Review: Hanna

Focus Features

Right off the bat there's going to be one thing that divides the audience on 'Hanna', the new action/thriller from director Joe Wright ('Pride & Prejudice', 'Atonement'): how smart of a thriller are you expecting? What even makes a thriller 'smart'? When I think of a 'smart' thriller the first movie that pops into my mind is 'Memento.' 'Memento' is complex and confusing from the beginning, and slowly pieces fall into place and start to make sense. Not to mention the intensity is kept at a fairly good rate throughout the entire film. So, what approach does 'Hanna' take to building/maintaining intensity and establishing the mysterious/complex aspect that is often (if not always) part of 'action thrillers'?

'Hanna' is set up as a sort of chase scenario from the beginning. Once young Hanna (Saoirse Ronan) decides she has received enough training from her father (Eric Bana) and is 'ready' she sets off a beacon that alerts Marissa Viegler (Cate Blanchett), a CIA agent, to the duo's location in the middle of the woods somewhere. Right away, the focus of the film is on why was Erik Heller (Bana) training his daughter to kill Marissa and why does she, in turn, want to kill the two of them? What's more, there's obviously something different about Hanna. Mainly that she's a highly skilled killer who is a CHILD.

Review: Source Code

Summit Entertainment

With the release of 'Moon' in 2009 I not only gained much more respect for Sam Rockwell as an actor, but also for the film's director, Duncan Jones. 'Moon' proved that Jones has a knack for handling both the tension and progression of stories; especially in the sci-fi genre. Within this genre it's so easy to let the effects, action, and spectacle take over and you lose any sort of connection to the audience and the characters as human beings. It's easy to understand since sci-fi mainly revolves around the science (duh), technology, and fascination with the undiscovered (often UNdiscoverable) elements of the galaxy and the limits of human life and perception. Thanks partly to Rockwell's strong performance as Sam in 'Moon', Jones was able to keep the focus trained on Sam as a human being. The emptiness and seclusion of Sam's position and predicament revealed towards the end only succeeds to emphasize his character and not the 'sci-fi' elements. It makes for a very fascinating movie visually but also emotionally.

So has Jones done it again with 'Source Code', the new sci-fi thriller starring Jake Gyllenhaal? I'd say he has. While the overall tone of the film is quite different from 'Moon', it succeeds on multiple levels of tension, twists, and most importantly, character development.

Review: Of Gods and Men

Why Not Productions/Armada Films/France 3 Cinema/Canal +

This is a time when I'm really thankful for the way Europeans, specifically the French, make movies. Unlike Americans who have the attention span of an ADD five-year old, the French tend to take their time in movies. They don't care if Americans call it 'slow' or whatnot, it's all about the pacing, telling the whole story, and getting it right. That's something director Xavier Beauvois understands very well, and it was especially important for the making of 'Of Gods and Men.'

In Algeria, in the mid 1990's, fundamentalist terrorist groups began attacking at different locations around the country, specifically targeting foreigners. A few such instances occur near the monastery of Tibhirine where a group of Trappist monks live alongside a Muslim community. They give the villagers medical aid and grow all of their own supplies and sell honey they make in the market. Other than helping the villagers, the brothers spend their time studying, praying, singing, and eating together. Beauvois' handling of the material and the cinematography of Caroline Champetier perfectly capture the simplicity, commitment, and quietness of the monks life. Lead by brother Christian (Lambert Wilson), the monks must decide whether to stay with the villagers the monastery has cared for for decades or flee from the growing danger of the terrorists.

Review: The Adjustment Bureau

Universal Pictures

Something that is immediately strange about this movie is that it isn't a remake or sequel to anything. Sure, it's "based" on a Philip K. Dick story like every other science fiction movie ever made, but it's still something new coming out of Hollywood. So why was Hollywood willing to put money into a project that is generally unfamiliar to most people? Sure, Matt Damon is a draw for a lot of people and Emily Blunt is a good-looking, talented actress, but is that enough the world of today where most movies are rehashed material?

It seems to me that the premise of the story that a secret organization known as the "Bureau" is controlling life on earth is nothing new to anyone. Whether it's God, angels, lizard people, the illuminati aliens, whatever, many people believe in some force like fate that directs and governs life. Therefore, it's a safe bet that the audience will connect with this movie on some level. But is the massive appeal a good sign for someone who is looking for an intriguing, intelligent time at the movies?

In most cases, movies with universal, obvious messages are terrible or at best mediocre. And even if a movie is generally intelligent in the layout of the plot the revealing of the message at the end is usually something stupid like the ending to many indie movies that usually goes something like "we just have to learn to love in this crazy world." With a question of fate or free-will which 'The Adjustment Bureau' blatantly poses in the trailers and the film itself is the execution of the story or conclusion more important?

Review: Jane Eyre

Focus Features

It's hard to believe I haven't seen a movie in theaters since 'The King's Speech.' And now, with spring break, it was inevitable that I'd see a movie or two. We'll see if I get to the other two I saw ('The Adjustment Bureau', 'Of Gods and Men'), but for now I'll start with this timeless, Bronte classic that has been adapted to screen countless times over the span of some 100 years; basically ever since making movies became a thing.

So how does it hold up against all the others? It's hard for me to say for sure since I've only seen one version that BBC did a while back that is quite good and is like 3 hours long or something which makes it a lot easier to cover a lot of material. That's probably something this movie accomplished better than any other movie adaptation could have. Jane Eyre (Mia Wasikowska) had a sad, troubling childhood and many things happened to her while leading up to her job as governess to the little French girl at Thornfield Hall, and the film did a great job of capturing it all in just a few scenes. The most important thing being capturing Jane's resilient nature and strong will. Mia Wasikowska definitely picked this role well if she was looking to work on her capabilities as a leading actress, and I think she will most likely be an Oscar contender at some point in the future if this performance tells us anything.

2010 Academy Award Predictions

Before laying it all out let me just say that this year's biggest categories (mainly director and picture) are really hard to call. This is a year where I'm sure I am right about a number of winners, but there's a couple very important ones where I could very well be flat wrong. While I don't have a lot of smart explanations like many smart people out there (Roger Ebert) for why different movies/people should win, I'll do my best to give a brief reason. Or two. Or maybe not. We'll see.

So, let's start from the bottom, with the stuff that doesn't really matter, shall we?

Best Documentary Features - Restrepo

So while 'Exit Through the Gift Shop' is a fantastic doc as well (that might be fake?), 'Restrepo deserves to win. It is as raw and real as a documentary can get. Two camera men embedded with a platoon in the most dangerous combat zone in Afghanistan makes for one of the most exciting and emotionally real docs you'll probably ever see. Sadly, we all know the 'issue' doc will win ('Waste Land', 'Gas Land', or 'Inside Job') because that's what people care about. So this category is more what-I-want-to-win rather than an accurate 'prediction.'

Best Achievement in Visual Effects - Inception

Since we all know the Academy loves to snub Christopher Nolan, they'll have to settle with awarding arguably the best movie of the year with all the technical awards. But let's face it, it really does deserve it all.

Best Achievement in Sound Editing - Inception

*see above comment*

Are You Watching Closely? The Trick of Christopher Nolan's 'The Prestige' and 'Inception'

Warner Bros.

While exploring the idea of augmented realities, and the impact stories have on us, specifically in regards to film, one name immediately came to mind: Christopher Nolan. No doubt everyone is familiar with this man’s work, if not his name as well, already. What some may not realize is the intriguing commentary Nolan provides us on the art of storytelling through many of his films. After studying the plots and conclusions in particular of his films, I came to the realization that each builds on the other. Although the Batman series may be the exception to this trend, the rest of his movies certainly play a part in what I will reveal to be a commentary on how we choose to understand reality.

Summit Entertainment

Nolan is perhaps the most exciting film director working in Hollywood in this day and age. In 2000, he brought us a story, based on a short story written by his brother, Jonathan Nolan, called Memento. This little film mesmerized audiences with its reverse chronological narrative that also included a chronological one differentiated by the use of black and white and color photography. It earned praise all across the board and even a spot on many top lists of the decade due to this ingeniously devised plotline. With the major success of Memento, it is easy to forget Nolan’s first film which he wrote, photographed, co-edited and produced, and directed. This was Following, released in 1998 at a mere sixty-nine minute running time, but with a hefty plot. Like Memento, it follows a non-linear storyline involving a man who follows strangers around London to try and find inspiration for a novel he is writing. The rest of the film sees the man getting involved with a stranger, named “Cobb”, who in turn manipulates him into being framed for crimes Cobb committed. Following set the stage for Nolan’s twisting, mysterious, non-linear storylines.

Warner Bros.

Two years after Memento he made Insomnia, a remake of Norwegian murder mystery film, starring Al Pacino, Robin Williams, and Hilary Swank. Although it is not as famous as his other films, it was still given credit for being a smartly written, psychological thriller that put more power in Pacino’s career. It was at this point that one could easily recognize the darkness connecting Nolan’s movies. Memento emphasized how much obsession and revenge can manipulate reality even at the consent of an individual. Insomnia follows the same idea of warping reality, but this time to avoid taking responsibility for a violent act and how it drives Pacino’s character over the edge.

The Post-Apocalyptic Tale: Survival, Death, and Morals

Dimension Films

This is something I may do from time to time when I get really motivated. It may involve one movie or a few that revolve around some interesting idea or ideas or hints at some. Hopefully these posts will spark conversation with whoever happens to take the time to read them, because I'm aware they're a lot longer than normal.

What is so appealing about the post-apocalyptic tale? It seems to me to be the very essence of human survival. Unlike many survival stories that involve being lost in the wilderness, separated from mankind, or some variation on this scheme, there is no good and right civilization to return to. One doesn’t stumble out of the woods to collapse in the arms of a search and rescue crew or some flabbergasted family in route to a vacation spot. These stories rely on the sheer power of will and logic against inanimate forces, and it is assumed that the reward is finding ‘home’ and comfort again.

                Not so when the human race is on the line. There is nothing to return to. But everyone needs a goal, something to keep them going. So, why not head to the ocean? Or where we grew up? Or ‘I heard they have a [insert particular safe-haven] in [insert city], let’s go there.’ However, this only occurs when one wants a ‘happy ending’ to their story, like ‘I Am Legend’, or ’28 Days Later.’ A lot of sad and awful things have already happened, so why not give the audience something to feel good about? But these stories never stay with us for long.

                Its stories like ‘The Road’ or another movie I recently watched (that was surprisingly good for how simple it was) ‘Carriers’ that tend to floor you; especially ‘The Road.’ The drive for survival is still there and keeps people going, but they know (and we know) it will all end in death. That sounds silly to say because that’s just like normal, comfortable life, but therein is the paradox.