MOONLIGHT

Recently, controversy has permeated Hollywood. Whether actors are publicly commenting on political and social issues, or top-echelon award shows are embarrassing themselves with botcheries in front of millions of viewers, there is always cause for debate and discussion in the entertainment world. Barry Jenkins' 2016 critically commended film, "Moonlight", artfully touches on topics which are widely discussed not only in entertainment, but in society as a whole. Quietly received upon its initial commercial release, it has recently struck chords with critics and moviegoers alike, and for good reason.

Admittedly, I tend to disfavor films which I find to be too desperately preachy. Many movies attempt to address deep subject matter, but fail in doing so and lack in the required entertainment qualities. Often times, Hollywood is too out of touch with the life of the average person to truly grasp serious social issues. Acting almost as a case study of one young man's life, "Moonlight" actually achieves the emotional reality which filmmakers so often strive for. It chronicles the life of Chiron, the young, black son of a drug-addicted single mother, as he attempts to survive in a poverty-stricken area of Miami. As the character grows, the audience sees his maturation through three vital phases in his life. His greatest personal struggles come from his negligent mother, classmates who harass him and question his virility, and most of all, his internal questions about his sexual orientation. The division of Chiron's life into three separate chapters allows viewers to clearly see the development and changes in the character's life and those around him. With each phase, the audience must quickly adapt to the new version of the character that they are being presented with. Over time, Chiron's attitude regarding the overarching theme of his sexuality develops and changes.

"Moonlight" was a remarkably courageous undertaking for young director Barry Jenkins. Dealing with a delicate subject, such as homosexuality, is a challenge for any director, and especially for a 37 year-old relative newcomer. Additionally, the cast is made up of mostly unknown actors, including the three employed to play the role of Chiron. Had any of these inexperienced faces been unfit for the role, "Moonlight" would have suffered. However, Alex Hibbert, Ashton Sanders, and Trevante Rhodes each excel in their turns as the protagonist. The more recognizable names in the cast, Mahershala Ali and Naomie Harris, fill the roles of Juan, a good-natured drug dealer who acts as a father figure to young Chiron, and Paula, the boy's mother. Ali and Harris turn in two of the best supporting performances of 2016.

The picture has rightfully been awarded for its screenplay, which was adapted from a play and written by Jenkins himself. Poetic dialogue drives "Moonlight"'s best scenes, seen in conversations between Juan and the young Chiron, and the exchanges at the end of the film which display the largely unspoken complications of the relationship between Chiron and his old friend Kevin. Chiron is written and acted in a way that establishes him as a greatly troubled character, before it is fully revealed what pains him the most.

"Moonlight" brings raw, honest, and artistic qualities unseen in the majority of coming-of-age and self acceptance stories. As viewers, no matter our personal beliefs and ideologies, we feel for the agony of the main character. Chiron's struggle for self-acceptance is one which is likely familiar to many children and young adults, and the creative passion clearly behind the production of this film allows for a truly beautiful, empathetic memoir of his life. As the debate rages on over which film was the past year's best, "Moonlight" deservedly tops the lists of many movie fans.

RATING: 8.5/10



 

MANCHESTER BY THE SEA

"Manchester by the Sea" is a film that I will likely never watch again. Not because it is bad, but because one viewing is all it takes for this movie to have a lasting effect on its viewers, for better or worse. Every scene of this picture is wrought with deep, often complicated emotion. Its not for the faint of heart, and may leave you feeling as beaten down as some of its characters, but "Manchester by the Sea" has ridden a thoughtful script and stellar performances to praise among the elites of the film world.

During the early parts of the film, Lee Chandler seems to simply be a sulking loner. He is frustrated with his dead-end job, reluctant to act as guardian to his 16-year-old nephew, and drained by the death of his brother. It is not until later on, when the audience sees flashbacks of the darkest days of his past, that we truly get a sense for why the character is so distant and withdrawn from those around him. As the film's lead, Casey Affleck has experienced somewhat of a breakout. The actor delivers Chandler with the perfect amount of reservation and detachment. Much of the praise that "Manchester by the Sea" has received has been focused upon its performances, and Affleck masterfully leads the group. Throughout the film, the character of Lee Chandler creates tension by seeming so agitated and exasperated with life, but rarely allowing his feelings to boil over. Because of this, the moments when the character's emotions show are especially powerful. Affleck brings just the right amount of edge and complexity to this tortured character. The supporting turns of Michelle Williams and youngster Lucas Hedges are additionally powerful. Williams has little screen time, but does the emotionally distraught very well. Hedges, as Chandlers nephew, Patrick, comes across as snotty and unpleasant as he is tormented.

Writer and director Kenneth Lonergan is well respected for his abilities as a storyteller, and "Manchester by the Sea" has earned him a number of award nominations for his screenplay. Personally, I do not find the story to be as ground breaking as many others do. I will admit that it is remarkably honest and realistic, but for almost two and a half hours of brooding emotional spectacle, the payoff is dissatisfying. The audience is meant to walk away from the film realizing the painful realities of many lives, and a happier ending may have tarnished the artful, introspective aspects of the film. However, as a selfish moviegoer, I would have enjoyed a more conclusive, unambiguous finish to the story. Some choices made by Lonergan are quite tasteful, like the weaving together of flashbacks and plot in order to provide character backstories. At times though, "Manchester by the Sea" gets a bit too emotional for its own good.

If its possible to appreciate a film without actually enjoying it, then that is my reaction to "Manchester by the Sea". If not for Casey Affleck's revelation of a performance, this film would likely have been lost in its own overly-dramatic space. In hearing award season buzz and reading other takes on the picture, I've come across some who interpret the film as a skillfully disguised dark comedy. To that I scratch my head, and wonder what kind of things people find funny these days. For every brief moment of levity, there is a more powerful moment of tragedy and desperation. From an artistic standpoint, "Manchester by the Sea" is a standout film, but do not expect a heartwarming and encouraging outcome.

RATING: 7.4/10

HELL OR HIGH WATER

It may be hard to believe that after decades of popularity and hundreds of films, it is still possible to entertain audiences with a western-styled film. The truth is, in the last ten years or so, American westerns seem to have made somewhat of a comeback. Films such as "True Grit", "Django Unchained", and "No Country for Old Men" all achieved critical acclaim and box office success. With "Hell or High Water", director David Mackenzie has crafted a more than worthy contribution to this revitalization of the western genre. Of course, the themes of bank heists and a pair of outlaws on the run from a Texas Ranger are nothing new, but the excellence of this film's screenplay and acting come together to form one of my personal favorite movies of the past year.

Chris Pine and Ben Foster play a pair of brothers, one a divorced father and one an ex-con, who devise a plan to rob multiple branches of the same bank in order to prevent the foreclosure of their deceased mother's ranch. Their methods are haphazard, as Foster's character, Tanner, is reckless and gritty, while Pine's Toby is far more levelheaded, as bank robbers go. Both actors play their parts well, and I must say that Pine in particular shows some of the finest dramatic acting of his career to date. His portrayal of a conflicted, broken down Texas father is brooding and genuine. He allows for a character with depth to drive one side of the plot. In the future, it would benefit Pine, who usually opts for big-budget action and adventure roles, to seek more thoughtful roles like this one, as "Hell or High Water" shows real dramatic prowess.

As the brothers continue their string of thieveries, Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton is called upon to track them down. Jeff Bridges was precisely the man for this role. Bridges thrives as a somewhat stereotypical, aging cowboy. He delivers dry, often degrading sarcasm to his Native American partner, while maintaining loyalty and calculated dedication to the lawful duties. At this point, moviegoers are well aware of the fact that Bridges brings experience and expertise to every role, and "Hell or High Water" does not deviate from that trend.

In western fashion, the film runs as essentially two separate, intertwined storylines. The outlaws are consistently one step ahead of the law. Taylor Sheridan's script includes occasional humor and complicated yet heartfelt relationships between characters. While they are rarely on screen together, and Bridges has been labeled in the award circuit as a supporting actor, I see Pine and Bridges as the co-leads in this film. Their characters of Toby and Hamilton are the two who the audience see experience deeper emotions and moments of reflection. While much of the story is occupied by tense heist sequences and the Ranger's aggressive investigation, the final sequences are brilliant. Tanner and Toby go their separate ways, and a classic western shootout ensues as we see Bridges' character begin to take his own assertive measures. The last scene in the film sees the first shared moment between Pine and Bridges, and the result is an engrossing concluding exchange. Hamilton drives home the point that, no matter the payoff, the seemingly well-intentioned Toby will never fully outrun his past. The writer properly reveals Marcus Hamilton to be a far more introspective and virtuous character than the audience may have expected.

"Hell or High Water" forces viewers to question what exactly is "going too far" in order to achieve upstanding goals, like providing for one's family. Each of the three principal characters provides perspective on the others. In comparison to his unhinged brother, Toby comes across as honest and good mannered. However, the final scene of the film presents a new standpoint, revealing Toby as pathetic and haunted, compared to the honorable Hamilton.

On the surface, this film is a high-powered, exciting tale of cowboys and crime, but its writing and performances are remarkably artful. I am hopeful that in upcoming award presentations, "Hell or High Water" is rewarded for its screenplay. The pensive style of the story (possibly combined with the presence of Jeff Bridges) reminds me of something one might see from the Coen brothers, which in itself is a statement of praise. As so many films today are concerned with action, special effects, and spectacle, it is refreshing to see a film with a budget barely over ten million dollars deliver like this one does. As modern westerns continue to be a fashionable fixture in Hollywood, "Hell or High Water" stands out as one of the best.

RATING: 8.2/10

HACKSAW RIDGE

World War II was arguably the most influential and widespread event in the history of humankind. And for that reason, it seems like the storytellers of the world will never run out of subject matter on the topic. Some WWII based films and television shows have been truly great, because as destructive as the period was, there are many heroes of the "greatest generation" whose tales are profoundly inspiring. Desmond Doss of "Hacksaw Ridge" is one of those heroes.


Andrew Garfield, in his most mature leading role to date, plays Doss. The character is a spiritual, soft-spoken, conscientious objector who enlists in the army to serve as a medic. Prior to hearing about this film, I was not familiar with the story of Doss, who saved the lives of over seventy men during the Battle of Okinawa, en route to receiving the Medal of Honor. Without question, Doss' dedication to his faith, his men, and his country was heroic; certainly worthy of depiction in film. Garfield has earned praise for his performance, and has even been nominated for several notable awards and honors. Personally, I don't see this as award-winning acting, but Garfield does do the job of coming across as morally righteous, yet extremely courageous, which is vital to understanding this character. The supporting cast is made up of Sam Worthington, Teresa Palmer, an excellent Hugo Weaving, and a slightly out of element Vince Vaughn. Garfield, however, occupies most of the screen time and holds his own at the center of the story.

"Hacksaw Ridge" marks Mel Gibson's return to feature film directing after 10 years. There are definite similarities between this film and his greatest triumph as a director, "Braveheart". "Hacksaw Ridge" is incredibly violent, possibly even more so than "Braveheart", but for the most part, viewers get the sense that the brutality of the movie's battles is honest. Gibson intentionally avoids sugarcoating the nature of World War II, and specifically the conflict in the Pacific. There are plenty of corpses, explosives, and lost limbs to give the picture a distinctive Mel Gibson edge. Aside from the action however, it is easy to see why Gibson was drawn to the character of Doss. Like William Wallace of "Braveheart", Doss is a hero with pride and personal ideology guiding his decisions. I enjoyed many of the choices made by Gibson in directing this film, and for a movie with a surprisingly low budget, the spectacle is huge. However, I feel that occasionally in Gibson's films, spectacle overshadows story, which at times is the case with "Hacksaw Ridge".

This may be unfair, but in my head, every war movie is immediately stacked up against "Band of Brothers". The mini-series is the greatest depiction of life on and around the battlefield that has ever been put on a screen. It will take one hell of a film to ever match up with "Band of Brothers" in terms of accuracy and sincerity in depicting modern warfare. Again, I realize that this way of thinking is likely completely unreasonable (after all, "Band of Brothers" is not even a movie), but I can't help it. Where "Hacksaw Ridge" lacks is not in its action or its hero story. My grumbles with the film lie in the number of typical war movie clichés that it exudes. These include; the degrading authority figure who yells in his soldiers' faces, the overconfident trooper in camp who flounders on the battle field, and the fact that everyone must receive a semi-humorous nickname, among others. The best war films are the ones that limit the presence of these predictable factors, or at least don't rely on them to create and introduce supporting characters. "Hacksaw Ridge" falls victim to these, but the extraordinary story of Desmond Doss assists us in overlooking them.

With "Hacksaw Ridge", Mel Gibson has familiarized the world with one of the most courageous figures in American history, and for that he should be commended. Evidence of the heroism of Desmond Doss lies in the fact that Gibson cut things out of the medic's story, because he felt that audiences would not even believe them. This is not one of the great American war films, but what makes it entertaining is the resilience of its central character combined with bold, engrossing battle sequences. In the overall compendium of World War II films, "Hacksaw Ridge" falls somewhere in the middle, but it is surely a candid account and a worthy installment.

RATING: 7.5/10

THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS

"The Silence of the Lambs" is often characterized as a horror movie because at its core, there is a story dealing with psychotic serial killers, one of whom skins his victims, and another who prefers to eat them. Disturbing subject matter no doubt. However, labeling this picture merely as a horror film removes a great deal of substance. Where the majority of contemporary horror films lack (deep characters, riveting dialogue and a captivating story), "The Silence of the Lambs" excels.

Adapted from Thomas Harris' 1988 novel of the same title, "The Silence of the Lambs" brings to life one of the most feared, yet enticing, characters in movie history, Dr. Hannibal Lecter. What makes Lecter so endlessly perturbing is the calm and correct dialogue that he delivers, which almost allows viewers to forget that this character is the embodiment of unrelenting evil. Sir Anthony Hopkins' performance in "The Silence of the Lambs" is truly one of the best examples of screen acting I've ever seen. Despite having a limited amount of screen time for a role considered "leading", Hopkins' performance is by far the most memorable aspect of this film. The character's introductory scene is iconic. His first exchange with FBI trainee Clarice Starling is seemingly cordial, but viewers cannot help but get the sense that there is underlying evil within Lecter. He presents the frightening idea that someone with such a dark and wicked past can come across as intelligent and collected. The dialogue which Hopkins so precisely utters contains some of the most artfully malicious lines ever scripted for a film antagonist. While watching this film for the first time, I could not help but be troubled by the fact that there really are people like Hannibal Lecter and Buffalo Bill in the world. Because of the realism that these characters are depicted with (particularly Lecter), they are easily set apart from the more transparent villains of most thrillers.

The true lead in the film is Jodie Foster's character, FBI recruit Clarice Starling. She is an ambitious, dedicated worker who sees identifying and arresting a prolific serial killer, known as Buffalo Bill, as her path to self-fulfillment and satisfaction. Starling is inspiringly resilient. She is doubted and flawed as an FBI agent, but her intelligence and courage lead to her almost single handedly being the one to bring an end to the vicious insanity of Buffalo Bill. The FBI's search for details on Bill is what leads them to Lecter, and as a result, Starling's relationship with Lecter becomes much closer than she ever intended. Hannibal obsesses over Starling, and his persistent desire for information about her emotions and her past make for deeply uncomfortable, yet impeccably acted, conversations. "The Silence of the Lambs" creates a stark contrast between these two entirely different characters. Clarice Starling represents a true heroine who is thoroughly good, and one who viewers immediately want to see succeed.

While many scenes throughout this film are famously tense, Starling's final scramble to hunt down Buffalo Bill in the killer's basement stands out as a fittingly "edge-of-your-seat" climax to this film. Around every corner we fear for Starling's safety, and as she searches room after room, the audience senses ensuing danger. During director Jonathan Demme's brilliant night vision shots from the point of view of the killer, it is clear how close Starling comes to suffering a similar fate to Buffalo Bill's other victims. Jodie Foster appears genuinely horrified in this scene which solidifies her award winning performance.

What really drives "The Silence of the Lambs" is two incredibly memorable, complex characters and the relationship between them. Clarice Starling is often named as one of film history's greatest female leads, and Lecter is, in a word, unforgettable. There is something to be said for a thriller with this amount of staying power and influence. Over twenty five years after its release, "The Silence of the Lambs" and its characters are as shocking and fascinating as ever. I would attempt to close this review with a line as haunting as "I'm having an old friend for dinner", but who could possibly do haunting better than Hannibal Lecter.


RATING: 8.9/10

LA LA LAND

A musically driven modern day love story may seem rather removed from the other films which I have reviewed on this blog thus far. That is likely because, frankly, "La La Land" is not the type of film which I usually go out of my way to watch. I must admit that I tend to find many of the classic Hollywood musicals, such as "The Sound of Music"and "The Wizard of Oz", to drag and focus too much on musical numbers, and not enough on story. "La La Land" is a rare case in which the rich songs, elaborate dance numbers, and down-to-earth screenplay result in musical which I thoroughly enjoyed, and one which deserves all of the praise it is receiving.

"La La Land" does not waste any time in setting its tone. Its opening musical number, which shows hundreds of Los Angeles residents dancing around a sea of cars on the freeway, is one of its best. Everything from the vibrant costumes to the over the top, but fun, choreography immediately excites the audience. From this scene on, the spectacle only builds. The film effectively combines actors who are obviously trained singers and dancers, and A-list Hollywood stars who are perfect for the lead roles. Fans of old-fashioned musicals may be underwhelmed by the singing and dancing of Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling at times, but if their abilities in these areas were too good to be true, they would fail to be as believable as they are in their roles. Stone and Gosling exhibit excellent chemistry throughout the film, and are the driving force behind the emotional ups and downs of the story. The characters of Mia and Sebastian are brought to screen in a way which has viewers dying to see them finish "happily ever after", but I'll cover that later.

After the success of the psychologically intense "Whiplash", released in 2014, it was generally agreed upon amongst moviegoers that up-and-coming writer and director Damien Chazelle had serious potential. With "La La Land", Chazelle has solidified himself as a full-fledged Hollywood prodigy. From a writing standpoint, the film features affection, humor, and heartbreak. The clash between love and ambition allows audiences to wholeheartedly sympathize with the lead characters, and invest emotionally in the plot. Chazelle's direction is equally impressive. The scenery and locations chosen for the movie's most meaningful scenes establish Los Angeles as the perfect utopia for a love story to unfold in. While the recent success of certain Broadway shows has brought the concept of the musical back into the mainstream,  "La La Land" is still an extremely bold undertaking. Had this film been produced in the middle of the 1960's, it might not have stood out as much as it does, but in recent decades traditional, let alone successful, musicals in Hollywood have been few and far between. And for that reason alone, Chazelle deserves an applause.

Droves of idealists on the social media circuit have expressed their disappointment with the ending of this film. I however found it refreshingly realistic. We see no anger or animosity between the characters of Mia and Sebastian at the conclusion of the story. The differences that they did have are long settled at this point, and ultimately each of the characters reaches the goals that we see them working toward throughout the film. Mia's final what-could-have-been montage and the characters' appreciative final glances at one another represent the satisfying notion that they both have moved on, but will always appreciate the time they had together. Sure, it may not be the picture perfect outcome that many love stories feed their audiences, but if you want this award season's true dissatisfying conclusion, look no further than "Manchester by the Sea".

There is plenty of singing and dancing, and it is all well done, but "La La Land", above all else, is a gratifying story with enjoyable characters. Chazelle's vision, which took years to bring to screen, results in a truly unique film in the landscape of modern cinema. Few will be surprised when  "La La Land" walks away from upcoming award shows with plenty of honors and recognition, and I must say that the acclaim that it has received is deserved. This is the kind of film that could make contemporary musicals a popular trend in Hollywood, but Damien Chazelle has set the bar high for those who follow him.

RATING: 8.5/10

RESERVOIR DOGS

It is a film filled with head-scratching ambiguities and nameless characters, and the majority of the 100 minute runtime takes place in the same room, yet "Reservoir Dogs" manages to be one of the most gritty and engaging films to come out of the last three decades. Of course, it spurred an extremely successful career from one of Hollywood's most acclaimed directors, and this film continues to hold up as one of Quentin Tarantino's best works to date.

Violent crime films were a pervasive trend in the 1990's. Notable examples include "Goodfellas", "The Usual Suspects", "Casino", and "L.A. Confidential", all of which have their own charm and appeal. However, as he always has, Tarantino did things a bit differently. Especially in his earlier years as a writer and director, he played devil's advocate to the traditional style of linear storytelling. Many of his films jump from one part of the story, to a completely different one, within minutes. As he has stated in the past, he subscribes to the notion that it's okay to be a little confused, as long as everything is pulled together in the end. In one of its earliest scenes, "Reservoir Dogs" shows Tim Roth's character, Mr. Orange, curled up and covered in blood in the back seat of a car. Its not until close to the end of the film that we are actually shown how this happened. In fact, the entire plot of the film revolves around a diamond heist that is never actually brought to screen. In many cases, a film with this many unanswered questions would be bothersome. But with Tarantino, viewers get the sense that they're in good hands.

The aforementioned Roth plays a seemingly timid crook, later revealed as the undercover cop who arranged for the diamond scheme to be busted. The rest of the cast is equally colorful. Steve Buscemi is excellent as the paranoid, yet "professional", Mr. Pink. Harvey Keitel, a recurring figure in Tarantino movies, plays Mr. White. The psycho of the crowd, Mr. Blonde, played by Michael Madsen, makes the actions of the other characters look tame. Lawrence Tierney plays Joe Cabot, who has assembled the group and acts as the mastermind behind the operation. The dialogue helps to develop a distinct personality for each of the leading characters, and all of the actors execute their roles perfectly.

Aside the abundant violence and stylized story structures, one of Tarantino's most effective strategies for making his films supremely entertaining is the level of detail he applies to his writing. Take, for example, the opening scene of "Reservoir Dogs". We see the characters sitting around a diner table, enjoying a nice breakfast before a day of stealing precious gems. The content of this scene is ultimately unrelated to the rest of the film, yet Mr. Pink's "I don't tip" rant is arguably the most quoted group of lines from this film. Tarantino takes the time to create intriguing side and filler conversations, even if they have no effect on the plot. This captures audiences and allows for a full understanding of each character. With this style of screenwriting, everything is said with purpose, and not one line of dialogue is wasted.

It's made very clear that all goes to hell upon the attempt to come away with the diamonds. Most of the film shows the aftermath of the caper, which is bloody and chaotic, as the group attempts to identify which of their associates sold them out to the authorities. There is tension to spare as Mr. Orange lies on the floor bleeding out, Mr. Pink stresses over the potential police presence, and Mr. Blonde dances around with a razor blade before gruesomely peeling off the ear of a captive officer. As the plot unfolds, nobody, not even viewers, know who to trust. We see flashbacks to the crime itself and Mr. Orange's plan to blend in with this group of experienced tough guys. Members of the group turn against each other, for right and wrong reasons, leading to one of the most iconic, and widely debated, endings in film history. During the final standoff, it seems that three shots are fired, but four men get hit. Since this film came out, "Who shot nice guy Eddie?" has been a popular debate. However, according to most accounts, it happened due to a special effects error, but was left in the film nonetheless. Only Tarantino could get away with that.

This film may leave you asking yourself a lot of questions (one of them being, "what the hell is a reservoir dog?"), but its not a film that you mind giving a little thought to after its finished. Whether it's through off-color conversation or unharnessed violence, one thing is for sure; Quentin Tarantino knows how to entertain. And when it comes to the entertainment test, "Reservoir Dogs" passes with flying colors (pink, white, orange, blonde, blue, and brown, to be exact).

RATING: 8.5/10

THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL

In some cases, I believe that it is entirely justifiable to say you just really enjoy something, without actually being able to explain why. Certain movies, songs, places, and even people just give off an unusually enjoyable and welcoming energy. Overanalyzing in order to find the source of these experiences may not do them justice, but that is exactly what I will attempt to do with regards to Wes Andersons 2014 film "The Grand Budapest Hotel".

When I first saw this film, I had not previously seen any of Anderson's films. Quickly, any moviegoer will sense that his movies are distinctly stylized and meticulously eccentric. "The Grand Budapest Hotel" is certainly no different. The pastel colored sets, charming original score, and pacy yet meditative story make this movie thoroughly delightful and easy to watch. Anderson's elegant visual style transports viewers into a fantasy-styled, early 20th century Europe. It creates its own artistic historical setting which essentially acts as its own character in the already star-studded cast.

"The Grand Budapest Hotel" boasts an impressive ensemble, including a number of acclaimed figures, such as Jude Law, Willem Dafoe, Jeff Goldblum, Bill Murray, Adrien Brody and Harvey Keitel, among many others. The combination of high level talent and clever writing makes even some of the film's minor characters endlessly entertaining. Even the relatively unknown Tony Revolori stands out as Zero, the unassuming lobby boy who acts as viewers' favorite sidekick. Ralph Fiennes, however, is undeniably the standout in this film. Playing Monsieur Gustave H., the witty and profane, yet loyal and caring concierge of The Grand Budapest. Fiennes drives the unconventional story with dry humor and precise delivery. Though most of his roles previous to this one were not at all comedic in nature, the performance is simply hilarious. Without question, M. Gustave has become one of my personal favorite characters from any movie, and Ralph Fiennes is the one to thank for that.

In its most basic form, you could say that "The Grand Budapest Hotel" is a crime film, as the conflict and adventure arise from the theft of an invaluable painting. It contains drama, murder, and an underlying mentor-student relationship story. However, nothing about this movie wants to be taken that seriously. Its scenes, dialogue and characters are playfully crafted, and as viewers we are meant to sense a comedic tone rather than a solemn one. I would describe this movie as exceptionally "watchable". It doesn't require much as far as deep thinking and reflection, as it abandons the melodrama of most films with adventure and crime themes. What it does bring is characters, music, and settings which effectively transport viewers to an exciting, imaginative time and place. When its all put together, there's just something about it that is obscurely loveable. There is no question that its quirky, but its quite frankly a whole lot of fun.

RATING: 9.5/10

THE SHINING

"The Shining" is a strange 2 hours and 26 minutes. After putting a considerable amount of thought to everything that goes on during the film, I am left thinking that there are some aspects of Stanley Kubrick's classic which are simply meant to confuse it's viewers. This is why many people may hate it, or be frustrated by it, but its what has helped it to stand alone and endure as a cult, as well as main-stream, Hollywood classic.

If you are generally in touch with popular culture at all, then there are some things about "The Shining" that you are already familiar with. The chilling twin girls standing in the hotel hallway, the unforgettable "Here's Johnny!", and the infamous "REDRUM" are some of the most parodied and widely referenced images in the history of films. However, beyond the endless "Family Guy" spoofs, there is an incredibly refined film. Kubrick's methods are so effectively creepy because they don't resort to the cheap and predictable "jump scares" of most horror films. Instead, they create situations and imagery which is exceptionally unsettling. Kubrick also employs ominous music to brilliantly suggest the presence of danger in many scenes, even when nothing harmful is to come. Any movie that makes a viewer this uncertain of exactly what might happen next is tremendously, and precisely done. Of course, I must mention that the inspiration for the bizarre supernatural story comes from the master of all things creepy, Stephen King. Never having read the original novel, I cannot be certain, but King's well publicized resentment of the film adaptation of "The Shining" proves that Kubrick took the necessary liberties with the story.

Now I'll talk about Jack. If not for Jack Nicholson's impeccably convincing insanity, "The Shining" would not be half the movie that it is. The character of frustrated father and recovering alcoholic Jack Torrance allows Nicholson to display exasperation, rage, and dark humor in a way that is psychotically believable. Yes, Shelley Duvall is a perfect horrified mother and wife, but the cast of this movie starts and ends with Jack Nicholson. One of the greatest testaments to his mastery and comfort with the role is the fact that the most memorable line in the film was entirely improvised. But its not just the axe swinging "Here's Johnny" scene which makes Nicholson's performance legendary. The argument between Torrance and his wiferegarding "what should be done with Danny" has left audiences as horrified as Wendy Torrance for over 35 years. Even in slightly more subtle scenes like the conversation between Jack and the non-existent hotel bartender, and his wicked stare out the window at his wife and son, the audience gets an overwhelming sense that something about this character is simply not right.

When it comes to the story itself, "The Shining" is one of those movies which sparks endless discussions and a wide array of interpretations. As I stated earlier, its damn near impossible to piece together every part of the story into a conclusive and linear narrative. It seems easy to chalk the protagonists mental breakdown up to a spiritual presence in the hotel, until the final shot of the film shows him present at a 1921 gathering at the same location. Is Jack Torrance some sort of immortal being who has gone through a cycle of starting, then murdering families at this remote hotel? Or, perhaps he is a sort of reincarnation of the man who killed his family there many years before. Its even possible that young Danny Torrance is the true source of the Overlook's evil atmosphere. Well I'm not one of those crazy, too-much-time-on-my-hands, internet conspiracy theorists, but I have my own hypothetical explanation for "The Shining" that may be different from any you've ever heard before. My imagination may be getting ahead of me, but its possible that Jack and Danny Torrance come from something of a family line of Overlook Hotel family murderers. In the final shot of the movie, it is never confirmed that the man in the dated picture is Jack Torrance. Maybe this man was Jack's father, who killed his wife and twin daughters at the hotel years before. The twins we see may truly be the ghosts of Jack Torrance's sisters, as he was left alive by his father so that he could carry on the tradition with his own family. Danny is possessed with the gift of "the shining", which spurs him to act strangely, and sometimes violently. My take is that Jack Torrance is inhabited by a similar spiritual presence, as his father before him was, but realizes its potential harm. Jack wants to kill Danny so that this ritual of Torrance men murdering their whole families, except their sons, does not carry on to the next generation. The film leads you to believe that Mr. Grady, who appears to Jack during a hallucination of a hotel party, was the true murderer of the twins years before. But in my version, Mr. Grady is simply a creation of Jack's off-balance mind with the purpose of convincing the character that he should in fact kill Danny. You'll notice that during his conversation with Mr. Grady, Torrance is facing a wall almost entirely covered with mirrors. Mr. Grady is not there, he is Jack's internal voice telling himself "this is the right thing to do. The boy has to die". Farfetched and over the top? Maybe, but so is this whole film, in the best way possible.

Of course, almost forty years of ridiculous speculation may be exactly what Stanley Kubrick wanted from this film. To dislike "The Shining", one must either be absolutely terrified by it, or trying to hard to make logical sense of it. Its ambiguity combined with its chilling performances in front of, and behind, the camera are what set it right near the top of the horror movie mountain.

RATING: 8.8/10

FARGO

Often, I find myself finishing a movie and requiring a few hours, or even days, to really determine my opinions on it. I guess you could say that for a lot of films, I need time to let them sink in. Ethan and Joel Coen's "Fargo" was not one of those films. My first viewing of this picture came on a laptop, sitting in the basement of my college library. I wouldn't say I went into it with any major expectations, but it was a rare film which made me close my computer and immediately say to myself, "that was damn good".

Not much can be said that hasn't been said before about the Coen brothers' abilities to tell stories. "Fargo" is written in such a way that irony, eccentric humor, and slightly off-beat characters almost let the viewer forget that the underlying story is rather disturbing. William H. Macy plays desperate salesman Jerry Lundegaard, who plans to put his own wife's life at risk in order to obtain a large sum of ransom money from his rich father-in-law. Macy handles the character of Lundergaard perfectly, delivering every line with the perfect amount of scatter-brained uncertainty, down to the last stutter. Additionally, how many actors are better at than Steve Buscemi in a cynical, underground criminal role? The list is short. The filmmakers have stated that the role of kidnapper Carl Showalter was written with Buscemi in mind the whole time, which was a spot-on choice. Peter Stormare rounds out the films duo of misfits, playing Gaear Grimsrud, who is the embodiment of the phrase "silent, but deadly".

As strong as the film's supporting performances are, Frances McDormand makes this movie. Her Academy Award winning performance as friendly police chief Marge Gunderson brings this brilliantly scripted character to life. Gunderson is a darling balance of innocence, pride, intelligence and determination. The moment McDormand first appears on screen, the focus of the film shifts from Jerry Lundegaard to the awesomely loveable Marge Gunderson, which of course, is by design.

Predictably, Lundegaard's dysfunctional scheme to have his wife safely captured falls apart quickly, and the juxtaposition of Macy and McDormand's characters is vital to the outcome of the film. Marge Gunderson is ethical and honest; she is kind to her coworkers, supportive of her husband, and deliberate in going about her work the right way. These traits ultimately help to establish Lundegaard as pathetic and destructive to himself and his family. When last we see them in the film, Lundegaard is being dragged away from a lonely motel room by police, while Gunderson comfortably enjoys her husbands company in her home. The character of Marge Gunderson provides a valuable statement about humility and the separation of work from the most important aspects of life.

A review of this picture cannot be complete without some discussion of how technically sound and well directed it is. Nearly the entire film takes place on a lonely and snowy landscape, on dark overcast days, reflecting the lack of substance and dreary existence of characters like Lundegaard, Showalter and Grimsrud. As far as camera work, one of my personal favorite shots in "Fargo" sees Jerry discussing illegitimate business over the phone, as the blinds of his office window brilliantly provide the audience with an inkling of the character's eventual fate.

"No Country for Old Men" has its undeniable moments, but this is the film which best represents the talents of Ethan and Jeol Coen. "Fargo" is a remarkable combination of quirky storytelling and genius filmmaking, and for my money, it is underrepresented in conversations about the smartest movies ever brought to screen.

RATING: 9.2/10

CINDERELLA MAN

Lots of movies have been made about boxers, and lots of movies have been made about boxers overcoming the odds, or being the underdog. "Cinderella Man" however, is unique. I am a massive sports fan, and I believe that sports are important to the history and tradition of America. But, for the most part, sports films bother me. The majority of them are basic and unsuccessful in their attempts to include dynamic characters and properly display emotion on screen. "Cinderella Man" on the other hand, achieves these goals, and it is because boxing in this movie is essentially a minor aspect of the story. I love this movie not because of all of the action between men punching each other in a ring, but because it provides us with a rich story and authentic characters who are easy to enjoy, and easy to root for.

Russell Crowe is his usual excellent self in his role as James J. Braddock, a past-his-prime boxer who like the rest of the world, has been brought to his knees by the Great Depression. The audience sees Braddock go from a position of glamour and triumph, to begging for any work he can get alongside the common man. Braddock is almost too good to be true as a character, as he is a humble, hard working family man who has very few moments of weakness throughout the film. Crowe superbly portrays someone who, simply put, is a good man. Mae Braddock, the boxer's wife, brought to screen by Renee Zellweger, must do her best to raise the couple's children while there is no longer an illustrious boxing career to put food on the table. Moments of levity in the film are brought to screen via the best performance of Paul Giamatti's career, as he plays Joe Gould, the foul mouthed, sardonic manager and trainer who attempts to bring Braddock back into the world of boxing and launch the second half of his career. Gould is easily the film's most entertaining character, providing witty dialogue and an unforgettable excitable demeanor.

Much the early plot of the film is, fittingly, depressing. Director Ron Howard's most powerful scene in delivering Braddock's overall sense of defeat comes when the character is forced to beg his former employers in the New York boxing business for money so that he can pay his family's electric bill. Viewers feel for Braddock in this scene, and it, more than any scene directly related to boxing, makes you really root for the character. Crowe and Giamatti are the perfect pairing for their roles, and their friendship, which comes across strongly in this scene, is one of the best things about this movie.

The term "'feel-good' movie" is cliché and grossly overused, but as "Cinderella Man" progresses, that is undoubtedly what it becomes. One of my favorite things about this movie is that once things get good for Braddock, they get really good. Seeing the "Bulldog of Bergen" kick ass again is refreshing, and his final opponent in the film, Max Baer, is so arrogant and perfectly hate-able that you almost wish Braddock would send his head flying into the Madison Square Garden crowd. But as I stated earlier, this movie really isn't about boxing. I see Braddock's career in the ring as a simple yet effective metaphor for every blue collar American man during this period in history. As a viewer, you're not pulling for Braddock to win a fight against one man, rather you're pulling for him to win a fight for his family, against all of the circumstances which the Depression has stacked against them. Russell Crowe brings Braddock forward in a way which stresses the importance of being an honorable and great man, over being a great boxer.

RATING: 9/10

GOODFELLAS

I have always felt that some of the best movies are the ones which leave me wishing that, at least for a little while, I could live in the world of these films and spend time with their characters. And for me, as far back as the first time I saw "Goodfellas", I've always wanted to spend a day as a gangster. Now, granted, many of the events we see on screen involving the characters of Henry Hill, Jimmy Conway, and Tommy DeVito are not things I would ever want to associate myself with. I'm talking about the card games, late night drinks and cigars, and hilarious banter. "Goodfellas" does those scenes better than any other film. The first time I saw "Goodfellas" I was 15 years old, and watched it with a group of my bestfriends late one night. Naturally, this spurred us to take interest in poker and cigars during our high school down time. Lets face it, only Martin Scorsese could make a group of gang affiliated maniacs look like they're having so much fun. Scorsese's no-holds-barred style of storytelling and appreciation of his actors' improvisation in front of the camera allows "Goodfellas" to be one of the most authentic feeling movies ever. It seems to me that Ray Liotta, Robert De Niro, and Joe Pesci were so perfect for their roles in this film because sharing drinks with their buddies and cracking witty one liners are things that they had years of practice doing off-screen on their own time. The chemistry of the cast, combined with a hasty and episodic script from Scorsese and author Nicholas Pileggi, allow each scene of the film to be more entertaining and quotable than the last.

Henry Hill's story of a high rise and steep fall in a life of crime is told in the most honest way possible. The first hour or so of the film glorifies life in the mob; as Henry states, he and his friends, "had it all just for the asking". I must admit, the idea of being able to shove hundreds in the pockets of restaurant  owners just to get a seat wherever you want it is, well, pretty cool. While the beginning of the film shows the characters enjoying their glory days, Scorsese maintains the slightly psychotic undertone to just the right amount, like in Joe Pesci's infamous "funny how?" scene. My personal favorite scene however has always been the late night dinner with Tommy's mom. In the span of ten minutes, the story takes us from the brutal murder of Billy Batts over a petty argument, to a jovial conversation about marriage and art with an unassuming, innocent mother. Listen closely, and the unscripted dialogue from De Niro and Pesci during this scene is frankly hilarious. The dinner's lighthearted nature compared to the ferocity of the scenes that surround it is a perfect example of what makes this movie so unique. Scorsese is able to use this juxtaposition to add to the overall shock factor of the characters and their lack of restraint in their everyday lives.

As Henry begins his inevitable spiral towards retribution, the tone of the entire film changes. Instead of upbeat and sarcastic, the characters become paranoid and untrusting. The pace of the film quickens as Scorsese attempts to convey the disorganized sense of Henry's new drug fueled existence. "Goodfellas" quickly shows its audience that the lives of these characters are not nearly as glorious as it led them to believe. In typical Martin Scorsese fashion, just when you think the raunchy but illustrious characters are invincible, very quickly, "it's all over".

"Goodfellas" certainly presents themes such as power, morality, tradition, and masculinity, but for me, the bottom line is, its just fun to watch. I challenge anyone to argue for a movie that is more quotable than this one. Because of "Goodfellas", when I sit near a window at a restaurant, I'll always think ,"this is good, I can see everyone who drives up to the place". Because of "Goodfellas", an entire genre of music will always be labeled as "Goodfellas music" in my head. I struggle to call anything perfect, but I struggle more to find grievances with this picture. Its portrayal of the Italian-American crime scene is unique, enjoyable, and memorable in ways that no other film in the history of cinema can match, and that includes "The Godfather".

RATING: 10/10