People love a crazy true story. So when Ben Affleck decides to make a movie about a real CIA operation involving tricking Iran into thinking that American fugitives are a Canadian film crew, people tend to pay attention. And when he attaches an all-star cast to it, and you might get a good movie out of the deal. You'll get something like Argo.
Argo is about "The Canadian Caper", a CIA operation in which escaped members of the US Embassy in Iran were smuggled out of the country in an elaborate ruse involving a fake sci-fi movie. Ben Affleck, besides already pulling double duty as producer and director, also plays the film's protagonist, Tony Mendez. In the aftermath of a riot in Tehran that culminates in the raid of the US embassy and the kidnapping of its workers, Mendez devises a plot to rescue six escaped embassy employees that have fled to the Canadian embassy. While the film isn't going to win any awards for historical accuracy, Affleck finds a good balance between the realms of Hollywood thriller and historical drama. Including some shot-for-shot reenactments of actual footage from the crisis, Argo does a great job at capturing the cultural tensions and urgency of the situation.
The biggest draw of Argo by far is its cast of characters. While Affleck's turn as Mendez is a bit boring, John Goodman and Alan Arkin shine as make-up artist John Chambers and producer Lester Siegel. While the character of Siegel is fictitious, that isn't stopping Arkin from being nominated for Best Supporting Actor at the Oscars. The actors playing the embassy employees were also all fantastic.
My only problem with Argo is that it's just not mind-blowing. There's nothing really wrong with it, but I guarantee that people will be forgetting about this film in five years. There's nothing to it that really makes it remarkable, and for being so laden with accolades, I was expecting something more.
I don't expect Argo to make any real waves at the Oscars tonight, but in a few hours I may eat my words. Regardless, it is a good way to spend two hours of your time. Just don't expect it to be your new favorite movie. I give Argo 8 incredibly tense scenes of downtown Tehran out of 10.
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Zero Dark Thirty
Kathryn Bigelow has an affinity for keeping her finger on the pulse of the War on Terror. After winning Best Director and Best Picture in 2009 for The Hurt Locker, Bigelow has apparently decided she isn't done with the subject. Keeping with the style used in The Hurt Locker, Zero Dark Thirty is a personal, semi-fictitious chronicle of Osama bin Laden, and if the Academy feels the same way Sunday as they did in 2009, it's lined up to do very well. It deserves it.
The first thing that struck me about Zero Dark Thirty was its brutal frankness. The first scene of the movie, involving rookie CIA agent Maya (Jessica Chastain) and her more experienced partner (Jason Clarke) interrogating a terrorist is simultaneously gut-wrenching and captivating. It also set the tone of the film: nothing is going to be held back. Starting with that 2003 interrogation, the film follows Maya as she works the hunt for bin Laden, transforming from a naive rookie agent into a relentless manhunter with an incredible intensity that upholds my thought that Chastain might be one of the greatest actresses of our generation. Her supporting cast in no slouch, either. Clarke is a chillingly captivating standout as Dan, a ruthless CIA interrogator that nonchalantly calls terrorists "bro" while waterboarding them for information. His lack of nomination as Best Supporting Actor is an abysmal mistake.
What makes Zero Dark Thirty stand out from every other movie about the war on terror, for better or for worse, is its sense of pacing. The movie spans a total of eight years, and that leaves a lot of ground to cover. The scenes in the movie are all very intense, which makes watching every individual one an emotional experience that is so often lacking in war movies. Unfortunately, a running time of over two and a half hours means that all of those intense scenes that follow every minute aspect of the hunt start to get taxing after a while.
Zero Dark Thirty is not for everyone. Those looking for an action movie need to look elsewhere, as the only action takes place in the last 20 minutes. However, if you're idea of a good war movie involves the dramatic minutiae of undercover operations and intelligence gathering, then this might be the best war movie you've ever seen. I give Zero Dark Thirty 9 shady intelligence deals out of 10.
The first thing that struck me about Zero Dark Thirty was its brutal frankness. The first scene of the movie, involving rookie CIA agent Maya (Jessica Chastain) and her more experienced partner (Jason Clarke) interrogating a terrorist is simultaneously gut-wrenching and captivating. It also set the tone of the film: nothing is going to be held back. Starting with that 2003 interrogation, the film follows Maya as she works the hunt for bin Laden, transforming from a naive rookie agent into a relentless manhunter with an incredible intensity that upholds my thought that Chastain might be one of the greatest actresses of our generation. Her supporting cast in no slouch, either. Clarke is a chillingly captivating standout as Dan, a ruthless CIA interrogator that nonchalantly calls terrorists "bro" while waterboarding them for information. His lack of nomination as Best Supporting Actor is an abysmal mistake.
What makes Zero Dark Thirty stand out from every other movie about the war on terror, for better or for worse, is its sense of pacing. The movie spans a total of eight years, and that leaves a lot of ground to cover. The scenes in the movie are all very intense, which makes watching every individual one an emotional experience that is so often lacking in war movies. Unfortunately, a running time of over two and a half hours means that all of those intense scenes that follow every minute aspect of the hunt start to get taxing after a while.
Zero Dark Thirty is not for everyone. Those looking for an action movie need to look elsewhere, as the only action takes place in the last 20 minutes. However, if you're idea of a good war movie involves the dramatic minutiae of undercover operations and intelligence gathering, then this might be the best war movie you've ever seen. I give Zero Dark Thirty 9 shady intelligence deals out of 10.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Les Miserables
Two-and-a-half-hour long movies are not for everyone. Two-and-a-half hour long musicals appeal to even less. Make that 150+ minute musical a period piece and you're appealing to a sort of niche market. So if those things are not what you're looking for in a movie-going experience, we can stop right here. Les Miserables is not for you, and you're not going to like it.
However, if you're still reading this, this indicates that you're probably interested in those things, and to you, I say this: you're going to really like Les Miserables.
A film adaptation of the immensely popular musical, Les Miserables is the story of Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman), a successful businessman who is on the run, physically and metaphorically, from his dark past as a felon. Pursuing him doggedly is Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe), a French policeman who will stop at nothing to bring Valjean to justice. Along the way, matters get complicated with a destitute factory worker (Anne Hathaway), her daughter (Amanda Seyfried), meddlesome innkeepers (Sascha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter), and a young French Revolutionary (Eddie Redmayne). If it sounds like a lot to keep up with, you're right. It kind of is. But it is so worth it.
Les Miserables is being especially noted in the musical film world because it does not rely on vocal tracks. That means that there are no dubovers of flubbed notes or lip-synching involved. Although it sounds like nothing more than a novelty, it has a direct effect on the power of the film's emotions. The movie's entire script is in song, so it is incredibly important that the music tells the story of the characters' thoughts and emotions. The live taping of the actors' voices keeps their characters in the moment, making the audience feel everything the characters do.
That being said, there are things that keep Les Miserables from being a perfect movie. Like most musicals, the runtime is disproportionately long to the amount of content in the story. When everything is sung, musicals tend to spend more time than need be to convey a thought. This film is no exception. I found myself not paying attention at times because a song had spent so much time on one idea that I was just waiting for it to be over.
Despite its marathon running time, Les Miserables is a fantastic movie. Every actor pulls their weight (even poor Russell Crowe, who has a subpar singing voice, was awesome), and the filmography is just beautiful. I will be honestly surprised if Anne Hathaway does't win Best Supporting Actress at the Academy Awards next week. I give Les Miserables 8 and a half emotional ballads full of strife out of 10.
However, if you're still reading this, this indicates that you're probably interested in those things, and to you, I say this: you're going to really like Les Miserables.
A film adaptation of the immensely popular musical, Les Miserables is the story of Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman), a successful businessman who is on the run, physically and metaphorically, from his dark past as a felon. Pursuing him doggedly is Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe), a French policeman who will stop at nothing to bring Valjean to justice. Along the way, matters get complicated with a destitute factory worker (Anne Hathaway), her daughter (Amanda Seyfried), meddlesome innkeepers (Sascha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter), and a young French Revolutionary (Eddie Redmayne). If it sounds like a lot to keep up with, you're right. It kind of is. But it is so worth it.
Les Miserables is being especially noted in the musical film world because it does not rely on vocal tracks. That means that there are no dubovers of flubbed notes or lip-synching involved. Although it sounds like nothing more than a novelty, it has a direct effect on the power of the film's emotions. The movie's entire script is in song, so it is incredibly important that the music tells the story of the characters' thoughts and emotions. The live taping of the actors' voices keeps their characters in the moment, making the audience feel everything the characters do.
That being said, there are things that keep Les Miserables from being a perfect movie. Like most musicals, the runtime is disproportionately long to the amount of content in the story. When everything is sung, musicals tend to spend more time than need be to convey a thought. This film is no exception. I found myself not paying attention at times because a song had spent so much time on one idea that I was just waiting for it to be over.
Despite its marathon running time, Les Miserables is a fantastic movie. Every actor pulls their weight (even poor Russell Crowe, who has a subpar singing voice, was awesome), and the filmography is just beautiful. I will be honestly surprised if Anne Hathaway does't win Best Supporting Actress at the Academy Awards next week. I give Les Miserables 8 and a half emotional ballads full of strife out of 10.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)