Jamie Daily

Gravity (2013) Review | Jamie Daily

Gravity (2013)
86th Academy Awards 2014
5/5 Stars
Nominated for 10 awards, of which it won 7.
Nominated for Best Picture (Alfonso Cuarón, David Heyman), Best Actress (Sandra Bullock), and Best Production Design (Andy Nicholson, Rosie Goodwin, Joanne Woollard).
Won Best Cinematography (Emmanuel Lubezki), Best Director (Alfonso Cuarón), Best Film Editing (Alfonso Cuarón, Mark Sanger), Best Original Score (Steven Price), Best Sound Editing (Gienn Freemantle), Best Sound Mixing (Chris Munro, Christopher Benstead, Niv Adiri, Skip Lievsay), and Best Visual Effects (Chris Lawrence, David Shirk, Neil Corbould, Tim Webber).
Watched April 7, 2014.

 

What was undoubtedly this year's overall "winner" at awards night, Gravity is a huge accomplishment in all areas of filmmaking.  To get ten nominations is impressive enough, but to walk away at the end of the night with seven wins is a testament to the skills behind this piece.  If that isn't enough, the movie even lives up to the hype.  From story and casting to visuals and sound, the film is a feast for your senses.

 

Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) is a medical engineer on her first space mission.  While out on a routine space walk making repairs, their shuttle is hit by debris and Ryan finds herself detached from the shuttle and spinning helplessly into space.  Luckily, her colleague Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) who is vastly more experienced, was attached to thruster jets when disaster hit and he is able to tether Ryan to himself and begin a horrifying orbit around the earth towards a space station.  Every breath is terrifying as Ryan's space suite constantly reminds her how little oxygen she has left.  She has to learn to overcome her fears and must refuse anything but survival as a possibility.  

 

We know very little about the characters, but the back story that is revealed about them gives all we need to know.  The story is not simple and predictable, although it has the possibility to be that.  While Clooney's performance is simple and to the point, his character is exceedingly impressive and calm.  Bullock commands attention, adding to the crescendo of sound and visuals that make Gravity hard to look away from.  Her nomination was extremely well deserved.  

 

The film does not make a grand statement.  It revolves around the ideas of "you never know who might be listening" and that space is not able to be conquered--that life in space is impossible.  Almost right away Ryan says, "I hate space," which sets up her character for what she is about to experience.  You might laugh, you might cry, and you will definitely be sitting at the edge of your seat.  I can only imagine what the film was like in the theatre in 3D, but even on my HD 47inch it was to die for.  

 

Director, writer, and editor Alfonso Cuarón paired with cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki are unstoppable.  I cannot rave enough about the imagery and the lighting.  To be fair, there was no weak link.  All of the puzzle pieces fit.

 

Clearly I would highly recommend this film.  It is one of the best films out of Hollywood in a long time.

 

Lincoln (2012) Review | Jamie Daily

Lincoln (2012)
85th Academy Awards
3/5 Stars
Nominated for 12 awards, of which it won 2.
Nominated for Best Picture (Steven Spielberg, Kathleen Kennedy), Best Director (Steven Spielberg), Best Supporting Actor (Tommy Lee Jones), Best Supporting Actress (Sally Field), Best Adapted Screenplay (Tony Kushner), Best Original Score (John Williams), Best Sound Mixing (Andy Nelson, Gary Rydstrom, Ronald Judkins), Best Cinematography (Janusz Kaminski), Best Costume Design (Joanna Johnston), and Best Film Editing (Michael Kahn).
Won Best Actor (Daniel Day-Lewis) and Best Production Design (Rick Carter, Jim Erickosn).
Watched February 27, 2014.

  

I have heard a lot of good things about Lincoln, and perhaps these things, along with Daniel Day-Lewis' win at the Oscars made me expect too much.  As much as I tend to enjoy the pristine nature of a good Spielberg film, the stage like dialogue, production design, and cinematography left something to be desired.

 

President Abraham Lincoln is perhaps one of the most well remembered Presidents.  This film focuses on a small period of time around his reelection, just months before his assassination.  He is gunning for the 13th Amendment, which would abolish slavery, much to the chagrin of his cabinet.  Even some within the Republican party were hesitant.  Everyone wanted peace from the Civil War.  They wanted their sons to stop dying in battle and for the South to come back to the nation.  The Democrats were vehemently opposed to the Amendment.

 

We all know what happens in the end, which takes away some of the mystery and suspense, although the filmmakers tried their best to keep the audience on the edges of their seats.  The representatives vote and threaten each other.  Lincoln is slow and yet eloquent.  He speaks strongly when needed but prefers a calm state and story telling.  In tense situations he commands the attention of a room by telling a story that might relate to the situation at hand.  

 

The acting, particularly from Daniel Day-Lewis and Sally Field, is top notch.  They deliver difficult lines and portray a wounded spirit very well.  My favorite scene involving Mary Todd Lincoln (Field) is when she defends her remodel of the white house to some extremists, showing a bit of the gumption that Lincoln must have fallen in love with in the beginning.  The loss of one of her sons has all but done her in, but in this moment there is fire in her eyes, much like in the President's when he expresses how disgusting slavery is.  

 

He and his political party dance the line between peace and the freedom of slaves.  They believe that if they declare peace with the south before the Amendment is brought to a vote, there will be no sense of urgency and it will not be passed.  They employ questionable and typical techniques to "buy" votes and stall envoys.  

 

Some of the story is much too slow, or maybe unnecessary.  I understand why they included the story line of Robert Lincoln (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), the son who wants to go to war, but it is so underused that it is more of a distraction from the main story than anything else.  It shows the fear of his parents and unearths more of their grief.  The emotions in these scenes are palpable, but the execution of the filmmaking is very staged.  There is a constant tug of war between filmmaker and actor in this film that I found very distracting.  

 

Despite some negative attributes, the film is well done and deserving of its nominations as well as wins.  I would definitely watch it again, although I might not own it.  If you are a history buff you will probably really enjoy it.  I can recommend Lincoln as a good film, but you should expect it to be somewhat slow, dark, and quiet.

 

Django Unchained (2012) Review | Jamie Daily

Django Unchained (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
4/5 Stars
Nominated for 5 awards, of which it won 2.
Nominated for Best Picture (Stacey Sher, Reginald Hudlin, Pilar Savone), Best Sound Editing (Wylie Stateman), and Best Cinematography (Robert Richardson).
Won Best Supporting Actor (Christoph Waltz) and Best Original Screenplay (Quentin Tarantino).
Watched February 12, 2014.

 

Back in the day (and by that I mean the distant four years ago of my university days), I was a huge Quentin Tarantino fan.  I was studying film, screenplays, editing, and acting.  Tarantino is an original, extremist, mainstream director who combines old-school techniques (especially typography) with new age music to create an irony that is amusing and jarring.  Tarantino loves reminding his audience that they are watching a movie.  While most directors and editors want everything seamless and invisible, specifically in editing, Tarantino does the exact opposite.  Even in his period films, he uses current societal trends to create humor because the audience recognizes that it is misplaced.  

 

Django Unchained, while it is no Kill Bill, is no different.  The setting is a couple years before slaves become free, and Django (Jamie Foxx) is a slave who was recently sold at auction.  He crosses paths with Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz), a German bounty hunter, who purchases him and promises him his freedom if he helps him find three very valuable wanted men.  Django's main mission is to find his wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), and after obtaining his freedom he continues to work with Schultz in order to find her.  She was sold to one of the biggest plantations in the south, Candieland, where the crazed owner, Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio) is protected by family and slaves alike.  

 

The film is no less brutal than Tarantino's recent Inglorious Basterds and he pulls no punches.  In fact, the blood and gore is to such a ridiculous point that it is morbidly humorous.  Candieland is horrible and Candie himself is both puppet and puppeteer.  His right hand man is Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson) who hates the fact that Django rides a horse as much as any white man would.  Eventually guns are pulled and shots fired and the death toll becomes so impressive you would think it a battlefield.  

 

The story is extreme and the circumstances follow suit.  Broomhilda is probably the weakest character, and yet her terrified silence is the most realistic of the entire film.  Each character is distinctly different and loud in its traits.  Django has a steel and a smoldering anger that only Broomhilda can solve.  Schultz is a chatty German who hates the KKK and doesn't mind shooting a felon in front of his kid son.  Each performance is a knockout, but it is certainly no surprise that Christoph waltzed (get it?) away with the Oscar.  

 

This is one of the few films that DiCaprio has starred in where he is not the main character.  His character is distinctly darker and more sinister than he usually plays.  He participates in an underground fighting ring involving slaves fighting to the death.  In order to get in his good graces, Django and Schultz put on an elaborate charade to convince Candie they want to buy one of his fighters, when in fact they only want to purchase Broomhilda.  

 

Django Unchained is no picnic.  While it is staged during the years of slavery, it was not created to make a statement about the practice.  It is as much a character study as it is a comedy and a gruesome action film.  Each plantation in the film is distinctly different from other films about slavery.  On one planation, dozens of women stand about the house and their curious questions are bemusedly answered by their owner, while one poor girl is being whipped for dropping eggs.  At Candieland you are placed naked in a steel "hot box" if you try to run away.  Tarantino's style gives the plantations a sheen that most films avoid.  Slavery is certainly not presented as something positive, but its storyline is different in Django Unchained.

 

I could probably write a fourteen page essay on any Tarantino film, so I will summarize the rest of my opinions.  All of its nominations are deserved.  I am a little shocked that he won Best Original Screenplay, but not upset.  The cinematography is a feast for the eyes, the costumes are either humorous or indistinct.  The side plots and characters lend to the story well and although the run-time is a bit much (and the gruesome firefight is probably where the story gets unnecessarily lost and meandering), all in all it is a great film.

 

Please be aware that this film is 100% rated R and make your decisions accordingly, but what kind of Tarantino fan would I be if I did not recommend this nominated film?  I suggest that you see it not because it is a historical film about slavery (because it is not), but because its characters, editing, story, and humor are all something unique out of Hollywood. 

 

 

Islands in the Stream (1977) Review

Islands in the Stream (1977)
50th Academy Awards 1978
2/5 StarsNominated for 1 award.
Nominated for Best Cinematography (Fred J. Koenekamp).
Watched November 12, 2012.

 

I watched this film quite a while ago, before I got married and my posting schedule for the blog completely changed.  I am just now getting around to this piece, and unfortunately we weren't missing out on much.  Islands in the Stream is based on the last Hemingway novel.  Really it was pieced together by his wife after he passed away and we can't really know if he would have ever had published himself, but it is said that the main character is based on who Hemingway saw himself as.

 

Thomas Hudson (George C. Scott) has seen a lot in his life and has retired to an island in the Caribbean where he fishes, sculpts, and drinks.  He has some good buddies who don't expect much from him but would do a lot for him.  When the film opens he is expecting a rare visit from his three sons from two marriages.  Ranging in age from 10 to 19, the boys all have unique relationships with their father.  The oldest, Tom (Hart Bochner) remembers his mom and dad having a loving and passionate relationship, while the middle child David (Michael-James Wixted) is resentful toward his father for the way he treated his mom--the second wife.  

 

Wixted is probably the best performance from the three kids, and it is just as well because his character has the biggest arch out of the three.  It is very much a coming of age tale for him, and it helps that his dad is there to gently coach him through it.  Though you wouldn't expect it, especially because Thomas has been absent for much of their lives, he really does care for his children.  He perhaps has more affection toward Tom because that marriage was the best, and he misses it.  

 

The second part of the film is quite slow and is punctuated by an unexpected visit from the first wife, Audrey (Claire Bloom), who brings hard news that perhaps spurs on the third act, which is so drastically different from the first two it's a wonder it ever made it into the film.  Although the first two thirds of the film moved very slowly, I was interested in the characters and their relationships.  The third act completely lost me.  I'm not sure if it is a part of the book--some reviews made it sound as if it was an addition to the film and I would love to know if this is true.  Perhaps the production team was attempting to liven up the story, but I really wish it had not been included.  There are rescued Jews (the story takes place at the beginning of World War II), smuggling, and cheap looking explosions.  It is a huge disruption from the tranquility of the island life.

 

I'll be honest that I wasn't the biggest fan of Islands in the Stream.  I was curious about Thomas, his family, and the relationships all throughout the film.  I cared for them, but there were certainly moments that I won't specify (no spoilers here!) that could have been done better.  The cinematography was certainly beautiful and well done, especially for a film from the seventies.  The acting was acceptable, and although the pace of the film was slow it fit with the lifestyle of beach life.  

 

I wouldn't necessarily recommend this film.  I probably won't be watching it again.  If you are curious about Hemingway's last book, it might be a good place to start, but I expect the actual novel would be a much better medium.

 

Skyfall (2012) Review

Skyfall (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
5/5 Stars
Nominated for 5 awards, of which it won 2.
Nominated for Cinematography (Roger Deakins), Music-Original Score (Thomas Newman), and Sound Mixing (Scott Millan, Greg P. Russell, Stuart Wilson).
Won Music-Original Song "Skyfall" (Adele Adkins, Paul Epworth) and Sound Editing (Per Hallberg, Karen Baker Landers).
Watched September 3, 2013.

photo source: Working Author 

After 50 years and 23 Bond films, I was mildly surprised by this latest installment in the franchise.  I saw it last November in theaters and the film was so far off from what I had come to expect from 007 that I didn't quite like it.  However, after watching it a second time I have come to appreciate it much more as a stand alone film.  

 

What is great about Bond is that if you have seen none of the films before, you can jump right in and know what is going on.  It doesn't generally have a complex plot that stretches through the years of films, but each installment focuses on its one story alone, with perhaps a little bit of carry over that isn't too hard to figure out.  What makes Skyfall so unique is its story, its ending, and the fact that it dwells on characters that we don't usually get to spend this much time with.

 

The tradition in the last three Bond films, which feature Daniel Craig as said hero, has been to go a bit more deeply into 007's emotions and past than is normal.  The 20 films preceding them generally followed the same formula while having similar elements--ie. the Bond girl, the bad guy, and the gadgets.  These recents films, instead, have focused more on Bond himself and have only brought in the other three factors when prudent.

 

In Skyfall, MI6 itself is under attack, both from the Prime Minister and from a super genius computer hacker by the name of Silva (Javier Bardem) who has been slighted in the past by MI6 and M.  Having been attacked on their home turf, the secret service shows a remorse for loss of life that has rarely been seen from the franchise.  We see more from the home front than we do on location and the opening sequence, which of course includes a car chase, guns, and a fist fight atop a moving train, are punctured here an there by tense moments with M at headquarters helping her agents make tough decisions.  

 

Bond's loyalties are put to the test in this thriller, and although Bardem's villain as well as performance has been compared to the late Heath Ledger as the Joker in The Dark Knight, his psychological and physical attacks are much more direct.  Having been an agent and a favourite of M's in the past, he is bitter that he was not considered more important and determines that one person is to blame.  It becomes Bond's task to stop Silva at all costs.  These attacks and action sequences are much more personal than normal, and as such, we get to know Bond and his past a lot more than we have before.

 

Judy Dench as M has always been a wonderful pairing, and being one of the greatest actresses of our time, she finally gets to show her incredible skill in Skyfall.  While the special effects, editing, cinematography, directing, and over all vision of the film are exquisite, the acting sets it over the top.  While one might expect the Bond films to merely be guy flicks with guns, explosions, and hot women, this 2012 favourite has taken the franchise to another level.  

 

As I mentioned before, it follows a slightly different formula than normal, which is why I did not care for it very much at first.  I had expected some light hearted entertainment, whereas I got something much deeper.  Without spoiling it, I didn't much care for the ending and felt the entire film unnecessary because of it.  However, disregarding the outcomes of Silva's rampage, the entire film was pieced together so well that you can't even see the stitches.  Sam Mendes' first action film is a success.

 

I would certainly recommend Skyfall, not just as a James Bond flick, or a 50th anniversary celebration, but as an excellent film that deserves some attention.

  

Anna Karenina (2012) Review

Anna Karenina (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
2/5 Stars
Nominated for 4 awards, of which it won 1.
Nominated for Best Original Score (Dario Marianelli), Best Production Design (Sarah Greenwood, Katie Spencer), and Best Cinematography (Seamus McGarvey).
Won Best Costume Design (Jacqueline Durran).
Watched June 6, 2013.

Photo Source: Peter Viney's Blog 

The story of Anna Karenina is perhaps one of my least favourite so far among the 2013 nominations, which is of course no fault of the screenwriter as it is based on Leo Tolstoy's classic novel.  Those who love the story, as well as Tolstoy, don't worry.  Although my feelings toward Anna and her plot line are less than favorable, I did quite enjoy the stories surrounding her, as well as the interesting style of this latest film.  While the artistic direction may be a bit distracting from the story, I found it quite enchanting and it made me wish that it had been bestowed upon a different story, because then I would have liked to watch it again.

 

This may all be a very complicated way of saying that I have a love-hate relationship with director Joe Wright's interpretation of Anna Karenina.  It is the story of a woman (Kiera Knightley) in the Russian high society  who does not love her husband (Jude Law).  Instead of remaining faithful so that she may be with her beloved son, she runs off with Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson)--whose mustache is very silly if I do say so myself--and therefore suffers the social backlash.

 

It is this story that I found very annoying.  I didn't care for Anna and therefore understood none of her decisions.  Her husband, although a bit weak when it comes to home life, was an admirable character.  Vronsky was young and had no idea what he was getting Anna into, and her poor abandoned son doesn't get much screen time.  I appreciated the story in that it shows an example of why it is morally wrong to cheat on your husband, although Anna mainly suffered the surface repercussions--none of her friends would hang out with her any more.  If the book goes more in depth about this, then perhaps there was not enough time to explore the depth of it more than that in the film.

 

Despite my dislike for the story, again, I quite appreciated the production design and the costumes.  In fact, my love for period pieces is what kept me going through the over two hour film and I wished that the beautiful consuming and innovative sets could have been bestowed on a different plot line.  I liked the side stories, although they seemed somewhat out of place, despite showing a complete turnaround from Anna.  

 

I will very readily say that I won't be seeking out this Anna Karenina adaptation again any time soon, and unless you 1. like the story or 2. have incredible patience, I would advise against watching it just to see the aesthetics.

  

Life of Pi (2012)

Life of Pi (2012)
85th Academy Awards 2013
5/5 Stars
Nominated for 11 awards, of which it won 4.
Nominated for Best Picture (Ang Lee, David Womark, Gil Netter), Best Adapted Screenplay (David Magee), Best Music, Song "Pi's Lullaby" (Bombay Jayashri, Mychael Danna), Best Sound Editing (Eugene Gearty, Philip Stockton), Best Sound Mixing (D. M. Hemphill, Drew Kunin, Ron Bartlett), Best Production Design (Anna Pinnock, David Gropman), and Best Film Editing (Tim Squyres).
Won Best Director (Ang Lee), Best Original Score (Mychael Danna), Best Cinematography (Claudio Miranda), and Best Visual Effects (Bill Westenhofer, Donald R. Elliott, Erik-Jan De Boer, Guillaume Rocheron).
Watched April 12, 2013.

 

Photo Source: Subscene

Life of Pi is based off the award winning book by Yann Martel.  I have loved the book for years and was ecstatic when I heard about the film, but when the movie actually came out, other lovers of the book told me that they were really disappointed in it, so I decided not to see it in theaters.  Low and behold, I should NOT have listened to them!  Opinions about the film vary, which is understandable, from both those who have read the book and those who have not.  From my perspective, not only does the film follow the book incredibly well, but its execution stands up to Martel's vision and I would love to watch it as often as I read the book… which is very often.

 

Life of Pi can be broken into three parts.  Pi Patel (Irrfan Khan) is living in Toronto when an author (Rafe Spall) comes to him in search of a story--a story that is said to make you believe in God.  With a knowing smile, Pi begins at the beginning.  He was raised in Pondicherry as a zookeeper's son.   The beginning is very family friendly--with silly humor including an overly buff and disproportionate swim instructor and Pi's exploration of many religions.  The beginning almost feels disconnected with the rest of the film, but it is also necessary in order to set up the rest of the story.  

 

Encountering some difficulties, Pi's family decides to move to Canada where they will sell the animals and begin a new life.  Their Japanese ship never sees shore again because during a terrific storm, it sinks to the deepest part of the sea and Pi finds himself alone in the ocean, apart from the giant tiger Richard Parker.  This is when the story picks up and things get good.  Pi must find the strength to fight for his life, as it is being attacked from all angles.  His faith is challenged, and because he spends over 270 days at sea, he is left with nothing but faith by the end.

 

Because Pi is telling his story to the author, we know the outcome, and for those who have not read the book, this is perhaps a let down.  However, the book reads the same way and therefore Ang Lee, who directed, took no liberties in that regard.  Although there are a few weak links in the production, as a whole, the entire cast performs very well, and one could argue that the three who carried the film were Ang Lee, Claudio Miranda (the cinematographer), and Suraj Sharma, who plays Pi for the majority of the film.  

 

Ang Lee has directed many award winning films in his time.  His wins with Life of Pi are well deserved.  Miranda's work is exquisite, and combined with the visual effects, the screen becomes candy to the eyes.  When the heavens reflect so perfectly in the waters that it seems Pi and his raft are floating in midair, I wasn't sure where to look because I wanted to look at everything at once.  Richard Parker, the tiger, is 100% animated and there is very little within the film that indicates this.  Sharma does a magnificent job acting and reacting to his tiger-less circumstances and I am pretty shocked the Academy gave him no recognition.  

 

There is love, humor, sadness, and fear.  The end delivers the best moment of the film by Sharma and although many reviewers dislike the conclusion, feeling as if it is a bit tacked on, I found it wrapped everything up nicely.  It is a film that causes one to think rather than just something that entertains.  Although I'm not sure if Pi's story would cause one to believe in God, I really enjoyed it.

 

I would definitely recommend this film.  Hands down, no arguments against it.  It can be slow at times and the three parts of the film can feel a bit disjointed, but as a whole it is a beautiful film and one that I would love to own.

  

Hugo (2011)

Hugo (2011)
84th Academy Awards 2012
4/5 Stars
Nominated for 11 awards, of which it won 5.
Nominated for Best Picture (Graham King, Martin Scorsese), Costume Design (Sandy Powell), Directing (Martin Scorsese), Film Editing (Thelma Schoonmaker), Music-Original Score (Howard Shore), and Writing-Adapted Screenplay (John Logan).
Won Best Cinematography (Robert Richardson), Best Art Direction (Dante Ferretti, Francesca Lo Schiavo), Best Sound Editing (Philip Stockton, Eugene Gearty), Best Sound Mixing (Tom Fleischman, John Midgley), and Best Visual Effects (Rob Legato, Joss Williams, Ben Grossman, Alex Henning).
Watched January 4, 2013.

 

photo source: Scarlett Cinema

In a machine, there are no extra parts.

 

Hugo is a family movie, despite its length, that brings humor and reality to a world of magic.  The plot seems to begin in one place, but before you know it you are headed in almost a completely different direction.  

 

It is a film about Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield) who lives in a train station in France.  He once lived with his father (Jude Law), a clockmaker who passes away in a museum fire.  Hugo is then taken to the train station, where his Uncle Claude (Ray Winstone) takes care of the clocks.  Once Hugo knows how to do his Uncle's job, his Uncle disappears and he is left to somehow survive on his own.  He steals food and maintains the clocks so that no one suspects his Uncle has gone.  The Station Inspector (Sacha Baron Cohen), the almost childish comic relief, is notorious for catching boys and sending them to the orphanage, therefore Hugo must always watch his step.  

 

Hugo is in possession of an automation that he and his father were repairing.  While trying to pilfer supplies for the repair from the station's toy merchant (Ben Kingsley), he is caught and his notebook with is father's drawings of the automation is taken.  This throws him into an adventure, one which he doesn't really care for until the merchant's goddaughter Isabelle (Cloë Grace Moretz) gets involved.  She reintroduces him to books, he introduces her to movies, and together they seek out the notebook while fooling the Station Inspector left and right.  

 

In a machine, there are no extra parts, and as Hugo Cabret sees it, if the world is a machine, then he must be there for a purpose, and so must Isabelle.  They soon discover that maybe, for now, their purpose is to give a man back his life.  Once Isabelle is introduced to the magic of movies, the plot turns and the two adventurers discover a secret about her Godfather.

 

photo source: A Potpourri of Vestiges

The performances in this film are pretty standard.  Many reviewers rave over Moretz but are a little wavy on Butterfield's performance in comparison.  On the contrary, I thought Moretz fell a bit short of her past appearances but this is perhaps more because of the story and the intention of being a family movie.  Her enthusiasm often felt a bit unreal, but then again, isn't the magic of movies a bit unreal itself?  Butterfield did an adequate job for a family movie, on the same level as Moretz.  I loved the supporting cast and fell quite in love with Ben Kingsley's on screen wife, Helen McCrory.  Sacha Baron Cohen, also, was much different from what you might remember him as in his past roles, and I found that it fit him quite well.  His story was a bit unnecessary to the rest of the plot, but again, it is a children's film and therefore requires a little bit of unnecessary humor to maintain everyone's attention for two hours.

 

The cinematography, art direction, sound, and visual effects were all absolute magic.  Everything combined beautifully to create such a visual feast that even in 2D format it was incredible.  I have heard that nothing can touch the original 3D format and it is said that although there is a lot of shoddy 3D work happening in the industry right now, Scorsese has the sense to respect the viewers and understand that if you are going to do something, you must do it right.  He also brings his own passion for maintaining film history to the story and perhaps wishes to help the younger generation understand the magic of film so that they too can respect it and pursue it, whether in career or simply pastime.  

 

Hugo might not be for everyone, but if you are looking for a family film with a bit more depth than usual, and an incredible visual display, I would definitely suggest you sit everyone down to enjoy this Scorsese masterpiece.  

 

 

Sources: A Potpourri of Vestiges, Scarlett Cinema, IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, Movies on Film, The Guardian, Films According to Chris Wyatt, Picturenose, The Best Picture Project, John Likes Movies

War Horse (2011)

War Horse (2011)
84th Academy Awards 2012
3/5 Stars
Nominated for 6 awards.
Nominated for Best Picture (Steven Spielberg, Kathleen Kennedy), Cinematography (Janusz Kiminski), Art Direction (Rick Carter, Lee Sandales), Music - Original (John Williams), Sound Editing (Richard Hymns, Gary Rudstrom), and Sound Mixing (Gary Rydstrom, Andy Nelson, Tom Johnson, Stuart Wilson).
Watched December 29, 2012.

 

photo source: DreamWorks Studios

What can I say about you, War Horse?  It is a technical genius and a simplistic, clichéd display of love and devotion that leaves half of the critics baffled and the other half in adoration.  

 

Steven Spielberg will forever be a cinematic genius whose technicality in the art is boundless.  However, I have grown so accustomed to his polished cinematography and overall composition that I was less impressed with the technical aspect and therefore more distracted by the unlikely plot line.  It is simple in almost a bad way.  There was very little character depth and the actions of all but the horse (Joey) were extremely predictable.  

 

Despite its shortcomings in story, I still enjoyed it, partially because I am a huge horse lover.  It is a war movie without the gore of today's films.  Spielberg did not feel the need to show every battle field in detail and to draw out the exchange.  Instead, he took a much more simple, abstract approach that lets the audience know what has occurred but does not necessarily show the act itself.  This was one of my more favourite aspects of the film, which leads me to my viewing advice.

 

photo source: Awards Daily

If you have the ability to suspend reality (something that most movie-goers should be well versed in) and accept the fact that War Horse is going to test you, then you should certainly see it.  It is a walking cliché--a tale of innocents on all sides, despite the gruesome war surrounding it, and the joy that is found despite the death, destruction, and separation.  

 

Joey begins his life as a playful, half-thoroughbred who is bought at auction at a young age by a farmer who needs a plow horse.  Ted Narracott (Peter Mullan) was tempted by the astounding beauty of the horse, his landlord's clear desire for the animal, and his drink.  His wife Rose (Emily Watson) is furious when he brings the young, small, untrained horse home, but his son Albert (Jeremy Irvine) is ecstatic.  He takes the horse on himself, names him, and trains him, and in one of the more unlikely bits of the film, plows an entire field with him in order to save his family's farm.  

 

Despite their efforts, the farm is still in jeopardy.  When World War I finally breaks upon them, Mr. Narracott sells the horse to a Captain James Nicholls (Tom Hiddleston).  Heartbroken, Albert vows to Joey that he will find him again one day.

 

photo source: Fan Pop

It is soon after this that the most brilliant scene of the film occurs.  The Captain and his company are led to believe that a German camp lays close by, unsuspecting, and thus their calvary rides into it. They ride through the camp at full gallop but once they reach the woods at the other side, they are cut down thoroughly by machine guns.  Instead of watching the horses and their riders fall at extreme length, we instead see one shot of the riders charging at full gallop and in the next the horses are leaping over the guns--riderless.  

 

Joey finds himself in German hands, and along with his gorgeous black stallion friend, jumps from master to master and from England to Germany to France and back again, much in the same way that Black Beauty would share his tale of owners.  He spends time on a French farm, pulling guns in the war, and even brings the entrenched British and German soldiers to a temporary truce as they try to free him from barbed wire.  

 

It is not the most brilliant nominated film this year, but it is certainly deserving.  Although the end shots are certainly a sort of sentimental pride with Spielberg, as is evidenced by their drawn out screen time, the majority of his execution is so flawless that I longed for a dirtier edit and a more experimental cinematographer.  If you have missed War Horse somehow, I would certainly suggest watching it, especially if you are in a good mood and are willing to set aside your firm grasp on reality for some more innocent fun.

 

 

 

Sources: Fan Pop, Awards Daily, DreamWorks Studios, IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, NY Times, The Guardian, John Likes Movies, The Best Picture Project 

The Magic Flame (1927)

The Magic Flame (1927)
1st Academy Awards 1929
Nominated for 1 award. 
Nominated for Cinematography (George Barnes).
Lost film.

 

photo source: A Certain Cinema

Only five out of the original eleven reels of The Magic Flame remain, and it is hard to tell precisely where they might be.  It is rumored that they are at the International Museum of Photography and Film at George Eastman House.  Here follows an original review by Mordaunt Hall, published September 19, 1927, in the New York Times:

 

An ingeniously contrived and magnificently photographed production, with the contrasting backgrounds of life under a circus tent and that in the palace of a mythical kingdom, has been wrought by Henry King out of Rudolph Lother's novel, "King Harlequin," which for reasons best known to Samuel Goldwyn, the producer, comes to the Rialto Theatre screen as "The Magic Flame." In this film it falls to Ronald Colman's lot to impersonate both a sympathetic clown and a rascally prince, while Vilma Banky, the lovely Hungarian actress, plays the part of a stellar trapeze performer with the wagon show; she is adored by the humble follower of Grimaldi and she also attracts the vagrant eye of the heir to Illyria's throne.

Mr. King has pictured the various incidents of this story in an imaginative fashion and his introduction of the Clown, Tito, is excellent. At first the features of Roland Colman are hidden under putty and greasepaint, but this Clown sits at a mirror and gradually wipes off the disguise until the well-known physiognomy of the popular player is revealed.

It is, of course, a highly romantic affair, but the scenes in the circus are brilliantly filmed. After an exciting happening, Mr. King turns his camera to the unperturbed countenance of the circus band leader. This director has also accomplished remarkable effects by soft shadows and the close-ups of both Mr. Colman and Miss Banky fit in nicely with the action of the narrative.

The comedy in the circus scenes is very well done, for although some of the tricks are ancient they belong to this type of show. There is the strong man who awes the audience with his lifting of prodigious weights and then there is the clown and his absurdities.

Tito and the prince resemble each other like the proverbial two peas. The Prince's father dies, and after the heir apparent, like Humpty Dumpty, is beyond picking up by all the king's horses and all the king's men, Tito finds himself bound to accompany Illyria's noblemen to the royal palace or be arrested for the murder of the Prince. The beautiful trapeze artist suspects foul play and as she hears that the Prince is safe she believes that Tito has been slain. Therefore with a pistol concealed in a bouquet of flowers, she goes forth to put a bullet through the new King.

Throughout this good-natured and interesting romance there are some joyous situations. At first one is impelled to regret Mr. King's permitting the trapeze artist to leap out of a window, but when she happily saves herself by clinging to a tree one realizes that it is her circus stunts that serve her in good stead.

The way in which Tito gets away from the palace is artfully arranged, for the Chancellor, who might have killed Tito (as the King), discovers that it is unnecessary. When the Chancellor informs the clown that he (Tito) must be apprehended for the slaying of the King Tito cooly tells that official that he will have a hard time proving that he (Tito) is not the King.

Mr. Colman fills the dual rôle with much artistry. His mustache is longer and neatly curled as the Prince. This Prince also wears a monocle. The clown has put a faint suggestion of a mustache and his face does not appear to be as well nourished as that of the Prince.

Miss Banky is attractive enough as the circus performer, but after the Chancellor has bought her one of Illyria's latest creations, she is stunning. Miss Banky also delivers a competent performance. Gustav von Seyffertitz is splendid as the Chancellor.

THE MAGIC FLAME, with Ronald Colman, Vilma Banky, Augustino Borgato, Gustav von Seyffertitz, Harvey Clarke, Shirley Palmer, George Davis, Andre Cheron and Vadim Uraneff, adapted from Rudolph Lothar's novel, "King Harlequin," directed by Henry King; "Memories," a technicolor novelty; Miriam Lax, soprano. At the Rlalto Theatre.

 

Sources: NY Times, IMDB, A Certain Cinema