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. 

Frailty

Bill Paxton, 2001

IMDB

3/5

Bill Paxton is an actor who wouldn't make a good straight up villain because of his charm / likeability factor. That is why his "Dad Meiks" character succeeds in this 2001 directorial debut (screenplay by by Brent Hanley) by Paxton.

Almost immediately you like the Dad character. Hard-working, eats dinner with his boys every night and warmly sends them off to bed before retiring himself. It's when he is awoken by a vision that it all changes. He tells his boys how God will be making a kill list for him, demons that he must rid the world of. Your suspicion of Dad grows, and you find yourself finding a certain comfort in Fenton's character, who is seemingly the only sane character left. His impressionable younger brother Adam is going to do anything his father wishes so there's virtually no hope for him to snap out of it.

What transpires is a dark southern gothic story with some real twists. The way that the film shifts your vision of who is good and bad is impressively executed. It's a good opportunity to see some of McConaughey's early acting chops which are evident in the film. He's kind of in his wheelhouse as the Texas-based drifter type that mutters slowly and thought-out. But overall it's a unique film that grabs you, and there's definitely some black comedy elements at work even if they are a bit buried beneath the surface. Paxton is really so perfect for the role as the eccentric father who really feels like he's God hand and doing something important. A straight up scary guy would never work. And it's his ability to be the benign father early on and get you invested in him as the good guy that is the springboard for all of the alternating that continues throughout the film.

Cold in July

Jim Mickle, 2014

IMDB

3/5

Any fan of Dexter probably believes that Michael C. Hall has paid his dues enough to give his future work a shot. Even those (I among one of them) who gave up in the final season on the mostly great series. That wasn’t his fault. Dexter showed he is a guy who has range, constantly having to shift from the unassuming blue collar guy to the struggling-to-keep-restrained serial killer. And although in tone Cold in July is a dark film, it’s quite a departure from his work on Dexter. His character Dane is an everyman character, mullet and all, living in Texas as a picture framer working out of a mom and pop storefront. Awoken in the middle of the night by an intruder in his home, he impulsively takes action to protect his family and finds that his life is immediately turned upside down. What transpires is an attempt to return his life to it’s normalcy, but he soon finds that the disruption in the routine has shaken things up to a point that he can’t help but venture into the depths of the mystery surrounding that intruder.

This pursuit leads him to the company of two men, Russel (Sam Shepard) and Jim-Bob (Don Johnson), men who are living the complete opposite life as himself but men that he can’t seem to distance himself from. And while there are moments where your eyebrow is raised, wondering why Dane doesn’t just move on with his life and let sleeping dogs lie - it sort of makes sense. It sort of makes sense that he is hungry for some disruption from the routine. And also a sense of closure on everything. Cold in July is an ultimately satisfying film, not without it’s flaws. You are introduced to Russel quite abruptly without much explanation, you really have to do the quick work yourself to realize who he is. But the movie is well shot, sounds good (especially with the period-fitting synthwave soundtrack). And the chemistry between the three men are enough to fuel your engagement. When does Sam Shepard NOT deliver?

Sicario

Denis Villeneuve, 2015

IMDB

3/5

A common theme in Canadian-director Villeneuve's films is uncertainty. Particularly uncertainty about a person, if that person is the person that you think they are. It's certainly a theme in Sicario, Villeneuve's seventh feature film. When it comes to the Mexican cartels, finding someone you can actually trust is a rarity. With the Mexican State Police on the Cartel's payroll, the CIA working covertly underneath the nose of many other government agencies, the list of people you really know is very short. So it isn't unusual for Kate Macer (Emily Blunt) to be suspicious of why she is thrown into the middle of the fray. She is told by her higher ups that she will be helping them "shake things up" and "make noise". She is told that it's a thing that they do to force Cartel members to act impulsively and make mistakes. Kate is definitely the moral force at work in the film, never really comfortable with the circumstances she is put in and the decisions that she is forced to make. Blunt is a proven acting force at this point and holds her own alongside Benicio del Toro and Josh Brolin. 

What transpires is skillful filmmaking in line with good storytelling blended with skilled acting, which one comes to expect from Villeneuve at this point. He has yet to make a disappointing picture. While none of this films are as impactful as the very much under-rated Incendies, you see constant improvements in his craft. At times Sicario is reminiscent of the night vision sequences of Zero Dark Thirty. Certainly up there with some of the intensity fueling everything. The story certainly doesn't hide it's comparisons to the Mexican Cartel and the U.S. Government, and whether or not they are actually that different from each other. One interesting consideration is how you notice the Cartel members are family men, or at least have people to go home to. The American characters are more career-focused, married to their jobs.

Sicario certainly blends elements from films like the aforementioned Zero Dark and even some of the southern border bloodshed of Breaking Bad. But it feels like a movie that might be too stable, too uniform. His other work leaves you with images and story-threads that you will never shake. Sicario feels like a solidly made film that won't leave you with the same memories.

Joe

David Gordon Green, 2014

IMDB

3/5

Like he did in previous film Prince Avalanche, Green drops you into the heart of the south in rural Texas. It's a different Texas though this time. This one is a more menacing blue-collar landscape, with dark red-lit brothels, dive bars and rust-laden pickup trucks. Lots of folks living check to check, hour to hour, struggling to make ends meet. Drunks that wander through the streets like slow zombies, scraping to get any buck in their hands so that they can feed the beast sip by sip. Although there are many shifty figures in the story, the film is largely about the relationship between ex-con Joe and drifter-kid Gary. Gary is clearly looking for someone to fulfill a father role while his cannot even gather the balance to walk on his own two feet from his heavy alcoholism. Joe feels responsible to take care of Gary, presumably seeing a younger version of himself in him and also probably feeling guilt about his own negligence in his personal life. Throughout the film he struggles greatly with restraining himself from seeking justice against the dark forces around Gary, mostly his dirt-bag father.

Joe is one of those movies that it almost feels strange you say you enjoyed, because there are so many elements that aren't enjoyable to see. Drug / alcohol addiction, child abuse, animal abuse, violence. It's certainly a negatively charged piece. But what makes Joe good is what makes television series like True Detective good, or Jeff Nichols films good - like last years Mud that Sheridan also appeared in. It gives you the opportunity to see some of the darkest sides of humanity. The Joe character is certainly more of an anti-hero. You root for him to help deliver some come-uppance to the horrible figures in the story, but he is not without his flaws either. He is an absentee boyfriend and father that is slowly killing himself with cigarettes and alcohol. He seems to be a good boss, but not really a good guy. His actions are largely impulsive. His occupation consists of poisoning trees one axe-swing at a time. You wonder if it feeds into his self-destruction, as if he is one of the trees in the forest. Or are the trees themselves reminders of his past, and it's his duty to expel them from the earth? He does take care of his employees and attempts to take care of Gary to a certain extent, but Joe is a work-in-progress that still has a lot of work to do.

Nicholas Cage finally takes on a role that isn't intended to just be another back-tax payment. Instead here you can tell he puts a lot of effort into his performance with his Joe character. He balances retrain and rage so well here, almost like he's redneck version of Bruce Banner. Tye Sheridan is amazing; showing that he's one of the best up and comer actors working today. Sheridan should have a long career ahead of him. He's already been fortunate enough to work with Terrence Malick, Jeff Nichols and David Gordon Green in his first three features, who happen to be some of the best filmmakers working today. Gary Poulter creates one of the most despicable characters ever on screen with his Wade (Gary's dad) character. The film itself is almost like a freaky fun-house of crazies. The town itself is almost a character in the film, with a constant feeling of uncertainty, structures falling apart piece by piece. At the end of the two hour run you are probably happy to get out of the story, but some of the imagery at least shows you some sense of rebirth after a rather destructive climax.

Boyhood

Richard Linklater, 2014

Can I Stream it?

5/5

Filmed over 12 years with the same cast, Boyhood focuses mostly on Mason (Ellar Coltrane) from age 5 to age 18 as he endures some of the most formative years of his young life in Texas.

Linklater has a really interesting voice when it comes to looking at the world. It's evident in virtually all of his films; a sort of rebellious, looking at the clouds, lost in the music abstractism. When it's channeled through the eyes of a young boy, it continues to be engaging and visceral. Boyhood is his boldest work.  The dedication and ambition to create a movie that spans 12 years is astonishing. The production has to run on the cast's good faith due to the fact that they can't secure contracts for that length of time. All during such a critical and sensitive time in young Ellar Coltrane and Lorelai Linklater's (his real life daughter) life. Time when they are distracted by so many other things. People their age are playing football one moment and in the school band the next. Constantly running on impulses. The 12 year production even involved having a backup plan in the event that Linklater suddenly died; Ethan Hawke would step in and complete the film.

Boyhood is a beautiful, heartfelt masterpiece. It's a complete coming of age tale combined with a turbulent family drama, and the scale of it is much bigger than some of the spotty acting that may be present at times. It plays out like a rock record with some goofs that were baked in to the final pressing. After all, Led Zeppelin's "Since I've Been Loving You" wouldn't be the same without John Bonham's squeaky bass pedal. Not only are you seeing young Coltrane actually age through the story but you are actually seeing the wrinkles on the faces of Hawke and Arquette appear over time, and with them the memories of their comprehensive characters develop. The chapters of their life unfold and you are there on the journey. The ebbs and flows, ups and downs. The more bountiful days, the more desperate ones. It's captivating, exhaustive, and just real. 

Slacker

Richard Linklater, 1991

Can I Stream it?

3/5

Most of the great modern filmmakers have that one particular film early in their career. Typically a more primitive representation of their abilities, it showcases some of their ideas and thoughts but not in such an organized or refined fashion. Of course you need experience to evolve. Kevin Smith has Clerks. Steven Soderburgh has Sex, Lies, and Videotape. David Lynch has Eraserhead. While all of the aforementioned films have varying levels of quality associated with them, they all display a certain root quality to each director. Linklater’s Slacker is probably more messy than all of those, but it doesn’t mean it’s bad. Linklater is a man who has a lot to say, and before he made the Before films where he had an Ethan Hawke-led Jesse vessel to deliver it, it came off as a lot of disorganized stoner talk and philosophical ranting. All in the setting of a pre-Hipster Austin Texas. When you get a good look at this 1990’s Austin, you understand the inevitable influx of hipsterdom to the city that would come in the later years. The amateurish quality to the film is certainly revealed when you even see a finger at the top of the frame in one of the scenes. But there is something there, some qualities that you will see in Dazed and Confused and even in School of Rock. What separates these characters from Linklater's future characters is certainly a sense of purpose, or at least principle.

In a way it’s a film that questions a lot of things. Authority in it’s many forms. Uncle Sam, parents, the police, the boss. An examination of the aimless Gen X population. Drifters, couch surfers. People with a lack of conviction to virtually everything in their lives. Habitual moochers in the same vein as the Freegan movement. All laid out with Linklater’s signature tracking shots, only this time focused on people with fanny packs and acid washed jeans.