Friday, August 28, 2015

Trainwreck (2015) Review

 Pitching a romantic comedy hardly seems necessary, since even the feign innovators often resort to the same tired tactics.  So when a movie establishes its main character with the expression "monogamy isn't realistic," we already know what the subsequent arc and conclusion will be.  It's a tale you know start to finish before the opening credits even begin, which means the best course of action is entertainment and a sense of actual character development.  Thankfully for us, Trainwreck has just enough of those qualities to make a visit worthwhile.

The aforementioned lead in question is Amy (Schumer), a young woman who juggles guys about as much as she chugs a bottle and smokes a joint.  She's also a journalist who hates sports and, as luck would have it, her sadistic boss (an uproarious Tilda Swinton) tasks her with a sports related article where she interviews sports doctor Aaron Conners (Bill Hader), who happens to be pals with LaBron James.  Between Amy's behavior, her job and the assignment she's given, you can already what territory we'll be dealing with.  All the while, Amy has family matters to contend with, including her bitter, outspoken father (Colin Quinn) and rather resenting sister (Brie Larson).  When you consider what's going on, there's a lot to take in, even for a 2-hour movie.  And it's true, the pacing does begin to stagnate in some parts, but nearly everything is touched on just enough to avoid a sense of incompletion.  Judd Apatow movies aren't known for being slim offerings, but this feels less demanding than his usual work, which may have to do with the writing helm being given to Schumer instead of him.  That doesn't mean the usual antics and crude, pop cultural jokes don't get shoved in every now and again, but if you're already a fan of Apatow, the writer swap should hardly affect your lasting impressions.  
Another pleasant surprise in Trainwreck comes from one of its minor characters, Steven, played by John Cena.  Even non-wrestling fans are like to find themselves bawling with laughter at his deliberately over-the-top lines and deliveries, which peak at a movie theater scene early on.  Despite a number of surprisingly funny moments, this is by far the brightest highlight.  As you've likely noticed, Trainwreck has quite the cast of just-recognizable celebrities, and all of them are clearly having a fun time.  Laughs are never far away, and the expected drama is handled with enough heft to make you feel invested, if not won over like an overly generous slot machine.  

A romantic comedy like Trainwreck is an ideal date movie for those who like or prefer a mild spec of spice to go with their cheese.  Innovative?  No.  A fun time?  Yes.  Just be sure you know exactly what you're getting in this transparent piece.

Grade: C

Sunday, July 19, 2015

Ant-Man (2015) Review

Let's consider the very thought of a movie named "Ant-Man."  Simply reading the title would lead one to assume this was a tride, D-grade kids film.  Yet it's the latest in Marvel's ongoing series of productions, introducing yet another potential Avenger.  The aptly named character uses size (or lack thereof) to achieve results, often involving infiltration in a fashion that would leave James Bond speechless.  This may immediately sound like a step back for Marvel, especially considering Age of Ultron's bloated sense of scale.  In many ways, Ant-Man is indeed a regression; everything is more low-key, local and concentrated.  But here's the thing: most of it is for the better.

Paul Rudd fronts a competent cast as burglar Scott Lang, a disenfranchised father who can't seem to find a groove between his con-man skills and desire to be with his daughter.  Fortunately for him, former Ant-Man Hank Pym (a reinvigorated Michael Douglass) offers Scott a second chance, one that may set him on a path to reunion and redemption.  The ensuing plotline is, as you'd expect, a heist scenario fitting for this latest branch in the neverending Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU).
Edgar Wright was the original visionary for Ant-Man's big screen arrival, and though he ultimately dropped out, his influences are immediately discernible.  Comic relief is never out of reach, and though this silliness can turn grating, audiences will get a fair fill of chuckles.  Another of Wright's qualities shines through in the action sequences, even from a conceptual standpoint.  Hank and his daughter, Hope (Evangeline Lilly) put Scott through a bit of training to preface what's to come.  Each of these are noteworthy simply for the instantaneous nature they lend themselves to; shrinking, sprouting and shrinking again make Scott a tour de force unlike any Marvel hero we've seen.  In short (pun not intended), it's a refreshing take.

Performance-wise, most of the cast is in fine form.  Paul Rudd caters to his off-key and awkward, comedic strengths while keeping the right dose of humanity.  Yet he ends up outclassed and outversed by Michael Douglass, who gives one of his best portrayals in recent memory.  Douglass runs the gamut from stark comedy to dramatic heft and turns into the film's true center of interest.  If anything, he nearly steals the thunder from the action scenes, which are at their best when they're the most spontaneous.  The finale is ripe with clever action and silly, comedic touches that leave a lasting impression.  Less commendable on the development front is Corey Stoll, bringing enough odd facial expressions to make one doubt the script's own competence.  Douglass expositiously mentions that Stoll's character isn't the most stable person, but this facet is insufficiently realized.  What ultimatley results from this is a miss-mash of rising action into the climax.  The payoff feels disproportionate when compared to recent MCU entries, but this also has much to do with perspective.
Ant-Man is more Iron Man than any other Marvel entry, especially considering the volume of sequels we've received.  The disadvantage here is that Ant-Man doesn't have the element of surprise that Tony Stark brought on us.  For what one would initially expect, however, Ant-Man is a home run.  You could objectively pick this film apart in so many ways, but that would require several moments of denial, moments that are ripe with fun.  And really, isn't that what a Marvel production should accomplish above all else?

Grade: B

Wednesday, July 8, 2015

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (2015) Review

Girl has cancer; girl meets boy; girl and said boy spend time together.  Might sound like a rehash of The Fault in Our Stars, right?  Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, however, has a newsflash for you: "this isn't a touching romantic story."  These words come courtesy of Greg Gaines (Thomas Mann), the first of our titular characters and voice of narrative throughout the film.  As a senior in high school, the fact Greg has a dearth of friends already tells us enough about him as a person.  To say that Greg is a pessimist is like telling prospecting viewers that this is a hefty film; the ongoing and growing role of Rachel Kushner (Olivia Cooke) and her cancer is essentially a base for the film to move from.  In a deliberate play of irony, Rachel becomes the optimist to balance out Greg's less-than-glowing personality.  As for Earl (Ronald Cyler II), he's often--and expectedly--the neutral, unemotive voice of our three characters in question, though his role is of less emphasis than Greg and Rachel's.

Speaking of Greg and Rachel, let's discuss them.  The two simply become friends, a fact that Greg points out early into their off-key greeting session.  This isn't to say the two don't develop feelings for each other on a different level--a reality Hollywood often makes us forget, quite the contrary.  We see what Greg and Rachel do for one another, even if one of them requires more encouragement from other, more minor characters.  The film uses its fitting depictions of high school life to bring us in, ultimately keeping us clenched thanks to the transitions out of school and into the characters' personal lives.  This is where Greg and Earl's collection of films come into play.  On their off time, they write, direct and act out parodies of many famous movies.  These are among the many things in Greg's life he'd prefer to keep low-key, yet their significance goes beyond mere charm and entertainment.  How exactly is this achieved?  You'll have to see the movie to find out.
One can easily look at the preview(s) for Me and Earl and the Dying Girl and expect a quirky dramedy that will express in equal doses of oddball laughter and conflict.  On that same coin, there's an anticipation for heavy themes tilting the scale ever so considerably.  Neither would be entirely wrong.  There are a number of chuckle-worthy moments, though these are admittedly of a dry nature.  Subsequently, the dramatic moments aren't here to pull punches, and one key scene features growing intensity amidst a prolonged frame-hold, similar to a standout shot in 2013's Twelve Years a Slave.  Director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon doesn't shy away from breaking the characters open, and when the cards are down, he makes sure we see (and feel) every bit of emotion. 

Grade: B

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Inside Out (2015) Review

 We all know Pixar.  Since 1995, the CGI giant has bestowed us with feature films filled with wonder, awe and morality.  Every release was a treat, catering to kids while speaking to adults.  Or so it was, until a small creature known as Cars 2 followed an 11 home-run streak with a foul ball.  Add another pair of blunders (Brave and Monsters University) and the concern for Pixar's stellar track record appeared to be in question.  Fortunately, the studio's latest, Inside Out, doesn't just break the seeming streak of mediocrity, it earns a decisive nomination for the best, most emotional Pixar movie to date.

The story is literally one of varying moods and perspectives; Riley (Kaitlyn Dias) is a young girl with five emotions controlling and representing her mind.  These include the vibrant Joy (Amy Poehler), hysterical Anger (Lewis Black), sassy Disgust (Mindy Kaling), frantic Fear (Bill Hader) and moody Sadness (Phyllis Smith).  Joy reigns bright as Riley's dominant emotion until her parents announce they're moving to San Francisco (from Minnesota).  The shift in environment brings numerous challenges, many of them internal, thus resulting in a quest riddled with, well, emotion.
Part of Inside Out's initial appeal is witnessing its creativity on display for the first time.  Yet like any good tale, it holds up stupendously for multiple viewings.  Pixar's tried-and-true attention to detail comes back in style here, with several mental terms being incorporated in a way that will leave older audiences grinning with glee.  What they do to explain dreams, for instance, is a prime example of the film's witful imagination.  From a technical standpoint, Inside Out isn't nearly as eye-popping as other Pixar projects, yet much of the setting depends entirely on the zealous and fictitious.  Inside Out is still a heavily visual movie, thanks in large part to the emphasis on different color palettes, determined by whatever (or whoever) is the dominant emotion.

Carrying more weight than visuals is the film's poignancy.  Pixar are no stranger to making us feel for their characters through their empathetic struggles; Inside Out replicates this in spades.  The choice to emphasize inner turmoil is rarely done in cinema, primarily due to inherent limitations (almost all book adaptations suffer this).  However, Pixar have worked around said dilemma with such finesse that viewers can only be drawn in to this fresh yet familiar world.  Truth is, Pixar are the perfect company to produce a project such as this, since childrens' imaginations run so wild.  Yet this does eventually hit a decline for us all, and Inside Out begs us to take another look at the inevitable struggle. 
What writer/director Pete Docter and company have graced us with is a potent, stylistic return to form for their respective studio.  Inside Out takes an introspective look into the mind of many by depicting one person's ultimate plight.  The results from beginning to end are instantly memorable and sure to inspire many subsequent viewings.  Do yourself a favor and see it, but make sure you have a supply of tissues ready.

Grade: A

Friday, June 12, 2015

Jurassic World (2015) Review

 Most movie franchises tire out by the time a third installment rolls over, and that's being generous.  The stretches between each Jurassic Park installment have been as endurable as the wait for a new theme park attraction, subsequently breaking halfway through the projected 180-minute wait.  Except where the rides in question tend to feel short-lived in their bliss-ridden cheese, the Jurassic Park sequels were like prolonged shows without stimulation.  My fellow Universal Studios/Islands of Adventure fans will know, going from Jurassic Park to its sequels is like going from Back to the Future to The Simpsons. 

Now, in the 14 years since Jurassic Park 3, production and crediting issues served as the breadcrumbs leading to the awkwardly titled Jurassic World.  We can almost immediately sense a lack of concern in the script, with the premise of how another park got opened being utterly skimmed over.  Amidst business jargon, we learn that public demands are nearly insatiable, resulting in the creation of one Indominus Rex, a genetic mutiny waiting to happen.  This new dino baddie may sound similar to Jurassic Park 3's Spinosaurus in premise, which it might as well be.  Indominus is actually kept obscured for its first few scenes, making for a welcome attempt at build-up that never actually pays off.  Jurassic World tries to be brisk on the pacing and is reluctant to put its main characters in harm's way.  Neither struggle nor terror are properly realized, leading to a lack of investment and, ultimately, moments of drag from the attempt to zip through scenes. 
Save Chris Pratt, who slices up a valiant effort, no one on-screen is alleviating any of the aforementioned issues.  Pratt may be the main man on the posters, yet it's a pair of boys who serve as our characters of note; that is, if the runtime has any say.  This particular facet is odd since, for the first half, these two are little more than a plot device.  What's more is that a couple sporadic reveals about their past and what they can accomplish feels as natural as a bucket of expired aspartame.  Stiff dialogue doesn't help either, becoming even more of an issue with the adult actors; apparently 14 years wasn't enough to rectify said issue.  As a result, where the kids look and speak with boredom, Pratt and company feel juvenile and trivialized.  Even with a degree of bonding between him and the Velociraptors (a shred more plausible than you'd expect), their interactions are hardly more palpable than the human-on-human ones.  If anything, a brief, shoehorned phone conversation between Bryce Dallas Howard and her sister is the film's emotional peak.

What about the action and spectacle then?  It's sufficient to a point, one that likely won't take long to pass.  Jurassic Park 3's over-reliance on CGI, both up-close and afar, leaks and spreads throughout Jurassic World.  If animatronics were used, they're far from convincing.  Playing up Hollywood's CGI overload, Jurassic World has a highly saturated, strangely contrasted look to its color palette; everything is vibrant, washed out and like to play a part in how well this installment will age (poorly).  Many shots are borrowed to the point of stealing from previous films, including runaway shots from Jurassic Park 3.  It gets to the point where throwbacks become a crutch for the movie to sit on, as if each one will pardon the tired shortcomings.  Another surprising issue is the misuse of music, which would have you believe landscapes should draw more awe than dinosaurs.  Remember some of the high points from the trailers and how the music swelled?  Don't expect the movie to replicate that.
Jurassic World becomes harder to defend the more you think about it.  If you recall the fair first-time entertainment of Thor: The Dark World and the subsequent cringes upon re-watching, you'll find more than a bit of deja vu here.  Moments of fun aren't absent, they're just overwhelmed by a plethora of troublesome aspects which should've been addressed during the prolonged production.  Instead, the entire piece feels like a lazy effort scrapped together in a rush.  Try to keep your expectations modest.

Grade: D