Dallas Buyers Club

Looks like SOMEBODY wants to be a real actor this year…

Directed by: Jean-Mark Vallée
Released: 2013
Starting: Matthew McConaughey, Jared Leto, Jennifer Garner, Denis O'Hare
Rated: R

  If I could give out ONE film award for all of 2013, it would be the "Congrats on finally becoming a real Actor" award and it would be given to one Matthew McConaughey. From Dazed and Confused to just about every Rom-Com in the past ten years, McConaughey resume has been far from impressive. A confident swagger, dark skin and blinding white teeth make him a romantic comedy casting directors dream; for years, and years...and years, that's all he did! Come 2011, something or someone gave McConaughey a swift kick in the behind and so began the slow crawl from hottie heartthrob to talented leading man. Yes, we still had to deal with relapses (the cringe worthy Magic Mike) but in just one year, McConaughey has given 2 of the best performances in his entire career. His primal, hilarious, and all too small role in The Wolf of Wall Street {Review HERE} and of course, Dallas Buyers Club.

  Dallas Buyers Club tells the real life story of Texan Ron Woodroof. An unashamed redneck and homophobe, Woodroof is diagnosed with AIDS and told he has 30 days to live. Determined to do whatever it takes to live, Woodroof seeks alternative treatments, eventually discovering the then unauthorized medication AZT. Upon it's discovery, along with several other drugs, Woodroof decides to make a buck while helping others with his condition. Assisted by the confident, transgendered Rayon, the two create a club dedicated to making money and healing those that hospitals and their FDA approved drugs couldn't.

McConaughey's transformation from stud to dud.

  I'm quite certain the term "He plays himself in every movie" was created to describe Matthew McConaughey; harsh, but true. It's a disease many in Hollywood suffer and almost impossible to escape, especially when one has such a distinct look, accent, and attitude as McConaughey. In Dallas Buyers Club, he does away with all but one, the accent of course. This film was about re-invention for McConaughey, both physically and emotionally. The actor dropped 47 pounds and his good looks to play Ron Woodroof; hustler, homophobe, and ailing AIDS patient. Protruding collar bones are not the only revolting thing about this character. Unlike his past roles, Woodroof is not a likable charmer, he's a hooker-loving member of Dallas' white trash community. McConaughey's charm and wit turn to sleazy words spoken by a greasy, foul mouthed low-life. Any sympathy that this character should have received from the audience is absent due to the fact he's a horrible human being. As the Doctor tell him of his positive AIDS test, the audience sits with a smug, serves you right attitude; however, Woodroof's journey and transformation quickly win viewers. Winning the viewers is perhaps not the correct word, but it feels right. McConaughey keeps his character consistent, it's not an overnight change from homophobic cowboy to hero of the AIDS/HIV community. Remaining relatively unlikeable for a good portion of the film, McConaughey's character develops an odd love/hate relationship with Jared Leto's color Rayon.

  In his return to film for the first time in four years, Jared Leto creates a character, much like
McConaughey's. Audiences will love Rayon for her vibrance and I don't give two shits what you think about me attitude, but her destructive tendencies are infuriating. Leto is obviously aware and plays it up throughout the film. Woodroof's partner in crime, Rayon is the lovable transgender woman who knows how to push buttons and get reactions. Leto can stand toe-to-to with McConaughey, in heels, and win the fight. The chemistry between the two is electric and real. They play off each other in a despising and eventually affectionate fashion that makes their friendship and the journey all the more emotional. Leto plays Rayon with a playfully destructiveness while McConaughey's Woodroof emits an over-guarded, seriousness that provides the film with a nice contrast between it's leads.
  The film itself is not particularly strong, staggering between dark comedy and serious social commentary. That being said, it's offers more than it's share of entertainment and emotion. This film is about transformation, and not only by the actors, but by the characters they portray. In the early portion of the film, Ron Woodroof is NOT a character the audience is cheering for, yet by the end he's somehow metamorphosed into a hero. Once he gets past his condemning, fearful attitudes, he's a pretty funny guy who just wants to help people…and make money.

Ron Woodroof isn't going down without a fight, and a couple extra dollars in his pocket.

 Dallas Buyers Club offers many a hearty laugh as well as big heart at it's center. Perhaps that's what took the film down a couple notches. Near the end was almost TOO heartfelt…
The first act plays as a serious drama, the second as a comical, developing friendship adventure, leaving a weak third act to dwell in limbo. The film jumps between it's moods too often, not wanting to commit to drama or comedy. I do believe a film can be a perfect blend of the two, but Dallas Buyers Club didn't quite make the cut.

  McConaughey and Leto give committed, strong performances, leaving fellow cast member Jennifer Garner lost and confused. And I don't mean this figuratively, Garner honestly looks lost in her role.   Her rapid blinking, taken aback face and constant look of worry don't play well in the film. She plays her character with a fragile restraint that doesn't meld with her cast members. Garner's was the only role I felt was mis-casted and slightly baffling in a company of break-out, rejuvenating performances.
  Previously one of my least favorite actors in Hollywood, McConaughey proved to me he can do serious work just as well, if not better than charming rom-coms. Dallas Buyers Club is one of the better comical films of 2013; one I would watch again and recommend based on the excellence of it's male performances. Dallas Buyers Club is a prime film that shows audiences history and the people behind it. Heartbreaking and heartwarming, the topic of HIV/AIDS is still important today and even more important is the message of acceptance and love that Dallas illustrates.

  McConaughey and Leto's Golden Globes were much deserved however, both actors missed out on an opportunity to raise awareness on the subjects they depicted. I was disappointed by both speeches, the men took the chance to congratulate themselves on their transformations and the "scarifies" they made in developing their characters rather than addressing the real people dealing with HIV/AIDS. Leto hinted at it in the end of his speech, but McConaughey's acceptant was truly devastating. Sadly it came off as self righteous, self congratulatory and reaffirm my belief he, as a person, is somewhat of a Southern airhead. But I'm not here to comment on MacConaughey's behavior or vanity issues; I'm here to tell you that he's branching out, he's testing the waters, he is finally becoming a real actor. I only hope that, should he or Leto again get the chance to accept an award, they recognize the true scarifies real people have made while dealing with HIV/AIDS and acknowledge them for their bravery.

The Wolf of Wall Street

It's called GREED Old Sport! 

                Oh wait…

Directed By: Martin Scorsese

Released: 2013

Staring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Jonah Hill, & Margot Robbie 

with special appearances by Matthew Mcconaughey, Jean Dujardin and that guy who plays Nucky Thompson's brother Eli on Boardwalk Empire - Shea Whigham.

Rated: R

One hell of a showboat performance from Leonardo Dicaprio

 Aka: The Great Wolf of Gatsby Street

  "I will tell you God's truth, God's truth about myself. I'm the son of some very wealthily people; sadly they're all dead now."

       And I can say after watching this film I cannot help but be baffled by the fact that not only did this main character and his antics exist but he's still alive to write about it. 

The true story of Jordan Belfort, stock broker, drug addict, and womanizer is 100x more unbelievable than the tales one Jay Gatsby strings and weaves for an innocent Nick Caraway. I only draw the comparisons to the two films due to the lavish parties, booze, drugs, women and uninterrupted flow of illegally obtained cash...And the two films star of course, Leonardo DiCaprio.  

  Remember earlier this year when I reviewed  The Great Gatsby and I said something along the lines of his role in that film would not being enough to garnet the talented actor with an Oscar? It was going to take more than the charmingly passionate, love-sick millionaire Gatsby to get the coveted golden statue on his mantle piece. If there was a role DiCaprio could have, would have, SHOULD have won for in the past two years it was Calvin Candie in Tarantino's Django Unchained. Alas, poor Leo was not even graced with a nomination for his exceptional performance. With 7 days until nominations for the 2014 Academy Awards are released, The Wolf of Wall Street is DiCaprio's best shot at Oscar gold. 

His performance isn't just good, it's a nose full of coke, Mia Wallace "I said GOD DAMN, GOD DAMN" good. Sex, drugs and shootin' the authorities a big ol' fashion fuck you, are the precious cargo filling Scorsese's crazed ship and DiCaprio is the captain.

  I'm a fan of actor-director relationships films. Tim Burton has Johnny Depp, Nicholas Winding-Refn has Ryan Gosling and Martin Scorsese has Leonardo DiCaprio; when two artist work together on a regular basis it not only brings a familiar feeling to the film, but both are able to experiment and take risks. This couldn't be more apparent than in The Wolf of Wall Street. The Wolf is the product of an actor-director relationship that has surpassed all levels of comfort and flow into a realm of UNcomforted that only could be explored by very close friends. I've already used up one of my swears and I'll use another now, a shit load of craziness and debauchery, that is what Scorsese and DiCaprio create. The film is jam packed full of unbelievable circumstances that upon hearing, one would think nearly impossible to put on screen; but this dynamic duo does it in high flying, unforgiving fashion.

  

  The Wolf of Wall Street works because it's biggest star holds nothing back and it's director captures it all. DiCaprio is a powerhouse in the film; a larger than life personality and presence that, on more than one occasion had members of the audience clapping and cheering. DiCaprio shows not only how completely selfish and crazed Belfort was but also exudes the persuasive force that inspired his employees and later lead him to be a motivational speaker. Jordan Belfort is a disgusting character; an asshole, yet all you can do is shake your head and laugh when he gets in deep. You want to see just how far down this man can go before he's buried in his own filth and mistakes. DiCaprio brings the charm and sleaze to this corrupt animal all at once, making him nearly impossible to dislike. 

   Members of the supporting cast are individually strong, discovering their own characters and holding fast to them throughout the entire film. Actors who have been duds or type casts in years past dish up some hilarious and pinnacle performances. Matthew McConaughey's appearance is brief but a real highlight of the first half of the film. Jonah Hill provides the audience with a bundle of squeamishly laughable moments and commits to offering more than enough of his physical self to the camera. 

 

As I defended Baz Luhrman's over the top production of The Great Gatsby, I must also defend Martin Scorsese's choices; it's his personal directorial style. Something it seems many reviewers and audiences just don't get it. Have you seen Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Casino? Are you really surprised by profanity? This is a serious question and something that truly irks me. ARE YOU REALLY SURPRISED? I shake my head when I read reviews condemning Scorsese, for the vulgarity of his films, especially The Wolf of Wall Street. In this case it's not only the directorial style but also the subject matter that must be taken into account. The Wolf of Wall Street is based off of Jordan Belfort's autobiography, and having read excerpts from the book, I can tell you the film is pretty spot on with Belford's description his over the top lifestyle. Upon entering a Scorsese film, one must be prepared for a heavy helping of F-bombs, accents, and boobs. After seeing The Wolf, I'm quite sure I'm immune to all. 

  As a movie fan, I tend to stay away from comedies, not because I don't enjoy a good laugh, but because let's be honest, most "comedies" produced now a days are rubbish…I'm not even sure comedy is a genre anymore…that's the odd thing about The Wolf, it has more than it's fair share of laughs, but should I be pegging it as a Ha-Ha funny COMEDY? I don't know. It's laughs come from it's absurdity…like The Hangover (which I thought was funny the first time around then hated the next 3 times I was forced to watch it) but real. 

  Clocking in at a solid 180 minutes, The Wolf of Wall Street proves to be the longest running comedy on the market today. I say comedy because there really is no other genre in to which to place this film. All of Scorsese's works have their far share of laughs, mostly delivered by unique and outlandish characters. It's the people and the situations they get into that produce the biggest laughs. A drooling DiCaprio, resorting to rolling himself down a flight of brick stair because he's lost almost all of his motor skills due to a drug overdoes is ridiculous…and funny as hell. Jonah Hill's disturbingly white, propionate teeth are funny. Matthew McConaughey rhythmically pounding his chest and emitting primal, cave man-like beats is funny. A looping plane full of hookers, coke, and naked men is, dare I say it, FUNNY. What I'm trying to get at is this, The Wolf of Wall Street is brash, disturbing, and often cringe-worthy (definitely not for everyone) but it is a comedy. A comedy that may just deliver Leonardo DiCaprio that Best Actor Oscar that has eluded him for too long.  Do I think it's the perfect holiday film for audiences to see with Mom and Pop? Absolutely not. Is it a seamlessly crafted performance piece for DiCaprio full of raunchy laughs and depravity? Absolutely yes. 

  Now all I can do is sit back and have a mental battle with myself as to whether Oscar Isaac or Leo is more deserving of the Academy's honor...

If DiCaprio wins and I don't see this exact dance, I'll be very disappointed.

Inside Llewyn Davis

The Coen brothers knock it out of the park once again with their painfully truthful portryal of a 1960's folk singer's struggle for success and survival. 

Directed by: Joel & Ethan Coen
Released: 2013
Staring: Oscar Isaac, Carey Mulligan, Justin Timgerlake, John Goodman, Garrett Hedlund, & Adam Driver.
Rated: R

  If there's one thing Hollywood loves, it's films about show business and rising stars. If there's one thing Hollywood loves more, it's films about those rising stars crashing and burning. Quite often we see these films taking place on the glittering streets of Broadway, grungy British pubs, and Cadillac recording studios. The Coen Brothers take the story of the struggling artist and place within a minimalist genre. The absence of  gaudy, loud shows leaves the audience susceptible to the characters and the raw emotions that fuel this quiet powerhouse of a film.

  Born in St. Louis Park Minnesota, the Coen Brothers bring their uniquely distinct Midwestern style to New York's Greenwich Village. The Brothers are known for their odd company of characters and relatively abstract stories and Llewyn Davis is no exception. The Coens have released a series of hits and misses throughout the past couple years. No Country For Old Men ('07) hit, Burn After Reading ('08) miss, A Serious Man ('09) miss, True Gritt ('10) hit. Inside Llewyn Davis is a sure fire hit.

Ethan Coen, Oscar Isaac, and Joel Coen on set.

  A first rate acting ensemble brings the Coen's distinct troupe of characters to life. Oscar Isaac's performance verges on bitter perfection. In the title role, Isaac creates a character the audience gets behind and supports, but he doesn't shy away from Llewyn's nastier nature. It's that brutally honest frustration, jealousy and exhaustion that makes Isaac's performance one worthy of Academy notoriety. Blending seamlessly with his emotion acting performance, is Isaac's singing talents; his voice is clear enough to raise goosebumps but it's the spontaneous edge that brings his character to life. Marcus Mumford adds his famous voice to the brilliant folk soundtrack, fusing perfectly with Isaac.

  Cary Mulligan, who has become quite the Hollywood darling over the past couple years, gives a firecracker performance as Llewyn's friend, part time love, and worst enemy. Mulligan doesn't hold back when it comes to berating Llewyn and giving him a piece of her mind.  The performance borders on melodramatic but works, adding a spark of heat to the chilly atmosphere of the film. Accompanied by a giddy Justin Timberlake, the two make an odd and slightly cartoonish couple; a perfect fit for the Coen's script.


  Inside Llewyn Davis works so many levels because the Coen's don't shy away from reality. What we the audience may see as unfair treatment of our anti-hero are the truthful consequences of many an artist. Llewyn's struggle and stubborn attitude are unrelenting, leaving the audience almost as frustrated as he is. The the film, like so many in the Coen's repertoire, are neither drama nor comedy, simply a commentary on the life of one man. That being said, Inside Llewyn Davis is one of the Coen's more humorous films thanks in large part to a restless cat and a handful of supporting actors like Timberlake, Adam Driver, and John Goodman.

  With it's misfit company of characters, superbly performed folk melodies, and heat-wrenching story, Inside Llewyn Davis should be a critical and commercial success for both Writer/Directors and actors alike. It's modern, yet classic; Isaac's performance is definitely in contention as one of the best of the year and as far as the film itself is concerned, it's one of my personal favorites of 2013.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Directed by: Peter Jackson
Released: 2013
Staring: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lilly, Lee Pace, Benedict Cumberbatch and Luke Evens.
Rated: PG-13

  At this point introducing any film from J.RR Tolkien's Middle Earth brought to you by Peter Jackson is nearly impossible. The films speak for themselves and The Desolation of Smaug is no exception.

  Rewind to 2001, a series almost forgotten by many mainstream book enthusiast regained a new life in the hands of one unknown New Zealand director. The Lord of the Rings series had been adapted from its book format before, but never in such an appropriate, epic style. Seemingly overnight names like Frodo, Gandalf, and Gollum became household names, and 'Hobbit' may be used as an endearing term to describe your hairy footed uncle who can't recall if this is his first or second breakfast. With multiple Oscars under his belt including one for Best Picture in 2003 and more than a fist full of dollars (highest grossing film of 2003), it was only a matter of time before Peter Jackson returned to Tolkien's material.  

  

  We, the anxiously awaiting (fans) public, knew we'd get the The Hobbit sooner or later, what we did not except was 3 Hobbit films, all filmed in sequence at 48 frames per second with extra material, not published in the original book, but Tolkien's none the less. There was much debate over which portions were Tolkien and which were Jackson's; an uproar sounded in the Middle Earth community, whether it was one of joy or outrage was hard to tell but in the end audiences got much more Hobbit than was expected. 

 I've spent many hours reading, watching, and rewatching the original Lord of the Rings series, and as an avid fan it is my humblest opinion that the more the better! Jackson is a director who, when it comes to STORY, does not sacrifice quality for quantity. Was/is there a whole hell of a lot going on in The Hobbit films? Yes. Does any of it take away for the driving plot line? Debatable, but when you get down to it, the answer is no. Is Peter Jackson a greedy little Dragon who is possibly suffering from James Cameron-Ka-Ching-Ka-Ching syndrome? Possibly. As an avid fan, if you present me with a Jackson quality product that remains almost unwaveringly faithful to it's source material while ADDING even more, I'm going to lap it up. The fact that Jackson can do so much while staying true to the book overshadows any doubts I had about the added material. 

  As a reviewer I see faults in The Hobbit series, An Unexpected Journey more than The Desolation of Smaug, yet as a fan I'm completely enraptured by them both. I tell you this, my dear readers, so you will know, there may be nit picking points accompanied by minor annoyances but in the end The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit has been and will remain my favorite series of all time.

  In my end of the year review for 2012 I named The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey my favorite film of the year on the basis that I had been waiting for it for almost ten years...While this is true, the film was not without it's faults; primarily it's silly, prepubescent humor. The burp, butt and snot jokes were not only disgusting but completely misplaced in Jackson's directorial world. The Lord of the Rings films never lacked jokes and wisecracks, but it's humor never dealt on such a low, bodily level. The Desolation of Smaug regains any traction that might have been lost due to the low blows of An Unexpected Journey by keeping it's humor referential rather than immature, gross out stints. Martin Freeman is a funny actor and very funny in the role of Bilbo Baggins. His physicality and facial expressions lend themselves to the character brilliantly. The script is often quite humorous and I think produces may have read many of audiences reactions to the overall tone of An Unexpected Journey and for that reason darkened the mood of it's sequel.

  The Desolation of Smaug is considerably darker than it's predecessor and rightly so. The first act is over, introductions are finished we know our main characters; we've seen them laugh now we want to see them fight! And fight they do. The Desolation is action packed from start to finish. The fast paced action scenes are engaging and exciting, verging on ridiculous but unimaginable fight scenes are a driving force behind the success of these films. I'm not paying to watch Tom Cruise shoot a gun at a criminal mastermind, I picked this film to see 12 Dwarves and a Hobbit race down a river in wine barrels while pursed by Orcs and high-flying Elves. It's fantasy and fantasy will lend itself to fanciful chases! 

Lee Pace, Director Peter Jackson & Evangeline Lilly

  Speaking of Elves, new comer Lee Pace, beloved from Bryan Fuller's short run and under-appreciated TV series Pushing Daisies, melds perfectly into the world of Elven royalty. He's come a long was from loveably awkward pie-maker. Devilishly wicked and totally unexpected, Pace plays the role of King Thrunduil with operatic bearing. Evangeline Lilly, also new to Middle Earth, was a missed opportunity. A fine actress, Lilly's character whom adds would have audiences believe is the strong, feisty, warrior woman of the series is reduced to an object of affection in possibly the oddest love triangle ever put on screen. I supported bringing in the new, original character of Tauriel thinking she'd be portrayed as a warrior like all the rest; instead she succumbs to the emotional advances of two men...brilliant. This from the director who gave us "I am no MAN", witch king-killing Éowyn. I don't get it. 

  Odd Elven relationships aside, the remaining story line in The Desolation of Smaug stays true to the book as well as any side stories begun in An Unexpected Journey. Audiences weren't left with so much a cliff hanging in the first of the series as something to look forward to, as all good films should. We knew we'd be seeing the great dragon in this installment and the tension leading to the final revel makes it all the more scintillating.   

 

No words review can accurately describe the detail and deadly beauty in the animation of Smaug. It's brilliant, flawless, and any other adjective associated with top notch animation. Every scale and claw was considered...the lighting and coloring are pure perfection...the way he moves and please let's talk about the cutting voice behind though razor sharp teeth. Benedict Cumberbatch with the best and only choice. His voice is pure dangerous allure. Cumberbatch, with the help of visual animation studio WETA, truly became this dragon through motion capture technology. That means voice, movement, and facial expression were all generated by Caumberbatch...and quite perfectly, he gives this inhuman  creature a personality and purpose. A huge hand must be given to the animators behind Smaug, he is a sight to behold on the big screen. No images found online can do him justice.

Benedict Cumberbatch gets in touch with his scaly, fire breathing side

  Smaug's animation soars, leaving many of the other animated characters with a rushed, sloppy, even cheap feel to them. One thing The Lord of the Rings series did so well was create real, disturbing characters through the use of great prosthetics. This is a technique not used as appropriately in The Hobbit series, especially where Orcs, Goblins and other nasty folk are concerned...yes animation is cheaper but nothing draws an audience from the moment like recognizing "oh that's definitely CGI" This is a huge attributing fact as to why Smaug's animation is so incredibly impressive. Comparing the detail in his design to that of others is somewhat disappointing.  

  With a darker atmosphere, Jackson really plays up Biblo's developing obsession with his newly acquired ring and creating a strong tie between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. The Desolation of Smaug is great fun with a couple of nice references for die hard fans and spectacular animation (for the most part) Fans will not be disappointed and new comers to the series should find it just as enjoyable. Don't expect Smaug to be popping up in any category except effects, during awards season like The Lord of the Rings films did, but the heart of this film is in the same place; as is its epic scope and action packed adventure. If there was ever a time to jump into one of the most celebrated fantasy series of all time, now would be it! 

Thor: The Dark World

While Thor: The Dark World has just as many (if not more) plot holes than it's predecessor, The Avengers, I found it equally irresistible and thrilling.

Directed by: Alan Taylor
Released: 2013
Staring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Sir Anthony Hopkins, Christopher Eccelston, Kat Dennings, & Stellan Skarsgård

I swear I don't hate Marvel sequels, I just wish everyone get their directorial butts off of the Joss Wheaton bandwagon and start creating again instead of copying. 

  2011 was a hype year for Marvel Comics, releasing Thor and Captain America within two months of each other. The hype was all building to the biggest film success of 2012, The Avengers, which beat out Christopher Nolan's Batman finale The Dark Knight Rises by more than 220 million dollars. First glances didn't do much for me, thinking both Thor and Captain America were nothing more than the dumbed down superhero movies that climb to the top of every summer box office, I didn't make an effort to see either in theaters. A year later, both films were released to Netflix and I thought I should see what all the fuss was about, surprisingly I thoroughly enjoyed both!

Sir Kenneth Branagh filming on the set of Thor (2011)

  Kenneth Branagh, the Lawrence Oliver of our generation, is the best Shakespearian Actor/Director working in film today. His adaptions of Hamlet and Much To Do About Nothing are two of my personal favorite films; however, there was a point in his career when his success had clearly gone to his head. Branagh is good, in fact he's great as both an actor and director, but his knowing that lead him to make some serious professional mistakes. Time has matured Branagh from a head strong star, into a mature, highly respectable talent.

  For many, an Oscar winning, Shakespearian trained actor would be the last to take on a comic book -action film. This is what's great about Branagh, he surprises, and his take on Thor was one brilliant surprise. The thing about Thor is the story itself is deeply Shakespearian...rival brothers, buying for their barbaric father's throne...and THAT'S why Branagh was a perfect choice to direct it. His over theatricality in acting HELPS him while directing, creating top notch productions that are visually stunning. The story is there without sub-plots or distractions. The clear cut, classic story line of Thor is perhaps why I didn't react as positively to it's sequel. 

  Now before any Marvel fans break out the pitchforks and torches, let me say this. I LIKE THE AVENGERS. I REALLY LIKE THOR: THE DARK WORLD. I enjoyed them all immensely, they're fun, action packed, and charismatic...that being said, both films are riddled with poor film making decisions and plot holes. If you want a break down of a "good" movie verses an "enjoyable" movie check out my review of The Avengers. The first installment of Thor was a magical combination of both quality and entertaining filmmaking but then came The Avengers and every Marvel film to follow has been an attempt to mirror Joss Wheaton's cheeky humor and over the top action, Thor: The Dark World is no exception.  

 Thor: The Dark World is occasionally confused and jumpy, trying desperately to make many of the same jokes that made The Avengers a success. Don't get me wrong, I was laughing the whole way through. Gags and laughs are great to break the tension, but when they're injected every 10 minutes the build to the climax is rough and almost nonexistent. I wanted to be on the edge of my seat, concerned for Thor in his battle with Malekith but I couldn't when the film was pulling jokes every other shot. The disruption of continuity honestly gets a bit annoying at times...JUST LET THEM DUKE IT OUT! It's NOT Joss Wheaton directing and we the audience KNOW this...and yet it's his STYLE...it seems like a bit of directorial plagiarism...but I don't want to get into that.  

  

  Another reason for The Dark World's confused state is due to it's plot line...there's simply too much and not enough time spent addressing it all. I'm just going to call bogus on this plot line right now because IT IS. Honestly, who wrote this film because I'm positive they just threw darts at a board to see what should happen next in the movie and to what character. But just like The Avengers, I end up not really giving a crap. I thoroughly enjoyed the film and would watch it again in a heartbeat! 

...is this a good thing? This is serious question that should be asked...there is so much going on in this film, so many sub-plots, so many inside Avengers jokes, so much MUCHNESS that it should have turn the movie into a failure right? Right, but it DOESN'T...I don't know how Marvel does it, but with all the continuity problems this film has and the contrived plot line, I can't bring myself to say The Dark World is a BAD film. I can, however, say this of Iron Man 3...sorry World, I have to get this off of my chest, Iron Man 3 was ridiculous...ugh, but still mostly enjoyable...damn it...this is turing into the most contradictory review of my career...

  The  problems in The Dark World could have been solved has the filmmakers taken a bit more time...The Dark World is NOT a long film; had it been, many of the holes could have been filled, the pacing smoothed and overall quality of the film improved.

Tom Hiddleston's Loki is dealt some serious time out in Thor: The Dark World

Tom Hiddleston and Chris Hemsworth as quarreling adopted brothers Loki and Thor.

  Thor, you know, hangs around being Thor, swinging his Hammer and stuff...beating up on the baddies, check. Honestly it's not the character development people pay to see. They pay to see Thor, his hammer, and his muscles do some serious damage to other worldly villians...and Loki.

  Oh Loki, you are such a little maniacal trickster...Tom Hiddleston again knocks it out of the park in his portrayal of The God of Mischief. In The Dark World, Hiddleston lets loose all that crazy, "I do what I want"attitude and schemes Loki has been harboring while imprisoned. It may be called "Thor", but there is no doubt that this series and The Avengers  owes much of it's popularity to Hiddleston and his devilishly handsome and infuriating Loki. Is he GOOD? Is he BAD? Who's team is he on? The answer to that is team Loki, but he never fails to drive fans and audiences crazy with guessing. Marvel has obviously recognized and monopolized on Hiddleston, having him return to set and shoot extra scenes later added to the film.

As a Doctor Who fanatic, I was ecstatic when I heard Ninth Doctor, Christopher Eccelston was cast as the main villian. Eccelston delivers with some AWESOME prosthetics in tow, but again, I desperately wish he would have been given more screen time. Malekith's battle with Thor is action packed but interrupted by so many slap stick jokes I found it difficult to become truly invested.
The design of Malekith and his army of Dark Elves is exceptionally creepy without being hokey, I was pleasantly surprised and satisfied.

  Kat Dennings and Stellan Skarsgård return as the blunt and lovable Darcy, and Doctor Erik Selvig...who may or may not be lacking pants in several scenes. These two are hilarious and Dennings especially is a scenes stealer, I would have loved to see her and Loki share some screen time. Natalie Portman is back as itty bitty Jane Foster, hottest scientist to walk the earth. She and Hemsworth have a couple nice scenes but again, much of the time needed to build a serious relationship that the audience can become invested in is lost. Performances around the board are strong included Anthony Hopkins who's Odin still resorts to growling like a bear and refusing to show Loki any love; and Rene Russo plays a Julie Christie-esque Frigga who has a nice, Bad {Ass}gardian moment half way through the film.  

  In conclusion, Thor: The Dark World is not without it's faults but the same can be said for any action film; especially one from Marvel. The company is a cash cow and audience will never be in short supply of Superheroes and Villains to watch on the big screen. The Dark World is leagues better than the slap in the face sequel that was Iron Man 3, and I hope Captain America: The Winter Soldier to be just as enjoyable...although I'm sure I'll have a bone or two to pick  concerning the Cap as well. There comes a genre of film where, as outlandish as it's story may be, I as a reviewer must sit back and enjoy the spectacle; Marvel films, and their subsequent sequels, have proved to be that genre of film.  

It's just too cool to not like...

12 Years a Slave

Steve McQueen's brutally honest film depicts both the best and (mostly) the worst of man kind. 

Directed by: Steve McQueen

Released: 2013

Staring: Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender, Paul Dano, Benedict Cumberbatch, Lupita Nyong'o, & Brad Pitt

Rated: R 

Times Viewed: 1

  Every fall as the weather transforms from glowing warmth to chilling cold, a new film season emerges to draw audiences to theaters. The first budding blooms include previously reviewed films Gravity & Captain Phillips; each release seemingly better than the next. Awards Season may only be in it's early, yet essential months of release, but Steve McQueen's bio-pic 12 Years A Slave may possess what it takes to persist the cold winter winds all the way to March 2nd. 

  12 Years A Slave tells the true tale of Solomon Northup; a free black man, making a living as a violinist in upstate New York before being tricked and sold into slavery.  Frame by frame, director Steve McQueen paints an unrelenting portrait of the human soul in both it's brightest and darkest colors.

Cinematgrapher Sean Bobbitt & Director Steve McQueen

  12 Years a Slave is meticulously crafted, each individual shot looks as though it could be a masterpiece painting. The angles at which cinematographer Sean Bobbitt and McQueen shoot are unique, fresh, and fascinating. Wether it be Benedict Cumberbatch standing in a door frame with Chiwetel Ejiofor at his feet; or Ejiofor hanging from a tree, the source of his punishment and suffering, an unfinished cabin looming in the background, the imagery and iconicism are breathtaking. No frame was shot without the closest consideration, and every shot is intentional and for that reason, powerful.

  From the beginning scenes of the film McQueen uses camera angles, light and sound to establish the right from the wrong, the natural from the unnatural. The film begins with Solomon cutting sugar cane but moves quickly into another scene later that night in which he and a fellow female slave become intimate. The scene was shot from a tight, overhead, horizontal view, the characters only visible from the chest down. The abruptness of the scene is somewhat jarring in not only it's placement in the film but also the angle at which it was shot, with both actors heads situated far screen right. The lighting is cold and harsh. Another rapid cut to atheistically contrasted shot; Solomon and his wife sit in bed in upright vertical positions. A warm light is cast around them and both actors are centered screen, a comfortable distance from the audience. The transition from one intimate scene to another create a vivid image to emotionally influence the audience as to what feels warm and safe, verses cold and uncomfortable. 

  "Uncomfortable" is a word many would use to describe any number of scenes in 12 Years A Slave but eliciting an emotion from an audience is the sign of a true director. McQueen utilizes not only camera angles/light but also manipulates sounds and ABSENCE of sound. A score by Hans Zimmer feeds the desolate undercurrent of the film but rises when called upon to become a tool of heightened drama. Sound builds and builds in moments of strife; however, once action has been taken, the audience is left with nothing but the bodily sounds of the characters, accompanied by silence. It's this silence that delivers the true impact of suffering better than any motif ever could. 

Our main character left hanging by a rope, his toes sloppily grace the mudded ground below last for an "uncomfortable" amount of time. No synthetic sound is heard, and with nothing but staggered breathes and the call of birds, this is the most powerful scene in the whole film. Prolonged silences and takes are what drive 12 Years a Slave and turn a possible generic period film into Oscar GOLD.

The beautiful Lupita Nyong'o as Patsey along side Michael Fassbender & Chiwetel Ejiofor. 

12 Years A Slave has quite the list of Hollywood names, those names however are reputable, respected names. 

  Adds are selling this as a Brad Pitt film when in reality his total screen time can't equal more than 15 minutes; that being said, he gives a well acted performance. Pitt's hand is more in producing than acting which, I have no complaints about. It takes a strong and humble actor to have so much invested in a production and yet take such a small role. Pitt's eye and and status in film making have matured immensely over the past 10+ years and I can't help but feel my sense of respect for him, as both actor and person, grown.  

Chiwetel Ejiofor, Benedict Cumberbatch & Paul Dano 

Benedict Cumberbatch's role as plantation owner Ford plays as the contrasting figure to Michael Fassbender's maniacally cruel and unhinged Edwin Epps. Ford, while a slaver non the less, displays acts of kindness, generosity, and humanity. Cumberbatch was a perfect choice for the role, not only a goodnatured face but he also emits a disposition to match. His range of work in 2013 alone must be noted and applauded. I find it hard to believe that this man on screen is the same who plays the cheeky Sherlock Holmes and intimated nerds world round as the ruthless Khan. Benedict Cumberbatch is a rising star who shows no signs of slowing down...and I hope he doesn't.

  Our leading man Chiwetel Ejiofor, a relative unknown to both me and most likely the average movie goer, gives a performance that is nothing short of superior. To pull the truth and raw emotion from a story and script such as this is a feat daunting to any actor, no matter what their status. Ejiofor demonstrates a fearlessness and force that radiates through the screen. As I wrote before, 12 Years A Slave features numerous prolonged scenes of silence with nothing but the actor and perhaps a breath of wind. These scenes could have become dull and lifeless but Chiwetel Ejiofor emotes pain, trepidation, and hope all through his eyes. He knows how to utilize his face without seeming overdramatic and mime-esque. When he does speak, his delivery is believable and powerful.

 

Closely tied with Ejiofor for best performance in this film is unsurprisingly Michael Fassbender. The audience isn't sure whether he's a racist or a sadist, or just plain insane, but what Michael Fassbender creates is nearly beyond words. He demonstrates a calmness that makes his character all the more dangerous and terrifying; a burning and intense gaze accompanies words that had many an audience member shaking their head and murmuring in disgust. Edwin Epps is an unforgiving man, holding true to the belief that these people are his property and he many do with his property as he chooses. In the same fashion, Fassbender's method and performance are just as unforgiving. He could have gone complete passion and emotion, yelling and gesturing about, but he saves it for when it counts...a silent attack that explodes at the slightest push. Michael Fassbender has proved time and time again to be one of the best performers working in cinema today in for his role in 12 Years A Slave I'd be shocked if he didn't receive an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor.

  Paul Geomati makes a brief but note worthy appearance and I've never heard an audience applaud so loudly as they did when Paul Dano's character was beaten by Solomon. THAT is a true testate to the power of acting and the influence it can have on an audience. Where Fassbender's character had a quiet  yet deranged force behind it, Dano was it's counterpart. His performance as the overseer Tibeats on Ford's plantation is a boiling pot of superiority and temperament, quick to jump on any slave that shoots him a definite eye and acting rashly with no concern for law and order.

  The performances in 12 Years a Slave were the strongest to have graced in screen in all of 2013 and I will be shocked if there's not one or more cast member who's nominated for an Academy Award. For all of it's successes, the film does get heavy. With very few, if any light moments, the film may prove hard for some to sit through. It's an intense emotional roller coaster from start to finish, but the quality of the production and performances make it well worth the strife. Moving in more ways than one and important in the fact this is not an African American movie, it's an AMERICAN movie. One of the greatest countries in the world, America is also one who's held a blood-soaked ledger.  Steve McQueen reminds us how important our history is, he shows us the good, the bad, and the worst of ALL Americans.

  The only other obstacle I see 12 Years facing is what I've come to call the "Lincoln Bug." This time last year, everyone had Steven Spielberg's presidential bio-pic to be front runner for the Academy's highest award; however, following it's release, interest in the film dissipated and soon it lost to thriller Argo. The problem with Lincoln was it was all talk no action....what everyone thought would be a stirring drama turned out to be a Daniel Day-Lewis performance piece filled with the President telling lengthy stories and jokes...while all performances were excellent (I did cry) as a whole, Lincoln was one of my biggest disappointments of last year. Honestly I don't think 12 Years will suffer the same fate...it's equal parts performance drama and cinematic beauty along with severe depictions of plantation life.

  12 Years a slave received a rousing reception at The Uptown Theater with both the 7:00 and 10:00 shows selling out, the 7:00 showing by 3:00pm! There was not a dry eye in the house during the final scene and credits. Goosebumps, cheers, and tears were a plenty throughout the film; this is one film that MUST not be missed for both it's cinematic achievements  and outstanding cast.

Dracula (1992)

Directed by: Francis Ford Coppola
Released: 1992
Staring: Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Keanu Reeves, Anthony Hopkins, Clary Ewles
Rated: R
Times Viewed 5+

 There is a moment in film making when the artistic choices go beyond  filling a lot, clothing an actor, and underscoring a scene; the artistic team behind Bram Stoker's Dracula immortalized not only a literary character but multiple periods of art and history, all on screen.

   Nothing dates a film more than bad special effects, whether they be shoddy stop motion or CGI. Francis Ford Coppela's adaption of the iconic novel by Bram Stoker will forever stand the test of time due to his traditional method of special effects and camera technique. When one says "traditional"the usual connotation is old, boring, out of day; however, by using practical effects and no CGI, Dracula is  a back of all treats and no tricks. Coppela's collaboration with costume designer Eiko Ishioka, scenic designer Joseph Hodges, special effects artist Roman Coppola, and composer Wojciech Kilar resulted in a true work of classic, cinematic art. 

  The only thing more engrossing than watching Coppola's adaption is watching the production documentaries and videos following the development of the film. I own a copy of the 15th anniversary edition DVD which is packed with hours of such footage. Absolutely no green screen's were used all sets were built on screen and effects only produced as they would have been in the early 1900's. Magic tricks, reverse photography, and double exposure were all used to create the unique and often haunting effects that give Dracula it's classic flair. In this Coppola really must be applauded, his passion and unrelenting dedication to the classic art of film is something sorely missed in today's Hollywood. There are some truly BRILLIANT effects and sequences created in this film...all of which are addressed in this fantastic short The Naive Visual Effects of Bram Stoker's Dracula. I highly suggest checking it out, it's a great look at the technical craft and ingenuity that goes into practical classic film making. 

  Special Effects included, Bram Stoker's Dracula is wickedly theatrical and full of art history and this is most apparent than in it's costume designs. Eiko Ishioka one of Hollywood's most creative and dramatic costume designer's created looks that not only elude to famous works of art , but become art themselves; Dracula's garments specifically span generations and cultures. Coppola refers to images as "swatches" during the visual production period and the these "swatches" from Klimt to numerous other's are...There are just too many brilliant pieces to choose from, each gorgeous in it's own individual fashion...

 The quality of the production design is beyond words, and let's not forget that the film one best Oscar for Costume Design, Make-up, and Sound Effects/Editing...The old age make-up on Gary Oldman is truly THEE best over put on screen, I've yet to see it's rival...Benjamin Button, eat your heart out. Besides age make-up, the creature prosthetics are incredibly detailed and quite honestly perfection; every line was considered, every hair in place. The costumes are pure theater, and the make-up pure magic.

Wojciech Kilar's melodies are equally haunting as the tale they underscore. A multiple repetition of chords that build and build, creating tension; Kilar compliments these heavy tracks with a light as air romanic theme that twists itself and soon becomes a hair raising refrain.This soundtrack is the perfect mix of horror, danger, and romance.

  Now let's address the one conflicting factor that takes this Art History masterpiece of Romanic Horror and turns it from Oscar gold, to B-film camp. The acting...Specifically Keanu Reeves acting.

  Poor, poor Keanu Reeves...he tried, He really, REALLY tired. While he's one of those actors who's been consistently bad in almost every movie he's in I, due to some unknown force, like his movies. {The Matrix, Constantine, & of course Dracula} Some roles are juste cursed and the role of Jonathan Harker is on of them...first of all, he's like Raoul in The Phantom of the Opera...the writer's try SO desperately to turn him into the romantic lead when it's obviously the opposer. Second, he's a bit of a pussy...he goes to the castle, get's imprisoned, get's out then whines the entire rest of the story...I don't think anyone has every felt badly for Jonathan Harker in Dracula's history. THAT, however, does not excuse the exceptionally painful job that Reeves did in this role. His acting befits that of a high school freshman...who doesn't enjoy theater.

  Keanu Reeves is not the only one having a hard time in their roles...Sadie Frost who plays the part of Lucy Winestra struggles through her character by series of sexual moans and screeches. Winona Ryder as a whole makes a mostly successful transition from child star to leading lady with this role, however she does have a couple awkward moments herself. And if I must be totally honest I have to confess that, while he's brilliant, this is not Sir Anthony Hopkin's best role. He was and is perfect for the part, it's simply falls upon some rather odd physical choices he makes that bring the performance down to a satire level.

  Check out this clip below, it shows not only the faltering attempts of Reeves, but also the levels that Gary Oldman brings to his performance of Dracula as well as the rich costume, set, and sound designs...it's definitely a defining scene of the film.

  The shining star in this sometimes fading constellation without a doubt is Gary Oldman. Oldman's versatility and complete commitment never fails to blow me away, Dracula is no exception. In a performance that could have been weighed down by make-up and costume, Oldman uses them to his advantage and brings a timeless, yet fresh take to the most iconic of Monsters. The performance plays on the subtleties and theatricality of the character of Dracula creating a new character who you are both revolted and attracted to. My personal favorite, of all Gary Oldman's performances.

  So if you haven't see it yet, Bram Stoker's Dracula is the one to watch this Halloween evening. With his stunning costumes, intriguing set and special effects designs and above all Gary Oldman's performance it's not only my pick of  Halloween movie, but also happens to be my FAVORITE movie.