Chronicle

It's hard to find movies with original ideas. Producers like to place safe bets, so movies are typically made to have a certain amount of familiarity with audiences. Sometimes, though, a movie comes along that takes a couple of those reused ideas and creates something that is more than the sum of its parts. Chronicle takes the video-camera point of view made popular by The Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield, and Paranormal Activity and matches it up with the superhero genre to make a movie that feels simultaneously familiar and fresh.

Despite the fresh take on the superhero genre, the rest of the movie is pretty mediocre. The special effects are pretty good, and the acting is decent, but a lot of my grievances with the movie come from the story. I know that ideas are used and reused, but this story is painfully predictable. I don't want to give anything away, but if you've ever seen a movie (or, more commonly, children's superhero cartoons) where the villain is a bullied kid who gains superpowers, then you know exactly where this movie is going to go after the first ten minutes.

The saving grace is that the movie is still really fun to watch. The video camera POV gets a fresh update from other movies that you've seen, the actors all give solid performances, and the special effects are really top notch. Had they made the plot a little better, this would be a really great movie. As it stands, though, the cliche-ridden script chains the movie down to mediocrity. I give it 6 silly telekinetic pranks out of 10.

The Descendants

The Descendants is one of those movies that are obviously tailored to garner critical acclaim. They take a tried-and-true plot (my wife is cheating on me!), add a unique tragic twist to it (but she's in a coma!), take an actor that's very good at both drama and comedy (George Clooney) and put him as the lead, and unleash it upon the viewing public in the last couple of months leading up to Oscar voting. It's a formulaic process that Hollywood goes through every fall and winter, but it doesn't make it any less enjoyable to watch.

Although I knew The Descendants would be good, I had no idea it would be this well-done. One of the things that jumped out at me the most was how perfectly the movie was cast. Clooney plays Matt King, a Hawaiian lawyer with the weight of the world on his shoulders, juggling work, family, and the tragic news that his wife is dying. His older, troubled daughter is played by Shailene Woodley, who I had only known from the commercials to The Secret Life of the American Teenager. Knowing her only from that made me cringe at first, but after about 30 seconds of screentime, I understood perfectly why she was put in this movie. Clooney and Woodley play incredibly well off of one another, skirting the line between rebellious animosity and familial codependency with an amazing sense of honesty.

The story, like I said, is standard-fare Oscar screenwriting: formulaic, but good. It flows very well from one instance to the next, developing all three of King's struggles fairly evenly without losing the audience. It drags a little in parts, and some of the scenes can be a bit cliche, but it's overall a very solid storyline. The cinematography is unique in that it captures Hawaii from the point of view of the characters. At the beginning of the movie, King states that the beauty of Hawaii becomes the norm, and it gets kind of lost on the people that live there. The cinematography captures this by showing the beauty of the setting, but not overemphasizing on it until the moment is right.

Overall, The Descendants is a fantastic film. It could have been a little tighter in the middle, but overall, I think it's a huge contender for Best Picture. I give it 9 awkward father-daughter confrontations out of 10.

The Ides of March

My personal record with political thrillers has been very lukewarm. I've watched plenty of them over the years, but they're so forgettable that hardly any ever stick out. The Ides of March is an entirely different experience. An adaptation of the play Farragut North, The Ides of March is the third film directed by George Clooney and stars himself, Ryan Gosling, Evan Rachel Wood, Paul Giamatti, and Philip Seymour Hoffman.

Gosling plays Steven Meyers, a young, idealistic deputy campaign manager who, while campaigning for presidential candidate Mike Morris (Clooney), uncovers a potential career-ending scandal and learns the ugly truth about the dirty underbelly of political campaigning. Gosling is absolutely amazing, portraying the shift between starry-eyed naivety and cold political shark with fantastic skill. And with Clooney's smooth-talking politician, Hoffman's gruff campaign manager, and Wood's overwhelmed intern, the supporting cast is an actor's dream come true.

The story is a pretty standard-fare political drama affair. The concept of a hotshot newcomer being disillusioned by the gritty behind-the-scenes work of politics is something that's been done again and again. What makes this story stand out though is the impeccable sense of pacing. The movie goes by quickly, but they pace it enough to make sure it doesn't leave the audience feeling like they've missed something.

At the end of the movie, I was angry that it didn't get as much critical commendation as it should have. It's nominated for only one Academy Award (Adapted Screenplay) and was nominated for four Golden Globes, where it went home empty-handed. I think it's one of the best movies of 2011. I give it 9 shady political meetings out of 10.

Moneyball

It seems that every year at least one good sports movie comes out and garners a lot of praise and awards. In 2010, The Fighter released to a lot of good press and won two Academy Awards for Christian Bale and Melissa Leo. The year before that, The Blind Side garnered a lot of accolade and gave Sandra Bullock her first Academy Award. This year's Oscar-bati sports offering, Moneyball, is nominated in six categories, including Best Picture, and Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill are both nominated for awards for Best Actor in a Leading Role and Best Supporting Actor, respectively.

Moneyball is the story of Billy Beane (Pitt), the Oakland A's general manager that used the concept of sabermetrics to create a winning team with a very limited budget and pioneered a new way of player scouting in professional baseball.Yes, it's the classic Cinderella story that is seen so many times in sports dramas, so what makes Moneyball so special? The answer: superior writing and acting. Moneyball is unique because it's a baseball movie where baseball isn't the true focal point of its story. You're really watching the story of a man, what makes him run, and how he survives in an environment that has stacked the deck heavily against him. It's not a movie about trying to beat the other team. It's a movie about a man trying to validate himself in his own eyes and in the eyes of those he loves.

Of course, a main reason that the story is so powerful is due to the powerful performance by the lead. Brad Pitt delivers a great performance and fully deserves his nomination for Best Actor. Philip Seymour Hoffman plays Art Howe, the manager of the A's that serves as Beane's foil for the majority of the movie, and Jonah Hill rounds out the main cast as Peter Brand, the Yale graduate in economics that introduces the idea of sabermetrics to Beane. Hill is nominated for an Academy Award for his performance, and I have no idea why. The character is done well and is a nice fit for the movie, but it's the same character Jonah Hill uses in every movie he's ever been in. If anyone is excited to see this movie because they think his nomination represents a stretch out of his comfort zone, they will be sorely disappointed.

There are a few minor complaints I have about the film. First, the middle of the movie starts to drag immensely. I feel like it could have been easily a half-hour shorter. The second thing was a minor annoyance, and that's the fact that Pitt's character seemed to overturn things a lot when he was angry. Phone call didn't go so well? Throw my desk. My player is dancing after a game we lost? Overturn the watercooler. I've been sitting in silence too long? Chuck the chair out of my office. It's very overused. But aside from those minor complaints, Moneyball really is an excellent film for sports fans and non-sports fans alike.  I give the film an overall 8 overturned desks/chairs/watercoolers out of 10.

The Tree of Life

So I know I haven't posted in some time. I apologize. However, I am back, and I'm back with a real mind-bender of a film. The Tree of Life is the latest movie by Terrence Malick and stars Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain, and Sean Penn. It is an Oscar nominee for Best Picture, and, quite frankly, if it wins, I will lose a lot of faith in the Academy.

Don't get me wrong. It's a wonderfully acted and a visually beautiful movie. Pitt and Chastain play Mr. and Mrs. O'Brien, a suburban couple in 1950's Waco that are raising three sons. The chief protagonist of the movie is their eldest son, Jack. Jack's memories comprise the majority of the movie, and it is through his eyes that we understand how his relationship with his parents define the person that he is in the present. The visuals are amazing. Malick incorporates a lot of surreal imagery into the movie, spanning from a montage illustrating the beginning of life on Earth, to a dream image of Jack's mother floating above the ground while dancing, and beyond. They were very instrumental in illustrating the main character's thoughts.

My chief complaint with this movie is the storytelling. Malick uses a very non-linear approach to the story, but that's not the problem. The problems I had dealt primarily with the way information was delivered. He didn't want to just spell everything out for the viewer, but what he opted for instead was a very roundabout way of conveying ideas that just felt like more trouble than it was worth. Also, there are a LOT of montages in this movie. I would say that a good third of the movie is made out of various montages, something that grated on my nerves after the fifth or sixth montage.

Also, just a word of caution for anyone that is planning on seeing the movie: if you bear through the weird intergalactic montage thing close to the beginning, it WILL make sense. I was very confused at first, but it makes more sense as the scene goes on.

In short, the movie was well-acted and visually stunning, but the storytelling is disjointed and unique to a fault, making the movie too much work to actually enjoy. I give it four high-minded visual metaphors out of ten.

We Bought a Zoo (Spoilers!)

Okay, I know what you're thinking: why would I even waste my time on a movie that looks as cheesy as We Bought a Zoo? To be perfectly honest, I saw it because a) my girlfriend loves things with cute animals in it, and b) because Matt Damon told me to on The Daily Show. He was very upfront in explaining that it would be a good movie despite the obvious misgivings a lot of people would have, and his honesty in confronting those issues gave me enough respect for him to go see it. I'm actually glad I did.

We Bought a Zoo is based loosely on the true story of Benjamin Mee (Damon), a writer who, while coping with the death of his wife, decides to buy a rundown zoo on the edge of town and revitalize it. Accompanied by his two children, he moves on to the property and establishes a quick rapport with the employees of the zoo, strikes up a flirty relationship with the head zookeeper (Scarlett Johansson) and ultimately saves the zoo from being shut down by the mean inspector. Cut-and-dry feel-good family movie, I know.

What made We Bought a Zoo work for me was the caliber of performances I got from the actors. Matt Damon is great, and Thomas Haden Church steals all of his scenes as Benjamin's older brother Duncan. Maggie Elizabeth Jones is absurdly cute as Rosie, Benjamin's seven year old daughter, and all of the zoo employees, from ScarJo's head zookeeper to Elle Fanning as her sheltered younger cousin, are on point the entire movie. Their performances were exactly where they needed to be to keep this movie from being the absolute cheese-fest it certainly could have been.

Now, just because this isn't a complete cheese-fest doesn't mean that it's not a cheese-fest. The story is still just as cookie-cutter of a feel-good movie as you can get. Rash decision turns into an inhuman amount of work, but through love, everyone bands together and wins. Even fate smiles kindly on strong family-man, and some disasters get averted through sheer luck. I know it's based on a true story, and it's supposed to be a feel-good film, but come on.

If I was to give a one-sentence review of this movie, it's this: We Bought a Zoo is a feel-good movie you'll roll your eyes at, but it's a movie you'll enjoy rolling your eyes at. I give it 6 adorable shots of zoo animals out of 10.

The Help (Spoilers!)

With all of the buzz that real critics have generated about The Help, I knew that I eventually had to see it. Also, my girlfriend really wanted to see it, so we rented it and that was the real reason I watched it. Of course, this movie is intended to be Oscar-bait. Based off the 2009 novel of the same name by Kathryn Stockett, it is a fictional account of the lives of black maids and a white reporter who chooses to write a book about their stories.

In a nutshell, the movie's theme is how people can find commonalities in people they never expected to. It's a subject that's been covered over and over again in any movie where racism is a central conflict, but The Help steers away from the normal fold by not having the characters strive to make a dramatic change in the status quo. What makes The Help stand out from other movies that deal with the subject of racism during the Civil Rights movement is that the characters try their very hardest to deal with the situation fairly. Both sides are capable of good and evil, and it makes the characters much more human. Of course, it doesn't hurt that the casting choices were all excellent.

Emma Stone plays Skeeter, an Ole Miss journalism graduate that dreams of being a novelist. Her idea manifests itself as a project compiling the stories, good and bad, of "the help," a term used to categorize the black maids and other domestic workers employed by the middle- and upper-class white community in Jackson, Mississippi. Her main co-conspirators are Abilene (played by Viola Davis) and Minny (Octavia Spencer), and the movie follows their triumphs and pitfalls as they try to anonymously publish the book while Skeeter and Abilene hide their activities from alpha mean-girl Hilly (Bryce Dallas Howard) and Minny learns that there is such a thing as a kind employer from the well-meaning but bumbling Celia (Jessica Chastain).

While the movie's story is charming and the acting is spot-on (Oscar prediction: Emma Stone will be nominated for an Oscar), I kind of liked the movie better when I thought it was based on a true story. Some facets of the stories, including the end, were realistic enough (read: sad) to make you feel like it was realistic, but some of the stories that were told, especially Minny's shit-pie episode, kind of felt like the outcome worked out a little too neatly. It's really nothing especially terrible or unbelievable, but it was something that irked me all the same.

Overall, I think this is a contender for the Best Picture award at the Oscars, and Emma Stone is definitely going to be a contender for Best Leading Actress, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Davis or Spencer (or both) in the running for Best Supporting Actress. I give it 9 out of 10 heart-warming stories.