Rogue One

Gareth Edwards, 2016

4/5

I take quite a bit of pride as being someone that has been able to completely dodge the George Lucas Star Wars Prequels. I have no plans to see them. I don't care one bit that I will have that blind spot through the rest of my life. I am going to push my daughter into seeing the original 3 as soon as she is old enough. But I will warn her about those prequels just like I will warn her to stay away from the troublemakers at school. Lucas basically went Adam Sandler on the precious Star Wars franchise, where it was evident that he lost his fastball. It changed the way the fans viewed Lucas. Maybe it was because he never seemed apologetic. Instead he was the opposite, he actually seemed quite smug about them. He made the concious decision with those films to not take cinematic risks and shoot for something edgy that pleased the veteran adult audience. He made characters like Jar Jar Binks for his kids. The closest you will get me to seeing those three would be to watch one of the unofficial fan edits, such as Topher Grace's version.

So let's rank the original three. For me (and most people I think) - it goes Empire, New Hope, Jedi. With a pretty big drop off from Empire to Jedi. I watched Jedi a few months back now and all I can really recall (and this is probably the 3rd or 4th time I had seen it) is the Ewoks' dancing at the end. 

So where does Rogue One land? Well, in all fairness - I still have not seen the Force Awakens. But I would place this film directly behind A New Hope. This is better, and far better than Return of the Jedi.

You kind of have to go into this with neutral expectations, sit and just kind of take it all in. I didn't know much about it and went into it not expecting to see any familiar characters, other than the digital recreation of Grand Moff Tarkin (Peter Cushing - who died in 1994). I will admit at first glance when he appeared on screen that he didn't quite look 100% authentic and some of the digital elements bled through. But in the following scenes he sort of blended in. The idea of a standalone film is interesting because it completely abandons the familiarity of the characters that are buried in the zeitgeist. The Force Awakens was able to deliver a dose of nostalgia. But Rogue One isn't set on providing a dosage of nostalgia. But there are certain elements for sure that bring you back to the Star Wars universe and make you feel at home. Walks through trade districts, where you see all walks of (alien) life - as Jyn (Felicity Jones) bumps into a strange figure who immediately snarls "watch where you're going". Reminiscent of the Mos Eisley Cantina in New Hope. One of the features of the Star Wars movies is how absorbing the world can be. Rogue One created this same feeling.

Rogue One for the most part fits into the Hero's Journey structure with some deviation. But it's visually stunning, sounds great, compelling, and completely engaging. If I were to criticize anything, its that once the plot is set up, you can kind of predict the direction things are heading and the pace it takes to get there starts to slow down in the second act. But ultimately it's another Star Wars installment that goes down easy and feels ripe for a rewatch.

Deadpool

Tim Miller, 2016

IMDB

4/5

You can't really look at Ryan Reynolds filmography and see winner after winner. But to be fair, who can you really do that with? It's unlikely that any actor is going to bat 1000 in terms of always picking something that is going to be artistically fulfilling and please an audience. A respectable actor takes on risky roles, are willing to put themselves out there. Reynolds has proven that he is willing to do this when you consider his roles in The Nines, Buried and The Voices. Clearly he had better hopes for Green Lantern and he wouldn't be to blame for the film's flaws. You also can't blame him for his first portrayal as Deadpool in 2009's X-Men Origins: Wolverine. As director Gavin Hood explained in an interview with The Independent, the studios had too much control and mishandled the character.

Fortunately the studio heads didn't ruin this Deadpool. Which could have been so easy to do. They could have stripped away the R-Rating and made it PG-13 to put more bodies in theaters. That would have been an early kiss of death, as this movie just wouldn't work with much restriction. Instead Deadpool becomes the R-Rated superhero film that we didn't we know we needed. In a way it's very refreshing after enduring so many safeguarded Marvel universe films. Deadpool has some real grit and danger to it. It's also probably the most self-aware superhero film to be released. From the opening credits where it makes fun of the category's tropes to the latter points of the movie where it's still poking fun at other superhero films. It will be interesting to see if the trend continues of the studios providing superhero films for adult audiences and not just for mid-puberty teenagers borrowing $9 admission from their parents. People have accused Deadpool of being too topical, as if it's going to date itself. But I didn't have that reaction. It is certainly topical, but it feels like it will have a longer shelf life. Certainly more than an Eminem song. Go listen to one of those early tracks (with the Backstreet Boys and Mariah Carey references) and tell me they don't feel dated.

I Don't Feel At Home In This World Anymore

Macon Blair, 2017

IMDB

4/5

Anyone familiar with Jeremy Saulnier's films is going to recognize Macon Blair. Blair has had roles in every one of Saulnier's feature films from Murder Party to 2016's Green Room. The pairing is almost like a dark art-house variant of Scorcese and Dicaprio where Saulnier has clearly found someone he can remain confident in who shares similar sensibilities. All of Saulnier's films have dark elements to them and Blair is responsible for carrying a bulk of the weight of those very tones to the screen in Saulnier's movies. He is a very distinctive actor. More of an internal force, playing more reserved characters who have a certain level of unpredictability to them. With them having so many cinematic collaborations with each other of course one of the big questions going into this directorial debut of Blair's is going to be "does it feel like a Saulnier film in any way"? The answer is yes, but to avoid marginalizing this very good film we should just say it feels inspired by Saulnier in ways but also feels like it really has some identity on it's own.

You could describe this film as an adventure into the underbelly of society, if, say, you caught a junky stealing from you and you followed him home. But junkies don't live in modest homes. They live in condemned houses, or in the woods. So now imagine that you continued to follow this junky into the woods. Instead of getting too creeped out when you find a bum-camp in the woods you decide to get out of your car to further confront the person. Of course the depths that you could venture down with these types of people will continue to descend lower and lower. These are the types of people who lurk in the shadows. They come out at night. Ruth (Melanie Lynskey) is not this type of person. She is a 9-5er who is bound to a mundane daily routine.

Lynskey (who has a lot of indie credits under her belt now- Happy Christmas, Perks of Being a Wallflower, etc) is completely fitting and really nails the Ruth character. Ruth is a person that is having one of those totally identifiable bouts of misfortune. When you feel like the world is just shitting on you over and over again. She drowns her sorrows at home, and when she discovers the break-in the theft of her aunt's silver is the last straw. I Don't Feel at Home reveals itself to be the black comedy that it is when Elijah Wood's Tony character appears. Wood is so great in this movie and it's really refreshing to see him continuing to take on indie roles like this when he could just take a pass on everything and enjoy his Hobbit money.

A lot of elements of this film continue to stick with me days after viewing. Blair has veteran indie sense and clearly understands pacing and character development. I Don't Feel at Home is a movie I will be pushing on the people around me. I am actually eager to get another look at this one again soon. 

Doctor Strange

Scott Derrickson, 2016

IMDB

4/5

Kids today don't realize how good they have it. The enormous amount of great content that is available to them. Anyone looking for a visual spectacle has a vast library to pick from, readily available. When we were in High School, if we were high and wanted some kind of eye candy, we had to download a visualization screensaver and attempt to line it up with the bpm of some primitive, poorly produced techno. It often failed, but we took what we could get and were happy with it. Doctor Strange is a visual spectacle to say the least. It's a bit of an ocular masterpiece that feels like Inception and Guardians of the Galaxy had a baby. When Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) desperately ventures to the far East in search of a cure for his damaged hands, he meets "The Ancient One". Skeptical and unsure of The Ancient One's abilities, she throws him into an multidimensional wormhole to shake his senses. This entire sequence might have you thinking someone laced your popcorn with LSD, but no need to worry. A 14 year old version of me would have literally watched this segment repeatedly until my eyes gave out and I fell asleep. The special effects capabilities that are available today continue to be mind-blowing. Marvel Studios continues to keep upping the ante as well, raising the bar from a technical standpoint. It's really gotten to the point that when you watch these Marvel stories come to screen, you know you are going to be fed such quality magical realism that you can just sit back and take it all in. Like Pixar studios, these are beautiful looking films that transcend generations in terms of story that is mature enough to keep adults watching along with their kids.

Cumberbatch is kind of the perfect fit for the Stephen Strange character. He is able to channel that over-confident English-cored arrogance that worked in The Imitation Game and the Sherlock television series. Strange is an ego-driven brain surgeon who feels like he has lost everything when he sustains serious nerve damage to his hands. Strange is a lot like Tony Stark in the sense that they have humongous egos that people sort of forgive because of their impressive brain power. But they are both reckless characters as well. Strange's accident is totally self-inflicted. He learns quite quickly how vulnerable and as human as (everyone he has operated on) he really is. Sometimes movies that play with time can become convoluted quickly. Derrickson keeps things manageable enough that you don't get lost in confusion. If anything it seems like Stephen picks up on the magical arts a little too quickly, but I suppose its excusable because of his tremendous brain power. He admits himself that he has a photographic memory. So this would mean he would be able to consume the texts in his chambers and retain the vast knowledge contained in them without any problems. Either way, his quick grasp of the powers only helps to move the already interesting story along.

Doctor Strange is a unique offering to the MCU from a stylistic standpoint. You could argue that it falls into the same formula as the other origin stories do. Person has some kind of conflict. Conflict creates need for special ability. Special ability obtained. Special ability used in climactic segment. But the delivery of this formula is done through such a spectacular visual spectacle that it makes you eager to stay in the world shown to you.

An optical feast, a visual journey, something that I am eager to jump back into. Something I wish was on screen 15 years ago when I was most hungry for these types of movies. When you think about all of the atrocious superhero offerings we have had to endure over the years: Batman Forever, Spawn, Batman and Robin, Elektra, Affleck's Daredevil film, those Fantastic Four films. Ugh. It's safe to say I personally won't take films like Dr. Strange for granted. The unfortunate thing is - today's youth totally will.

Captain America: Civil War

Anthony Russo, Joe Russo - 2016

IMDB

4/5

Along with the Iron Man films, the Captain America Marvel installments have proven to be the most dependable and consistent, possibly even more than the former. Winter Soldier was such a solid film that I was convinced I will give them all a view when the opportunity arose. When I was browsing through Netflix and saw Civil War - the only thing keeping me from putting it on for so long was the 147 minute run time. Interestingly enough, while Captain America is a central figure in the film, Civil War could really be a stand-alone film not bound to the Captain America narrative. This is the first film to put normally very friendly characters at odds with each other. There's always the small conflicts and differences between the various characters but this is the first outright battle story.

Faced with the global ramifications of some of the collalteral damage that the Avengers created, the UN has drafted an agreement holding the Avengers accountable for their actions. Tony Stark, feeling the weight of his actions, is eager to sign the agreement while Steve / Captain America is against doing so. The main thing keeping Steve from signing is it pits him against his old friend Bucky (Winter Soldier) who has been accused of a terrorist attack and is now a global target. Steve being loyal and protective to Bucky forces him to create a Captain America vs. Iron Man dilemma.

The tension builds between Tony and Steve and while the divide grows between them, they both build their own camps on each side. It all erupts into one of the big moments which of course is the battle sequence between them all. The delicate balance of conflict leading up to it is so impressively well-done. It's also another great showcase of these well developed characters in the Marvel Universe coming together in these big moments.

Civil War actually did something for me that hasn't been done since I saw the first Avengers film back in 2012. I admit that, like many other people, had become fatigued a bit by the constant superhero movie drops. Since that Avengers film, I would casually check in with the Marvel universe periodically, never at release point but with more of a "when i get to it" attitude. What continued to be absent for me was that level of excitement that I would get. That little boy excitement. Can't even remember the last time I had a gross sense of that excitement. Decades ago probably. But Civil War managed to resurrect at least a hint of it. Civil War also managed to resurrect a character that I had written off in Spiderman. Being a fan of the Tobey Maguire Spiderman films, when it was announced that Maguire was no longer going to be involved in the franchise and Andrew Garfield was taking over in a rebooted version I basically checked out. For me it was going to be just another product of money-hungry studios rebooting the shit out of everything and their inability to turn down the next dollar-making opportunity.

Tom Holland brings an energy to Spiderman that should have always been there. High School-age innocence and youthful naivety. Tobey Maguire was 27 when he played Peter Parker for the first time so of course he just wasn't able to fully capture a high school student. But Holland is 21, and could easily pass for a 17 year old. When he meets Tony Stark for the first time, he is at a loss for words and is completely star-struck. Later when in costume doing his thing, he talks too much and makes rookie mistakes just like any high school age kid would 6 months into having superpowers. There's a lot to look forward to with Holland in the Spidey suit. It seems like Marvel Studios cutting a deal with Sony may have saved the character from total mediocrity.

The level of quality that these films are working with should override the cultural fatigue that the marketing executives are inadvertantly unleashing upon us. There's no reason to believe that these films are going to degrade anytime soon.

The Impossible

J.A. Bayona, 2012

IMDB

4/5

There are disaster movies that focus on the disaster, and then there are disaster movies that aren't really disaster movies because they focus on the characters that are victim to the disaster. The Impossible is definitely the latter of the two. A disaster film with a heart. Focusing on an English family of five, they are on Christmas holiday in Thailand in 2004 when the historic tsunami hit their beachside resort. The images of this natural disaster have been in my memory for the past 13 years since it happened. Seeing the beautiful country decimated by Mother Nature so quickly. I remember seeing the amateur footage on Youtube back when the disaster occurred.

Bayona's immediate accomplishment with this film is getting you invested in the characters so quickly. Without this they would be nameless faces dealing with the destruction. But instead, you are familiar with them very early on. You see their vulnerabilities as they sit on an airplane on their way to their vacation spot. Maria (Naomi Watts) has anxiety from the turbulence. Henry (Ewan McGregor) has some OCD tendencies with trying to remember if he had set an alarm at home before they left. These elements cleverly humanize them and help to generate empathy early.

When the tsunami hits, it doesn't feel like a bastardized CGI construct. It feels like an authentic force. The film doesn't heavily lean on the CGI though. It feels completely necessary, like its just enough. How it should be. A supplemental tool in the absence of the real thing. There is an obvious sense of panic. You are left with no real answers as to which members of the family have survived and which members have perished. The film then evolves into more of a gripping survival film as a wounded and incomplete family desperately tries to become complete again.

The sense of desperation and heartbreak resonates throughout the film and I can't remember the last time that a 2 hour running time passed by so quickly. Watts and McGregor deliver remarkable performances as they usually do. Surprising to see that Watts was the only one that received attention from the Academy with a Best Actress nomination (she lost to Jennifer Lawrence for Silver Linings Playbook). McGregor really deserved a nomination too. It's actually quite surprising to realize that McGregor has yet to receive a single Oscar nomination in his entire career when you remember his performances in films like Trainspotting and Big Fish. The Impossible is a really gripping film, rich in detail. History should be kind to this film. A really accurate look at one of the most tragic and destructive natural disasters in our modern era.

The Fall (Season 1 & 2)

Allan Cubitt, 2013 & 2014

IMDB

4/5

There is certainly a variety of serial killer related dramas across the Television landscape. A lot of them are quite good: Dexter (until the awful final season), Hannibal, first season of True Detective, first season of Fargo. But there are of course some duds - like The Following.

The Fall, created by Alan Cubitt, is an offering set in Belfast Ireland. The film focuses on both sides of the spectrum. Gillian Anderson (widely known for her role in the iconic X Files) plays Stella Gibson, the reserved but dedicated investigator leading the hunt. Jamie Dornan plays Paul Spector, the man they are after. Paul is a family man who moonlights as a serial killer. He seeks out a particular type of woman and plans a meticulous strategy to sneak into their home and kill them. He is a man living two lives. During the day he is employed as a grief counseler. He gets his two kids ready in the morning and sends them off to school. He kisses his wife goodbye. It's not until his family is in bed that his nocturnal murderous side comes out. He has his wife convinced that he is working a suicide hotline when he is out filling his savage needs.

One interesting feature right off the bat with The Fall is the fact that you are introduced to Paul quite quickly. Once you are introduced, Paul and Stella get equal screen time. You learn quite quickly that Stella fits into the workaholic investigator trope that we've seen so many times. Strong-willed female. Sleeps at her desk, never really taking any time off, married to her job. Completely wrapped up in whatever case she's on. She's that person that can get into the mind of the serial killer. She knows how he thinks. She can predict his behavior. This concept is nothing new, we've seen it many many times.

This is where the series gets conflicting for me. You have two central characters, neither of which are very likeable figures. Stella is a very cold woman; she doesn't offer much in terms of vulnerability and openness. Paul is equally cold, and the lack of history provided just has you spending time with a distant man with no real sympathy for his evil compulsions. So it becomes a situation where you can tolerate Stella because she is dedicated to hunting down a guy that you just don't like because he continues to kill beautiful women for whatever reason. This decision to not reveal much of Paul's backstory may have been a deliberate decision by the show's creators, but that doesn't mean it was the right choice.

We discover more about Paul's past in Season 2 which does shine some light onto his dark proclivity. But this could have been done in the first. They could have even had some flashback sequences to provide more of a complete illustration of Paul. The lack of these elemnents were something that constantly troubled me watching the first season, but the series clearly was doing something right because I couldn't resist watching more even with those frustrations noted. The series without a doubt is better in the second season. Most notably the extended-length season 2 finale. That is without a doubt the best episode of the series thus far. Multiple story threads come together so remarkably and the balance of tension and delivery is outstanding.

Sing Street

John Carney, 2016

IMDB

4/5

I have to confess that Sing Street was one of those movies that I watched the trailer for the first time and felt a little annoyed. It was clearly the headspace that I was in at the time. Because the movie surfaced one night through a brief Netflix browsing session with my wife who was looking for something with some heart and not blood. Sing Street would prove to be one of the better 2016 films to watch with my wife.

One of the redeeming qualities about Sing Street is the fact that when the group of high school strangers assemble, their first attempts of making music don't actually suck much. In fact even their first tune that they make is actually pretty catchy. By doing this it eliminates a lot of technical build up like in School of Rock where students literally have to learn from the ground up in terms of form. A device used is to sort of skip over the rudimentary obstacles is to plug in character Eamon (Mark McKenna) who not only is a multi-instrumentalist but he is even able to provide practice space because his father is in a cover band. School of Rock is a fitting movie to bring into this conversation because there are obvious parallels. Young school kids making music together, all bringing their own life experiences and using music as a form of expression. But the differences between the two are stark. Admittedly a lot of it is cultural. With Sing Street being an Irish production, the story is set in the rigid and strict confines of the UK educational system in the 1980's. The landscape is gloomy. There is an obvious sense of authoritarian rule. Bullying is rampant. School of Rock was more about a wild teacher finding a way to connect with a classroom. Sing Street is more about a young man dealing with all of the normal angst-ridden things that teenagers have to deal with and finding a way to deal with it. While a lot of what lead character Conor (Ferdia Walsh-Peelo) are common teenage problems, they are all illustrated in a way that makes it compelling on screen.

Perhaps the only negative that exists with Sing Street is the fact that its filled with the conventional teenage movie tropes. Frustration toward your parents. Not having a lot of friends. Not liking your teachers. The crush on the unattainable girl. Escape through music. But Carney finds a way to put blend these elements on screen that make it feel fresh and charming. This is likely to do with it with being an Irish production and having fresh faces on screen. It speaks well for international film, telling stories that might not be completely unique but telling the story in a place that doesn't get as much attention as it probably should. Its obvious that Sing Street would be a much different movie if it were set in New York City with American actors. But it wasn't. Instead it's a sweet little Irish film that will have "Drive it like you stole it" in your head for a few days after viewing.

Manchester by the Sea

Kenneth Lonergan, 2016

IMDB

4/5

Any New Englander is going to feel a sense of familiarity to Manchester by the Sea. It's a movie filled with characters constantly battling the cold temperatures, something we are all used to dealing with in the Northeast. But these characters, while possibly making the mistake of dressing a little too lightly, are tough people. They have endured. There is a sense of resilience. These are working class people who are dealing with the difficulties of ordinary life. Loss of a loved one, past mistakes, struggling to make that next dollar.

Casey Affleck is a proper casting choice for the Lee Chandler character because he's not a very external actor. Lee is not a very external character. Lee bottles things up. He carries the weight of his past on his back. The only release for him is the occasional bar-fight that can be provoked by something as simple as accidentally bumping into him. So it's safe to say he's a man on edge. He becomes a profoundly sympathetic character when more of his past is revealed during the films constant flashbacks. There's just so much nuance to his character, along with the other characters in this film. Kyle Chandler, who plays Lee's brother Joe, brings the same level of consistency that he always brings. Chandler is really one of those actors that is always just dependable. Michelle Williams continues to prove how unbelievably good she is. She has this ability to pull a reaction out of you with little dialogue. She's all in with her supporting performance as Randi Chandler. The standout scene with her being an alleyway confrontation with Lee that dares you to not tear up.

This is a movie where you can't point fingers. Everyone is struggling in some way or another, just like normal folk do. There is a defining turning point in the tone of this film that you never fully recover from, even after the end credits. That's why it takes such an emotional toll on you. Because this is a real movie, maybe too real. You aren't spoon-fed a Hollywood ending here. This film ends just like life goes on. Sometimes things work out, sometimes they don't, sometimes it's neither. Sometimes things just keep on keeping on. You just continue to exist in the world, with no choice but to carry the entirety of your history with you.

Train to Busan

Sang-ho Yeon, 2016

IMDB

4/5

When we saw how fast the zombies were moving in Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later, we realized that one specific tweak changed the genre drastically. This was a different universe than Romero's where you could quite easily dodge the walking dead. These were frenetic terrors hellbent on attacking you. They jumped through glass. The crowds moved swiftly. So some future films followed suit and these were now placed in the category of fast zombies. Zombies that could run. REC, the remake of Dawn of the Dead, Zombieland. There are zombie purists who discount this change to the genre. They believe that zombies should inherently be slow moving. I am not one of these people.

Jump to 2013's World War Z and we not only have fast zombies but there is another level of intensity to them. Perhaps it's the massive numbers that are moving quickly. Rapid virus transfer. Inhuman biting actions. These things pile on top of each other, go airborne, take down helicopters. Terrifying.

Korean film Train to Busan captures a similar ferocity that World War Z had. The only difference is much of the movie is set inside a train. So the movie itself becomes this hybrid offspring of World War Z meets Snowpiercer. Like Snakes on a Plane, but Zombies on a Train. Complete terror that is unleashed in a tight space.

There are so many memorable moments in this film. The image of when they reanimate and you can hear the bones breaking and they get into these contorted positions, damn its freaky. I don't think i will ever get the image out of my head of the zombie running down the train platform with the broken arm that is sticking straight up the air. Busan is without a doubt one of the best zombie films to come out in the past 10 years. Maybe even the best. Yeon manages to get you invested in the characters with their vastly different personalities. You are really rooting for the couple or so to make it out in one piece. Then there are others that you are begging to receive some comeuppance. One guy in particular, Yeon creates this one character (corporate POS Yong-Suk) that is just so completely selfish that you are eagerly waiting for some karmic balance. The film itself is an interesting concept, the world around you completely falling apart while you are stuck on a high speed train that is also falling apart but on a more micro scale. The special effects are remarkable. These are really rabid-like zombies. There's no 10 minute break from death to reawakening. This virus spreads very rapidly. It's a matter of seconds. Train to Busan is a solid offering to the zombie genre that I believe history will be very kind to. Hopefully now that it's receiving international distribution (currently through streaming services) it will get many more eyes on it.

The Wailing

Hong-jin Na, 2016

IMDB

4/5

​Some people will probably say the Wailing is like a Korean Exorcist but they shouldn't. That marginalizes what is one of the better horror films to come out in the past ten years. What is true is that there are elements of possession in this film that center around a young girl. But it's a bigger story. A story that involves an entire community. A demonic force that has taken hold of a Korean village. The desperation of the affected family is totally compelling and completely gripping.

Asian cinema has an ability to really focus on the dynamics of a family. This is probably because of the cultural differences between the Eastern world and the Western world. The Eastern world tends to hold their family more dearly, less of a focus on oneself. Grandparents tend to be around much more than they are in Western culture, as also shown in this film where the grandmother plays a very active role in Hyo-Jin's life.

This is a film where the mystery and uncertainty builds all the way to the end. The Wailing doesn't rely on cheap jump scares. It relies on character development and pursuit. Pursuit of a bunch of things. Justice, answers, remedy. By the end you certainly get what you need as a viewer. Hopefully this film gets some of the attention it deserves in foreign cinema this year.

Hell or High Water

David Mackenzie, 2016

IMDB

4/5

There was the period in time in the first half of the 20th century where the Western genre dominated movie screens. Many viewers could vicariously live the life of a Ranger; preserving justice and maintaining order the small dust-ridden towns. In 2016, we look back on the genre with nostalgia but that plot model is certainly passe. Those are generations gone. The prosperity isn't so obvious. The future doesn't show as much promise. The modern day America is built for a different type of Western that meet the screen.

Hell or High Water is a Southern Gothic / Neo-Western set in West Texas that is constantly looking back. Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges) is looking back on his long career that is about to end, much to his dismay. His partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham) is the future; but even he is looks to the past. He looks around the town filled with run down strip malls and recognizes it as a place his family owned before it was taken from them. The town doesn't stop with the run down strip malls. The sidewalks are empty, there's an obvious sense of desperation. 

In the middle of the forlorn town are brothers Tanner (Ben Foster) and Toby (Chris Pine) who have decided to rob banks to come up with the money to save their family ranch from foreclosure. Very ironic; stealing the money and giving it back to the very people who you took it from - just in a different setting altogether. This is a concept that comes up a few times in the film, with some peripheral characters understanding and even supporting the brothers' actions. There's not much certainty in High Water though. You never feel certain that you are witnessing what will be a successful bank robbery. The brothers are impulsive and not always on the same page. But watching them is tense and riveting. Watching Marcus' skillful but relaxed pursuit is compelling in its own right, watching a tired expert just work on instinct. Not surprising at all if Jeff Bridges gets an Oscar nod for his performance here. Somehow he is able to bring an original and fresh character to the screen this late in his career. While actors like Pacino are bringing caricatures, Bridges is still bringing new characters. High Water is a slow burn that exudes something solid and impactful. Solid filmmaking, solid writing, solid performances. It offers characters are not black and white by any means, and instead are all intricate in their own ways. 

Arrival

Denis Villeneuve, 2016

IMDB

4/5

Denis Villeneuve is without a doubt one of the most interesting filmmakers working today. His filmography spans through different genres. Abudction thriller in Prisoners. Psychological thriller in Enemy. Dark family drama in Incendies. Drug action thriller in Sicario. They are films with a particular distinction, a noticeable intensity. They all carry a certain weight to them. They all feel like they were in the hands of a confident, capable filmmaker. 

Arrival is his first real dab into sci-fi genre, a taste of maybe what we can expect when his take on Blade Runner is released in 2017. Arrival is an adaptation of a Ted Chiang short story that got tossed around by the studios quite a bit before finally getting some life. Starring Amy Adams, it is rooted in an alien invasion film but has some real family-oriented emotion to it. Its what a film would look like if Contact and Independence Day had a baby. The visual elements are fresh and inventive. It refuses to dumb itself down. If it were to dumb itself down it would certainly feel much more like Independence day. And Arrival probably won't fill theaters like an Independence Day would. Its not that kind of movie. Its a thinking mans Sci-Fi. Like they should be. The way that the film plays with time and a non-linear format is really remarkable. There are moments of pure tension in this film. When the crew first enters the alien spacecraft and as they approach the glass wall the score kicks in with an incredibly loud humming that feels like Han Zimmer's Inception score. What a great decision it was to cast Adams. She possesses the perfect amount of vulnerability and curiosity needed for the Louise character. Villeneuve continues to create mystique around spider-like creatures in his films but instead of eight legged beings they are instead seven legged heptapods. The film explores questions about humanity, how we perceive the unknown as threats, how time can interact with our universe. 

It's probably the second best film Villeneuve has done. Incendies will continue to hold the number one spot for me personally but this is a movie that needs to be seen by cinephiles. The sci-fi genre doesnt typically get a lot of best picture love so this one probably will not get that time of recognition but its just another remarkable piece in Villeneuve's already impressive filmography.

Captain Fantastic

Matt Ross, 2016

IMDB

4/5

Captain Fantastic is one of those films that seemed to slip between the cracks over the course of 2016. Which is strange because on paper it looks like an interesting movie. Viggo Mortensen stars as father of six kids who live remotely in the Pacific Northwest forests and struggles to maintain order within his family after his wife suddenly passes away. It feels like an easy sell. And makes you wonder why this film didn't really generate a lot of buzz over the course of the year. Perhaps because it's so indie-feeling. Some of those quirky indies, if they aren't directed by Wes Anderson, struggle to float to the surface among the many bigger budget films that distract from these smaller ones over the course of the year. Mortensen is becoming one of those actors that, like Clive Owen, are so consistent that you know you are going to get a good performance from them in any film. He's able to bring an energy to his Ben character that makes it hard to picture anyone else in his place.

Theres a certain degree of hypnosis pretty quickly when a Sigur Ros tune starts playing in the background and you are treated to some superb cinematography with some beautiful lighting. Basically a showcase of their forest spread. Giving you the indication that they have been there, roots are pretty deep, comfort is there. Some of this daydreamy vision that exists in the film is reminiscent of The Spectacular Now, which also had a lot of ambition and heart but not all of it landed like it does with this film. Some of the quirkiness is reminiscent of a Wes Anderson piece, particular the way Anderson approaches some normally morbid subject matter. In fact this film could be regarded as the 2016 Wes Anderson movie that he didn't do. The forest world that's constructed is reminiscent of the The Kings of Summer, another indie that slipped by a few years back and should have received more praise.

This is a film that should be seen. There are things that are done here that haven't been the same way before. Brutally honest moments at a dinner table. Umcomfortable moments at a funeral that haven't been seen since Harold and Maude. The way the film deals with death late in the film has an intrepid black comedy approach that is heartbreaking but also emotionally rewarding.

Vikings (Seasons 1-4)

Michael Hirst, 2013-2016

IMDB

4/5

Vikings is probably what Kurt Sutter wished The Bastard Executioner could be. Being quite obvious that Sutter wanted to make his version of Game of Thrones, Vikings has the period aesthetic of Thrones while also managing to possess the volatile relationships and sometimes calculated deception of Sutter's owns Sons of Anarchy series. Vikings own set of characters often generates memories of the Sons characters, most notably the similarities between Ragnar and Jax Teller. I'm certainly not the only one who sees this. But Sutter is not involved with Vikings at all. Who knows if he is even aware of it. In 2016 Game of Thrones continues to get all of the love when it comes to the Fantasy Drama genre, but hopefully Vikings will continue to build an audience because it's pretty great.

Vikings creates an immersive world, at the center of it is the anti-hero Ragnar Lothbrook. Ragnar has big ambitions, an urge to explore the world around him and make his mark in the pages of history. It's this very hunger that made the Vikings important people. Their ability to travel and and make broad impacts on what was considered a small world at the time. They were able to make that world bigger.

Vikings is the first scripted series created by The History Channel, and hopefully it inspires them to continue to create original scripted content rather then mediocre scripted cheap reality shows (*cough* Pawn Stars). And while Vikings is certainly unique and original on it's own, it's probably always going to be compared to Game of Thrones on some level because they exist at the same time. To be fair, there are certainly similarities between the two. Gratuitous violence. Seemingly endless battle. Sudden twists. Successes and failures. Deception. But where Vikings takes a turn is it's focus on the duality of Paganistic religious faith and the spread of Christianity. The evolution of military technology. Of course the biggest difference is Vikings is rooted in some real historical context and Thrones is pure fiction.

Brooklyn

John Crowley, 2015

IMDB

4/5

Brooklyn is an adaptation of the best-selling novel written by Colm Tóibín. Set in the Post WW2 1950's and shown through the eyes of Irish immigrant Eilis (Saoirse Ronan - Hanna, Grand Budapest Hotel), it shows an America that like today shows a country ripe with oppurtunity. Modern day New York City is filled with Irish ancestry but there was a period of time where the Irish/Italian ancestral lines weren't so embedded. Eilis is sort of thrown into this America. A priest sponsors her trip to America with the intention that she will find more oppurtunity and fulfillment there. Staying in her native Ireland means probably working a low-wage job and becoming a slave to the dreary monotony that seems to resonate through her small town. She would likely marry the neighborhood boy that wins the approval of her bitter mother. She would then take care of her mother until she died, and then inherit her home and stay there for the rest of her life. So she boards a ship with many other immigrants, a total fish out of water.

It's here that Crowley is able to capture some real emotion that lands on the screen. Much credit is due to Ronan who is able to display the unbearable homesickness, stranger anxiety, the grieving over a deceased loved one. She is able to balance the wide spectrum of emotions so remarkably, alwhile also showing a blossoming love with Italian man Tony (Emory Cohen). Ronan continues to impress, showing she is one of the more impressive leading performers working today. This film might break your personal record for most goosebumps felt. Brooklyn is a look at a bygone era. Where people looked out for each other more than they seem to do today. People weren't walking with phones in their hand looking down at a black mirror and instead used that free hand to hold a fellow person up. Brooklyn is also just another great example of how New York City is the best movie setting for romantic storytelling. Sorry Paris.

Inside Llewyn Davis

Joel & Ethan Coen, 2013

IMDB

4/5

The Coen Brothers could quite possibly have the most diverse filmography in movie history. Their body of work is divisive. But one undeniable fact is if you polled anyone on the street who is a true fan of film and asked them what their favorites of all time are, it's almost a certainty that there is going to be a Coen Brothers film on there somewhere in the top 20. They approach widely different topics and you are never quite sure how specific that approach is going to be.

So of course it's intriguing when you hear that they are making a movie about a struggling folk singer named Llewyn Davis. And Llewyn is certainly struggling; freezing his way through the Greenwich Village streets lacking the proper winter attire. He is a man that is stagnant, can't seem to get to that next level in his career. Can't seem to manage his relationships properly, therefore having many displeased people in his periphery. It's a dreary character study. A man sort of ahead of his time. He's working before the big folk explosion in 1961. People haven't really been exposed to Bob Dylan yet. The big question is can Llewyn even survive long enough to make it there. He of course has no clue. While the odds seem more and more insurmountable, he spends a good portion of the film even wondering why he keeps at it. Is it worth it? What's the point? It's this quest for survival that adds the heart to the story. While Llewyn isn't a largely likeable character, you are rooting for him.

But his stagnation continues to be draining on you as you watch. The universe is using him as a punching bag. He doesn't seem to even draw luck from it. So he wakes up daily, stuck in the bondage of desperation. In a sense the film resembles Groundhog Day. Like there is the possibility that if Llewyn could transcend on some level, make some attempt to personally evolve, that there would some kind of epiphany. But he doesn't do himself many favors. He doesn't treat people as well as he could. He has a lot of pride, too much pride. He refuses to work a normal job, although it's exactly the type of thing that could help him upgrade his current situation. He's all in on the music. That alone is admirable.

There's a segment in the film when Llewyn is hitchhiking. It's a segment I can't seem to get out of my head. It so resembles some kind of purgatory. The sound, the visual elements at work. Man, only the Coen Brothers could create a landscape like this in the middle of a film. The fog on the highway, the hypnotic repetition of the painted lines.

Llewyn is certainly not a feel-good film. If anything it's a feel-sorry film. But it's memorable and unique, qualities of all of the good Coen Brothers movies.

Bone Tomahawk

S. Craig Zahler, 2015

IMDB

4/5

Bone Tomahawk is going to appeal to viewers that aren't necessarily into the Western genre. It's a pleasant surprise, the great writing grabbing you right away and not letting loose until the end. The violence is going to surprise you. The gore is going to startle you. The performances are going to inspire you.

There are things that were done in this film to the human body that I didn't necessarily want to see at any point in my cinematic journeys, but regardless of seeing said cannibalistic atrocities - this film was an absolute thrill. These are the best films; the ones that sneak up on you. The ones that you weren't bombarded with marketing day in and day out. Everywhere you looked: billboards, television commercials. This is a pure indie shot on a $1.8M budget and somehow managing to cast Kurt Russell, David Arquette, Patrick Wilson, Matthew Fox and an UNRECOGNIZABLE Richard Jenkins. Jenkins was really the exceptional performance in this film. It took about 20 minutes of screen-time to recognize him. There's not much to the story, really. A group of a men set out to rescue a local man's wife and a sheriff's deputy from a tribe of "savages". A template for a lot of standard Western fare, but boy is Tomahawk different.

Zahler does a fantastic job of getting you to despise the brutal tribe that attacked the small town of Bright Hope. You are begging for vengeance, praying for a positive outcome. And when you finally confront the unforgiving Troglodytes, they make the film almost feel like a Western Mad Max or something. There are so many movies that have been made that have these disturbing moments in them. Irreversible, Requiem for a Dream, Human Centipede, Funny Games. They take you so far that you don't want to revisit them again. There's nothing beneficial to go back to. But Bone Tomahawk is interesting, because some of the images shown are on par with some of those barbarous moments in the aforementioned movies. But Bone Tomahawk is a movie that I will almost certainly want to revisit at some point in the future.

The Limey

Steven Soderbergh, 1999

IMDB

4/5

There’s a reason that film schools study The Limey. Its taking a simple premise and building a sophisticated visual construct around that premise. Something that amateur filmmakers wouldn’t be capable of doing. But someone like Soderbergh can. Soderbergh is one of the more prolific directors working, maybe the most. And I will admit right off the bat, I consider him to be a bit overrated. I am not a fan of all of Soderbergh’s films. While everyone raves about Out of Sight, I am not one of those people. I didn’t care for it. I thought Contagion was dull. I thought Gina Carrano’s distractingly bad acting killed Haywire, which felt too much like Out of Sight for me at times. In fact, in memory the two movies blend together for me in my mind. Girlfriend Experience felt empty and forgettable. And the Ocean’s sequels just lacked that same allurement that the first one had. But then there’s the original Ocean’s Eleven. One of the best remakes ever made. I saw it three times in the theater back in 2001. Side Effects was a really well crafted film, was really able to display some of Channing Tatum’s acting chops while giving Rooney Mara another avenue to display her natural abilities. Behind the Candelabra was an HBO release but that should have had a wide theatrical release. It’s unforgettable. That’s the thing with Soderbergh. You can rattle off a few of the films of his that you really care for and any director would kill to have those films in their filmography. He’s not out there to please everybody with every film. He takes risks and jumps around to vastly different material and that’s admirable.

You can really just boil down the plot of The Limey to a father wanting some closure for his daughter’s death. And Soderbergh is able to build this captivating, tense stylistic film around that premise. Precise editing, great performances, a hypnotic score with haunting piano, this sort of yellowish haze that seems to pour over the screen. It has remarks about social hierarchy and the whole wealthy class on the mountaintop. The complicated nature of a father and daughter relationship. There's even a subtle indictments of Hollywood and celebrity culture. In a sense the Limey is what Pierre Morel’s Taken would be in the hands of an auteur rather than an action director.

10 Cloverfield Lane

Dan Trachtenberg, 2016

IMDB

4/5

Everyone has probably at some point imagined what their emergency plan would be if some catastrophic event were to occur. Perhaps there's a bomb shelter in town. Or perhaps you have that rural family member that is as close to off the grid as it gets.

There is this whole sub-culture of doomsday preppers. They are meticulously building emergency shelters, often underground. It's part of our whole post 9/11 zombie-obsessed culture. Planning for the worst. Some would say it's overcautious, even paranoid. There's a stigma associated with the prepper type. Far right wing, reclusive, lacking certain social skills. What's interesting is that while we often let our imagination run wild when it comes to what we would do in an emergency situation, we probably don't envision ourselves buddying up to the doomsday prepper in order to survive.

Howard (John Goodman) is exactly this type of person. Building his underground bunker for years leading up to this "chemical attack", his efforts finally feel justified when something finally occurs. A doomsday preppers wet dream. And Howard is exactly the socially awkward type of person that you would picture a prepper type to be. Paranoid, controlling, impatient, unpredictable. When Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) awakens from her state of unconsciousness after a car accident, Howard doesn't exactly help her feel comfortable. She is chained to the wall, so she might as well assume she's being held captive.

It's a limited storytelling movie for sure. Most of the film takes place in Howard's underground bunker. There is impressive production design here too. Every little nook and cranny of the shelter is decorated. The wallpaper makes it feel kind of homey, and the back-lit glass behind the kitchen sink almost makes you feel like you aren't 20' below grade. And although you don't see the threat above ground, you know it's there from the constant loud noises that suddenly erupt.

It's a satisfying film for sure. You spend a good portion of the film wondering yourself if Howard is a good guy or not. You feel locked in there with Michelle, dealing with that same uncomfortable uncertainty. But of course there's all these things going on above you as well, so it makes you wonder even if Howard is a bad guy you have to weight it out. It's probably still better putting up with the bad guy if it means you aren't falling victim to the chemical attack above you or whatever it is.

A lot of people probably go into this movie having seen Cloverfield (2008) and assuming that it's connected to this film. But it's not really. Producer JJ Abrams has said that it exists in the same universe. But it's probably better to just disregard any connection, because they are really just two completely different films. The only similarity is the extra-terrestrial presence. But that's all. And don't worry, that's no spoiler.