The Tree of Life

        I consciously passed on going to see The Tree of Life as I knew that it was an ‘art’ film.  A colleague of mine urged me to see it as, while he can’t say he enjoyed it, he was interested in my take on it as he was still thinking about it days later.  I think that is as good a description as any for the movie.  

The Tree of Life is a highly abstract movie and like viewing any work of abstract art, how one describes it says more about the viewer than what the film may or may not be trying to say.  Let me say that Terrance Malik’s creation is an incredibly beautiful visual and auditory odyssey (it even says in the beginning credits that it is best viewed at high volume).  If you are looking for a coherent storyline then you will be disappointed.  What you can take from the montage of images is that this is the story of Jack (played in adulthood by Sean Penn), a troubled man in the modern world trying to come to grips with his childhood and troubled relationship with his authoritarian father (played by Brad Pitt).  The story is non-linear and is more a series of images and feelings set to music and poetry.  It captures moments rather than a story from growing up in Waco Texas in the 1950’s.

The movie opens with news of the death of Jack’s younger brother (we assume it’s from Vietnam, but it never explicitly says so).  For the first 30 minutes of the movie we live the moments of a grieving mother and a father full of regret.  The movie then takes a unique turn and for the next 30 minutes gives us a visual opera of the birth of creation.  This is the most abstract part of the movie, but at the same time the most riveting.  The imagery of the birth of creation, to the creation of the earth, to the arrival of life is some of the most incredible cinematic artistry I have ever seen.  The power of the images are only heightened by an incredible operatic movie score.  Much like an abstract painting, you are not always sure what you are looking at, but you know when it  touches and moves you.  Words are not always effective (and sometimes a hinderance) in trying to describe it.  It must be experienced to appreciate it (or dismiss it).

The images are filled not only with the fire and power of creation, but also the rhythms of life.  The movie records rhythm from the very core of the universe to the smallest creature that begins to evolve on Earth.  The camera follows the formation of life as it it struggles to leave it’s primordial ooze and survive on land.  While this unfolds following our belief in evolution, there is definitely a feeling of God or something majestic in the grand design of it all.  I couldn’t avert my eyes during the odyssey.

As the creation montage ends and one is still reeling from what they just saw we witness the birth of Jack.  We feel the insignificance of his birth after witnessing the grand design, but we realize his part in the tapestry of life and he fits seamlessly into the rhythm of existence.

The next part of the movie doesn’t really tell a story per se, rather it paints a portrait of feelings and memories.  There is no individual significance to each of the moments portrayed, but as the film progresses you begin to see the pattern in the tapestry of his life and there is a certain majesty to it’s commonness (How’s that for an assessment of a piece of art?  Pretentious and contradictory).  There is nothing extraordinary about Jack’s life.  It was probably the experience of countless others from the time period, but it fit perfectly into life’s grand design.  

As the movie draws to it’s final chapter all the moments and people of Jack’s life are drawn together and we share with Jack his feelings of forgiveness, love, and release.  These moments are as abstract as the creation of the universe, but treated with equal awe and wonderment.

It’s difficult to review a movie that does not necessarily have a traditional storyline.  It’s hard to strike a balance where you will either sound like a pretentious bohemian poser or an unsophisticated dolt.  The movie doesn’t easily lend itself to review.  I will say that whether you like or dislike the film, Terrence Malik must be respected for his vision and artistry.  Unlike some works of abstract art that is dismissed for it's banality, one can feel the power and force of this work.  I’m not sure I can recommend it to anyone, but I have to admire and applaud the craftsmanship.

I rate this film **** (strictly for form, not enjoyment)

Real Steel

       I’m a little late reviewing this movie as I was not highly motivated to go see it.  Before I get into the criticisms of this movie (and there are many), let me start off by saying that I did have a good time and enjoyed myself.  This movie targets the same demographics as the Transformers series, but unlike the Transformers, there is a story and characters we cared about.  If I had to describe this movie, it would be Transformers meets Rocky meets Rokem’ Sokem’ robots (the child hood game).  

The story takes place in the near future where robots have taken over in the boxing ring as the public constantly wants bigger and badder entertainment.  Charlie Kenton (Hugh Jackman) is a once fighter who had a title chance before robots took over.  He is now a small time boxing promoter trying to scrape by in underground robot fighting.  His life is a mess and he continues to spiral downwards with no end in sight.  When Charlie hits rock bottom, he discovers that an estranged girlfriend of his died and his  9 year old son Max (Dakota Goyo), whom he barely knows, suddenly comes back into his life.  Through a series of questionable legal maneuvers (only in the movies), Charlie finds a way of making money by agreeing to take care of his son for the summer until his deceased wife’s wealthy sister can take care of him.  Charlie plans to leave Max in the care of his girlfriend (Evangeline Lilly), but Max forces Charlie to take him along by confiscating his keys (I rolled my eyes too).  What follows is a no holds bar foray into the world of underground robot boxing.  I didn’t know they would even let a 9 year old into those type of clubs, but hey, it’s a movie.  As the stakes are raised, Charlie and Max must assemble a robot that will take them to the ultimate robot championship, while finding each other in the process (I know, I’m wincing as I write this).

Again, I enjoyed this movie, but I also felt that the enjoyment was manipulated and not organic. This was cookie cutter film making.  The movie followed the underdog genre as close as a paint by numbers landscape painting kit.  Like a paint by numbers set, you appreciate the picture after it’s done, but there is no satisfaction and just a bit of guilt for how uninspired it is.

One thing I never overcame was Hugh Jackman.  He was supposed to play a down and out over the hill man hitting rock bottom, but frankly, Hugh is just too good looking for this role.  He is as clean cut and chiseled as he has ever been and he flashes his charming smile more often than George Clooney at a Sports Illustrated photo shoot.  He looks like a guy at the top of his game as opposed to a bottom dweller.  They throw in a 5 o’clock shadow, but even that is emaculately groomed. Then of course the thing I hate the most; precocious kids.  I’m not sure why writers consider obnoxious know-it-all kids to be endearing, but Max really was annoying.  And I never bought how a 9 year old can navigate the adult world better than any adult.  Especially the underground world, where any kid would be wetting his pants dealing with shady characters and brutal situations.  Max has no problem talking smack to leather clad mohawked drug addicts.  Max just proceeds along teaching his father wholesome family values while dwelling in cesspools of humanity.

I will say that I am thankful they tried to develop the characters, but it was just all so contrived that not only could I predict what was going to happen in the next scene, I could almost predict what the next lines of dialogue would be.  

The villains were generic rich bad guys and I’m still not quite sure how the down and out father and son team managed to score a world title fight with a few months, but of course they did.  I’m not going to give any plot spoilers other than if you’ve seen any Rocky movie then you’ve seen this.  I even read somewhere, that some of the choreography was taken directly from Rocky IV  (Sugar Ray Leonard was a consultant for the rest).

This would be a great movie to take any kids in your family and have everyone enjoy it, but if you are looking for something even marginally sophisticated, then move on.  There’s a lot of emotional heart-string tugging and a lot of vibrating bass in the soundtrack to give the film the illusion of gravitas, but it’s about as heavy as a helium balloon.

Fun, but I can’t recommend anything other than a family outing.  

I give this film **stars

Ides of March

Ides of March is an intriguing movie of how the political process works in America.  The movie follows the final days of a close Democratic primary battle in Ohio.  The thing I really liked is that this movie had little to do with political ideology.  This could very well have been a movie about a Republican primary. It illustrates how little ideology has to do with how campaigns are run and the compromises and back room deals that even the most idealistic candidate must make in order to win.

The film follows the campaign of Governor Mike Morris (played presidentially by George Clooney) as he campaigns to win the Ohio primary, a must win State if one wants to win the Presidency.  The story is told through the perspective of a young, up and coming, and idealistic press secretary; Steven Myers (played by one of my new favorite actors, Ryan Gosling).  Gosling is in his element here and delivers another knock out performance.  Like Tom Cruise, Gosling can act with intensity, yet Gosling doesn’t have to demonstrate it over the top like Cruise.  You can sense the power behind his subtle facial expressions. Gosling had no trouble holding his own with veteran actors, Clooney, Giamati, and Hoffman.  No dismissive accomplishment when you consider Clooney had a mullet and was appearing on bad sitcoms when he was Gosling’s age.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman plays Myer’s boss, Paul Zara and the great Paul Giamatti plays the opposing press secretary, Tom Duffy.  Again, political ideology is not the focus of this film as it takes place almost entirely in the Democratic circle.  Republicans are barely mentioned.  Myers lives and breathes the campaign and is the one person who is not a realist among the ensemble.  He truly believes in Gov. Morris and is able to justify his spins to the press as what is necessary to propel his righteous candidate to the White House.  What he doesn’t know is that political story spinning to the press is the least of the evils that must be done in the game of politics.  His boss Paul warns him that he must be careful in idolizing great men as, like anyone, they will invariably disillusion you. 

What we don’t realize is the depths of amorality that Steven is capable of when pushed.  The director does a credible and capable job at revealing the change in Steven as his illusions crumble around him. You see that no matter who you are, ideals will eventually give way to reality in politics.  Steven becomes more adept and ruthless than either he or the audience thought he was capable.  The young intern Molly (played seductively by Evan Rachael Woods) is the catalyst that starts Steven’s downward path (or correct path depending on your point of view).  As a scandal breaks out when the Governor is accused of having an affair with the young intern, all chaos and panic breaks loose in the campaign.  Paul mentors young Steven; a candidate can start a war or drive the country to bankruptcy, but his campaign can’t survive an intern scandal (or something to that effect).

All the players, including the idolized Governor Morris, start to show their true talents in politics as they make compromises and back room deals in order to keep the campaign alive.  Each person, including the young and naive Steven, try to orchestrate Machiavellian moves in an escalating game of one up-manship.  Not only are they fighting their opponents in the other camp, but they soon turn on each other.

The film is powerful and flows like a suspense and intrigue movie.  It doesn’t tell us anything we don’t already know or haven’t heard or suspected about politics, but to see it laid out before us is truly sobering.  We see that ultimately, the person who wins has had to put his ideology on the back burner to achieve his position.  Republican or Democrat, it doesn’t matter; all that matters is winning.  It’s a tough pill to swallow, but one that makes us realize why things really never change significantly, no matter what we are promised on the campaign trail.  I give this movie top marks for superior acting performances from a superior ensemble of actors.

I give this movie ****stars

50/50

      Inspired by the true life illness of the film’s writer Will Reiser, 50/50 takes us on a journey through cancer that is as comedically touching as it is heartrending. This film could have gone overboard by making a depressing film about a 27 year old who discovers he has a rare aggressive form of cancer or it could have been an inappropriate obtuse comedy making light of one of the most serious things that could happen to a person.  Instead, the film blends the two resulting in a spiritually uplifting, yet sobering film of a tragedy that could happen to anyone.  The film’s script and pacing is nothing technically impressive, but the talents of Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ana Kendrick, and Angelica Houston bring nuanced and powerful performances that leave us emotionally drained as well as immensely amused.  The film illicits tears from both laughter and tragedy.  Not an easy mix.

Adam (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a twenty-something NPR writer who is living the life of any young person in Seattle.  He has a semi-serious relationship with a beautiful girl named Rachael ( the lovely Bryce Dallas Howard), a hilariously obnoxious best friend (Seth Rogan playing Kyle [Seth is writer’s Will Reiser’s real life friend who he based this character on]) and a life of coffee and political debate that is progressing just as it should at his age.  The one thing detracting from his ideal life is a prominent back ache that won’t go away.  Adam reluctantly goes to have it checked out. The scene where Adam learns of his illness from an indifferent and distracted Doctor begins the journey that makes us realize this isn’t just a typical movie.  The director and the incredible acting of Gordon-Levitt captures the roller coaster of emotion through tight camera shots as opposed to dialogue.  Adam learns that he has a 50/50 chance of survival. The scene becomes more powerful as Adam tunes out the doctor’s medical ramblings and his emotions turn inward.  I was never a fan of Joseph Gordon-Levitt as a child actor on ‘3rd Rock from the Sun’.  I thought he would grow up to be another failed cliche Hollywood child actor.  I was completely wrong. I feel he has already turned in an impressive body of work and I don’t even think he has hit full stride yet.  His work on ‘500 Days of Summer’ was inspired and his role in ‘Inception’ shows that he can hang at the blockbuster level.  I’m looking forward to what’s next from him.

Back to the film; Adam turns to his girlfriend Rachael for support.  She says she will stick with him as that is what society demands of us, but she is too distracted by her artistic self-centeredness to be of any real support and becomes more distant instead of closer.  Adam’s obnoxious best friend Kyle does his best to keep Adam’s spirits up, but really isn’t able to express the true emotional support needed.  However, throughout all of Kyle’s bluster you can see his true depth of emotion and affection for Adam even if he can’t demonstrate it.  Angelica Houston plays Adam’s mother.  She is so overbearing that Adam reluctantly tells her in anticipation of her reaction.  She is already caring for Adam’s Alzheimer suffering father and this is another burden threatening to break her.  Ms. Houston could have played the overbearing mother comedically over the top (and she does), but she also infuses her character with an incredible strength, that despite Adam’s reluctance, he comes to rely on.

Adam joins a cancer group in the hospital and they all sit around each week receiving their chemo therapy.  This group imparts comedy as well as wisdom as long suffering cancer patients.  Veteran actors Matt Frewer and Phillip Baker Hall bring emotional depth to their comedic roles.  They try to brighten Adams outlook, but behind their goofiness you can see the sadness in their eyes that cancer as struck someone so young as Adam.  As bad as cancer is for them, it is something they realize comes often during the later years in life.  It breaks their heart to see young Adam so ill even as they struggle with their own diseases.  

Some of the most poignant scenes are between Adam and the hospital psychiatrist, Katherine (Anna Kendrick).  Anna is only 24 years old and Adam is her 3rd patient ever.  Her earnestness and frequent professional missteps are charming.  She struggles to maintain calm and professionalism, but her inexperience does not allow her to keep that objectiveness.  You sense that both Adam and Katherine are trying to keep their emotional distance, but they can’t and you see both their walls crumble as their therapy progresses.

Whatever qualms I have about the television style pace in the beginning of this movie are quickly forgotten by the third act.   As Adam faces life and death, the acting rises to powerful and emotional levels by which only the hardest hearts couldn’t moved.  The gambit of emotions where you laugh, cry, stare transfixed, and squirm uncomfortably in your chair show the true talent of the Director, Jonathan Levine and show that all of these actors are the real deal.  It’s a small film with many flaws, but has a big emotional impact.

I give this film *** 1/2  stars