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.

Inside Man

Spike Lee, 2006

IMDB

4/5

Spike Lee's bank heist action thriller makes you wish that he would make more action thrillers. It's interesting to see a New York City bank robbery through Lee's eyes. Police egos battling over who has authority or who they have to answer to. Bystanders of all walks of life who seem to have nothing but time to stand beside a police barricade. And inside the bank, methodical robbers led by (Clive Owen) who seem to be three steps ahead of everyone.

The stellar camera work is immediately evident as you are shown New York Architecture. The movie really never fails to be easy on the eyes. With Denzel and Owen playing two opposing forces at odds with each other, the veteran acting is surely going to fuel the story. Every casting choice in the film feels good, EXCEPT Jodie Foster. As skilled as she is, as capable as she is, its a bit difficult to picture her in this role as some diabolically calculating female force. With Foster a sly grin isn't all that threatening. 

It gets to a point in the film where you really do not know how hings are going to play out. Is Detective Frazier is going to catch these guys and have his career moment. Or is Russell going to be sitting on a beach drinking pina coladas like he had promised? You really do not know. Its really a debate as to who you think is sharper. The cop or the robber? Spike Lee can be a divisive filmmaker for sure but Inside Man is one of his films likely to please most. While he typically makes loud statements on race and police culture, that voice is not so pronounced here. Not much to pick apart negatively with this movie. It's fresh, solid, well-acted, well-shot. Just a well rounded film and goes down as one of the better bank heist movies made. 

The Big Short

Adam McKay, 2015

IMDB

4/5

Adam McKay’s The Big Short is a bunch of things. It's explanative, it’s sobering, and it’s thorough. But its also erratic and a bit messy as well. But it still works. Maybe it’s because Mckay, who is normally more focused on making more goofy comedic movies, is able to channel some of that silly energy into the film. Because it’s definitely a funny movie. Maybe its because of the ensemble cast - with really superb performances by Ryan Gosling, Christian Bale and Steve Carrell. Gosling brings an energy to his Jared Vennett character that reminds you of the cockiness of his Jacob character in Crazy Stupid Love. Jared is certainly a cocky guy, but also a funny cocky guy. His quick wit is able to draw laughter from people on the other side of the room who are feeling screwed over by him. Bale, who plays genius money manager / on-the-spectrum Michael Burry, is completely immersed in his role as usual. Something different for him, playing a guy who rarely wears shoes and locks himself in an office with heavy metal blaring. But he pulls it off, because he always seems to pull everything off. Carrel is someone who clearly is in a different chapter of his career. A chapter in which he wants to take more bold roles in more dramatic environments. The days of waxing his chest and screaming are behind him, as funny as those days were. He continues to show that he has a lot more to offer. His Mark Baum character is fueled by a manic myopic energy, a workaholic that is constantly pressing the gas pedal hard. He is grieving over the loss of his brother, attempting to right many wrong things on Wall Street - where there are many wrong things that may never be right.

McKay is doing a lot of interesting things with this film. The constant injection of clips of Americana. Music videos, news footage. It blends real life with grand fantasy, trying to blur the lines between the two. The real life vs. fantasy is something evident in the film. Lots of people taking advantage of a system with a real short-sight. Not really worried about the ramifications, or the domino effect that it may have. The ones that are truly aware of the effect it will have feel insulated from the consequences. Clearly the most frustrating aspect of the mortgage crisis to begin with, the fact that the higher-ups on Wall Street weren’t threatened that they would face any real prosecution. Worstly, they would be bailed out at the expense of the average American taxpayer. The Big Short is really similar to The Wolf of Wall Street in that sense. This sort of greedy carpe diem. The subconscious thought that at some point the party is going to come to an end. But who cares, everyone is making money today. That sort of mindset. Both stories play with themes of taking advantage of loopholes in a currently unregulated environment. When the one loophole is closed, another one will likely exist and be penetrated.

The American mortgage crisis was a complicated one, with a lot of trade-lingo and layers of confusion. The Big Short attempts to boil it down and succeeds in a lot of ways. It certainly puts you in the action, makes you a part of the conference room conversations, and revives an inner frustration that you haven’t felt since 2008.

The Walk

Robert Zemeckis, 2015

IMDB

2/5

Robert Zemeckis has had a long career of directing unique / interesting films that have a lasting impact. Back to the Future, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Death Becomes Her, Forrest Gump, Contact, Cast Away.. the list goes on. So much of his work is open for multiple viewings. So for me personally, he’s someone who I will see everything he does.

His latest work is a biopic of famed wire-walker Philippe Petit. Petit gained recognition for his daring stunt when he walked on wire between the two Twin Towers shortly after their construction in 1974. The stunt was the focus of the popular 2008 documentary Man on Wire. So going into the film you already know that it’s going to be a period piece / computer-generated simulation of the event, seeing as virtually everyone on Earth is aware that the Towers are no longer in existence. The casting of Joseph Gordon Levitt is welcomed, seeing as he is one of the more consistent modern working actors. 

But The Walk isn’t able to maintain that lasting impression that Zemeckis’ other films do. It’s a CGI-scape filled poor accents and not enough substance. First off, the Petit character comes off a purely arrogant, selfish man who doesn’t appreciate the people around him. One of which is girlfriend Annie (Charlotte Le Bon) who is nothing more than a extension of Petit’s huge ego. She, like the other partners, are barely allowed to show any identity. Petit is a person with tunnel vision. He cares about nothing more than walking the wire and making the front page. So you are forced to spend a great deal of time with someone who is really not all that like-able and challenging to become invested in. The only redeeming qualities of Petit’s character is really Levitt’s natural charm that sneaks through. 

It becomes obvious that the only real reward of the film is going to be his inevitable wire-walk in the end. At that point it’s just frankly hard to believe that Levitt is suspended above anything but a green screen. And his defiant back and forth across the wire while the police wait anxiously on both buildings actually feels dragged out and aggravating. Not to take away from the quality of the effects. It's quite amazing that buildings like the Twin Towers can be so beautifully reconstructed on film. It all looks real, no doubt about that. The cars below, the 1970's Manhattan skyline, the ant-sized cars slowly moving 100 stories below. Maybe it's the fact that the buildings themselves cause such an visceral reaction because of their historical importance, that it's difficult to the trick the mind into believing what you are seeing - specifically with those buildings. It’s understandable that Zemeckis would be interested in making the picture because it’s certainly an interesting story. But maybe it’s better preserved in the documentary category.

Trainwreck

Judd Apatow, 2015

IMDB

3/5

Apatow's last two full feature films, This is 40 and Funny People, did not live up to how good Knocked Up was. This is probably because Apatow wasn't really a present force in Knocked Up, already living the life of a married guy with kids. There was a certain organized simplicity that Knocked Up had going for it. The latter two films felt like there was a lot of forced messages within them. As if Apatow had a lot to say and had to inject it into the meat of those two films. Not that he is not an interesting guy, he undoubtedly is. But maybe his married guy angst is better served on the stage in front of a crowd, and not in front of a screen. Maybe they should be two separate things. Okay, now back to his movie. Judd Apatow set out to prove two things with his latest comedic installment. One - that he is able to finally top his best work in Knocked Up. Two - that Judd has a lot of friends in Hollywood. Particularly a lot of comedian friends. Trainwreck, written by the super talented and super funny Amy Schumer, loads up on comedian cameos (Dave Attell, Jim Florentine, Bobby Kelly, Mike Birbiglia). But it doesn't stop with comedians. Unexpected roles by John Cena and Lebron James add some of biggest laugh out loud moments. The casting process must have been a lot of fun. The editing process was probably also a lot of fun. Shit, the whole movie was probably a blast to make.

Schumer is kind of the perfect woman to put in the role of the very sexually active fun-seeker who likes a few pops and isn't ready to settle down and get serious in life. Bill Hader is kind of the perfect guy to compliment that fun-seeker as the square sports medicine guy who hasn't had much luck in the dating world. Credit is really due to Schumer. She really puts herself out there. Very much like Cameron Diaz did in There's Something About Mary. Moments of self-deprecation. Embarrassing romantic moments.

So much of the film feels identifiable, fresh, fun and original. Solid laughs all around. Definitely one of the most genuinely funny comedies to come out in the past five years. The film has the signature Apatow theme of feeling a tad long; but it's forgivable because there are laughs to be had up until the final moments. Trainwreck has the honesty and edginess to call it this generations Annie Hall, or at least this generations Annie Hall as told by Amy Schumer. It breaks down the conventions of the modern romantic comedy. And just when you think it's going to take a turn down cliche Avenue, it jerks the wheel in the other direction. She's going places, that Amy Schumer.

A Most Violent Year

JC Chandor, 2014

IMDB

2/5

Chandors follow-up to 2013’s great / under-rated All is Lost is a New York Crime drama starring Oscar Isaac and Jessica Chastain. The two of them are enough to get any cinephile on board. Isaac stars as Abel Morales, a successful business owner that runs a lucrative fuel-oil delivery business but has fallen victim to a lot hijackings of his vehicles. While the pressure builds for him to make changes to reduce the risk of his delivery-men in the field, he is focusing all of his energy into pooling together the funds to close on a neighboring property that would allow him to expand his operation.

The film could be considered a mild character study in the sense that you find yourself trying to get a read on Abel throughout the film. His actions are perplexing at times. He is very ego-driven, not so consumed with the money so much because he has enough of that. He seems to be another character completely focused on power, making that step to the next level. He is not very willing to let anything get in the way, even if it involves putting his employees and family at risk. His stubbornness becomes very frustrating in the story. You can feel the pressure mounting through the story while he stands back in his brown trench-coat staring at the walls thinking.

For a film to be called “A Most Violent Year” and have it be based on the most crime-filled year in the Big Apple, you would actually expect the film to be more violent. A more fitting name for the film would probably be a “A Most Non-Violent Movie”. Not that you NEED violence to fuel a film, but the rather unhurried rhythm of the film never really picks up and maintains that pace throughout the entire 125 minute running time. There isn’t a lot of chemistry between Isaac and Chastain. At times the script even feels quite weak. To the film’s credit it tries to explore some different avenues in the New York crime category by focusing on an entrepreneur rather than a group of gangsters, but it is ultimately too fruitless. Unfortunately Chandor’s followup to the great All is Lost is A Most Unmemorable film.

While We're Young

Noah Baumbach, 2015

IMDB

3/5

Noah Baumbach can easily be called a young Woody Allen. He often focuses on relationships between couples, set against the backdrop of New York. His films are very dialogue heavy, with a lot of cultural examination and introspective mania. The story mainly focuses on three couples at different phases in their lives. Marina and Fletcher, an early forties couple with a newborn (Maria Dizzia and Adam Horovitz). Cornelia and Josh, early forties couple with no children (Naomi Watts and Ben Stiller). Mid twenties hipster couple Jamie and Darby (Adam Driver and Amanda Seyfried). Cornelia and Josh are feeling pressure from their peers upon seeing all of them procreating and living amidst the chaos of child-rearing. They feel refreshed when they meet Jamie and Darby, a young confident couple that seems to be so cool and sure of themselves. They are creative, optimistic, interested. Cornelia and Josh feel jaded and exhausted, and the young couple re-energizes them.

While We're Young starts off as more of a young vs old story, or at least a young AND old story. Growing older, becoming uncool. Being young, being inherently cool. Looking back, wondering where all of the years went. Being bold enough to wear that hat that all the young kids are wearing. There are some identifiable and really comedic moments early in the film when Josh is talking about all of the "cool" things that Jamie is doing, and you soon see a montage of Josh attempting to dress differently and step outside of his comfort zone. At one point Josh says of Jamie and Darby: "It's like their apartment is full of everything we once threw out, but it looks so good the way they have it."

Some of these moments probably transcend comedically to whatever perspective you are sharing with the characters. If you are married without a kid, you are probably identifying with Cornelia and Josh. If you are stuck in baby prison you are identifying with Marina and Fletcher. If you are a young hipster, you're probably not identifying with Jamie and Darby because that wouldn't be unitary and instead are probably identifying with the older generations attempting to pick up some on some of the trends of the millennial generation in terms of fashion or throwback technology. Baumbach decides to really double down on the hipster here, and double up on Adam Driver's Frances Ha hipster character Lev.

The problem with While We're Young is Baumbach's age breakdown is so energetic in the first half of the film, and the story really loses a lot of that energy in the second half of the film when the story primarily focuses on Jamie's documentary. Baumbach tries to go down another avenue to a statement on intellectual property theft and the sense of entitlement of the millennial generation and in the process sacrifices the excitement that fueled the beginning of the story. In the end While We're Young has a lot to say but doesn't feel as complete as some of Baumbach's other work such as Greenberg or The Squid and the Whale. 

The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst

Andrew Jarecki, 2015

IMDB

4/5

Andrew Jarecki is a filmmaker who isn’t afraid to venture into the darkness. He doesn't appear to be affected by the fact that you may be disturbed by his work, perhaps even put off. His 2003 documentary Capturing the Friedmans captures the unraveling of the Friedman family whose patriarch is charged with child molestation. He has a unique vision in the way that he approaches the Friedman family. He doesn't just lay out an indictment on a family accused of some of the worst acts you can be accused of. He lets you decide for yourself. With his HBO docu-series The Jinx, it’s not much different. Many of us, probably mostly Northeast Americans, are familiar with the Durst family. Most of us have at least heard of Robert Durst, wealthy eccentric man who is accused of slaying his wife and possibly others. We often convict public figures subconsciously, sometimes simply based on appearance. Sometimes people look guilty. Sometimes people look creepy. Durst is certainly a suspicious figure. He doesn't express emotion. He doesn't smile, he doesn't kid around. He doesn't appear to show a longing for his missing wife.

Jarecki has already explored the Durst family in his 2010 feature film All Good Things, starring Ryan Gosling and Kirsten Dunst. The film is very much based on the real life events surrounding the Durst family. That film, while okay, was clearly not the right vessel for Jarecki whose strengths are really apparent in the documentary realm. But the one thing the film did is land him his interview with the real life Durst who saw the film and felt it gave him fair treatment. This is probably the opportunity of Jarecki's career, and this documentary series will certainly be the most talked about piece of work of his for years to come.

The series explores the insulation of wealth. It examines class structure in our country. It's a study on our imperfect judicial system which sometimes doesn't get it right. Episode one grips you, episode 4 shocks you. Episode 6 has you on the edge of your seat with your jaw dropped. You have to sit there and spend some time with this enigma of a person. Jarecki took a controversial mystery and put his artistic touch on it. Recreation of crime scenes, interviews with frustrated friends and family members, ex-police officers and investigators. He does some true investigative work. He can be accused of being predatory and baiting, but he also needs to be credited with giving Robert more of a benefit of a doubt than most filmmakers would be willing to do. He also is in front of the camera quite a bit, at times very uncomfortably. Confronting Douglas Durst and asking for an interview on the night of a big dedication dinner is a ballsy move. It’s almost like walking into Trump Tower and interrupting the Donald’s dinner and asking for a job. Even the interviewing process with Robert must be an uncomfortable one. The tension spills off the screen. Even if you are already aware of the outcome of the series from what you have seen in the headlines, it’s still worth the complete viewing. Your jaw will drop. Your eyes will be open wide.

This series broke some new ground. Instead of someone like Michael Moore placing pieces in an order that fits his ideology, Jarecki does some real investigative work that spans several years. The headlines and the finale are a little conveniently timed, there must have been some behind-the-scenes orchestration and collusion. It’s hard to debate that Jarecki ambushes Durst in the end for some self-serving reasons, but he had to do it right? And when all is said and done, we need to remember that at the very foundation of all of this is a medium of entertainment. And the trade off is closure for some of the family and friends of the victims. So a cold case finally gets some real answers. And that is worth it, right?

Synecdoche, New York

Charlie Kaufman, 2008

5/5

This is one of those films that after you process, it, it changes you. You want to tell your other movie-lover friends to go see it so you can gauge their reaction. They ask you “what’s it about?”. That’s the challenging task. “Okay, so it’s about a struggling playwright played by Philip Seymour Hoffman”. They reply “That’s it? That sounds kind of boring”. Your brain rattles, trying to come up with a better way to describe the film. “Okay, so it’s about a struggling playwright who works on an ambitious project after getting substantial funding and is able to recreate a miniature New York inside a massive warehouse that he purchases”. Closer. More descriptive, but no, that’s still not it. Maybe this is just another one of those films that you say “Just go see it.”

Synecdoche is one of those films sort of difficult to really discuss upon first viewing. It almost demands rewatching. The attention to detail, the exhausting carefulness that Kaufman clearly puts into his film. It’s one of those films that after looking back on it a few days later, there’s a dream-like quality to it. There is lingering imagery. Life and death. The fear of death, the neverending clinging to one’s mortality. Hypocondria, paranoia of being ill or falling ill. Parental pressures, the fear of losing your family or struggling to live without your family by your side. Career insecurities, self-doubt on the creative level. It’s also an examination of the American marriage, or at least a focus on a fading relationship. Complacency, marital boredom. Love lost, wandering eyes, jealousy. Kaufman is a genius when it comes to taking everyday life and completely manipulating it. Sometimes he is just toying with it slightly, with a minor hallucination. At others he is bending the world in different shapes and forms. He is an artist with a lot to say, and there’s not enough room in the massive warehouse to store it all. Hoffman’s Caden character is one of the more complex characters to come out of 21st century cinema. As he seems to grow more and more disconnected from reality, his artificial world seems to grow more elaborate. There are certainly people out there who will watch a film like this and pick it apart. It’s a complicated film. At times probably over-complicated. But that’s sort of what Kaufman has done with his screenwriting, so why would he not do the same thing while sitting in the directors’ chair? Nobody but Kaufman could conceivably make a movie quite like Synecdoche. He turns parts of upstate New York and New York City into an urban mind-field. The final result is some kind of surreal hybrid of Vanilla Sky, Being John Malkovich and Adaptation. And who wouldn’t want that?

Blood Ties

Guillame Canet, 2014

IMDB

2/5

The first thing you notice with Blood Ties is the loaded cast. Clive Owen, Zoe Saldana, Mila Kunis, Noah Emmerich, Marion Cottilard, James Caan. It almost feels as if someone owed someone a favor. How could it go wrong? Probably because Guillame Canet is at the helm. He wants to make his version of a 1970’s Period Piece like American Hustle. He knows the music. He knows the attire. He knows the cars. But it just feels lacking. That and the film has some problems with it. First off, Clive Owen is one of the best actors working today. But he is miscast here. He just doesn't fit the role as the dirt-bag criminal brother. His character just feels unauthentic. The neck and arm tattoos feel painted on. The accent, while not British, is not exact. Owen was actually replacing Mark Wahlberg for the role, who had to drop out due to scheduling conflicts. But Wahlberg probably wouldn't have been really good either. You really need someone in the role who has more street grit, someone more erratic. Someone with more deep-seated New York ties. Maybe someone like Michael Imperioli. Not an English actor pretending to be a New Yorker. Another miscast is Mila Kunis who really brings nothing to her role other than her good looks. She is the typical cliched girl who can't resist the bad boys. That being said, praise is due to the casting choice of Billy Crudup who really nails his Frank role. Crudup is one of the more underrated actors working today.

There are problems with the film. Instead of being in the presence of complex characters you sit in the presence of caricatures. A good example is James Caan’s father character who really feels one-dimensional. Comes off as sort of an aged Sonny Corleone if he had lived to his later years. But without the depth that Coppola was able to add to that character. This character is just a slow moving, bitter Italian who spends most of his time angry at his late wife that he had left decades ago. His purpose in the film is really to only to force continuous confrontations between Frank and Chris, reminding them of their (here it comes!) Blood Ties. There is some poor editing in the film. Chris and Frank get into physical altercation with each other in Frank’s apartment. Frank kicks him out and tells him he never wants to see him again. He goes into work the next day only to be told by his commanding officers that they can’t have him working if Chris is living there. You would assume the response would be: “funny you say that! he just moved out last night. He won’t be coming around again. You have my undivided attention when it comes to me doing my job as an officer of the law”. But no. Instead he comes off as insulted, offended. Storms out. Did he completely forget about the previous nights events?

Blood Ties could be considered a bad movie with a good ending. The last half hour or so of the film is actually quite decent. A great car chase scene filled with all of the period automobiles which feels like it took a lot of effort to choreograph. A call back to a childhood event that really lands. Good final scene. That’s great, except for the fact that you have to bear the unsubstantial first 2/3’s of the movie to get to the good parts.

Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Alejandro G. Iñárritu, 2014

GoWatchIt

3/5

Riggan Thomas is attempting to mount a career comeback with a Broadway adaptation of a Raymond Carver short story, years after entertaining movie audiences as superhero "Birdman".

Birdman is erratic, intense, manic. You spend 120 minutes in the presence of the true theater culture, with all of the moving parts. All of the dramatic impulses, the insecurity, etc. Riggan is the centerpiece of the story but one of many egos shuffling through the narrow halls of the St. James Theatre. Birdman could be called a character unraveling picture because Riggan is basically falling apart for the duration of the film. But his inner conflicts (you could call an overconfident voice in your head part of an inner conflict) and professional conflicts are completely compelling. There are constant elements of ego, self-doubt, regret. Digging your heels into a project that everyone around you seems to not have a whole lot of faith in. As time pushes on you only get deeper and deeper. The stage show is hanging on by a thread during the preview period, but then again all of the people orbiting Riggan are hanging on by a thread for the most part. It's a bold role for Keaton. Birdman is clearly a satirical look at his Batman days, where we didn't see much of him after he put away the Bat-suit despite the fact that the general public remained seemingly receptive. Nice to see him have a sense of humor about some of it. There's quite a bit of humor in the film, basically placing Birdman in a black comedy / dramedy category. It's actually a difficult movie to fully process in short time. There's a sense of satisfaction at the end credits, but it may need to marinate in your brain for a little while. Maybe because it's so flowing and bustling that there's a need for the mind to catch up afterward.

Whiplash

Damien Chazelle, 2014

Can I Stream it?

4/5

Andrew (Miles Teller) is a new student at the respected New York Shaffer Conservatory. When he catches the eye of intimidating instructor Terence Fletcher, he becomes eager to become a part of his core jazz ensemble.

Whiplash can easily be compared to Darren Aronofsky's 2010 dark ballet drama Black Swan. Both movies tell the story of a young protege eager to please an esteemed mentor figure. Extreme dedication to a particular craft to the point where it becomes an all consuming thing. Overcoming personal struggles, trying to meet the unrealistic standards set by the mentor figure striving for perfection among his tense pupils. And like Black Swan, Whiplash is an ominous piece. But it's more accessible, a story that you could revisit without much reluctance. The dynamic between Teller and Simmons is so engrossing. Although Andrew is a protagonist not without his flaws, selfish with his musical pursuits to the point that it damages the relationships in his life, you are rooting for him to succeed. And although Fletcher is a ruthless homophobic tyrant who uses manipulation and threats of removal to get his way, his character is so fascinating that you are dying to know what he's going to do next. His reputation, past achievements are certainly an academic justification. But is it worth being a human being that's so calculating, so controlling? What's the price of that level of success? Well, we certainly see some of that here. Simmons is certainly channeling some of that old energy from his Vern Schillinger character on HBO's prison-drama OZ. Some of Andrews ambition is also about exceeding the level of success of his father, who he feels has grown into sort of a complacency in his later years. His standards for Andrew are low, he feels if the situation has gotten too intense he should just walk away and move on with something else in his life. But that's exactly why Andrew is so adamant. He doesn't want to be average. He doesn't want to be a face in the crowd. He wants to be the guy on the stage under the bright lights, the guy on the covers of the classic records. The guy that people will be talking about, the way he talks about Buddy Rich or Max Roach. Andrew honestly feels he can get there, and of course the ambition alone isn't enough to satisfy Fletcher. Fletcher is basically looking for someone to sell their soul to the under-appreciated genre of Jazz. Someone willing to make sacrifices that past students have been unwilling to do. Chazelle really creates a picture that resembles Black Swan but it's something you will want to come back to, maybe multiple times. Whiplash is about pushing things to the limit and then going further. Not only overcoming the expectations but overcoming yourself. And damn, what an intense climax.

Vanilla Sky

Cameron Crowe, 2001

Can I Stream it?

5/5

Publishing empire heir David Ames (Tom Cruise) struggles to put the pieces back together in his life after a horrible automobile accident with lover Julie Gianni (Cameron Diaz)

Cameron Crowe is an interesting filmmaker, having taken many directions over the course of his career. He pursued his heart with Say Anything. He pursued his love of music (and of course his own history of journalism for Rolling Stone) with Almost Famous. He pursued personal reflection and personal unraveling in Jerry Maguire. He mistakenly tried to make a more populist kid-pleaser picture with We Bought a Zoo, but that feels like a film that didn't ultimately become what he had originally envisioned. But Vanilla Sky is his most interesting work, his most ambitious work, his most under-appreciated. It's already such a bold move taking one of the biggest actors in Hollywood at the time (Cruise), and disfiguring his face. That aside, he also demanded a big performance from Cruise who really did deliver. There are so many elements at work, some of them so obviously personal to Crowe. The way that this movie looks at love and death, memories, blossoming love. It hasn't been done exactly like this before. The effect of our memories on our subconscious. The impact of dreams. The toxic elements of our life that we fall into. Societal structure, technology, it's really all there. People often criticize this film for being too convoluted, confusing. That's actually quite surprising, because the reveal at the climax really does lay everything out there. The film really builds and builds, getting more complex. The final moments on screen our so powerful and emotional. It should have you questioning your own life, your own existence.

Scrooged

Richard Donner, 1988

Can I Stream it?

3/5

On paper, Scrooged seems like a pretty good idea. Create modern version of the classic Christmas Story and add Bill Murray, and infuse it with some meta elements of making a staged classic Christmas Carol television special during the updated retelling. Sprinkle in some campy zombie makeup, give Murray the obligatory 80's mullet, and of course add Bobcat Goldthwait. And although it carves out its own little niche in the Christmas genre, there isn't a lot of warm fuzziness to Scrooged. You won't really come away with it with a good feeling like you will with some of the other versions of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol". Instead there's more of a prolonged icy blackness that mostly just subsides over the latter moments of the film. Perhaps its the gaudy contemporary aesthetic to the corporate atmosphere in much of the film. Murray's character does arch, but it's not a complete moral makeover like you would see in Groundhog Day. But to give him credit, he has only had a few days to gain a different perspective and not hundreds of years. In a sense it's probably because his character is just downright bitter. There's not a lot of nuance to Frank Cross the person. Instead, he's just a nasty man who by the end of the film has you convinced he has had a moment of clarity. But is it really that convincing that it will stick? In a sense it doesn't really matter. Because the journey is still entertaining, witty enough, dark enough when it needs to be, and cheery enough when it needs to be.  (with some good meta elements involved), dark enough when it needs to be, and cheery enough when it needs to be.

The Wolf of Wall Street

Martin Scorcese, 2013

Can I Stream it?

4/5

The true story of Jordan Belfort, a young stock-broker that gets rich from scamming his investors.

Wolf doesnt feel like a movie made to be taken seriously. It doesnt feel like a film intended to drum up so mich controversy. The rags to riches to rags story is Scorcese going out of his out of comfort zone (along with screenwriter Winter), almost doing his version of a Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. His Hunter S is Jordan Belfort, eager to indulge in his excesses. It ultimately comes off as a Fear and Loathing / Wall Street / Scarface black comedy hybrid that even has notes of Raging Bull (a broken man that attempts to reestablish himself in the world). And like Gordon Gecko, his luxuries never feel cemented. When you are living such a lifestyle, combined with the fact that you are admittedly dependent on a particular prescription to maintain such mindset- it eventually reaches a tipping point. Add the fact that you are taking advantage of loose financial regulations in a realm of rapidly increasing regulations and of course its momentary. You get a clear sense that you will witness the rise and fall of a rather despicable figure, and the humor creates such levity that you don't need it to be a sophisticated character study of an anti-hero like PT Anderson's There will be Blood. There are brilliant, lewd LUDE moments. Scorcese's comedic experiment pays off and the result is provocative, overindulgent and hilarious. 

Home Alone 2: Lost in New York

Chris Columbus, 1992

Can I Stream it?

3/5

There is something different about revisiting films from your youth. Many of these revisits come around the holidays, when you can put up with that joke you've heard a hundred times. That comfortable predictability of a familiar premise. The Hughes’-penned Home Alone films certainly provide comfort. I remember being a kid and seeing this film in the theater in New York. I was 9 years old. I remember eagerly anticipating Kevin Mcallister's trap setting. I remember the movie going on and on and me sitting there thinking “when is it going to happen?”.. “Now? Now?”. And then it happened and I sat there in cathartic bliss.

Home Alone 2 builds upon the first film by of course recasting Culkin (which is absolutely critical to the franchise, the sequels after this do not exist). He’s grown a little older, but still has the innocence and charisma that he had in the prior picture. He’s the low kid on the totem pole. If he mouths back to his elder relatives, he gets put in the bed with bed-wetting cousin Fuller. The movie is very anti-authority, or at least pro-kid and pro-independence. It certainly spawned a whole generation of 90’s vicarious youth who were desperate to be put in similar circumstances. It puts a lot of faith into the kids of the world. Oddly enough, one of the antagonists is the hotel concierge played by Tim Curry. The concierge is immediately suspicious when he sees young Kevin walking confidently through the Plaza Hotel. He follows Kevin, explores the room, hoping to expose him as a little con artist or some kind of thief. But realistically, he’s not a bad guy. If it were real life he would probably have been praised for being so investigative. But the world of Home Alone isn’t real life. In real life, antagonists don’t get hit in the head with bricks from four stories and have a square imprint on their head. In real life, they have brain bleeding. But that’s the appealing element to the Home Alone movies. They are non-threatening, cartoonish, fun, nostalgic. They exist in a Hanna Barbara created universe where you can sustain serious injury only to be quite okay in the next scene. This film is good if only viewed as a time capsule. A preserved version of New York. A preserved style of 90's comedies. 

Funny Farm

George Roy Hill, 1988

Can I Stream it?

3/5

Andy Farmer (Chevy Chase) and his wife Elizabeth (Madolyn Smith) decide to get out of New York City and pursue a more peaceful life north in Vermont. But when they arrive in the town of Redbud, it's not the tranquil paradise that they imagined it would be. 

There was was once a period of time when Chevy Chase was a comedic force in Hollywood. Coming off of the success of such iconic films as Caddyshack, Fletch and a couple of the National Lampoon's Vacation films, he was one a few go-to comedic actors of the period (Bill Murray, Steve Martin, Dan Akroyd, John Candy among others). Chase's style is certainly distinct, and ultimately quite two dimensional. The oblivious but sentimental thirty-something. The guy who has some heart to invest in a situation but doesn't necessarily have the grace to see it follow through properly. Funny Farm is an under-appreciated film, and probably one of the best outlets for Chase's dry humor. Though undeniably flawed, there are certainly some memorable elements to the movie. Paying the town’s residents $50 a piece to emulate a Norman Rockwell painting so that they can turn over their cursed home and get the hell out of dodge. Excitedly going home with the new dog, hoping to further reinforce the country living they are so desperate to do - only to have the dog IMMEDIATELY run away. Realizing that the phone you had installed in the new home is a pay phone. It's forgivingly corny and worth a look around the holidays.

Obvious Child

Gillian Robespierre, 2014

Can I Stream it?

3/5

Broken hearted from a recent break-up, stand-up Donna Stern (Jenny Slate) finds herself in a vulnerable state when she meets smart grad-student Max (Jake Lacy) after one of her shows. Their drunken night ends with her being pregnant, confused, and trying to figure out how to handle the situation after already having trouble managing her current life.

Some people might remember Jenny Slate from her short-lived Saturday Night Live days in 2009 and 2010. You will probably remember that they weren’t actually all that memorable. She failed to ever really make an impression there. It’s quite apparent now that Saturday Night Live wasn't the appropriate comedic vessel for Slate. She has appeared on various television series since, but has really resurfaced in the quite-good comedy FX series Married. In that particular series she plays Jess, best friend to main character Russ. She is married to an older man, played by Paul Reiser. And she’s really great there. Unrestrained and honest, unfiltered. In Obvious Child, she brings a similar energy to her Donna character but elevates it and ultimately appears to be more comfortable. Perhaps the self-deprecating Jewish 30-something living in New York City is a more accurate version of the real Jenny Slate? Very loose on stage in the small club, quick to make fun of herself. Funny, edgy, interesting. Constantly drinking too much, not really taking much of anything in her life seriously while many people her age are probably taking things too seriously. She’s not even remotely prepared to handle something as extreme as pregnancy, let alone motherhood. She takes her issues to the stage, regardless of how personal they may be. At times it comes off as pure comedy, other times it’s pure performance art. Obvious Child rattles the foundation of the conventional Hollywood rom-com with great writing and performances, challenges some cultural taboos and creates something more realistic and fresh, almost like an Anti-Knocked Up.

The Heart Machine

Zachary Wigon, 2014

Can I Stream it?

3/5

Cody (John Gallagher Jr.) finds himself in an online romance with Virginia (Kate Lyn Sheil), consisting of nightly Skype calls and communicating via other social networking sites. But Cody soon becomes skeptical of Virginia's actual location, doubting that she's in Berlin like she says she is. He begins to discover that she may in fact be a lot closer to him than she tells him.

Wigon's unique romantic mystery piece is his first full-feature film, employing some talent behind the camera and also some talent in front of the camera with leading roles by Gallagher Jr. (Short Term 12) and Sheil (You're Next, House of Cards, Listen up Philip). It zeroes in on a pair of twenty-somethings that are in a digital relationship in the busy bee-hive that is New York City. Wigon's New York is friendly and passive by day, and promiscuous and forward at night. In a sense it's a cautionary tale about not knowing who the person is on the other side of the screen, projecting your ideal self through the filter of the internet. Gallagher is not the purely innocent sap that he played in the great 2012 film Short Term 12. Instead here, he is much more relentless and apprehensive. Some of his moments on screen are very uncomfortable in his few moments of great persistence. He certainly isn't a clear protagonist, and there also isn't really a clear antagonistic force at work either. It's certainly not certain that it would be Virginia. She's duplicitous, but not completely malicious. She's filling a void, protecting herself, but you also get a sense that she's protecting Cody. She values the relationship, and when there are hints of it's demise she grows defensive. You wonder why she uses her real name in her online persona, you would think that she would be able to hide more effectively if she hadn't. After all, it's seems quite easy to do some amateur detective work when you have access to the person's Facebook profile. It's probably the point for Virginia, who wants to hide in some shadow secrecy but perhaps not completely shrouded. Cody is a morally compromised character, like a stalker detective who digs his heels in even deeper when it would be way more appropriate to pull out and move on. Wigon plays with tension quite well, it builds to the point of being unbearable. The Cody and Virginia characters are complex and flawed, very much like any real life dynamic. There is irony in the sense that the online relationship is giving Virginia stability while making Cody grow more instable. Wigon's micro story feels much bigger with it's impressive balance of suspicion and deception.