The Conjuring

The Conjuring directed by James Wan, starring Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga, Ron Livingston, and Lili Taylor.

I love it when a small budget movie comes out of nowhere, dominates the box office, makes a ton of cash, and then leaves Hollywood scratching its collective head wondering why this happened.  Well I can tell them why it happened, but they will never understand nor do they really want to understand or they would be making more movies like this.  Before I get to far into this review, I will just say go out and watch this movie.  It is this good and deserves every amount money it earned because it earned the dollars honestly and without the blessing of Hollywood.

How good is this movie?

It's very good.  It harkens back to the good old days of Hollywood making horror movies, or for that matter, any movies any general.  This movie feels like a movie made in the 70's and it's all the better for it.  It is a horror movie but doesn't rely on over the top gory scenes or over the top blood drenched scenes, instead it uses the good old fashioned way of presenting horror.  It relies on what it doesn't show and lets the imagination of the viewer imagination far worse things than it could ever show.  Old school horror is so much better than anything these "new" directors are making now.  This movie mixes elements of the original Haunting with The Exorcist in a beautiful way, to create a movie that feels original yet familiar at the same time, not too many movies can do this or do this with such ease.  A lot of credit has to be given to James Wan.  His direction is superb even in the non horrifying scenes.  He doesn't use any clever camera tricks or editing to convey horror but uses the old school way of making the horrific terrifying and it works wonderfully.  And his direction of each family in this movie brings an intimate, closeness that really helps to draw the viewer into the world and story he's telling.

Some other things I think helped to make this movie storm the box office and ultimately as good as it turned out, at least for me.

Despite all of the horrific things that happen in this movie, it is a very family centric movie where the core family values are front and center through out.  This isn't a movie that is trying to break down the walls that make a family.  This isn't a movie that's trying to push some kind of political agenda against the family.  This is a movie that supports everything that makes a family, a family.  A mother, a father and the kids that flow from that relationship are what make a family, a family.  This is a movie that goes against everything Hollywood has been trying to break down over the last few decades on what makes a family, a family.  The Conjuring also fully supports a loving marriage between a man and woman, not a man with a man or a woman with a woman, but a husband a wife.  There just isn't enough movies out there that have this as a main focal point, instead many movies seem to want to destroy any notion of a loving relationship between a husband and wife.  This movie fully supports it and not in a wife being totally submissive to the husband way either, but in both of them taking a part in the relationship and sharing responsibilities.  I like the fact that this movie presents not just one family and one marriage as an example, they have two families and two marriages as an example.  That is one bold move and I think it paid off as it just so happens the people in America voted with their wallets and really connected with this movie, a family movie.  I also like how The Conjuring doesn't present a perfect family or a perfect marriage but a family and marriage that has problems but are still able to work through those problems without just giving up and throwing in the towel.  I think this also helped people to connect with this movie as it showed people who were willing to work through problems instead of not dealing with them, which is what our society seems more built upon now-a-days.

Lastly, The Conjuring is a very spiritual movie, one where God does exist and isn't just some innocent bystander watching everything going on from the distant realm where He lives.  And He doesn't just sit around with His feet propped up on a coffee table watching people suffer.  He works through people to get His job done.  This movie presents God and spirituality in a way that Hollywood is totally confused about and will never understand.  But I like how The Conjuring presents all of the spirituality in an honest way.  Not a way that is demeaning or poking fun at it but a real non-biased way, which is something Hollywood never does because in Hollywood spirituality is only to be mocked and made fun of, where it's principles and values are beat up on a regular basis.  Not so in The Conjuring, in this movie the values of spirituality and God are never mocked or made fun of they brought front and center throughout the movie and make up the foundation of everything that happens within the movie.

In case you couldn't figure out, I really liked this movie and everything about this movie, from the acting, the directing, the set designs, the story lines, the characters, the themes, everything connected in a good way and made this movie worth seeing.

Olympus Has Fallen

Olympus Has Fallen directed by Antoine Fuqa, starring Gerard Bulter, Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman, Angela Bassett, and that one Asian guy who always plays bad guy movies.

First off this is a totally absurd idea for a movie.  But if you're going to have an absurd idea for a story line, you might as run with it and go for broke, which means go full on absurdity.  This movie does, it pushes all the chips in.  Two things whole hardheartedly save this film from falling over the absurdness of the story line, that is the characters and the actors playing the characters.  Also this movie isn't out to make a statement about politics or politicians, it sets out to be a good action movie,and well it succeeds at this.  This is basically what you would pitch as Die Hard in the White House, that's pretty  much the bare bones of everything in this movie.

As I said earlier, two things save this movie and help it to be much more than the sum of its parts: the characters and the acting.   This is something I've noticed over the years with books and movies, no matter what kind of crazy, insane, absurd, or good story line you have, if you put some good characters into those story lines they will help them breath and will help people actually care about what is going on.  This movie is living proof of this.  Gerard Butler completely sells the action man scenario and embodies the Bruce Willis role with ease.  He's funny when he needs to be, cracking wise with the best of them but yet he's brutal and ruthless when the situation calls for it.  It's like watching Liam Nesson, in Taken all over again.  Butler also plays his character with smarts and gives him a charm that makes him completely likeable from the moment you see him on screen.  Morgan Freeman, is well Morgan Freeman.  I don't believe he can play a bad part even in a bad movie because there's just something about him that's interesting.  Aaron Eckhart proves once again what an actor he is, despite not being one of the main characters in this movie, he still brings a life to the president of the United States.  Angela Bassett proves once again that Halle Berry winning an Oscar, while she has none, is an epic fail on Hollywood's part.

Antoine Fuqa's direction is actually the third thing that helps this movie rise above the absurdness into the entertaining category.  His direction is actually a thing to behold as he helps to give everything a truly authentic feel.  His crisp, flowing direction never gets lost in the actions scenes or action set pieces.  His communication with the audience during the action is competent and clear, I never felt lost as to what was happening when hell breaks loose during those scenes.  And he doesn't result to the over use of the hand held camera, because, you know he actually directs the scenes without letting shaky cam take over.  He's in charge and he knows it.  I think he also helped to bring the brutality of Training Day into character Butler plays, and if he did, it truly helped to make his character all the more engaging and interesting.  As Butler's character fights to stay alive not to play around, when he has a chance to kill, he does it, ruthlessly and without reproach.  This movie is all the better for it. 

This is entertainment on an absurdly high scale.  But with characters you actually care about, embodied by actors and actresses, who aren't the A-list starts but are some really good character actors, that help bring them to life.  You follow all of that up with a good director and you got one good entertaining movie for the night.  Enjoy.

Pacific Rim

Pacific Rim written and directed by Guillermo del Toro, starring Charlie Hunnam, Diego Klattenhoff, Idris Elba, Rinko Kiluchi, and Ron Perlman, who seems to be in every film directed by del Toro since Hellboy.

This is one of the easiest films to break down I've ever done: giant robots fight giant monsters.

If you go into this film expecting anything more than this, then you are stupid.  Let me repeat the story line again, in case you missed it the first time: giant robots fight giant monsters.  You can't go into this movie over thinking anything about it because if you do, logically this movie won't hold up, but the whole point of this movie is to have fun.  There's nothing magical about the story line.  Nothing super special with the story line.  No mystery to this story.  No crazy ending twists to be found here.  This is just a movie about giant robots beating up giants monsters.  And from a nerd standpoint this movie delivers on every promise of giants robots beating up giants monsters.

Guillermo del Toro is an interesting filmmaker as he seems to be one of the few directors out there who has hasn't lost his way when it comes making movies that stir up fan boys and fan girls hearts.  He always seems to deliver when he makes these kinds of movies.  He hasn't let the Hollywood system steal his soul like it has done to Spielberg, Lucas, and Cameron.  His movies still have plenty of heart, joy, and passion oozing out from every frame without every loosing that little spark of life from being a fan.

Pacific Rim delivers on every promise of that simple premise: giant robots fighting giant monsters.  The robots are very cool looking and singularly unique in design.  Along with having their counterpart pilots be as diverse as the robots.  This is a totally outlandish story line but del Toro introduces enough things about the robots and their pilots to make their story interesting.  I like the fact he doesn't go overboard on the pilots' history.  He goes just far enough and then pulls back the reigns before it gets to sappy or overly dramatic annoying: see Star Trek Into Darkness for not knowing when to let up on story line and personnel back history clashing with action scenes.  Del Toro for the most part seems to know how to balance those to out, after all he did well enough with both Hellboy movies and I didn't expect anything less from him with this movie.  Even the monster designs were very individualistic as they all had a basic design but had their unique things as well without having to steal from Jurassic Park (American Godzilla I'm talking you).

Another thing I liked about this movie was the small details of the production design: from the sets, costumes, and even CGI.  Those small details were making everything in this battle worn world look broke down, scratched, paint peeling, and generally well used.  Unlike most CGI stuff today that has a super polished looked to the point where it looks fake (Star Wars prequels and Hobbit, I'm talking to you).  The world of Pacific Rim looks lived in.  These robots would never have a new paint job on them and would be severely scarred from their many fights with the giant monsters.   I like how del Toro incorporated this into the movie because for me it just  helped to make this movie a little more likable.  The world I live in is not super polished.  It's a blue collar world and the world of Pacific Rim is a blue collar world through and through and del Toro makes sure this movie wears that world on its sleeve with pride. 

Now the acting is every bit as one would expect with a del Toro movie.  All the actors and actresses buy into the world he is building and run away with it like kids in a candy store, much the same way as del Toro does when he makes a movie.  They seem to be having a lot of fun with the whole concept of (and I'll say it one more time) giant robots fighting giant monsters.  All in all I had a great time watching this movie.  It was funny when it needed to be and it was dramatic when it needed to be without diving into the over melodramatic.  

Charlie Bartlett

Charlie Bartlett directed by Jon Poll, starring Anton Yelchin, Robert Downing, Jr, Hope Davis, and Kat Dennings.

There's not really much to say about this film.  It's just a fun movie that's lite on the comedy and lite on the drama but mixes them together well enough to make a movie that's quite entertaining.

It's a typical Hollywood movie about fitting in, coming to find and understand who you are as a person.  There's really nothing about this film that shouts originality.  I could easily compare this movie with another movie I watched a few months ago, The Perks of Being a Wallflower.  They both kind of have this same theme running through it but Wallflower is a standout film whereas Batlett has a clone mentality to it that doesn't really try anything new.  


Everything about this movie hangs on the shoulders of the actor, Anton Yelchin, who plays Charlie Bartlett and he serves the movie well as he helps to make Charlie an interesting character and very likeable, which is Charlie's main goal in like anyhow. The other thing that helps this movie along is all the other actors and actresses.  They really lend a hand in this movie being entertaining.  If you're just looking for something light weight for the night to digest you can't go wrong with this movie as it will entertain you for a good 90 minutes.  This is a movie about the main character wanting want to fit in and be liked by everyone, the movie honestly fits in all too well with the other movies of its genre. 

Amores Perros

Amores Perros directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu, starring Emilio Echevarria, Gael García Bernal, Vanessa Bauche, Goya Toleo, and Alvaro Guerrero.

The title of this movie in Spanish is "Love is a Bitch".

This a multiple arch story line with, at the minimum, five main characters, with three story lines all interconnecting with a horrific car accident.  Two things connect all the characters and the story line: love and dogs.  This movie has a lot of connections with other movies just based on how the movie is set up.  The multiple characters and story arcs reminded me of Short Cuts, Magnolia, and Pulp Fiction.  But the one film it has the most in common with is Pulp Fiction.  

This movie has a Pulp Fiction kind of vibe to it and Pulp Fiction's style is all over this movie, but it's no where as intriguing as Pulp Fiction.  The production, design, and for the mast part how this movie is shot is very similar to Fiction.  It has low budget, down in the trenches mentality that add a lot to the story being told.  This movie is not great but it's good enough that the 2 and 1/2 hour run time didn't pass by slowly.

The only thing that really hurts this movie is the lack of intriguing characters, where as Pulp Fiction's characters really helped to make that movie flow (even though I'm not a huge fan of it, it did have some interesting scenes).  There isn't a lot of sympathetic characters in this movie and when things happen to them, I don't feel sorry for them because of their decisions beforehand.  The sign of a good writer is how they can make an unlikeable character either likeable or sympathetic by showing them in scenes that don't wash over how unlikeable they are but shows some inner humanity lurking within them.  Amore Perros doesn't ever really do this, which is the one failing of the movie.  Ultimately though it's an interesting movie if you're in the mood for a movie that is quite the opposite of what Hollywood is producing.

Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks written and directed by Bruce A. Evans, starring Kevin Costner, William Hurt, Demi Moore, Dane Cook, and Marg Helgenberger.

This is kind of like a movie version of Dexter and has a lot of similarities with Dexter as the main story line deals with a serial killer balancing his normal daily life of work and family with that of his addiction: killing people.  Only in Mr. Brooks, he kills innocent people whereas in Dexter, Dexter preys on other serial killers or criminals in general.  Ultimately Costner plays an unlikable character but the story shows enough of him in normal life - with his family (wife and daughter) and at work - that his character begins to earn sympathy.  Now I won't say everything in the screenplay works but it works enough to make the storyline interesting and works enough to make me actually care about Costner's character.  But don't get me wrong this story is a dark dive into a violent world that is made all the more enlightening by some good acting and a screenplay that actually cares about the characters.  This is a dark world Mr. Brooks takes us through but one I was ultimately intrigued in once the movie started.

This movie is stylish, glossy, and very easy on the eyes.  The production and set designs completely help to pull the viewer into Mr. Brooks' world as they help to make the dark subject matter a little more attainable.  I can't emphasize this enough about the production and set designs for this movie as they both enhance the story with some direction that more than serves the story without being flashy.  Everything works towards making the story line and characters the forefront of the movie and everything succeeds with that mission statement.

One of the boldest moves of the screenplay is having Mr. Brooks' inner Id take part in conversations with him.  On screen this works in wondrous ways as William Hurt embodies the Id, known as Marshall.  Marshall can only be seen and heard by Mr. Brooks, so every scene they are in together with anyone else, it's all in Mr. Brooks head, which leave Costner and Hurt to do some fine acting playing off of each other beautifully, even if there's another person in the scene with them.  This also helps Costner a lot as well as the majority of his best movies have him acting opposite some very good actors - Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, JFK, Waterworld, The Untouchables, Dances with Wolves, Wyatt Erp, Thirteen Days, and list goes on and on as his best movies always have him teamed up with a really good actor or actors.  This movie is no different with William Hurt, as his inner ID, and  Marg Helgenberger, as his wife.  They both help Costner to play Mr. Brooks with a detachment associated with a serial killer. I don't why this is with Costner because I don't think he's a great actor but he does a competent job when teamed up with great or very good actors. 

Demi Moore has the oddest job in this movie.  The screenplay uses her as a visual aide to guide the reader into the world of the serial killer Mr. Brooks, but if this part had been played by someone else I don't think it would have been as effective.  Moore makes her character come alive and does help the movie out despite a part that, for all attempts and purposes, doesn't really serve much place in the story line or the screenplay and feels forced when her world and Mr. Brooks' world come together.  This part of the story line seems rather contrived to me but considering how crazy everything else is in the movie I can actually buy into this a little bit and wasn't really annoyed at it. Her character seems more at home in an episode of Law and Order than here in a movie where Mr. Brooks' characters and psyche is being explored. At times her character and role in the story line seem like they're from a different movie - more like Clarice Starling from Silence of the Lambs - but her character never reaches the depth of Starling even though there is plenty of room for it.  Mr. Brooks is the main focal point of the movie but, as I said above, Moore does a good job making her character come alive and making her interesting enough that I wouldn't mind seeing more of the character in another movie.

Another aspect of this movie I like is how the story line weaves through some interesting aspects that rise up to challenge Mr. Brooks.  How he responds to these challenges is interesting as they both offer some pin point insight into his life and help to flesh out his character all the more.  But these instances also reenforce the fact that Mr. Brooks is predator and sees the world through a predator's eyes.  He is and always will be a serial killer.  It is his addiction.  It is part of his life and this movie offers the viewer a glance into his world.

Frailty

Frailty directed by Bill Paxton, starring Matthew McConaughey and Bill Paxton.

I've wanted to see this movie when it came out in 2001 but I just never got around to seeing it for various reasons, but now, twelve years later, I finally got to see it.  And what a little gem of movie it turned out to be.  Time has been extremely good to this movie as it doesn't rely on over-the-top special effects, gory scenes dependent on super violent blood shed, nor gallons up on gallons of blood spraying from the body in all kinds of various ways.  Instead this movie heralds back to the good old days of Hollywood where story line and characters were used in a movie. 

I would classify this movie as a low budget movie and if all low budget movies could aspire to be like this one, then low budget movies could easily be something great instead of the pretentious, agenda pushing, and shocking values they've become.  They forget to tell an actual story and become so focused on delivering a message and interpretation that they become lost to what actually makes a movie, good and that is (to repeat the phrase again) storyline and characters.

Frailty is never, for one second, lost to the confines that have shackled low budget film making for so long, as the pacing and story telling keep things rolling along with never a dull moment. Despite the grim, brutal subject matter of a father who hears the voice of God telling him to kill people and then bringing his sons along to apprentice them in delivering the justice of God to people, the movie remains a highly spiritual affair that doesn't mock or make fun of Christianity or God.  A few twists do abound as the movie starts to wrap up but the story is never obsessed with them and they aren't the driving force of the movie.  The driving force of the movie is, honestly, Matthew McCaughey as he tells an FBI agent how his life changed when his father heard God's voice to kill people.  And the story he unfolds is engrossing and mesmerizing as delivered in McCaughey's southern droll, with each word he completely drew me in as he peeled the story of his childhood away layer by layer. 

What a job Bill Paxton did of directing.  I'm not going to say he was super great but he was competent and assured in away most film makers seem overtaken with everything or wanting to show off when they don't need to.  He just let the story line and characters do their job as he got out of the way and communicated to the audience in a mature way.  There isn't anything flashy in the direction or editing of this movie and there didn't need to be because the story line didn't need it.  Paxton knew this and let the story line and characters be the focal point of the movie.  The movie does have a television type of feel to it but that is only because the budget didn't help with this but Paxton doesn't let that get in his way from telling a compelling story, which is what any good director would do, never let the limitations of the budget be a crutch. 

Overall this a good movie dealing with a dark and grim subject matter but looking at it in a mature way as they story doesn't pander or talk down to audience.