Fury

David Ayer, 2014

Can I Stream it?

4/5

Fury as seen in the decaying white paint on the barrel of the tank's main gun, is the large armored home to the group of five soldiers who serve as the main characters of this Ayers film. The film zeroes in on the latter days of World War II. Much of the European countryside has been ravaged by the destruction. The soldiers themselves wear much of the devastation on their faces. None of them appear to bear as much of the burden of the memories as Don "Wardaddy" Collier (Brad Pitt). He has seen many men die next to his gun and in front of it. He has grown increasingly angry with the German enemy. When he breaks away for short moments the memories catch up to him inducing moments of panic. His innocence is no longer evident. He is not exactly an approachable man. For him, it's the routine of completing mission after mission. He senses it's drawing to an end, but he expects more loss. It's almost a guarantee at this point.

When young Norman (Logan Lerman) is thrown upon him as one of his replacement troops, he isn't welcoming to the idea because he immediately sees the inexperience (and the innocence) in him. Much of the film becomes about Norman's character, a wide-eyed noob more suited for a desk job stateside and not even remotely equipped to dealing with the brutality that the others have grown so accustomed to. His initiation involves a lot of the veterans of the group slapping him around, busting his chops. You get a sense that they are just trying to make a man out him, they probably went through the same type of thing when they were new.

Most of Ayers film work has consisted of stories largely focused on police fighting violent street crime. There are some common themes in his films. Ranking hierarchy, male comradery, putting your life on the line for your job. He is able to inject a lot of that into Fury. At this point there have been so many movies about World War II that it has you wondering if anyone can create a film with some originality and uniqueness. Ayer manages to do that here. Some of the battles, as violent and gruesome as they are, feel very fresh. But they are quite gory. There are some images that are bound to stick with you, much like Saving Private Ryan probably has. The energy between the five soldiers feels very organic, making some really great casting choices. A lot of war movies seem to always have this built in feeling of brotherly love between soldiers. There's something about the way they handle the group dynamic here that makes it feel more authentic. They are tense, quick to turn on each other and get physical. This would make sense because they have been stuck in each others company for so long, under little rest. Of course they don't want to lose each other, but it's a complicated feeling to say the least. A tough love dynamic at work. The movie manages to maintain tension, in and out of battle. When things quiet down for a moment, you never really feel at ease.

Only Lovers Left Alive

Jim Jarmusch, 2014

Can I Stream it?

2/5

Two vampires reunite after years apart from each other to complain about their frustrations with the modern world and how uncivilized the human race has become.

Jarmusch creates the kind of movies that people want to say they liked. But Only Lovers is a perfect example of an intellectual filmmaker making an awfully dull movie. Maybe he was in his own head too much. Maybe he was trying to hard to make a carve out a niche in an already exhausted genre. But even the story didn't feel all that fresh, either. Maybe the angst-ridden vampire stories are better left for Anne Rice. Jarmusch did do a couple of things right. Shooting in Detroit to take advantage of the dystopian landscape is a good idea, might as well make use of America's dying city and make a subtle message about the actual state of our American culture at the same time. It's no mistake that they juxtapose dying Detroit and culture-rich Tangier. Casting Swinton and Hiddleston is certainly a good idea. But instead of letting Swinton breathe he follows her on exhaustingly long shots through Middle Eastern alleyways. Instead of letting Hiddleston breathe he turns him into a virtually mute emo-rocker, like a junkie who can't seem to get the right score in his hands. And of course that's the point, two vampires completely dissatisfied with the state of the world. All of the culture, the art, the creativity has died off giving way to a toxic race that they call "zombies". Maybe Lovers needed actual zombies to make it more interesting. Only Lovers feels like work while watching it. You get a feeling that you were bit in the neck in the opening credits and slowly bleed out during the remainder of the film, sort of falling into a lightheaded daze. There should be a disclaimer that you need 3 Venti's before viewing. Don't watch this one after a couple glasses of wine. The Blade franchise is more engaging, as strange as it feels to say that. Only Lovers can be placed somewhere in the middle of the Twilight franchise and the much better Interview with a Vampire. 

Nightcrawler

Dan Gilroy, 2014

Can I Stream it?

3/5

Night owl Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal) struggles to find any form of employment until he is excited to discover an underworld group who films newsworthy events and sells the footage to the local television outlets.

Nightcrawler is a menacing nocturnal thriller, with Jake Gyllenhaal channeling a manic energy thats sort of a blend of Travis Bickle and Patrick Bateman with the inappropriate persistence of a TMZ reporter with his Louis Bloom character. But to be fair, Gyllenhaal makes Louis his own and really gives him his own place in the world of deranged movie characters. From the get go, Louis is a difficult character to get behind. He scrapes by, stealing scrap copper and trying to flip it in yards under strict and personally disciplined negotiation. His social cues are a bit unpolished to say the least. Bags under his eyes, with almost an Uncle Fester like purpleness to them. He's a man still trying to find his place in the world. And his world isn't in the daytime. His world is the night-fallen Los Angeles, when all of the shady people come out to play. When he encounters a scene of an accident and sees that there is actually a job where people capture those critical moments for a quick buck, he's hooked on the spot. This form of employment suits Louis quite well, because he is undoubtedly a sociopath. He doesn't hesitate to get right in there with a camera, regardless of the pain or the seriousness of the situation. He is numb to the levity of the situation. His cold shell gets peeled away layer by layer over the course of the film, giving you the impression that you will eventually be exposed to some kind of warmth by Louis. But no, the layers only expose more apathy. Louis is callous, calculating, self serving. He looks upon these crime scenes with open eyes, and nothing behind those chilled eyes feels concerned or empathetic. Perhaps that's one of the most conflicting parts of the story. Sort of difficult to become genuinely concerned about a character like Louis. But much like Taxi Driver, the story isn't really about you getting behind Louis. You sit back and watch in awe. Nightcrawler somehow finds a new way to look at Los Angeles. Gyllenhaal delivers possibly the best performance of his career. He's really showing that he's working on himself as actor, trying to evolve. He's come a long way from Bubble Boy. Nightcrawler is a meditation on our culture of rubber-necking and giving priority to the horrific train-wreck-like events on our TV screens . But it also explores morality through the eyes of a maniac.

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.