"Manhattan couple Marion and Mingus, who each have children from prior relationships, find their comfortable family dynamic jostled by a visit from Marion's relatives."

Directed by: Julie Delpy, Rated: R, 96 minutes

I have always been a fan of Julie Delpy and her films. She has an interesting look at things, from children to the afterlife, and although she may seem pretentious at times, I think she's just more unique than anything else. She also manages to portray real romance very well, to the point that it can be hard to watch, even if it's funny. In 2 Days in New York, a film she also wrote and directed, Delpy steps back into the role of Marion, a role she previously portrayed in 2 Days in Paris. Co-starring Chris Rock, the film paints an interesting look at a relationship in New York. Unfortunately, it's really hard to picture Delpy with anyone but Ethan Hawke.

You have no idea how much this picture makes me happy. Before Midnight- 2013!!

Years after her failed relationship with Jack (from 2 Days in Paris), Marion how found herself in a relationship with Mingus (Rock), a radio host living in New York City. They live together in a small apartment, each with a kid from a previous relationship. When Marion's father (played by Delpy's real dad, Albert Delpy), her sister, Rose (Alexia Landeau), and Rose's awful boyfriend, Manu (Alexandre Nahon), visit, everything goes wrong. Mario becomes more stressed then usual, much is lost in translation between her family and Mingus, and the kids are introduced to a variety of things they are far too young for. Unfortunately for Marion, this is all in time for her art show that's about to premiere, and everything starts unraveling faster than she can put it back together.

Even an awkward sauna scene that looks entertaining, just becomes repetitive. 

2 Days in New York and 2 Days in Paris are both films that aren't for everyone. They are unusual combinations of comedy and drama and work for the most part. However, the few moments each film escalates into obscurity, it feels way too out of place. 2 Days in New York tends to go a bit more out of the box than its predecessor and just doesn't work as well as you'd hope. Chris Rock and Delpy manage to have great chemistry and all, but the story is really messy and rather bipolar. It's very dramatic some moments and then is riddled with ridiculous parts right after. Sure, a lot of the humor comes in the out-of-place-ness of Marion's father and sister, but a joke about the French's hygiene or their lack of English speaking abilities get old after we hear them over and over. Luckily, there's enough charm emitted from the entire cast to keep the entire thing afloat and tolerable.

Yes, that's a cutout of Barack Obama. Yes, Chris Rock talks to it throughout the film. Yes, it's awesome. 

While it's not a perfect film and is severely flawed, 2 Days in New York is watchable. It's not as good as the far superior 2 Days in Paris as it overreaches too often, missing the mark more than hitting it. It's sloppy in both presentation and story-telling but has a handful of laughs that keep you engaged. Delpy and Rock work surprisingly well together and the few moments when it's actually just them (improvising) are great. Unfortunately  there's not enough of their relationship on screen and the awkward focus turns to the out-of-towners, whose presences and jokes get tiresome very quickly. If you're a fan of the first film, I'd recommend checking this one out for curiosity's sake, but if you're late to the party, 2 Days in New York is okay to skip.

The Good:

great charm from Chris Rock and Julie Delpy

The Bad:

the charm is the only thing that keeps the movie worthwhile, as the script is quite a mess

The Ugly:

the handful of times the film overextends itself into ridiculousness are really hard to watch

Overall: 6.1/10

Discussion Question:

Are Delpy and Hawke destined to be together forever? Or does Chris Rock actually stand a chance?

Trailer:

Guest Review: Lincoln

When it comes to the 12:25 showing of Lincoln that I watched earlier today, I could rattle off a little grocery list of flaws about it, and maybe I still will a little bit later on. I could call it Oscar-Bait, roll my eyes and cross my arms. I could even claim that Daniel Day-Lewis isn’t human, and therefore should be disqualified from earning the Oscar for best actor this coming winter. Instead, I’ll go ahead and say this. Lincoln, directed by Steven Spielberg and starring Daniel Day-Lewis, is the best movie I have seen all year.

I should establish something up front here. I was one of the disgruntled masses that saw the trailer for this movie and a huge exclamation point sprouted up over my head. I don’t know what it was about the trailer that bugged me. Maybe it was the cuts to black every half second, maybe it was the schizophrenic soundtrack that changed tone every time the scene changed. I don’t know. I think I was afraid of this movie being something like War Horse, and I’m pleased to say that it was anything but.

This is not acting. This is channeling.

Lincoln is a film about a country nearly as foreign to us in our contemporary situation as it was and is to a lot of other nationalities. Watching this movie as an American (and indeed, as an American currently serving in the armed forces) was nothing short of a revelation. It pitched itself as Oscar-Bait, which was a pretty dumb thing to do since it’s anything but. This film is an important one, and we know this by the time ten minutes of it have rolled around.

I think the biggest problem with this film is the trailer. You read that right. The trailer undersold this film. It seemed like a trailer for a different movie altogether - though if you asked me to figure exactly what kind of film the trailer was for, I'm not exactly sure. A cheesy one. Lincoln, on the other hand, felt more like a Broadway or West End play captured on film. Maybe that's because some of the lead actors (Daniel Day-Lewis and Jared Harris) are from the UK. Who knows.

I could write pages about Daniel Day-Lewis and his performance as America’s most beloved president. Instead, however, I’ll go ahead and relegate myself to saying this – watching this film, I felt like I was sitting in a room with Abraham Lincoln. I don’t know what crazy things Lewis did to prepare for this role, and frankly I don’t particularly care to know, because that would dispel at least part of the illusion. All I know is that his portrayal of Lincoln is something I was lucky to see. This Lincoln is kind, warm, comforting, polite, soft spoken, and perhaps most surprisingly – very, very funny.

Thank you. All of you.

I think part of what makes Lincoln the film that it is can be traced to the performances offered up by its wonderful cast. I usually hate films with ensemble casts, since most of the time they seem to mute each other out. (See The Thin Red Line for an example of this too-many-cooks-in-the-kitchen syndrome.) Lincoln somehow manages to dodge this plague, bringing in some of our finest thespians in roles that seem tailored to them. Tommy Lee Jones is at the absolute top of his game here, providing the audience with a figure we at once love and are wary of. Sally Field is wonderful (though sometimes seems a little strained) as Mrs. Lincoln, and Jared Harris is a walking embodiment of Ulysses Grant. Some have complained about his accent. I didn't notice.

I'm the one with the hair.

I was able to speak with some of my fellow audience members after this film let out and as a result got to canvas their reactions. Interestingly, we were all surprised by the same thing – this film is mostly talking, without much “happening” in the way of 21st Century Hollywood. I think a lot of people might find issue with this lack of action, but I found it refreshing. I was nice to see a film that relied purely on its writing, its photography and its acting to imbue it with a sense of importance. It was nice to see a period piece about an American icon that was so grounded in reality that when it did touch on the extraordinary circumstances surrounding him, the times felt real.

I’m no history buff, but I’ve done a fair bit of research in Abraham Lincoln, and while I cannot speak for the history professors at Columbia University, I can speak for myself – I thought this film did a great job of portraying Washington as it was in Lincoln’s day...and indeed, how it still is, in some ways. This look at government is beautiful because it shows us the humanity behind it, but also reminds us that government can and should work for the people – no matter how difficult the road to success can sometimes be.

That this film arrives at a time of such political discord is, I think, important. Movies like Lincoln are more than just your run of the mill popcorn fare. They are messages, a call to arms from another time, reminders that we, the American people (though young) have it in us both the capacity and the obligation to be strong. So much unhappiness today can be resolved by remembering our common identity – something I feel a lot of us have forgotten about. If you like history, if you adore film, if you love great actors performing tremendous roles – go see this movie. I for one will be returning to see it again, if only to spend time with that greatest of American heroes for just a couple hours more.

The Bottom Line: Poignant, important, relevant and fueled by a once-in-a-lifetime performance by Daniel Day Lewis (unless, of course, you’re Daniel Day Lewis and performances like this come around once every three years or so), Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln is worth every caricature-graced penny.

Oscar Possibilities:
Best Actor - Daniel Day-Lewis
Best Picture

Overall Rating: 9.8/10

Nov 16: Magic Mike

"A male stripper teaches a younger performer how to party, pick up women, and make easy money."

Directed by: Steven Soderbergh, Rated: R, 110 minutes

There has been so much excitement surrounding Magic Mike, most of it coming from the middle-aged female demographic. Thus, my hestitance on finally getting around to watching it can be justified. It's simply not the kind of film I'd be running to see nor really get that enthusiastic about. However, after watching the movie, it's really not exactly what I expected and proves to be decent, if anything. It's a misguided movie that has several glaring flaws but it does have some great performances and a lot of energy. Even if that energy comes from the sequences featuring muscled men tearing off their clothes to dance remixes of popular songs.

It's raining men (with STDs)!

Channing Tatum stars as Mike in his quasi-auto-biographical film about an aspiring entrepreneur who's looking to get out of the world of male stripping and find his place in the world (like every stripper hopes for!). Mike takes Adam under his naked wing and gets him a job at the Xquisite Strip Club run by Dallas (Matthew McConaughey). Naive, immature, and at times, out of control, Adam proves to be a challenge. Mike realizes that the kid's arrogance and ignorance remind him too much of himself and only strengthen his desire to get out of the stripping game. Mike also sees himself compared to Dallas and Tarzan (Kevin Nash), two older strippers that realize there's nothing else for them in the world and that they've not only settled but have no desire to change. Of course, you can't have an entire movie about male strippers and not have some women so Mike falls in love with Adam's sister, Brooke (Cody Horn), as well as juggling a strictly physical relationship with Joanna (a topless Olivia Munn's ).

Yes, the super "nerd" gets naked. 

I'm a straight man but I have to say the most entertaining parts of Magic Mike are the actual sequences at the strip club. Each dance number is full of energy and style and makes you wish you were a six-pack toting man on a stage grabbing up all sorts of dollar bills. Well, it didn't make me wish I was on stage as much as it made me feel really out of shape. For any of you hesitant on watching the film, during these strip scenes the only thing shown is a bunch of muscle and banana hammocks. It never goes "too far" and focuses more on the excitement in the club than the junk in the pants. Director Steven Soderbergh (Ocean's 11f) is a master at capturing the moment and the energy of his environments and changing the setting to a strip club doesn't change anything. While Soderbergh doesn't elevate these sequences to beautiful works of art, he manages to make them tolerable and fun (for everyone). They're most certainly the takeaway of the film and the scenes between full of "story" and a romantic subplot are just boring. Mike is the pure focus of the film and his rather interesting co-stars are never given any depth or back story. Fortunately, Channing Tatum does a great job in the role and probably has the best performance of the film. Hitting close to home (as he was a stripper before acting), Tatum submerges himself in the familiarity and isn't embarrassed by it. He's an entertainer with a dream and Tatum jumps in and out of character with ease. Unfortunately, his love interest in the very unattractive Cody Horn lacks any of that same charisma and feels like a complete mismatch. They lack any chemistry and their relationship makes the entire film suffer. However, while Magic Mike won't be considered his Forrest Gump or My Left Foot, it's a step in the right direction for Channing Tatum and he shows he has some genuine talent.

I'll admit, the punk can act.

Magic Mike is far from terrific. It's poorly paced, has moments that are incredibly boring, and doesn't really have an ending. While Mike develops as a character throughout the film, you're never rewarded with seeing where he goes or what he has planned. Instead of being involved in his journey, the audience just takes a peek at a small part of his life and those surrounding him. Looking back on the movie in the future, all that will be remembered is the fact that it is "the male stripper movie" but I'd like to see it as the movie that showed us Channing Tatum has talent as an actor. Yes, it's forgettable and yes, it's nothing special, but I'd still recommend Magic Mike. It's a fun look at a world not many are familiar with (nor really want to be) and has enough energy to keep you entertained, even if it putters out from time to time. Go for the show but leave your dollar bills at home. Yep, I'm ending this review with that.

The Good:

Channing Tatum's performance and some very interesting scenes at the strip club

The Bad:

poorly paced script that lacks any substance or depth and drags on way too often

The Ugly:

actually enjoying particular parts of the film, knowing completely ahead of time the subject matter

Overall: 6.2/10

Discussion Question:

Showgirls or Magic Mike?

Trailer:

Nov 15: Safety Not Guaranteed

"Three magazine employees head out on an assignment to interview a guy who placed a classified ad seeking a companion for time travel."

Directed by: Colin Trevorrow, Rated: R, 86 minutes

I'll admit, I've never been a fan of either Duplass brother. Jay and Mark both tend to make movies that try way too hard to be something special or profound, but never really delve deep enough to pull the weight. However, I've come around to Mark's acting ability (as I have become obsessed with The League) and can appreciate the comic timing and unhinged awkwardness that's become a staple in his performances. With Safety Not Guaranteed, Duplass tiptoes the line between crazy and sincere and as his motivations become clear, you really care about the guy.

Seriously, though. If you haven't watched The League yet, get on it. 

Jeff (Jake Johnson) is a writer for a magazine that's looking for some interesting stories. After a rather odd newspaper ad comes to his attention, Jeff takes Darius (Aubrey Plaza) and Arnau (Karan Soni), two interns, with him to a small town in Washington. The ad states that a man is looking for someone to go back in time with him and that it is certainly not a joke. The trio of reporters want to investigate the man that posted the article and see if he's actually onto something or if he's just a crazy man. After Jeff fails at initiating any conversation with the man, Kenneth (Duplass), he enlists the help of Darius to 'woo' him with her womanly ways. As Darius hangs out with Kenneth more, she starts to believe that he's telling the truth and that he actually has a way to go back in time. Kenneth also claims that special agents are after him and his plans, putting himself and Darius in danger. Of course, we never know if he's telling the truth or not because the grand scale of his claims, he's hard to believe.

It's like Scooby Doo but with adult situations! And lament!

Safety Not Guaranteed tackles a ton of themes you wouldn't expect in a movie like this. A large theme is regret and the idea of chasing the past, only to change it. It's something we can all relate to, yet none of us have the motivation or intellect to build a time machine to change things. Kenneth is a troubled man and has a lot of complicated and even dishonest things about him, but he's still driven by the idea of changing the past and makes him a very relatable 'hero'. Duplass does a great job in the role and can bounce around from screaming lunatic to sympathetic oddball very smoothly. He's also very plain looking and his appearance makes you believe he's someone you could run into on the street (and go on adventure with!). Aubrey Plaza is beautiful as always and her sarcastic curiosity turns into something more as the investigation continues. She plays "I don't care about you, but kind of do" really well and is a perfect compliment to Duplass. Surprisingly, Jake Johnson gives a really good performance as Jeff. Best known for his role on The New Girl, Jake is much more tame in Safety Not Guaranteed. He's the cocky big-shot that heads to Washington for a vacation, and not actual work, but ends up reconnecting with an old flame that really opens his character up. He's just as vulnerable and obsessed with the past as Kenneth, and his subplot parallels the time travel story-line wonderfully.

Yes, Aubrey Plaza. I'd love to be your Marty McFly.

I would highly recommend Safety Not Guaranteed. It's a great little story that has a dash of science-fiction. It's never heading in a direction you'd expect and the ending is just as odd, yet lovable as the characters involved. It's a simple movie with really strong themes, and even throughout the craziness that sometimes ensues, the film is incredibly relatable. All of the main characters give great performances (some of the best of the year) and I hope that this little gem gets more love. It's one of those movies that feels genuine and real, never glossed over with Hollywood-ness, and delivers something special. Heck, who knows? Maybe next time you're browsing through your newspaper classifieds or seeing what's up on Craigslist, you might find your own bizarre little adventure. But be careful, you never know what kind of people are out there...

The Good:

three terrific performances surrounding a simple, yet beautiful little story about regret, moving on, and exploration

The Bad:

knowing that this film won't get the love and attention it deserves

The Ugly:

wondering if time traveling will ever be mastered and then wondering how many people will be lining up to change the past

Overall: 8.0/10

Discussion Question:

If you could hop into a time machine and head to the past or future, where would you go and what would you do?

Trailer: