Heartbreaking Honesty - "Brokeback Mountain" Review

Throughout my life, the film "Brokeback Mountain" was always treated like a joke. It was always seen as that silly, funny movie about two gay cowboys. There was an underlying sense of disgust and mockery in just about everything I heard about the film. When I was less educated and open about the LGBT community as a kid, I bought into the homophobic hype a bit, and always just assumed that the movie wasn't good. I gave the movie a watch for the first time, and as an adult, fierce advocate of the LGBT community today, I can happily say that "Brokeback Mountain" is a downright incredible film, rife with honest and realistic heartbreak and beauty.

The film stars Heath Ledger as Ennis, and Jake Gyllenhaal as Jack, two men who stumble upon sexual advances after meeting during a mutual gig herding sheep. Eventually, the two men part ways after this summer of confusing love and lust, and go back to seemingly heteronormative lives. However, the rest of the movie shows that these lives lived away from each other only work so well; the two manage to get away from their wives for time with each other.

There is some debate as to exactly what sexual orientations Ennis and Jack fall into, but that debate is hardly relevant in regards to the quality of the film. Neither character identifies as anything and have sexual relationships with both genders to varying degrees of intimacy, making it hard to confidently apply a specific label. The horrifically homophobic times the two live in make it difficult to effectively explore their sexualities and come to a proper identity, thusly creating ambiguity for them and the viewer. What isn't ambiguous is that the two men are in love with each other, and that they can't embrace that love because of the hyper-masculine and massively intolerant society they are a part of. 

Ennis and Jack's love is done without Romanticism, and works perfectly in its own way. This is not a romance film filled with astounding, glorious choruses to particularly strong scenes, or anything like that. Every powerful bit of affection is a struggle that lasts for only so long. The relationship of these two men is not always pretty; in fact, it is often quite ugly. The atmosphere of hatred towards homosexuality is shown most directly when Ennis tells a harrowing story from his childhood about his bigoted father, and bleeds into the whole film. 

The two characters themselves are fleshed out and fascinating, aided by the great acting of Ledger and Gyllenhaal. The supporting cast is also great, with folks like Michelle Williams playing Ledger's chief female love interest, and Anne Hathaway playing that of Gyllenhaal. The movie is well-written, but simple pieces of performance go such a long way. Often times, body language and facial expression manage to get across more than words in "Brokeback Mountain," making the most intense and important scenes all the better. 

The titular Brokeback Mountain serves as simple symbolism, representing the unbridled comfort in being who they really want to be: in love with each other. I appreciate a film that is willing to reject the American norm and do a bleak ending, and that is exactly what "Brokeback Mountain" does. There is no happy ending to this same-sex romance, showing the realistic nature of such a relationship in this time period. The movie embodies the exact, hazy mixture of euphoria and confusion that LGBT people have historically lived with and continue to live with today. 

Loud Optimism - "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" Review

One of the most exciting things about 2012's "The Amazing Spider-Man" was the fun garnered from its fantastic portrayal of protagonist Peter Parker's alter-ego as a strongly confident, wise-cracking goofball. The sequel, aptly titled "The Amazing Spider-Man 2," has an important theme at its heart that it takes seriously, as well as its fair share of drama, but the movie as a whole takes that fun from the first and catapults it into a loudly joyous and optimistic experience. This is the chief reason why this movie, despite big problems with the two major villains, succeeds as a very good ride.  

After a mildly dull and shakey-cam filled (albeit compelling in the long-run) opening scene about Peter's parents, the audience is treated to an incredible action sequence filled with awe, humor, and seamless set-up. Spider-Man's web-swinging looks better than it ever has in the film medium, with lots of elegant acrobatics, first-person points of view, and cool slow-motion. The titular web-head also spits out a ton of hilarious one-liners and taunts the bad guys in his signature cocky, goofy fashion. A super powers-less bad guy played by Paul Giamatti gives an incredibly fun performance filled with exaggerated screaming and meat-headed mannerisms, aided by neat zoom-in shots of his screaming, pudgy face. It is so much unabated, pure fun; this same kind of fun finds its way to a healthy portion of this film, even just through funny dialogue when there isn't any action going on. The viewers are also treated to a quick but totally effective conversation on the street between Spidey and new character Max Dillon, who later turns into Electro. 

Dillon is a compelling character, incredibly well-acted by Foxx. Dillon is deeply troubled psychologically, with an intense inferiority complex. It's played for laughs, through his mad, bumbling social failings, but it's also effective on a higher level. Dillon develops an obsession with Spider-Man that makes him dangerous when he stumbles upon the power of control over electricity through a freak accident at Oscorp. This makes Dillon a wholly sympathetic character, which again, Foxx portrays wonderfully. The actor's skill seen in his silly comedic work as well as his more dramatic work in stuff like "Django Unchained" allows him to pull off a nuanced, lovable little train wreck.

It's a darn shame that they give up on the character towards the end of the movie. It's also a shame that time is taken away from him to develop a pretty crappy Green Goblin character. 

Dane Dehaan plays Harry Osborn, a friend to Peter and a higher-up in Oscorp after his father passes away; this character is poorly acted and feels out of place, only redeeming itself slightly whenever he is decked out in the aesthetically-pleasing Goblin get-up. Harry is characterized as intimidating throughout much of the movie and the writing is fine in that regard, but Dehaan simply doesn't pull it off. His performance is weak and doesn't grab for attention. The character is also jarringly thrusted into a close friendship with Peter, and has an overly simple development that makes the stealing of screen-time from Foxx's character criminal. Both characters are lazily brushed aside at the end to save for further use in sequels, leaving a complete absence of closure for both of them. There was thematic potential for Foxx's character as well as Dehaan's character to tie into the overall theme in a much closer way, but that is abandoned. These stumbles form a big gash at this movie's quality. 

It really is a shame, because there are so many fantastically good things to this movie. There is a large amount of character drama in this movie for Peter Parker in his romantic life, with his aunt, and in dealing with his dead parents. Andrew Garfield reprises his role as Parker and does the same quirky, slick, great performance as before. His romantic chemistry with Emma Stone's   Gwen Stacey is remarkable, no doubt helped by the actors' real-life relationship together. Their struggle is dramatic in a way that comes full-circle with the theme of the role of Spider-Man. Sally Fields has already proven herself as an incredible actress and her performance in this movie doesn't stray from that. There is one scene in particular in which she gives a powerful, teary-eyed speech about her love for Parker. The drama with Parker maddeningly worrying and obsessing over the kinds of people his parents were effectively adds to the Spider-Man mythos in an original way, and also increases the level of adversity the character has to face in a good way. 

That is what is really special about "The Amazing Spider-Man 2:" Parker has a tortured sole and has to deal with a lot of heavy drama, but the movie simply uses that to make the joyous optimism even more palpable. Sure, he has clue what he is doing with his girlfriend, but he is still able to stop criminals and have the city of New York cheer him on. Sure, there is an awfully dark and sad thing that, after lots of harrowing foreshadowing, finally happens at the film's climax, but the last scene builds it all back up. After a tear-inducing scene with a kid showing bravery inspired by Spider-Man, our hero gets right back to fighting the good fight, giving hope to regular people trying to do their best and live happily. 

"The Amazing Spider-Man 2" stumbles in big ways, but it does something very well that most superhero movies don't; its loud positivity and optimism convinces that maybe everything is going to be okay. Thanks to that, I'd say it's a very good movie. 

S456 ARCHIVES: A Breath of Fresh Air: Gravity - Film Review

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2013-14 school year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

A few astronauts, namely a space-rookie named Ryan Stone and a space-veteran named Matt Kowalski, are calmly working on a damaged satellite. Regular small-talk is exchanged. The situation escalates until soon enough an alarming amount of debris crashes into the satellite, sending the rookie spinning out of control, tethered to a detached hunk of metal. She begins to panic more and more as she becomes less and less in control of her fate. She drifts into space, fully detached. 

The premise of Gravity, a new movie starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney, and directed by Alfonso Caurón, is compelling, and thankfully the film's execution is equally so. This movie is a terrifyingly plausible display of the human psyche when put together with the scares of space. This isn't a movie about mind-boggling future technology, or anything mysterious that may or may not be waiting out there for us to discover. This is a movie about the horror of the known, present and realistic. And it's fantastic.

What's presented here is a very effective mixture of thriller and science-fiction. The dialogue and acting is natural and believable, making these characters come to life. It's when these actors play their characters as horrified in one scene, and then nervously comical and chipper in another, that Gravity most shows just how unsettling it is. The movie looks stunning from a technical standpoint, with both methodical floating and exciting carnage which engross in whichever way each portion of the film calls for. Sound is also smartly played around with to tug on heart-strings and shoot up heart-rates. Seeing the film in 3D is so mesmerizing that I can honestly say it's the best experience I've had of the gimmick. The movie is aesthetically masterful. 

Gravity has a clear, focused story that it wants to tell, and sticks to it. Every second is relevant, delivering a plot free of fluff. Typical Hollywood conventions are not stuffed in here for length and easy-viewing; this is a unique film. It's structured like a single, long sequence, it takes its time on even small things when it needs to, and doesn't feel the need to align itself with expectations. The movie is constantly unpredictable and surprising. It's a breath of fresh air

By the time the credits roll, Gravity triumphs as a faithfully succinct tale of isolation, determination, and horror. Occasionally it gets a bit hokey, revealing perhaps a tiny overabundance of pride and confidence from the director. But ultimately, this stems from the fundamental truth that what he put together is special. Gravity is sublime. 

S456 ARCHIVES: The Perks of Being a Wallflower - Review

~~ the following is a piece I did for the 2012-13 school year of "The Ram Pride," Ringgold High School's school newspaper ~~

When trailers for The Perks of Being a Wallflower were playing on television and before movies at the theater, I had a very distinct impression: This movie is either going to be a whiney, pretentious pile of crap, or entirely moving and  inspirational. Nothing in between, folks. And now that I've seen the film twice, I can safely say that through the tears I was looking at one of my absolute favorite movies of all-time. Strikingly realistic and strongly emotional, The Perks of Being a Wallflower knocks it out of the park, and is entirely moving and inspirational.

My chief worry based off of the trailers pertained to what's probably the most important part of a drama - the characters. The easiest way to make a teen drama fail is to present characters with problems that all feels exaggerated and artificial, but that is not apparent at all in The Perks of Being a Wallflower. These problems are actually interesting and things that would cause a great deal of stress and conflict in real life. Some of these problems are things that some of us don't contemplate nearly enough.

This film follows a freshmen in high school named Charlie, played by Logan Lerman, who is challenged to move on from traumatic events in his childhood. In the process he interacts with family and new friends and discovers that they also have problems, and these break him down more and more throughout the film. One of the two most prominent of these new friends is Sam, played by Emma Watson, which plays as the love interest of Charlie but in her own right is challenged by men constantly treating her poorly. The other is Patrick, which the audience quickly learns is gay, with the main conflict of being in a relationship with a closeted son to a strictly homophobic father. There are some other characters with their own struggles and they're just as realized and interesting, but they're not focused on as much.

The movie displays these issues - childhood trauma, homophobia, violence, bad ethics in relationships - in a very direct and powerful way. The movie sent me on a bit of an emotional rollercoaster, at points bringing me to a point of blissful happiness when things are working out for these kids, and other points bringing me down to absolute sadness. The most prominent display of this is at the climax and afterwards, when a big twist is revealed. This twist makes a movie with already quite depressing moments seem even more depressing, and it's hard not to tear up. But, rest assured, dear viewer, because in the time after that reveal to the end it progressively works it way up to what I can certainly say is the most uplifting sequence I've ever witnessed in a movie.

There are nitpicks I can throw at the movie. Every now and then there is a line or even a small character that really doesn't work, either because it's just lame and unrealistic or something that should be challenged but isn't. The first character that Charlie interacts with in the movie is a stock bully that appears a few times throughout the movie, and she's very lame. (She does serve as effective symbolism by the end, however). The age difference between these kids in regard to romance is another specific example of something I think should have been challenged in the movie. But again, these are just little annoyances that don't drastically affect the oomph of the film as a whole.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower is the best movie that came out last year, and it's one of my absolute favorites of all-time. It's just so strikingly real, and powerful. 

Frozen (Film) - Review

I was taken by surprise at the decent acclaim that Tangled garnered, and so too was I taken aback by the response to Frozen. The trailers make Frozen out to be nothing too special, but that isn't the case. This is a special movie that will almost certainly go down in history as another Disney classic. With Frozen, Disney has crafted a self-aware, forward-thinking, and also very enjoyable film.

Anchorman (Film) - Review

Anchorman should be so much better than it actually is. It casts Will Ferrell alongside the likes of Steve Carell and Paul Rudd, to parody 70s-style misogyny in news broadcasting.  It's produced by Judd Apatow. Maybe by the standards of 2004 this was better, but today, at least, this is bad. What could have been a hilarious ride of mocking sexism is a joyless mess of a film that is only occasionally funny.

Ferrell's character Ron Burgundy is the beloved lead anchorman for a San Diego news station, along with other respected anchors for sports and weather and such. I can't tell you their names, because they're too boring for me to remember. One's gimmick, the one played by Carell, is that he is mentally retarded with an "IQ of 45," but the only real difference between him and just about every other character is that his mental problem has been diagnosed.

They're on top, so when a woman is hired on the station and garners some success, they become enraged, because she's a woman! This premise lends itself to an ongoing joke in the film; the anchors are sexist! They treat women like means for sex, and this is acted out in a very juvenile fashion. Prejudice is funny when it's made to look ridiculously bad, but here, it feels like just another joke. Initially the film-makers try to make the woman, played by Christina Applegate, a straight-man to their idiocy, which was functional until they gave up on that idea. Eventually her character becomes a whole lot less strong, and she falls for sexist dope Burgundy because that's what the dumb script calls for. I cringed and literally face-palmed throughout the film.

The core issue here is that the movie really doesn't know what it wants to do. Is it really trying to smartly satire old-school misogyny? If so, why is the woman turned into a submissive (and even damselized, at the end) joke? Is it about Burgundy's station beating out its competitors, like a very involved fight scene towards the middle, and an important exchange of dialogue at the climax, both seem to allude to? If so, why is it so underdeveloped? There's a colorful bit of animation abstractly visualizing sex, is it really just supposed to be a senseless, ludicrous collection of comedy?  If so, why ground the movie in troubling, serious subject matter?

The movie also has a habit of pretending its actors are much more talented than they actually are. And that isn't a slight at the talent here, because it really does bring together impressive performers. It's just that most of the jokes are one-man shows. We're usually watching an actor act towards the camera. To sustain a movie, it would make more sense to have the cast working off of each other more.

I can be a bit positive about the movie. It's not actually offensive, it just doesn't work. And it is occasionally funny. The attempts at satire don't really work, but when it's just trying to be humorously stupid, it tends to work a good bit. That animation I mentioned earlier is quite funny, and there's some good laughs when things get very ridiculous towards the end.

But the high points really aren't enough. I was surprised how much of a mess this movie is. Anchorman sports an all-star cast alongside its fantastically talented leading man. It's a shame that it's so awful.