50/50 (2011)

Often times in life its not the fears you plan for that throw up roadblocks, but rather the fears you never saw coming. The ones you hide behind under the belief that you're too young, live too healthy of a lifestyle, or too cautious and therefore they'll never happen to you. The very fears that allow you to get up in the morning and jog past busy streets, take those roller coaster rides, have that second hot dog, and breeze through the day while your conventional worries hog the rest of the time. Worries about your job, your living space, or your social environment.

Enter "cancer," the one word no human being on the planet wants to hear. Especially not when its directed in diagnostic format at them. But perhaps the greater question is once that word is out there, how do you react?

There's a lot to admire in the 2011 dramady that is 50/50. Its central figurehead is not a conventional cinema protagonist. The surrounding cast is each doused in their own collection of flaws and visible shortcomings as people, friends, and lovers. The approach taken to the very serious subject matter of cancer can be off putting to some, given the stark contrasting movements between levitating humor and emotional lashing out.

But at the core of it all is Adam, and I have to say he's quite a well crafted character, and one given the full treatment by Joseph Gordon Levitt. While it would have been easy to place Adam on the back-burner and use him as a medium to craft the characters around him, 50/50 Dives in head first in dealing with Adam's new found dilemma. We go on a journey through treatment, and the stages of acceptance as Adam not only overcomes some of his interpersonal problems, but also comes to embrace some of those peculiarities that make him who he is.

Behind the camera Jonathan Levine treads the thin line between style and substance. He intervenes only when he feels an added laugh or emotional tug can be gained through a bit of camera trickery, but for the most part holds himself at bay. His organization of shots and movement never left me wanting, never jerked me out of the film, or disassociated me with the characters. Will Reiser's steady pen boosts each character by laying on a level of complexity for each. Adam chews his nails, his therapist is unsure of herself and lacks seasoned confidence, his mother struggles with his father who has Alzheimer's and can't find a way to connect with her now sick son, his best friend tries his best to cheer Adam up but his plans are often misguided and seemingly selfish, and his girlfriend doesn't know how to be there when he needs her the most.

All of this plays out in a sea of well crafted drama and comedy, that floats below the line of greatness for me. Despite a few incredibly relatable and powerful dramatic moments, I still felt just on the cuff of that lasting emotional connection. As if there were a missing piece that would have turned a few passing sniffles and grins into a waterworks of tears and endless smiles. The added meh factor of Seth Rogan playing Seth Rogan squared did little to amplify my love for the characters. I don't dislike Rogan but his brand of comedy felt a bit out of touch with the emotional tone of the rest of the film. Sure Reiser and Levine do a find job of wrangling it in at the necessary moments of drama, but for the most part I wouldn't have minded him being put farther into the background.

Overall Score: 8.00/10

Film Credits:
Directed By - Jonathan Levine
Written By - Will Reiser

Traveling On Wings of Desire

Can you truly love a film and not understand one lick of it? I like to think so. Appreciation for films can often be found in the way they manipulate your mood, create a sense of elevation, and transport your mind into a realm far removed from the everyday. Oh, Wings of Desire, how you intrigue me.

Don't get me wrong, a good sixty percent of your dialogue sounded like the ramblings of a traumatized philosophy professor. Not to mention all the wrapped in layers of reiteration, subtext, and reflection on an eternal scale. You certainly don't make it easy, but you indisputably make it enchanting. So enchanting in fact that once the credits began to roll I felt a sudden jolt, thrusting me back into reality. What a harsh thing for you to go and do.

There's a definitive style to Wings of Desire. You can feel it in every scene, in every moment of dialogue. A fluidity to the language that rolls with the tongue. A strolling, indifference that trudges along with the camera. Then - a snap - all that color suddenly thrust right out at the viewer amidst an onslaught of black and white. Humans - color, Angels - black and white. It's an interesting superimposition that serves somewhere in the heart of Wender's tale.

A collage of esoteric beliefs colliding with introspective desires. At times trapped in moody contextualization, Wender blends new age lifestyle with a sort of frail longing to simultaneously escape and embrace a German past so distraught with conflict.

As entrancing an experience as I've had in some time, Wings of Desire lives up to the high acclaim it has garnered over the years. Not the kind of film built for those who seek mindless entertainment, Wender's tale of two perennial angels juxtaposed against the backwash of life is a wondrous affair.

Love in the Afternoon: Love Audrey Any Time

I don't mean to sound hyperbolic, but you could show me a film with Audrey Hepburn spending two hours counting dimes and I'd probably still give it a six out of ten. For my part, she's just that mesmerizing to watch. Of course, it doesn't hurt that in this 1957 seductive romantic sex-comedy, Hepburn plays the shy, seductive french (? - well, they say she's french) girl, who lures in the strapping American, Gary Cooper as Gary Cooper, and begins a tantalizing affair.

So, that's about thirty minutes of the two+ hour long film taken care of. What for the rest? Well a lot of montages, waiting for the characters to get back together, and then more seductive talk as Hepburn's character grows into a full woman, and Cooper begins the slow transition process from Master of Debauchery to Love Sick Womanizer. Oh, and don't forget to throw in some Gypsies and Maurice Chevalier for a bit of flavor (not exactly a sentence you get to write every day - shame).

And it's lucky for Love in the Afternoon that it has such a strong cast. Because in all honesty, I love you Billy Wilder, but this one is a bit of a bore. The middle just doesn't end. Once the setup is gone, the movie's footing is swiped out from underneath it quicker than a foot on top of a banana peel in a '30s slapstick film. The scenes were Hepburn and Cooper are apart are just agonizing to watch. It's not that they're bad, but rather that they don't go anywhere. So much rush for the setup only to sit around and wait for the film to roll back around again.

But that's OK, because you get to pass the time staring at one of Hollywood's finest stars. Hepburn may not have to pull off a french accent, but she knows how to work a camera. And few have ever come close to her level. Maurice Chevalier is always a delight to behold. Gary Cooper oozes manliness, even if it does come with a bit too much of the grandpa smell. Then, you have the gypsies, who are a solid recurring gag throughout the whole affair.

Wilder's direction is tame, and lacks the oomph of so many of his efforts. The dark, cynical edged, comedy he so often interspliced throughout his rom-coms is visibly missing from this affair. If it weren't for the opening credits, this film would lack the markers of a Wilder installment. Which is fine in some respects, but I couldn't help but long for that exaggerated zany, anti-romantic sentiment. Yet, what the film lacks in laughs it makes up for in torrid passion. A highly sexualized blend, stirred together using some of Hollywood's finest, and thrown into an era where such talk was far from the social norm. Now that's the Wilder I know and love!

Overall Rating: 7.00/10

Public Service Announcement:

Warning - Films starring Audrey Hepburn have been officially labeled aphrodisiacs by the Food and Drug Administration. Those sensitive to such 'energetic expressions' may want to consult their doctor prior to seeing any of her films. Ah screw, it live a little!

His Kind of Woman: A Priceless Affair

Is it too great a pun to call His Kind of Woman, Priceless? If so, slap the cuffs on me and take me away to jail because His Kind of Woman is a film which lives and dies by the vocal wonder that is Vincent Price. A constant reminder that the greatest flaw our society will always face is that he failed to live long enough to do a GPS voice over.

When dealing with a movie of the flair of His Kind of Woman, it's important to categorize just what kind of film it is. Setup and packed with all the markings of a fly by night, run of the mill noir tale, His Kind of Woman injects a lovely dose of self-awareness, and light hearted adventure along the way. The interplay and romantic tinglings between our picture of masculinity (Mitchum) and the epitome of sex appeal (Russell), reaches a chemical overload, exploding off the screen. And it's a good thing to, because the story just isn't that great.

But His Kind of Woman has a good enough story to do what it wants to do: spin noir on its head. Vincent Price's overblown tour de force finale, matched with Mitchum's tough guy looking for answers setup, all at the background of a beautiful costal resort in South America, it's just too much to handle. In most other hands, this film would be inept, generic, or so cheesy even milk would pass. Yet, it never falters.

True to the course, and willing to take a chance, His Kind of Woman shines in the most nuanced, twilight lit light. Of course, it doesn't hurt that the film features Jim "the Thurston Howell III Mr. Magoo" Backus as a bumbling background loafer - obviously present to supply this film with the necessary street cred. Oh, this is just a joy to be had.

Every character just works. Not only on their own right, but with respect to the personas of those around them. Their conversations bounce off one other flawlessly. It's almost as if the cast was born to work together. From bit players to big stars, everyone pulls their own weight. And the film is all the better for it!

Overall Rating: 8.00/10

Thor (2011)

Overall Score: 7.00/10

Hi, and welcome to Thor Review number 9,291 in your Google Feed Reader. We here at A Life in Equinox are proud to now present our vaguely similar thoughts to what most other people are saying about the film. If you don't want to read anything negative about Thor, please cover your eyes and whack aimlessly at your mouse now.

If I could boil down Marvel's latest endeavor to just one simple concept, it would be this: self-awareness. Every movie is not just aware of its place within the context of the greater cinematic picture. It's also aware of its place within public lore. The aspects of its story that can be mocked, are. The aspects of its story that can be championed, are. And this concept succeeds because of one simple thing: Marvel knows the formula for making a successful superhero movie.

Unfortunately, one thing is lost amidst all that self-awareness... a sense of self. Each movie is so wrapped up in being ironic, self-referential, and inter-series referential that it leaves its characterizations at the door. Life defining events are simplified into one or two sentence conversations. Character backstories are summed up in single facial expressions. And the dialogue of the world you're creating... well it's just used without context, definition, or explination.

All these things are fine, if you're dealing with an audience in which one can generally expect a great deal of knowledge on the subject matter going in. However, much is the same case with Harry Potter, that's not the norm. And for those like myself who didn't grow up caring about comic books, or superheroes for that matter, much is lost in a sea of names I can't understand, people who just seem to be doing things at random, and a hammer whose Arthurian 'sword in the stone' narrative seems to deliver a limitless power source to its holder.

These are the things I find frustrating about modern cinema in general, but if I don't want to get lost in a sea of 'looky looky,' I suppose it's time I start adapting. However, don't expect me to go easily. There are certain basic components I expect from a film, and in that regard Thor reaches the finish line by the narrowest of margins.

If nothing else, I'd say it's the 'cute factor' that saves Thor. Despite its PG-13 and occasional subtle adult humor, Thor is a relatively tame affair which embraces a childlike innocence of a comic book reader. The jokes are well timed, founded on over the top characters, and packed with plenty of charismatic talent to see it through to the end. The visuals are stunning, amped up by 3D - even if it is blatantly unnecessary - and full of color and life.

Breakthrough villain, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) finds an off-kilter balance between Commodus and The Joker, making him equal parts mysterious and creative, but ultimately lacking the villainy of the aforementioned. Sure, he gets up to a bit of 'mischief,' but for the most part his efforts are conventional and ill-conceived. Sort of how one would imagine an evil David Copperfield.

Chris Hemsworth utilizes charm, intensity, and dead on comedic timing in bringing our Titular superhero to life. By playing up the camp of the role he is involved in, we are allowed to buy into the camp of the surrounding story. A style fellow actors Natalie Portman, Kat Dennings, the 'Warriors Three,' and the infallible Clark Gregg embrace in whole. Especially when you consider that the relationships built between them are founded almost entirely on non-verbal communication.

Anthony Hopkins knows how to command the screen, and is a dead ringer for Odin alongside Stellan Skarsgard, who just seems to exude fatherly experience with each vocalization. Leaving the rest in the capable, if not overtly theatrical, directing skills of Kenneth Branagh.

Thor does not reinvent the wheel, it just adds a polish, little bit of gold plating, and allows the viewer to get wrapped up in the continuous motion. And for those seeking out Thor for their viewing, that's most likely the full range of what they seek.

Film Credits:
Directed By: Kenneth Branagh
Written By: Ashley Miller,  Zack Stentz, and Don Payne
Based on the Comics By: Stan Lee, Jerry Lieber, and Jack Kirby 

Source Code (2011)

Overall Score: 7.75/10

You wake up and you're a different man. The woman in front of you is a stranger who's known this you for time untold. The people around you are completely different from the world you know. You panic, you sweat, you flea. And when you reach a breaking point, boom. All of the sudden you're yourself again. But something's still not right. You're trapped in a box. On the camera is another woman you don't know, but this one knows the real you. The situation is the same, but different. Two woman, two you's, two completely different lives. Welcome to the Source Code.

Despite what it would have you believe, Source Code is not a thriller. Sure there's the running, the chasing, and the battle with time. But that's all a cover. Source Code is really all about one very specific thing. Life, and how far we're willing to go to salvage it when pushed beyond the confines of death.

As many have pointed out, Source Code is basically Deja Vu, Groundhog's Day, and Twelve Monkeys tossed into a blender; and yet it manages comes out clean on the other side. Its persistent optimism, high sci-fi undertones, and challenging questions on identity and fulfillment give it an air of freshness that even the most hardened of film goers will intake happily.

By those standards, Source Code thrives. With minute changes on each go-around it avoids the redundant atmosphere Vantage Point buried itself under. As well, Source Code also utilizes the 'actual' world, outside the restrictive the focal program, to give audiences another layer of tension and characters to interrogate and seek refuge in.

For a second outing, Duncan Jones plays it safe and smart, despite the ominous presence of Dunkin' Donuts (who I could have sworn were behind it all). The plot keeps things rolling, inviting new details to entice the viewer, but always acknowledging the characters and the science fiction first. As mysteries go, Source Code's is a rather tame one. No big twists, limited ideology, and even less big shock moments. It is those characters that we grow to know and appreciate that provides us the drive to see them prosper. Where many writers would put their idea at the forefront of any mystery, Ben Ripley intelligently makes it more about the surrounding events and people. The Source Code world is always secondary, and justly so.

Yet, there is one character that is disturbingly absent from the entire affair - Sean. The body to which Jake Gyllenhaal's Colter Stevens now owns while inside the Source Code. Very early on we are brushed aside on any emotional connection as Goodwin (Farmiga) promptly tells us "for this mission he is irrelevant." However, as Source Code travels down the slippery path between reality and imaginary, he becomes an element of collateral damage. By the end, many of us would be hard pressed to know he existed at all. Especially given the film's strong stance of ignorance with respect to him.

A minor detail in some eyes, but I can't help but feel that we have been deprived some crucial detail of character development. All we know of him is a name and profession. Beyond that he is a zombie. An empty vessel, and the lack of any care or attention towards him leads me to call into question the saleability of the film's ending. While it wouldn't be the greatest of endings in any other circumstance, I do feel it could have considerably benefited from some exposition on the man.

But Source Code does an excellent job of blinding that. By playing up our central character's emotional transformation, we care more for him than we would ever bother to care about the elusive Sean. We come to love Colter Stevens for his heart, his care, and the manner by which he comes to view the world. He, in essence, becomes our vessel. Yet, he is one to which we share the world, and for that we feel a deeper emotional kindred.

Thus becomes the tale of Source Code. For those seeking only thrills, Source Code is not the path you should take. For those who want the thrills mixed in with something a bit more, Source Code is without a doubt a destination you'll enjoy the journey to. Besides, who can turn down two hours of solid Michelle Monaghan and Jeffrey Wright lighting up the screen?

Film Credits:
Directed By: Duncan Jones
Written By: Ben Ripley

The Adjustment Bureau (2011)

Overall Score: 7.25/10

Set against a mosaic of blue and gray control interspersed throughout bright world of free will, The Adjustment Bureau takes on the long standing battle of Free Will vs. Pre-Ordained Path. And much like its political savvy centerfold, Adjustment Bureau knows to walk the thin line right in between the two. Unwilling to commit to religious overtones or undertones, Adjustment Bureau is a fresh spin on a tired romance genre, blending in a science fiction - fantasy element with some pseudo-religion that supplies just enough juice to keep the engine rolling along.

Despite being a romance-thriller, The Adjustment Bureau is surprisingly tame on both accounts. Instead, the film relies heavily on drama and anticipation in building to its inevitable 'run for freedom' climax. In turn, utilizing the strength of its characters to get it there. This is an admirable decision in an age in which unnecessary chase sequences to nowhere have become common place, and romances have been 'dumbed down' to 'asshole gets the girl.'

Relying on its cast of colorful characters, and the romantic inclinations of its audience members, The Adjustment Bureau finds a way to overcome the many 'really?' moments that would plague a film of this nature; while still maintaining viewer interest. Matt Damon is better than he's been in a few of his more 'Oscar-Bait' centric roles as of late, and Emily Blunt is always a delight to watch. Anthony Mackie continues his upward trend following The Hurt Locker, and John Slattery provides the film with a much needed whimsical edge. Terence Stamp seems set for a collision course with Frank Langella for the title of 'ultimate talk-only bad guy in a suit and hat,' but Langella still holds the edge. Last, but not least, professional 'that guy' Michael Kelly rounds out the film's strong cast, and gives us the necessary realist amidst this sea of fantasy.

Despite the film's unique color scheme, abandoned entirely by the marketing team, writer-director George Nolfi doesn't bring much to the table that one wouldn't expect from other directors. His greatest strength lies in his awareness of the openness to the world he has created. In a Matrix style environment where every door can lead to anywhere, Nolfi incorporates this motif through a series of exciting chase sequences spread across the entirety of New York. This high speed contrast keeps things exhilarating, allowing the film to touch on the finer landmarks without being too obsessive about them. Granted the one-two punch of Yankee stadium and the Statue of Liberty is a bit pushing it.

However, Nolfi also shows a concern in dealing with his supporting characters. Mackie's Harry Mitchell could have easily been written off as your typical 'they're not all bad guys' routine, but Nolfi takes the time to explore and expand deeper. He's more than just a knowledge bridge to the bureau, he serves as the center of the character web, keeping everything in balance for us to appreciate. Unfortunately, this comes at a cost a bit big to chew on. The almost complete loss of characterization for our main romantic counterpart in Elise (Blunt). We don't understand her reasoning, and her backstory is rushed at cataclysmic rates through brief encounters.

The obvious consequence leaves the romantic stronghold of the film in a bit of muddy water. You can stand to be there, but it's far from the comfort and safety you would expect given the conditions. It is by those standards that I find myself quite torn on The Adjustment Bureau. It's good enough to be enjoyed and appreciated, but where one can find potential, many can easily find fault.

Film Credits:
Written and Directed By - George Nolfi
Based on the Short Story By - Philip K. Dick

Blue Valentine (2010)

OVERALL SCORE: 8.50/10

It seems that the basic criteria for writing a review of Blue Valentine is that you open up with a melancholic prose on the destructive power of a dying relationship. Some go the doom and gloom route on how all relationships are a facade and to love is to embrace its inevitable demise. As the child to parents who have been married for thirty years, and the grandson to grandparents who've been married for sixty, that's one ticket I'm not buying. Nor am I buying the alternative viewpoint that all is bubblegum that it's really sad that these two just couldn't work it out.

Blue Valentine is about forgetfulness, in a rather abstract sense. Somewhere along the line our romantic focal point, Dean and Cindy forgot what it meant to love. Perhaps they never really knew at all. Love is more than passion, prosperity, and prospects. Love is about communication, compassion, and understanding. Passion flies by like wind over a meadow. It's ripples are everlasting, but in the end it is just a passing thing. What is important is what you do once it has left you by the wayside onward towards another unsuspecting pair.

Once the wind has made its move, Dean and Cindy seem at a loss for what is to come next. Their whirlwind romance, catapulted into the next dimension by pregnancy and a plethora of personal issues, comes to a point where they forget one another. The romance is gone. They exist now as two inverse functions desperately seeking the points of overlap. Yet even when they do manage an honest connection, the time apart has made them judgmental and repressive. They can't be honest because of the collateral damage. Even when they try, they run away because it's too hard. In the end, it is their own destruction that they bring about.

Told simultaneously, we see the rise and fall of Dean and Cindy through the scope of the events that forever changed their relationship. When we first meet Dean he's a young, charismatic, hard worker just looking for a decent job to pay the bills, and maybe find a girl or two. Cindy is an aspiring doctor with her wrestling boyfriend, and passes her time by taking care of her sickly grandmother. The world is ahead of her, and she's ready to take it on and escape her current circumstances. But when things fall apart with her loving partner, she finds herself magnetically attracted to the young moving boy at her grandmother's rest home. Their whirlwind romance is intense, quirky, and full of spontaneity and desire.

Years later, Dean and Cindy take care of their young, elementary aged daughter. Dean is working as a painter and drinks constantly. Cindy is a nurse at a small clinic with a cute doctor hoping to whisk her away with him to a new job and 'brighter' future. The desire seems all but gone, and in its place we find a cold awareness. The sort of faulty relationship you find when only a child seems to really hold it together. Like planets, their lives revolve around the daughter, only lining up on certain events, and even then still a safe distance away. Dean desperately wants the romantic past, but seems perfectly content with the present. Cindy desperately wants her prospect filled past, and feels weighed down by Dean's contentment. An intended romantic getaway to a second-rate hotel becomes the launching pad through which the end finally comes.

Perhaps the most appreciable aspect of Blue Valentine is the beauty to which director Derek Cianfrance captures the film. With a stern sense of realism, Cianfrance presents the audience with a story that feels so real you could imagine a friend of yours telling you about the demise of their own relationship. This factor draws back any hindrances from potential fabricated emotional plot points, and gives Gosling and Williams a stage upon which to shine. And shine they do.

Through the beautiful imagery of Cianfrance, we see the tale unfold. If it weren't for the sheer frustration that can be derived from two broken souls, Blue Valentine would almost be a perfect film. Yet as far as breakthrough films go, Cianfrance has hit a home run worth of note, awards, and a great deal more attention than he's gotten. Then again, that's the power of media's obsession with 'ooooh' such a naughty film. Has the sad side effect of wearing down potential voters. Unfortunately Blue Valentine is resigned to the A Single Man fate. A passing award nomination for a beautiful film that deserved far more affection than it truly got.

Film Credits:
Directed by: Derek Cianfrance
Written by: Derek Cianfrance, Joey Curtis, and Cami Delavigne

Knight and Day (2010)

OVERALL SCORE: 5.00/10

Every neighborhood has that one kid. You know the one I'm talking about. He's not the brightest bulb in the bunch, is a bit sycophantic, but everyone puts up with it because he's rather amusing to be around. In the most abstract sense, that's what Knight and Day is.

Like most romantic-comedy action-adventures, Knight and Day relies heavily on the action to save it from the romance, and in turn build some comedy. The movie borrows none too shyly from the likes of True Lies and the action-comedies of the nineties. Unfortunately, it's no where near as good as many of them, and itself, aspired to be.

Director James Mangold orders up a Tom Cruise number 1 special with the infamous "happy mcSmiley face w/ sunglasses" staple performance. Cameron Diaz shows up in a hollow shell of her prior works - the ditsy, but cute business girl with no luck in love. Together they formulate the kind of chemistry that can only be rivaled by a turtle using pick-up lines on a green and brown checkered wall. There's not much there, and to be quite honestly there doesn't need to be.

Perhaps the most saddening aspect of Knight and Day is just how hard it tries to be something more than a shoot 'em up, on the run tale. It's quite apparent that writer Patrick O'Neill wanted to say more about the life of a spy and resigned himself to a cheap little side story with next to no direct impact. Much in the same way one could define the entire movie.

Peter Sarsgaard comes and goes as the 'too obvious for his own good' villain matching wits with Viola Davis (who seems more than happy to play the same character she did in Law Abiding Citizen). We even get a few brief Paul Dano sightings as an uber-cliche, absent minded genius.

In many reviews I've read, they've pointed out the movie should have stuck with the opening concept of Roy being an agent whose simply gone crazy/paranoid. To be honest, I have to agree. The film's efforts at a modern technology based plot come off hokey, even for a film lathered in cheese (a super battery? really?). There's simply not enough in the engine to go the distance. It can be oddly charming at times, even quite a bit humorous, but never to the level it needs to be for sustained interest.

In the end, Knight and Day is an amusing tale that won't bore you, though it may offend your sensibilities. The kind of film you start forgetting the second the credits begin to role. Then again, if that's all you're looking for - no harm done.

The American (2010)

OVERALL SCORE: 7.75/10

Every year a handful of rather curious films make their way into the public foray of wide release. These films are often distinguishable from your grade A, prime Hollywood blockbuster by the even more aberrant phrases which accompany reviews of them. Most notably phrases like "deliberately slow," which of course comes in strict confrontation with the films that are "accidentally slow..." most likely due to some sort of crass infection (or having seen one too many Twilight films). Thus, ladies and gentlemen, I present for your viewing pleasure, or agony depending on personal preference, The American.

The tale of an assassin for hire going into hiding, on the run from a mysterious foe, is an old one we all know too well. These days they're often marked by the dire need for our hero, or often anti-hero, to wipe out entire villages worth of foes in an effort to either prove their innocence, or no longer be cost effective to hunt (takes lots of money to train a good spy, shame to train them all only to be killed by the one you paid good money to train and now want dead). In that respect, The American quite handily sidesteps the modern mold.

Built more on atmosphere than modern thrills, The American is moody, taut, and without judgment. Our hero is solicitous by nature and the path he has chosen. His apparent distaste toward his past derives from the consequences of his actions, not necessarily the moral ambiguity of them. He sees little wrong in killing, as he feels justified whenever he does so (though this could easily be a case of self-delusion - given his attitude).

Clooney is spot on as the dispassionate lead, Jack. Jack is a man built on repetition, and director Anton Corbijn aptly captures that. It is for that fact alone that many may find Jack to be a drawling and uninteresting character. He visits only the same girl at the same brothel, partakes in routine exercises, and handles time consuming, seemingly monotonous, fastidious tasks (such as the creation of a new gun from scratch). Corbijn's direction realizes all those activities, along with Jack's interaction with the folk of the small town in which he resides, and budding relationship with the prostitute.

Make no mistake, unlike many films which would pounce this motif in a moment, The American steers far away from the generic "small town rallies behind stranger whose become 'one of them,'" in favor of the more subtle one on one relationships that affect Jack's life. His interactions with the local religious leader, Father Benedetto (Paolo Bonacelli), new client Mathilde (Thekla Reuten), and prostitute Clara (Violante Placido) adversely affect his life. In that they merely open up the wounds (metaphorically and literally) that he keeps hidden deep inside. At the same time he presents upon them the very things they wish to shy away from in themselves.

The supporting cast displays deft timing and understanding of what they represent to the story (granted quite of a few of the female cast spend a good deal of the film topless - exception to Thekla Reuten). Their travels in and out of the tale are timely, and based on the need of Jack at that particular moment. Benedetto offers him guidance, Mathilde presents something to do, and Clara caps it off by delivering affection and companionship.

As a director, Anton Corbijn shows a decidedly strong knack for capturing the simple beauty of Italy without over glorifying it. It is far too often the case of European-located (American starred) dramas/thrillers/comedies that they feature more as advertisements for how much better everything is over there (especially if you're rich) than they are ever the aforementioned categories. The American manages to do some of that without being preachy, and still analyzing the seedy underbelly of the world in which it resides. There's a complex series of characteristics that define Corbijn's Italy, from violence, sex, and monotony to simplicity, wine, romance, and sweeping landscapes.

The slowness of The American can be defended through the factor that it seeks to capture them all without forcing the issue. I felt the movie's run time of an hour and forty five minutes perfectly fit the mood Corbijn created. The music of Herbert Gronemeyer, with his first score since the 1980's, perfectly matched it and helped carry along its more winding moments.

Despite what some people wish, I don't think The American needed any more violence/action than what it presents. The violence isn't what's important and it's spaced evenly enough throughout the film, with intermittent moments of tension to keep the ball rolling. I was rather taken by the characterizations, and wish, if anything, Corbijn had dedicated more moments to their exposition than the minutes he would spend focusing on Jack cleaning a barrel (or filling a can with bullets).

Because of those differing moments, I struggle to claim The American as an excellent film reaching into the realm of this year's upper echelon. I found it perfectly acceptable, engaging, and intense for my needs (in all honesty, coming off a Yasujiro Ozu bend helps make lots of things feel speedy), but the movie felt aloof enough to leave me a bit disconnected. I want to be engaged and enthralled in the world, but much like its main character I felt as if a long outstretched arm prevented it. The devil is in the details, and The American avoids the details of its plot in favor of imagery. To many this may be a sign of greatness, but at times I found it frustrating.

All in all, The American summarizes to a stagnant thriller with enough juice in the engine to keep moving, and more than enough characters to maintain my level of interest. Those who prefer action with witty-satirical heroes will likely find little to enjoy in Corbijn's tale. But if you're willing to give it a go and accept it for what it is, there's plenty of emotion and depth to behold.

Film Credits:
Directed By: Anton Corbijn
Written By: Rowan Joffe
Based on the Novel By: Martin Booth

The Secret in Their Eyes (2009)

OVERALL SCORE: 9.50/10

Regret can be debilitating even among the strongest men. It's worse when all the regrets of your life spawn from a single series of interconnected events twenty-five years ago. Retired legal counselor and federal agent, Benjamin Esposito (Ricardo Darin) finds himself at a crossroads in his life. With little to do, and less in mind, he decides to write a novel about the events that surrounded the rape and murder of Lilana Coloto (Carla Quevedo).

What transpires is a tale of passion, unrequited love, and justice in a world of political upheaval. In love with his young boss, the now Judge Irene Hastings (Soledad Villamil), Benjamin is a man fascinated by passion. Too reserved to ever express his feelings, he idealizes Ricardo Morales (Pablo Rago), Lilana's widower who spends every day at the train station hoping to one day find her killer.

In essence, that's what separates Secret in Their Eyes from so many of our modern-day generic crime thrillers. It's not a film with a series of twists and turns, desperately trying to get you to guess and second-guess who the killer could possibly be. The killer is revealed very early on into the tale. Instead, the movie is about what happens afterward. How those events so affect these characters that it breaks them down to their very raw emotional beings. What happens when these characters are finally forced to address the very things they've been repressing for years.

Once those shells have been stripped away, we finally get to see these characters for who they truly are. Often sad and lonely people trying to get through life with as little regret as possible. Sure, they work well-paying jobs, maybe they have a marriage or a loved one, but none of these things complete them. The things they truly want in life have either been taken away or not come along when they were in a position to grab them. As such, much of Secret in Their Eyes is about missed opportunities. Lives currently filled with reflection over action.

That's one of the many aspects I absolutely love about this film. Many will tell you it's a thriller, tense and ominous, and it is, but Secret in Their Eyes is so much more. Writer-Director Juan Jose Campanella majestically wraps a tale of complex, emotional characters around a captivating thriller with enough twists and turns to constantly keep you wanting more. As much a mood film as it is an emotion, Secret in Their Eyes constantly draws the viewer in with a perfect balance of intensity and reality.

One would be hard pressed to pin-point a single genre for the wide-spread narrative. The movie flirts with a wide variety of topics, with each character embodying a different form. Through their eyes we encounter politics, justice, love, loss, and addiction. We see how failing to gain closure on some of the biggest events of life can leave gaping holes that must be closed. And through it all Campanella finds hope in even the most solemn of life's moments.

Unrelenting, Campanella navigates the tale with a keen understanding for direction. His timing is as impeccable as his characters are fallible. Sentimentality is the name of the game, and everyone plays. Every scene is an expository moment, making even the most meandering scenes captivating.

At times the film may waver under the weight of its melodrama, but the characters and Campanella carry it through. There's no need for action to keep your attention, only tension and well designed characters. Simple enough to make you love them, complex enough to request you get to know them. All in all, The Secret in Their Eyes is one of the best films I've seen in years, and a surefire classic.

Film Credits:
Directed By: Juan Jose Campanella
Written By: Juan Jose Campanella & Eduardo Sacheri
Novel By: Eduardo Sacheri 

Monsters (2010)

Overall Rating: 7.50/10

A broken society can make even the simplest task seem inaccessible. You add to that a continent overrun by monsters, and you're likely to find that task nearly insurmountable. The 2010 low-budget sci-fi drama Monsters examines just that very situation. Teetering on the edge of dystopia, Mexico's alien invasion becomes the focal point where the future of humanity may weigh in the balance.

Navigating a world of aliens and alienated, Samantha (Whitney Able) and Kaulder (Scoot McNairy) must traverse the infected zone in the hope of getting back home to America. In doing so they bear witness to the brutal inner turmoil of a planet learning to adapt. Along the way they are also privy to some of the hidden beauties one might find in a world if they look. Something as simple as alien and plant life finding a middle ground, co-existing in a land of conflicting needs, can supply elements of hope and fear.

Able and McNairy handle the demanding task of being our eyes and ears, guiding us into this world, without hesitation or reproach. As these character begin to understand the new world in which they live, so do we. At the same time they also hold onto the world as they know it. We learn about their background through casual conversations during lull moments along their journey. Their conflicting traits of cynicism and optimism, sarcasm and frustration, help keep viewers engaged, without needing to constantly resort to action.

Director Gareth Edwards shows great talent in piecing together the film, despite a limited shooting budget, and making it authentic. The fictional world feels real because there are relatable components. Characters you could imagine living down the street from you or trying to prosper in a mundane environment, invite you in to their situation. You understand their plight because in many ways it's not as different as you might think. People trying to escape unwanted situations, foreign presences trying to change the environment, and amidst it all humans seeking to understand their place.

Going in with the knowledge that it's as much a drama as it is a science fiction or action film is crucial to understanding the direction it takes. Monsters relies on the tension derived from a foreboding nature. It also relies on human interaction, and basic human nature. We see character's who try to help each other out and those who seek only to prosper from others failures. By contrast we see aliens who maraud the world and aliens who study it.

At times I felt that Monster reached more than it needed to in terms of character development. Samantha and Kaulder's evolving relationship felt generic and faintly founded. The ending, which ties the film together, seemed like a bad *nudge nudge* moment, trying to get audiences rushing for a rewind button. Edwards' tale of conflicting worlds thrives on the journey, the different personality types it takes to survive, and the mysterious world. Monsters is as much about exposing an alien world as it is about a human one.

Film Credits:
Written and Directed by: Gareth Edwards

Tangled (2010)

OVERALL RATING: 6.50/10

When deriving the formula for a Disney 'Princess' film, it's often easy to forget the real factors that make them work time and time again. The way in which music, creation, and drama can be woven into our basic desires - our dreams. Disney knows better than most that the product of a great (family friendly) fantasy tale involves people rising beyond the monotony of their life. Those at the bottom realizing their dream and helping those on the top to understand theirs. In that respect Disney's 2010 offering, Tangled, knows what it's doing.

Tangled is not a unique experience. It's characters carry with them many allusions to Disney's classic - Aladdin, for example. A thief who dreams big. A princess who seeks to know and love. Cute animal sidekicks that are as defiant, as they are helpful. However, to end any analysis of Tangled there would be to sell the film short. At every turn, Tangled finds a way create something new with old Disney lore and formulate a fresh perspective on life.

It's unfortunate that Tangled doesn't start off strong. The opening is a solid setup narration, but it leads into a handful of musical numbers that are, let's be honest, dreadful. These opening musical numbers are bland, crammed together, and repetitive. Right from the start I was ready to repel the rest of Tangled, and write it off as another film I don't understand the praise for. Rapunzel's (Mandy Moore) depth felt fragile, and frustratingly trite. Her 'adventures' involve a lot of hair flying around, which makes for great CGI but not hilarious moments. Well, not as hilarious as the directors want them to be. With the introduction of Flynn Rider (Zachery Levi), everything changes.

The Rock called, he wants his eyebrow back... oh and a career if you've got it.

Flynn is your made to order thief on the run, with a somber enough back story to tie it all together. He stumbles across the tower which enslaves Rapunzel while on the run following his latest 'job,' and the rest, as they say, is history. Flynn and Rapunzel's scenes together are perfect. They compliment each other in the most dynamic of ways, delivering quality laughs and plot progression. In these moments you can really see writer Fogelman (Cars, Bolt) open up his bag of tricks and let Levi take care of the rest. Levi's portrayal of Flynn as cool, vain, and cunning keeps you guessing on his real motives, while opening your heart to his amusing ways. Fogelman perfectly swaps the straight man and comic moments between Flynn and Rapunzel, allowing both to shine. When Maximus, the royal guard horse and Flynn's mortal enemy, comes into the picture the rest of the film becomes pure Disney magic.

Directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard weave in and out of Disney norms flawlessly. They balance the pleasure with the pain, the love with the loss, and when it comes time to make us fear for the character's lives, they deliver. Intelligently using 3D sparingly, Tangled is a movie that can be revisited without worry on home systems. The 3D here accentuates, not defines, the film. It highlights the visual strengths, such as Rapunzel's hair and the lamp scene by the lake, without resorting to cheap gags (yes I'm looking at you awful Yogi Bear commercial).

The only real downside to Tangled is the lack of character exposition. Donna Murphy is fine as the evil Mother Gothel, but beyond some vanity and cinematic evilness her motivations are left entirely blank. The romantic aspect of Flynn and Rapunzel's relationship seems to grow in leaps and bounds, without solid transition moments to justify some of their sudden changes. During the middle, Tangled sprints on, requesting the audience to keep up as best they can.

By the end, Tangled does enough to leave the audience with a smile on their face, but lacks the depth to impose on them a long lasting connection. They'll remember the highs as it tries desperately to sweep past the lows, but that's a given. The best thing an aspiring audience member can do is to approach Tangled with an awareness of what it isn't (deep) and a desire for what it is (lighthearted fun). At best, it's a high quality imitation that escapes the cliche label through sheer charisma and determination. The characters may lack the fine tuning to make them Disney greats, but they do plenty for one solid outing.

Film Credits:
Directed By: Nathan Greno, Byron Howard
Written By: Dan Fogelman
Based on the Fairy Tale By: Jacob & William Grimm

The Kids Are All Right (2010)

THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT

DIRECTED BY: LISA CHOLODENKO

WRITTEN BY: LISA CHOLODENKO & STUART BLUMBERG

OVERALL SCORE: 8.25/10

When their children (Mia Wasikowska, Josh Hutcherson) seek out their biological birth father (Mark Ruffalo), lesbian couple Nic (Annette Benning) and Jules (Julianne Moore) must battle ever building insecurities, relationship issues, and a weakening family dynamic.

-----------------------------

Wonderfully balancing comedy and family drama, Lisa Cholodenko's The Kids Are All Right is one of the best films of the year, thus far. The dedication to realism, the depth of the characters, and the various issues they encounter breaths fresh life into the often hyperbolic subgenre dealing with homosexual relationships. Cholodenko's knack for creating viable character relationships allows the viewer to shed preconceived notions, and envelope themselves in these characters.

The viewer is allowed into the mindset of each character. We see Jules longing to be loved, Nic's desire to be in charge, the kids struggling to find balance in life, and Paul (Ruffalo) clinging to the hope of a family he never had. Very seldom throughout its run time does The Kids Are All Right ever feel forced, false, or disingenuous. The movie doesn't try and manipulate you into siding with the actions of one of the main characters over the other, but it wants you to understand each of them.

Cholodenko wonderfully crafts situations and common events to open the viewers mind to the insecurities of these characters. However, like any director, the actors need to deliver, and here each and every one does. Ruffalo, Benning, and Moore carry the heart of the film with their years of experience, while Hutcherson and Wasikowska match their talent scene for scene with great displays of potential.

One thing I found most fascinating about the film was its blatant distaste towards mainstream media based character archetypes. The 'dude' character often displayed as a cool, skateboarding, misunderstood genius, here is an idiot with no respect for anyone or anything. The 'not so subtle high school slut' gets set aside for her obsessive narcissism, instead of learning through some random series of events about true love. Paul, during his many tangents on the 'bohemian' lifestyle he represents comes off pompous. Even Nic, her dedication to work, and Jules, clinging to outward expressions of love, get the cynical eye from Cholodenko.

The well layered characters help to keep things rolling, especially when the plot falls back on some basic narrative conventions. The audience knows things will inevitably blow up, but the want to know how, and why is always at the forefront. Cholodenko keeps you wanting these characters to succeed, and hoping they will. Something only a great writer can truly knack.

The only real snag the film runs into is the lack of a substantial conclusion. While most likely intentional, the film leaves quite a few questions dangling for the viewer. Most notably, the ever frustrating 'now what?' The Kids Are All Right does an amicable job of hinting at the things to come, but it doesn't desire to be too descriptive. For the two hour emotional journey one goes on, it leaves a simultaneous feeling of joy and lacking. Not the most exciting duality of emotions to leave the theater with.

That doesn't change the fact that The Kids Are All Right is one of the better journeys of the year. The performances match the realism and intensity of the characters. The humor is fresh, serving as a perfect counterpoint to the drama. The movie is lighthearted enough to not feel like a burden upon the viewer, while deep enough to avoid feeling cliche. It should suffice to say The Kids Are All Right is one heck of a film.

The Kids Are All Right finds just the right balance between drama, comedy, and life to make its story not only plausible, but incredibly relatable. The film escapes genre cliches with ease, and stretches for that extra bit of realism. Lisa Cholodenko directs beautifully, never substituting style for substance. Cholodenko gets down to the core anxieties of the characters, peels back all their layers and allows the viewer to evaluate them on their own accord. All of which combines to make a great piece of cinema.

Princess Mononoke (1997)

PRINCESS MONONOKE

WRITTEN AND DIRECTED BY: HAYAO MIYAZAKI
TOP 100 FILMS: #53
OVERALL SCORE: 10/10

After a demon boar infects his arm, Prince Ashitaka, the last remaining royal heir of a tribe wiped out by the emperor, sets off on a journey to find his destiny. Along the way he finds himself caught in the middle of a war between the animal god Moro, her human child, and an ever expanding Iron Town which seeks control of the forest.

"What exactly are you here for?"
"To see with eyes unclouded by hate."

Early in the film, just after having been told his condition is irreversible where he now lives, the town elder tells Ashitaka that now all he can do is rise to meet his fate. To accept the path his life has taken, and go off to seek his destiny. Perhaps that is what is most earth shaking about Miyazaki's 1997 masterpiece (says me). The movie, no matter how you slice it, is the ultimate combination of everything Miyazaki had worked to create up until that point.

A movie about man's desire to control nature, it's desire to repel us, and the work of one to show them how they can find a middle ground. The notion of living in harmony with the earth so prevalent throughout his work, finds itself at the forefront of this visual art. And art is what it is. Using tons of textures, and amazing images Miyazaki created a world as rich as any he's created before, and since (though Spirited Away still takes my #1 spot).

To get this Miyazaki pushes his narrative into realms far darker than he had ever traversed before. Princess Mononoke deals with the most rash, and dark, of animal instincts: hate. And when you combine hate with greed, you can destroy everything pure. It's something each character in the film must rise to face. Everyone loses when you can't let go.

In showing us this, Miyazaki takes the time and effort to develop all of his characters. We see multiple sides to them. Their dark ambitions, and their saving graces. None of the leads are left too simple, straight, and each falters along the way. Breathing life into each scene, they become as deep as the forest itself. Rich with layers, and mysteries to solve. Each new scene with something to offer the viewer to chow down.

Ashitaka provides heart, and morality. San (the human child) provides perspective. Eboshi (female leader of Iron Town) offers us the future, with sympathy. Monk god-hunter Jigo the cost of greed. While the Gods Moro and Okkoto giving us experience and depravity. So much richness, with beautiful lines to deliver. And when you have such amazing voice work in both Japanese (Yoji Matsuda, Yuriko Ishida, Yuko Tanaka, etc.) and English (Gillian Anderson, Billy Bob Thorton, Mini Driver, Billy Crudup, Claire Dames, etc.), it's just a sight to be had.

Not to mention the action. Easily becoming Miyazaki's most violent film (for a PG-13 animated film there sure are a lot of decapitations). But in that violence Miyazaki builds character. A rarity in cinema these days, where violence is used for quick shots of entertain. Here it combines both to create something more. And for that the viewer gains a wondrous story to absorb.

The kind of story that's morals stick with you. The kind of story you can revisit anytime. Because it is so deep. Because there is so much too it. A new treat for each visit. A rare film that exceeds any genre by being a bit of all genres. One I highly recommend you check out any chance you get.

Princess Mononoke is the rare kind of animated film that reaches beyond all genres, creating a life unto itself. A story packed with heart, depth, and life you can't help but be absorbed by it. While the performances and writing are there each step of the way to match Miyazaki's ambition.

Gone with the Wind (1939)

GONE WITH THE WIND

DIRECTED BY: VICTORY FLEMING
WRITTEN BY: SIDNEY HOWARD
NOVEL BY: MARGARET MITCHELL
REVIEWED FOR: 1001 MOVIE CLUB
TOP 100 FILMS: #17
OVERALL SCORE: 10/10

Southern beauty Scarlett O'Hara (Vivien Leigh) must deal with Civil War, passing family, weakening estate, and a turbulent romance with the ever smooth Rhett Butler (Clark Gable).

"If I have to lie, steal, cheat or kill. As God is my witness, I'll never be hungry again."

An interesting thing happened during the dawn of feature length cinema. Despite loosing the war, the South managed to gain a great deal of cinematic prestige. From the 1915 Birth of a Nation to 1927's The General, Gone with the Win is the ultimate culmination of the Civil War from the perspective of the south. Epic, and yet simple. Tragic, and yet sublime. Gone With the Wind is a tale that escapes all bounds, by simply being a work of cinematic art.

A work that can be far too easily lambasted for being racist, and for its idealistic portrayal of Confederate superiority. All the while overlooking the fact that it is a tale from the perspective of slave owning, Confederate supporting, white female character. So while I do not agree with how it portrays these factions in a positive light, I do not criticize it for doing so given our limited point of view.

What is perhaps most striking about the film is how it portrays its two central characters. Scarlett is manipulative, conceited, and selfish. While Butler is in many respects a war profiteer, selfish, and manipulative himself. The two well compliment each other, and their romance (if one dares really call it that) gives Gone With the Wind a certain sentiment of tragic nostalgia. Never able to truly be in sync with one another, they find themselves often seeking what the other had.

You see, for all its negative traits Gone With the Wind is about facing change. Throughout the film Scarlett must match her will to live with the ever changing world around her. Her struggles with loneliness, and the ultimate consequences of her vibrant lifestyle. The final scene, a testament to all that these characters have had to endure.

As well, one can not appropriately mention this film without discussing Hatti McDaniel as Mammy. Despite her character being the ever typecasted "happy slave," McDaniel brings a great deal of presence, and character to the stage. The moral, and emotional, center to Scarlett's wavering ways. A subtly progressive character, whose importance in cinema can never be understated (in many respects both positively and negatively).

Importance in cinema. It's hard to describe Gone with the Wind any other way. For all its negatives, it's a movie that helped make cinema what it is today. And when you can be both important, and captivating, you have a visual treat for all to share.

One of the most epic films in history holds the test of time with striking visuals, memorable lines, and dynamic characters. Serving now as an example to what cinema can truly be with such prevailing talent behind it.

A Good Year (2006)

A GOOD YEAR

DIRECTED BY: RIDLEY SCOTT
WRITTEN BY: MARC KLEIN
NOVEL BY: PETER MAYLE
OVERALL SCORE: 6.50/10

After his uncle (Albert Finney) passes away, self-obsessed stock trader Max Skinner (Russell Crowe) returns to the chateau where he spent many years of his childhood, only to find it rundown, and riddled with memories.

Despite its flaws, A Good Year is a surprisingly charming affair. I can see why several years after its infamous critic bashing (26% on RT) it still holds a soft spot among fans of those involved. To be succinct, A Good Year is a moving that goes where many have gone before. The reformation of an asshole, who has a secret emotional side they keep hidden is no surprise. And at the same time Klein, Scott, and company are in no rush to redefine the genre. It's a romantic comedy that's less of a romance between Skinner and Fanny Chenal (Marion Cotillard), and is instead more a romance to the quiet, country side of France.

This is by no means a bad thing either. Scott's up-tempo directing style, compounded with beautiful scenery of rich lavish lifestyles we can never afford is appealing. It's amusing to see the locals interact, and the central cast are perfect, even if their characters are generally one note. They can be witty, goofy, and easy to attach to. Though I hate to say Max and Henry (the uncle) are the only ones given any real depth, and ironically Henry, who spends most of the film dead or in flashbacks, seems to be given more depth than any mainstay character. It's a shame, but Crowe, being his typical self, knows how to get more out of a one-note character than anyone. And that's where the film finds its saving grace.

For all of Scott's high tempo direction, the movie is a rather slow evolving tale. Characters come and go, and it has a rather episodic feel too it. Klein's intelligent dialogue script, works in favor of the personalities he has created. I just wish Klein had taken a few pages to really get into these characters. I kept feeling like something was going to happen, and while lots of things happened, nothing that ever sent me drowning in a sea of enjoyment did. Ultimately as the film's runtime passed along I sat entertained, but only mildly amused, and even less emotionally invested. Still, I was solidly entertained, and for most people that's an important factor. I still enjoy a some real depth though.

While A Good Year has all the charm a film of its nature should have, it doesn't go deep enough to get an overwhelming recommendation. Yet, I think it's solid enough to be worth your time, at the very least.

-------------------------------------------------
NOTE:

This was a special Happy Birthday Review for Common Sense Movie Reviews, be sure you head over there at some point today and wish him well!!!

Crazy Heart (2009)

CRAZY HEART

WRITTEN AND DIRECTED BY: SCOTT COOPER
OVERALL SCORE: 6.75/10

Stuck on the road most of the year, playing bowling alleys and rundown bars, ex-legend country singer, Bad Blake (Jeff Bridges) is an alcoholic with little going for him. After meeting up and coming reporter Jean (Maggie Gyllenhaal), Blake slowly starts to turn his life around.

Some great performances, and even better songs, trapped in mediocre direction and writing. That's about the best way I can summarize Scott Cooper's directorial coming out event. An event so saved by its performances I can see why Gyllenhaal and, to a greater extend, Bridges have gained so much love. Perhaps it is cosmic return for all of Bridges' hard work over the years, and some guilty feelings for the Rourke snub last year (yes, I still contend Penn's performance was only the 5th best of those nominated). Still, Crazy Heart has an admirably charming side to it. The kind of side that really gets audiences, and voters to rally behind it. It's dark, but never that dark. Sad, but never that sad. It's a product of hope, dreams, and lost ways. You know, sort of like what you used to hear musicians sing about.

Bridges is a delight to watch, even if his character is a bit on the scruffy side. He's got a great natural charm that really lights up the screen. While Gyllenhaal handles the emotionally torn romantic interest with a not so cheerful past. Together they create just a strong enough dynamic that it really helps make the film what it is. Of course smaller, but still solid, entries from Colin Farrell and Robert Duvall only add to this. They help to carry the film through a muddy middle portion, as the film tries to hammer out all of its characters' flaws and backstories. It creates a real emotional core for the film, bringing out those quiet moments, and making you really care for the audience.

Still, the entire time I couldn't help but be a little frustrated by Cooper's writing and directing. He's like an artist who can repaint all the great works, but can't figure out why his isn't the same. It, perhaps ironically, seems to really lack a little bit of heart. Blake is an enjoyable character, and easy to sympathize with, but we're never really let in. He drinks a lot, but then again it seems all worn down ex-celebrities do (just watch VH1). We never get to know why he is the way he is. Similarly for Jean. We see who she is, and we know there's reasons why she is that way, but we're never told. A couple subtle hints, and a fight, and that's about it. As well, during the really hard moments, Cooper seems to shy away from the emotion, and instead push the plot along. I hope in future films Cooper learns it is good to let some emotion sit, and resonate with the viewer, every once in a while. Still Cooper makes just enough of his writing to bring the film home. A good film, but not quite great.

About half way through Crazy Heart, it should become incredibly obvious to the viewer it's very reliant on two things: 1) the performances and 2) the songs. And when it has those two in unison it's a heck of a film, when it does it, it walks the thin line between good and mediocre.

The Time Traveler's Wife (2009)

THE TIME TRAVELER'S WIFE

DIRECTED BY: ROBERT SCHWENTKE
WRITTEN BY: BRUCE JOEL RUBIN
NOVEL BY: AUDREY NIFFENEGGER
OVERALL SCORE: 6.25/10

Chicago librarian, Henry DeTamble (Eric Bana) as an odd genetic condition: at random times, triggered by various things, he jumps through time. Clare Abshire (Rachel McAdams) has been in love with Henry since she first met him as a child, when he was a much older adult. As their first meeting comes very difficult, can they make such a complicated relationship work?

Sometimes you watch a movie, and while it's perfectly fine, you can't help but feel as if it would be far more developed in its original novel form. The Time Traveler's Wife is perfectly fine in and of itself, and it ranges between drama, romance, and comedy, but at times it feels a bit underwhelming, and illexplained. You see Time Traveler's Wife is, for the most part, told from the point of view of Henry, and his time line (except when needed to develop a character or move a plot point along for scene purposes). Still I never found the film difficult to follow, and I quickly bought into its notion of time.

Eric Bana and Rachel McAdams are by no means amazing, but their natural charisma, and chemistry, really works in developing this romance. This is critical as we come in at two very different points in their romance. For Bana our first encounter, is his first encounter, and we see his confusion over this girl, who has known him her entire life, being so excited to see him. The supporting cast are perfectly fine, but aren't asked to deliver a whole lot of emotion. Overall the story does take some adjustment, as well as time to get to know their relationship, and the story's way of dealing with time travel.

If there's one thing I often find to be most people's constant complaint is that the film's perception of time travel, doesn't match their perception (similar to what happened in Star Trek). And since nobody's yet to prove anything time travel related, it's sort of like arguing who has the better wormhole in their basement... just stop your grumping already.

Overall though, Time Traveler's Wife is really nothing special. It works because it does everything just fine, and carries the interesting, and story from start to finish. It's executed well, and works within its own confines. It never tries to be anything more. It never tries to be something massive. It simply intends to be a love story, about two individuals torn apart by a complicated issue. There's a few things I could note that would have been better, had they done them differently, but overall I feel as if it executes its romance perfectly well enough to be worth a recommendation.

While it's by no means a perfect film, The Time Traveler's Wife works despite its flaws, because of a captivating story, and two charismatic (not to mention easy on the eyes) leads.

Lovely Complex (2007)

LOVELY COMPLEX

DIRECTED BY: KONOSUKE UDA
STUDIO: TOEI ANIMATION
NUMBER OF EPISODES: 24
OVERALL SCORE: 6.00/10

At 5'8 Risa Koizumi struggles to find love given that she is as tall, if not taller, than most the men in her class. At 5'1 Atsushi Otani struggles to find love given that he is as short, if not shorter, than most of the girls in his class. Together the two create the famous Comedy Duo, both class representatives, known for their insane fights, and comical height difference. But their close friendship is threatened when Risa realizes she has fallen in love with Otani.

After the emotional roller coaster of my latest anime goes, I was looking for something a little more off the wall, random, romantic, comedic, and well a bit more Uni. At the recommendation of a friend, who noted it as chick flick meets absolute insanity, I decided to check out Lovely Complex, and found myself surprisingly pleased. To call this movie insane, might be a bit of an understatement. It's comedy relies on its ability to go over the board on the anime, random facial features, something I've found a staple of the comedy anime series.

Yet at the same time Lovely Complex is perfectly romantic in its own right. Love-Com manages to be both a tale of overcoming personal setbacks to find love, and a tale of finding the best inside yourself. Throughout the series there are a collection of oddball characters, each of whom seek love in their own way, and some who truly find it. It's an amazingly beautiful, and at the same time tearfully funny tale. It handles high school first loves with a sense of admiration, curiosity, and yet respect for how important it can be in the life of someone. If for no other reason than that, it allows Lovely Complex to overcome its many flaws.

While Lovely Complex is certainly charming, it suffers many setbacks. It's style of anime will only appeal to certain sections of anime fans (those who like their absurdity). It has several throw away characters, many thrown in towards the end to keep the drama rolling. As well it gets a bit repetitive early on during Risa's many attempts to tell Otani how she feels... and she tries a lot. Then again, I can't think of a single moment where Lovely Complex truly goes for that emotional home run. One thing I did notice is that all the kisses that do take place between Otani and Risa occur when they're at the same, or he's taller, than her. Not sure if that was intentional (or they just thought it was more romantic) or what.

It has its moments of sweet romance, and simple cuteness, but it's never the romantic emotional tug it could have been. Throughout the series it feels more like a springboard for series than a single season, stand alone, tale. Sure it possesses enough plot points to get it through, but there's always a feeling that they're setting up the tale for more, and not willing to go in depth on it. Though, it manages to create some great moments, such as the first kiss under the fireworks one night. It all ties together because it's not afraid to be itself, even if that's taking a risk the audience won't like. Such pure joy, it's a nice break from the emotional woes of many mainstream anime series.

While it's definitely flawed, Lovely Complex is a perfectly enjoyable anime series, with enough heart, and comedy, to win you over, if you allow it.