Category: Commentary & Essays

Original essays, film-industry commentary, awards analysis, year-in-review writing, and reflections beyond a standard movie review. Do not use for ordinary reviews merely because they contain opinions.

  • How I’d write #DeflateGateTheMovie

    How I’d write #DeflateGateTheMovie

    ​Everything about tonight’s incredible, dramatic Super Bowl that saw the New England Patriots rally back from 19 points down to win 34-28 in the first overtime championship game in NFL history begs to be turned into cinema.

    I started tweeting about #DeflateGateTheMovie during the Pats’ ridiculous comeback in the fourth quarter and basically started trying to will this concept into existence because, let’s face it, I want to see that movie.

    You and I both know Mark Wahlberg has already called Peter Berg and demanded a Patriots movie go into pre-production. First drafts of scripts are being written as we speak. It’s going to happen.

    Here’s how I think it should go down….


    The film opens with a montage of Patriots’ near misses, ending with the crazy helmet catch that helps the New York Giants defeat the Pats in Super Bowl XLII.

    We then cut to Tom Brady during warmups of SB51 trying to put that out of his mind as a Roger Goodell monologue plays in the background.

    Over the course of the first half, the film intercuts between on-field highlights, bench discussions and flashbacks to the darker moments of DeflateGate for Pats fans, including Brady talking to ball boys prior to the game.

    The film speeds through the third quarter and goes right into the huddle for Brady’s miraculous fourth quarter comeback to tie the game, when it abruptly stops to relive Brady’s suspension being upheld and missing the first four games of the season.

    Overtime ensues and the film ends with Goodell approaching Brady, fading to black just as Goodell is poised to speak.


    And that’s pretty much it. It’s the only way you can make the movie compelling to Pats fans AND fans of other teams, though it’s doubtful much of the nation will end up seeing this movie anyway.

    So there you go, Mark. I’ll take a story by credit and maybe a producer nod if you’re feeling extra generous. 

  • Oscar Nominations Reaction: La La Land and then everything else

    Oscar Nominations Reaction: La La Land and then everything else

    ​So did “La La Land” get nominated for anything? 

    I’m sure I didn’t hear their name called more than 14 times early this morning, tying a record for most nominations in Academy Awards history.

    It’s a City of Stars and we’re all just living in it.

    If you haven’t already seen “La La Land,” you’re going to want to go and watch Damien Chazelle’s cinematic masterpiece at least once over the next month before it takes the Oscars by storm.

    When you’re done with that, go find “Whiplash,” Chazelle’s equally brilliant 2014 film that earned a couple of nominations and a much deserved Best Supporting Actor win for J.K. Simmons. You’ll see that “La La Land” is no fluke.

    Before we get into more of the specifics, a few words on the nominations “ceremony” itself that shows just how out of touch the Academy is with the general movie going public.

    Nominations were released online at the crack of dawn (or before the crack of dawn depending on what time zone you’re in) via a pre-taped video reel featuring past nominees and winners talking about how great and life-changing it is to be nominated. Fantastic.

    Yet a good chunk of the country – the so-called “forgotten” ones we keep hearing about in Washington these days – will be too busy sleeping or getting ready for work that they’ll just glance at a list of nominees hours from now and lament about how they’ve barely seen any of these films.

    The Academy undercuts the value of their own Oscar nominations by releasing them haphazardly on a Tuesday morning. How perfect would it be for millions of Americans to see an hour-long special highlighting the nominees in prime time, with trailers and clips of the films to entice people into the theaters to see these films. 

    The divide between what Academy voters award nominations to and what moviegoers spend their hard-earned dollars on in theaters is widening and it’s not the audiences’ fault. Studios often make their best films difficult to find in rural America, cramming less quality movies down the throats of a populace much smarter than Hollywood gives them credit for.

    This isn’t to say that voters need to give “Deadpool” a Best Picture nomination, say, or a Best Actress nomination to Felicity Jones for “Rogue One.” But something’s got to change.

    The Academy needs to bridge the gap. And fast.

    Best Picture – “Arrival,” “Fences,” “Hacksaw Ridge,” “Hell or High Water,” “Hidden Figures,” “La La Land,” “Lion,” “Manchester By The Sea” and “Moonlight”

    The nine nominees in the Oscars’ top category are a terrific blend of everything right that’s going on in filmmaking right now in Hollywood. 

    Everything from big-budget blockbusters like “La La Land” and “Hacksaw Ridge” to small, intimate indie pieces like “Moonlight” and “Hell or High Water” are nominated. Amazon becomes the first internet company to earn a Best Picture nomination with “Manchester By The Sea,” which is surprising given how prevalent Netflix is in the online film world.

    All of these films are worthy of their nominations, but I can’t help but feel for films like Tom Ford’s haunting “Nocturnal Animals” and Martin Scorsese’s compelling “Silence” which feel incredibly under-seen and underappreciated given the complete nomination list. I had both films making the Best Picture race in my “best case scenario” predictions, besting “Hacksaw Ridge” and “Hidden Figures.”

    Acting Categories

    It’s probably best to start with the least surprising category – Best Supporting Actress – which went pretty smoothly with nominations for Viola Davis in “Fences,” Naomie Harris in “Moonlight,” Nicole Kidman in “Lion,” Octavia Spencer in “Hidden Figures” and Michelle Williams in “Manchester By The Sea.” All but Spencer seemed like an absolute lock for a nomination in this category.

    Spencer’s performance is very good in the critically acclaimed, surprise box office smash hit “Hidden Figures,” but I would have personally gone with Rachel Weisz’s wonderful turn in Derek Cianfrance’s criminally under-seen “The Light Between Oceans.”

    Best Supporting Actor had three certain choices confirmed with Mahershala Ali in “Moonlight,” Jeff Bridges in “Hell or High Water” and Dev Patel in “Lion.” Michael Shannon’s nomination in the category for his terrific work in “Nocturnal Animals” over Golden Globe winning costar Aaron Taylor-Johnson shouldn’t really come as much of a surprise to those who’ve seen the film. Both are fantastic.

    Lucas Hedges’ great work opposite Casey Affleck in “Manchester By The Sea” is well earned, though the Academy could have gone in any number of directions here, including Hugh Grant in “Florence Foster Jenkins,” Issey Ogata in “Silence” or my personal favorite fifth option, Mykelti Williamson in “Fences.”

    The Academy seemed to take the most chances with their nominations in the Best Actress category, though Natalie Portman in “Jackie,” Emma Stone in “La La Land” and 20-time nominee Meryl Streep in “Florence Foster Jenkins” aren’t surprises by any means.

    The biggest omission in any category has to be Amy Adams getting left out here despite her flawless performance in “Arrival,” a Best Picture nominee that simply does not work without Adams killing it in the lead role. Golden Globe winner Isabelle Huppert of “Elle” shouldn’t be as much of a surprise as it still feels like given her upset win last month, though Ruth Negga’s work in the barely-seen “Loving” will have average moviegoers who have never heard of the film scratching their heads.

    Best Actor, as expected, will feature the two-horse race between front runners Casey Affleck in “Manchester By The Sea” and Denzel Washington in “Fences.” They are joined by nominees Andrew Garfield in “Hacksaw Ridge,” Ryan Gosling in “La La Land” and Viggo Mortensen in “Captain Fantastic.”

    All are deserving, though it feels as if Garfield is nominated for the wrong film as his performance in Scorsese’s “Silence” is perhaps the best of his young career. Mortensen does a fine job in a great film, though “Captain Fantastic” feels like any number of terrific indie comedies that seem to come out every year. To me, Paul Dano and Daniel Radcliffe are both better in the tonally similar “Swiss Army Man,” but there are far too many fart jokes in that film for the Academy to take notice.

    Other various thoughts

    “La La Land” getting 14 nominations makes sense if you watch the film, though it will be incredibly unlikely the film carries the day as easily come Oscar night as it did sweeping all seven categories at this year’s Golden Globes. Backlash from the Globes could actually hurt its chances overall, though it probably has the best shot at Best Picture given the Academy’s preferential balloting system in the category.

    It feels pretty foolish for the Academy to pass on Pharrell’s incredibly catching tune “Runnin’” from “Hidden Figures” in the Best Original Song category given two “La La Land” nominations for “Audition (The Fools Who Dream)” and “City of Stars.” Voters might split their votes between the two songs and open the door for “Hamilton” creator Lin-Manuel Miranda to slip in and win the category with the great “How Far I’ll Go” from the hit Disney animated film “Moana.”

    “O.J. Made In America” should be the consensus favorite for Best Documentary, though the Academy certainly needs to clarify what is eligible here (and in the supporting acting categories). Like most who’ve seen Ezra Edelman’s terrific doc, I caught “O.J. Made In America” spread across several parts on ESPN rather than in one seven-hour sitting at a theater. To me, it’s a television miniseries rather than a single documentary. It will win, and probably deserves to, but it still seems fishy.

    Other nominations that I would have liked to have seen:

    – Alicia Vikander and Michael Fassbender for “The Light Between Oceans”

    – David Mackenzie’s direction for “Hell or High Water”

    – Love somewhere, anywhere for “Sing Street”

    – John Goodman for “10 Cloverfield Lane”

    – “Weiner” for Best Documentary

  • 2016: A Cinematic Year In Review

    2016: A Cinematic Year In Review

    It’s been a tough year.

    Just saying the word “2016” induces cringes from a vast majority of people, offering up painful thoughts of a highly divisive political campaign that may or may not have gone your way to general malaise about the state of the world to the seemingly endless rash of celebrity deaths that robbed us of talent far too soon.

    In the world of cinema, things got off to a rocky and slow start, as is often the case with the way in which studios schedule their releases over the course of a calendar year. But the close of 2016 brought some of the decade’s most interesting and compelling movies to the forefront, ones we’ll be talking about for months to come.

    As of the end of 2016, I’ve had the pleasure (and sometimes pain) to enjoy 102 different new release feature films from big-budget studios to smaller independent works that have me starting to believe in the magic of cinema once again. I hope you’ll feel the same way, especially if you see this year’s 10 best films.

    It should be noted that several of the year’s award-contending releases have not been made widely public yet and as such are not in this list, including “Hidden Figures,” “Live By Night,” “Patriots Day” and “Silence.”

    Blockbuster of the year – “Deadpool”

    There may have been more financially successful big-budget popcorn movies to hit the big screen in 2016, but none are as effortlessly enjoyable and re-watchable as Ryan Reynolds’ comic book passion project “Deadpool.”

    “Deadpool” is the perfect star vehicle for Reynolds, who maximizes his wry wit and charm (applied in the film as snark) within the comic book world’s most wisecracking anti-hero. The passion Reynolds exudes for the character radiates every minute he’s on screen, elevating even the more generic superhero scenes crafted out of a cookie-cutter superhero script.

    The film enters a much more fan-friendly environment for cruder, darker subject matter thanks to the cult hit status of British indie dark comedy “Kick-Ass” and Marvel’s Netflix miniseries – “Daredevil,” “Jessica Jones” and “Luke Cage” – which are considerably more violent than the Avengers’ solo and team-up movies.

    The sheer amount of Easter eggs and random pop culture references – akin to the tone of Marvel’s surprise smash hit “Guardians of the Galaxy” – lends itself to multiple viewings, though the monotone plot line does become tiresome midway through multiple screenings. There’s signs of greatness within “Deadpool,” especially when Reynolds isn’t tied down by CGI metal men or hacky, second rate villains.

    Though not a perfect film, “Deadpool” is the hilarious next evolution in the comic book film genre and immensely worthy of blockbuster of the year status.

    Also considered were “Captain America: Civil War” and “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.” 

    Most disappointing film – “Hail, Caesar!”

    The Coen brothers’ “Hail, Caesar!” is a huge swing and an even bigger miss.

    In the big-budget Hollywood movie about big-budget Hollywood making big-budget Hollywood movies, viewers find Josh Brolin star as Eddie Mannix, a Michael Clayton-esque fixer who keeps the scandals of his top actors out of the press in a vague 1950s Los Angeles. Audiences are propelled alongside Brolin as he ping-pongs from one studio lot to the next, fixing issues with major stars and directors to try and keep a theatrical adaptation of a smash Broadway play, a cowboy western, an aquatic musical, and an Roman epic on par with Spartacus on track.

    Clocking in at well under two hours, “Caesar!” attempts to cram far too much into far too little time, leaving major stars like Scarlett Johansson and Jonah Hill with nothing more than extended cameos as a Esther Williams-type actress trying to hide her illegitimate pregnancy and a studio stooge, respectively. 

    This doesn’t even begin to question the decision to limit the screen time of Ralph Fiennes – perhaps the film’s best actor – who perfectly fits the comedic bill of what the Coens were trying to achieve with the film, their take on Wes Anderson’s fantastic “The Grand Budapest Hotel.”

    Visually, “Caesar!” works in the respect that everything feels vintage Hollywood, from the costuming to the sets and performances within each film. The 50’s vibe is definitely there, but the Coens don’t really seem to have a firm grasp on where they want to go with this movie, dragging viewers all over the place in order to come to a middling conclusion at the end.

    While there’s all the pieces for a fantastic film, nothing really seems to come together in “Hail, Caesar!” From top to bottom, the entire production feels out of sync and in need of major structural repair to a confusing, all over the map script that holds “Caesar!” back from being something better.

    Also considered were “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice,” “Inferno,” “Suicide Squad” and “X-Men: Apocalypse.”

    Best documentary – “O.J.: Made In America”

    Some may question the validity of this ESPN-produced documentary that checks in at just shy of eight hours long in total. Ezra Edelman’s five-part feature about the life and times of mercurial running back turned accused murderer O.J. Simpson. But as the Academy has ruled this doc eligible for consideration after the entire film was released theatrically in major metropolitan areas, it also is eligible here.

    And what a film event “O.J.: Made In America” is. This is by far the most thorough and complete documentary I’ve ever seen regardless of running time. The depth of information found in this highly compelling, immensely immersive documentary is unparalleled and came at the exact right time in the pop culture scene in 2016, mirroring the terrific television miniseries “American Crime Story: The People Vs. O.J. Simpson.”

    Also considered were “Amanda Knox,” “Audrie and Daisy” and “Weiner.”

    Breakout performer – Kate McKinnon, “Ghostbusters” and “Office Christmas Party”

    “Saturday Night Live” star Kate McKinnon’s 2016 will probably be remembered most for her hilarious (and spot-on) portrayal of failed Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton over the course of the fall. While comedy gold, I’m throwing all of this out of consideration when looking at feature film breakout performer and McKinnon still takes the cake.

    More so than any other star this year, McKinnon proved with sidesplitting supporting turns in “Office Christmas Party” and especially “Ghostbusters” that she has the comedic chops to carry a 95-minute feature film in a leading role.

    By far the best part of “Ghostbusters,” McKinnon hammers home every punchline she’s given in the film with ruthless efficiency and proves herself to be a future comedy film star with her performance in much the same way Melissa McCarthy became a breakout following “Bridesmaids.” McKinnon is the single best part about “Ghostbusters” and outshines her more famous co-stars McCarthy and Kristen Wiig at every turn.

    Also considered were Alden Ehrenreich (“Hail, Caesar!” and “Rules Don’t Apply”) and Lily Collins (“Rules Don’t Apply”).

    Best supporting actor – Jeff Bridges, “Hell or High Water”

    By far the easiest choice I’ve had to make this year is in the best supporting actor category, where Jeff Bridges stands dominant over a fine slew of potential nominees for this award.

    In “Hell or High Water,” Bridges is damn near perfect as an aging Texas Ranger looking to put away one last bank robber before riding off into the sunset. 

    Inevitably, Bridges’ performance in “High Water” will be compared to Tommy Lee Jones’ effort in the similar, yet much darker Coen Brothers film “No Country for Old Men.” The parts are different sides of the same coin. Bridges does display a very effective “I’m too old for this” mentality, but it’s couple with an uniquely crude and albeit racist sense of humor that’s unexpectedly brilliant. 

    There’s a great deal of levity in Bridges’ partnership with a younger Native American colleague that tracks quite nicely throughout the film. When looking back on Bridges’ career, “High Water” will ultimately represent one of his best performances in a long, storied filmography.

    Also considered were Mahershala Ali (“Moonlight”), Michael Shannon (“Nocturnal Animals”), Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Nocturnal Animals”) and Mykelti Williamson (“Fences”).

    Best supporting actress – Viola Davis, “Fences”

    I’m not 100 percent certain that I would consider Davis’ role as Denzel Washington’s proud, yet largely subdued wife Rose in the dynamic character drama “Fences” to be a true supporting performance. Davis is in far too much of “Fences” for that. But as she is campaigning in the supporting category and will likely be the Oscar frontrunner for the year, it works for me as well.

    Her dynamic performance in a subtle, understated manner until a critical turn late in the feature is a testament to her ability to create a complex character in limited screen time. Davis’ work is devastatingly arresting and worth the price of admission alone.

    When it comes to awards season, this is the absolute most confident I am in the accuracy of my pick matching the acclaim from Golden Globe and Academy Award voters. She should win and will do so,

    Also considered were Naomie Harris (“Moonlight”), Helen Mirren (“Eye In The Sky”), Rachel Weisz (“The Light Between Oceans”) and Michelle Williams (“Manchester By The Sea”).

    Best actor – Casey Affleck, “Manchester By The Sea”

    Typically, Best Actor accolades go to showy, in-your-face performances where the actor proves their chops by emotionally yelling at someone in a climatic scene that ends up as the highlight reel for their Oscar nomination video.

    Ironically, this year’s best actor doesn’t yell and scream in anger, frustration or passion despite suffering through the tragic loss of his brother and dealing with the aftermath in a town he doesn’t want to be in.

    Casey Affleck’s performance in Kenneth Lonergan’s “Manchester By The Sea” is quietly arresting and frames the entire film in such a somber, morose way that allows the film to be the most honest, genuine, realistic feature to come out in 2016. Every single scene Affleck is in is carefully thoughtout and composed, giving the performance such depth of character as the uncle turned foster parent who just wants his life back.

    This category is probably the closest call out of all the major acting awards as Denzel Washington’s powerhouse performance in “Fences” is right there with Affleck. It’s only by the thinnest of margins that Affleck’s quiet desperation edges out Washington’s flashy performance.

    Also considered were Andrew Garfield (“Hacksaw Ridge”), Ryan Gosling (“La La Land”), Jake Gyllenhaal (“Nocturnal Animals”) and Denzel Washington (“Fences”).

    Best actress – Emma Stone, “La La Land”

    I saw “La La Land” for the first time the day after Christmas shortly after viewing the holiday classic “Love Actually.” One of that film’s most iconic lines was on my mind when I penned the following tweet after seeing “La La Land.”

    It’s Christmas – and at Christmas you tell the truth – to me, Emma Stone is perfect in @LaLaLand. Damien Chazelle is a master.

    A week later, this sentiment remains truer than ever. “La La Land” is the career-defining performance for a talented, Oscar-nominated actress in need of a star-making role. Stone’s turn as struggling actress/barista Mia in Chazelle’s love letter to classic Hollywood musicals is a breath of fresh air amid the dark, harrowing performances we’ve grown accustomed to seeing from Hollywood’s top actresses.

    The entire film, Stone glides through scene after scene as if on a cloud of air. Her performance is so effortless and light, dancing on a road of eggshells in the most charming of ways. Mia is the quintessential persona of what we imagine falling in love to be like when we’re dreaming about it in our heads and Stone takes every care to make the entire experience feel natural.

    “La La Land” is Stone’s movie through and through. There is no better performance by any actor or actress in 2016. Period.

    Also considered were Amy Adams (“Arrival”), Jessica Chastain (“Miss Sloane”), Natalie Portman (“Jackie”) and Alicia Vikander (“The Light Between Oceans”).

    Best director – Damien Chazelle, “La La Land”

    Damien Chazelle proved with 2014’s “Whiplash” that he has a master’s grasp on matching every note of a film’s score with individual frames of film to create uniquely compelling cinema.

    In the terrific movie musical “La La Land,” Chazelle ups the ante with a picturesque love letter to Los Angeles and an ode to classic Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers style musicals. Elegant and classy in every way, “La La Land” evokes old school Hollywood with new school technology thanks to Chazelle’s keen eye.

    “La La Land” is the perfect vehicle for Chazelle to show just how talented of a young director he is.  The vibrancy he is able to create on screen with dynamic color hues that radiate into the audience frame by frame is perfectly balanced against the terrific score from Justin Hurwitz. Los Angeles comes alive in such a forward, present way that few filmmakers have been able to achieve.

    Also considered were Barry Jenkins (“Moonlight”), Kenneth Lonergan (“Manchester By The Sea”), David Mackenzie (“Hell or High Water”) and Denis Villeneuve (“Arrival”).

    Top 10 films of 2016

    Finishing just shy of the top 10 were (in alphabetical order): “Allied,” “Captain America: Civil War,” “Demolition,” “Eye In The Sky,” “Hacksaw Ridge,” “Jackie,” “Miss Sloane,” “Moana,” “Moonlight” and “O.J.: Made In America.”

    10. “Swiss Army Man” (directed by Daniels, starring Paul Dano and Daniel Radcliffe)

    By far the most inventive and unique film of 2016, the Sundance alumni film known to some as “That Farting Movie” makes my list of the 10 best for the year simply due to the level of complexity and ingenuity that the directing team Daniels were able to bring to life.

    Think about it: A man on the verge of suicide saves his own life by discovering and later befriending a rotting corpse that reanimates in unusual, magnificent ways. This should be the logline of a much worse film than “Swiss Army Man” ends up being.

    Paul Dano runs the emotional gambit in the film as the living Hank, bouncing effortlessly from suicidal to gleeful to lonely and inquisitive and back again like only the most manic of actors could pull off. Daniel Radcliffe is a surprising revelation as the undead Manny. The former Harry Potter brings life to a monotone, flat character that allows viewers to discover Manny in different ways as Radcliffe himself finds them through self-exploration of the character.

    No 2016 film will energize you quite like the experience of watching “Swiss Army Man.”

    9. “The Light Between Oceans” (directed by Derek Cianfrance, starring Alicia Vikander and Michael Fassbender)

    Odds are you probably didn’t see this incredibly underappreciated film from “Blue Valentine” and “The Place Beyond The Pines” director Derek Cianfrance, but viewers who took the time to catch this two-hour romantic drama know just how deeply moving the film is.

    It starts with the casting, which leaves two of the best performers working today – Alicia Vikander and Michael Fassbender – alone on a remote Australian island and gives their magnificent performances time to breathe amid picturesque ocean expanses. Fassbender plays romantic stoicism better than anyone in the game, but somehow Vikander topples his work with a soul-crushing, otherworldly turn as his lover.

    “The Light Between Oceans” maintains constantly entrancing cinema despite a slow pace thanks to the cinematography and acting work, including an award-worthy supporting performance from Rachel Weisz in the film’s second half.

    You probably won’t find this film on another Best of 2016 list and that’s a real shame. Go see this hidden gem of a movie as soon as possible.

    8. “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” (directed by Gareth Edwards, starring Felicity Jones, Diego Luna and Riz Ahmed)

    The only blockbuster film to make this year’s top 10 list, “Rogue One” doesn’t even qualify as the year’s best blockbuster, a title that went to the gleefully distasteful “Deadpool” earlier.

    Admittedly, there are some script issues and a little bit of recycling from other films in the genre that normally would disqualify “Rogue One” from consideration, but the movie’s soon to be iconic final action sequence is so incredibly well-made that Edwards’ film makes the list on that sequence alone.

    Trying not to be too spoiler-filled in this recap, the sequence ends up being the closest thing to a space heist movie filmed in a World War II epic genre style thanks to Edwards’ visual choices in close combat that put viewers right in the heat of battle and amplify the audience’s ability to understand just how perilous the final mission in “Rogue One” truly is.

    Edwards perfectly captures the terror of the Empire’s massive firepower advantage, especially when cranking the camera angle skyward from the beachhead to reveal enormous AT-ST tanks barreling down on the small Rebel infantry force.

    The final 25 minutes of “Rogue One,” including that nostalgic epilogue at the conclusion of battle, are worth the price of admission alone.

    7. “Sing Street” (directed by John Carney, starring Ferdia Walsh-Peelo, Jack Reynor and Lucy Boynton)

    There’s another film in this genre higher on the Best of 2016 list, but without question the best musical of the year is John Carney’s ode to 80s rock music, “Sing Street.”

    “Sing Street” is a more than competent coming of age love story about a young Irish boy forced to attend a new Catholic school for boys in Dublin, who falls in love with the teenage model across the street. What makes Carney’s film remarkable, however, is the pitch perfect use of music to transform the narrative into something much more beautiful.

    In the film, Conor woos Raphina by promising to cast her in a music video for his rock band, except Conor doesn’t have a band. The film is as much about Sing Street finding its sound musically and visually through some incredibly inspired music videos the band makes along the way. It’s a comedy, a drama, a coming of age tale and one of the smartest independent, foreign features to come along in several years.

    One of three movies in 2016 that made me instantly purchase the soundtrack, “Sing Street” is a can’t miss film.

    6. “Nocturnal Animals” (directed by Tom Ford, starring Amy Adams, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon and Aaron Taylor-Johnson)

    Few films insist on audiences being present from the opening frame quite like Tom Ford’s dazzling and captivating second feature “Nocturnal Animals,” which begins with the controversial title credits sequence featuring obese, older women dancing naked on screen for three minutes. It’s a defining opening statement to a film that features one of the year’s best ensemble casts and engagingly puzzling screenplays.

    “Nocturnal Animals” leans on the strong performances from its core actors, with Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Shannon doing equally outstanding work in the film’s Texas noir-thriller segments. A full feature simply about this story-within-a-story could have made the top 10 on its own, but the layering of multiple story universes and timelines within “Nocturnal Animals” makes the film one of the most complex, thought-provoking cinematic experiences in several years.

    Ford’s fashion eye carries over well when it comes to the picturesque cinematography, which often feels ripped straight out of a Dior perfume commercial or Vogue magazine advertisement.

    “Nocturnal Animals” is without doubt a film that could have easily been slotted two or three slots higher given additional consideration as the quality really jumps to the next level for the six best movies of 2016.

    5. “Arrival” (directed by Denis Villeneuve, starring Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner)

    Science fiction as a genre hasn’t been strikingly beautiful in more than a decade, but Denis Villeneuve’s arresting, slow-burning think piece about communication and interpersonal relationships set to the tune of an alien invasion movie is the perfect remedy.

    “Arrival” confirms Villeneuve as one of the top three to five directors working in Hollywood today His film is the perfect thinking man’s sci-fi drama as Villeneuve and crew engage audiences in spirited debate about the meaning of language, reacting out of fear and using communication as a tool to bring people together rather than one to tear people apart. Cinematographer Bradford Young’s gorgeous work shooting the film elevates the entire piece to another level entirely.

    For all its visual wizardry and narrative complexity, “Arrival” lives and dies by the success or failure of Adams’ lead performance as Louise Banks, who drives the entirety of the action from start to finish. Fortunately for moviegoers, Adams hits it out of the park. While other actresses might have played Banks on a more one-dimensional level to let the technical aspects shine, Adams elevates her performance to the same level with a thoroughly layered, nuanced turn.

    What viewers will likely remember first when looking back on “Arrival” are the beautifully grotesque aliens that Banks and Donnelly encounter, known in the film simply as heptapods. While describing the heptapods at great length would ruin the surprise of their initial appearance, Villeneuve and his creative team do a masterful job of making such a strange, unappealing creature look stunning nevertheless. The visual artistry displayed in “Arrival” when it comes to these alien lifeforms is worth the price of admission alone.

    4. “Fences” (directed by Denzel Washington, starring Washington and Viola Davis)

    August Wilson’s Pulitzer Prize and Tony Award winning play about an aging former Negro League baseball player does not seem at first glance like it would be prime cinema fodder. Not until you get Denzel Washington’s hands on the material.

    First on stage in the 2010 Broadway revival and later in the 2016 film he directs, Washington and co-star Viola Davis put on an acting clinic for nearly two-and-a-half hours few films this decade could match. “Fences” feels like the audience is sitting on stage with the performers and it’s nearly flawless as a slice-of-life film reflecting on middle class African-American life in the 1950s.

    Scenes are extended in small, tight locales in Troy’s backyard, kitchen or porch for 15-20 minutes at a time without much room for audiences to breathe. The confining nature of the filmmaking along with Charlotte Bruus Christensen’s subdued cinematography make for a unique experience unlike anything you’ll see in theaters this year.

    Davis will win the Best Supporting Actress Oscar and Washington could easily overtake the star of the third best film of 2016 for the Best Actor prize as well. Dramatic acting doesn’t get much better than “Fences.”

    3. “Manchester By The Sea” (directed by Kenneth Lonergan, starring Casey Affleck, Lucas Hedges, Kyle Chandler and Michelle Williams)

    As character driven family dramas go, you’ll be hard pressed to find one more gut-wrenching and emotional as Kenneth Lonergan’s heartfelt “Manchester By The Sea,” a film so powerful that it’s difficult to put down in words the impact this film has on a scene to scene basis.

    Casey Affleck’s masterful turn as a Boston janitor looking to live a simple life when his brother’s sudden death puts him in charge of his teenage nephew is the best work of Affleck’s career. Supporting performances from Lucas Hedges, Kyle Chandler and Gretchen Mol combined with an Oscar-worthy supporting effort from Michelle Williams makes “Manchester By The Sea” the best ensemble film of 2016.

    There’s just enough humor throughout the relationship drama to offset the immense pain felt by the characters throughout the film and it brings much needed levity to keep viewers engaged throughout.

    A simple, yet effective film, “Manchester By The Sea” features some of the year’s best filmmaking from top to bottom and could easily be the top film of the year on many a critic’s list.

    2. “La La Land” (directed by Damien Chazelle, starring Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone)

    There’s not really a more delightful cinematic experience in 2016 than “La La Land,” Damien Chazelle’s vibrant, romantic love letter to classic Hollywood musicals and the dreams a city like Los Angeles can make come true.

    Visually perfect with the best musical score of the year, “La La Land” features a terrific performance from the elegantly understated Ryan Gosling and the career-best work of Emma Stone in an engaging, mesmerizing cinematic wanderlust through the beautiful Los Angeles skyline and iconic landmarks.

    This modern take on vintage Hollywood storytelling leaps off the screen and pulls viewers in for a classy, adventurous ride about struggling artists falling in love in Los Angeles. It’s exactly the kind of film that might have starred Gene Kelly or Bing Crosby decades ago and yet feels so incredibly fresh and authentic in a modern, 21st century way.

    While the primary hook for “La La Land” is inevitably its musical genre, the film shines brightest as a straight character-driven drama with outstanding performances from leads Gosling and Stone. Now in their third film together, Gosling and Stone’s pitch perfect chemistry drive the entirety of the action and make viewers want to dream and fall in love all over again.

    1. “Hell Or High Water” (directed by David Mackenzie, starring Chris Pine, Ben Foster and Jeff Bridges)

    I called this back in August. The opening of my initial review of this film still stands as true today as it did four months ago:

    “Hell or High Water” is the best film you’ll see this year.

    This isn’t hyperbole or a statement made lightly, especially given the fact that there’s still four months and an entire season of Academy Award candidates yet to be released.

    Beautifully crafted and acted, the first major release film from director David Mackenzie stars Chris Pine and Ben Foster as brothers who resort to robbing banks in sleepy West Texas towns while being pursued by a grizzled veteran Texas Ranger played by Jeff Bridges.

    “Hell or High Water” is a funky combination of thriller and neo-Western ripped straight out of a different era. Were they alive today, “High Water” is a movie that Steve McQueen and/or James Dean might star in – a quintessential tale of antiheros running from the law for morally just reasons. “Hell or High Water” is “The Getaway” with a conscience; a western “Rebel Without A Cause.”

    There aren’t any flaws that I can find with “Hell or High Water.” It’s the closest thing to the perfect cinematic experience I’ve found in quite some time.

    The acting is tremendous. Chris Pine does the best work of his career, Ben Foster is peaking at the right time with this movie and Jeff Bridges should unquestionably win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for this film. Bridges in “Hell or High Water” may be one of the two or three best performances in his entire career. It’s that good.

    “Hell or High Water” isn’t a western in the same John Wayne, Clint Eastwood way of thinking about westerns, but it is without a doubt an evolution of the genre to something more complex and layered.

    It’s the best movie of the year.

  • The Power of Cinema

    The Power of Cinema

    I love movies.

    I know. That seems like an all too obvious statement for a film critic to make, but I still feel like it needs to be said. People can like movies, or people can love A movie, but less people just love movies.

    Smart ones, dumb ones, big ones, small ones, ones that make you think, ones you can turn your brain off while watching. I’m down with them all. Yes, I sound like Dr. Seuss when I write like that, but it’s just coincidental.

    Typically, when I review films, I do my best to leave the words I or me out of the conversation, because at the end of the day, this isn’t really about me or who I am; it’s about the movies. I also don’t subscribe to the argument many film critics will make that they are journalists and have to write about movies as such.

    But it’s important for you, the reader, to know where I’m coming from, since Cinematic Considerations isn’t going to be like any other movie review you ever read. So this is me and my cinematic journey.

    I liked movies as a kid – even owned and re-watched more than your average child probably should – but I couldn’t really say I LOVED movies.

    It wasn’t until college and those long lonely nights in an otherwise empty dorm room where I truly found the allure of film, falling asleep to the same two or three movies on rotate (with or without the commentary track).

    image

    I’d fall asleep to Bill Murray sort of romancing Scarlett Johansson in Sofia Coppola’s 2003 dramedy Lost in Translation, or watching Jim Carrey pine over the fading memory of Kate Winslet in 2004’s Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. My irrational obsession over the career of Matt Damon thanks to the Jason Bourne trilogy also happened over this period of time.

    I learned then something I find to be completely true still to this day. The right movie seen at the right time in the right frame of mind can work wonders for the soul.

    Now I’m not talking about watching Pineapple Express or Zombieland while hung over on a Saturday morning eating cold pizza, though that does happen from time to time in people’s lives and both are excellent choices on such occasions.

    image

    I’m talking about how watching The Devil Wears Prada when you’ve had yet another rough day at the office and you just can’t stand another second working for a terrible boss can give you some perspective. Or how watching It’s A Wonderful Life can put you in the holiday spirit. (I really mean Die Hard, but that’s a topic for another time.)

    As a film critic, my goal isn’t to get you to race out to the theaters to catch a new release or save you the time and trouble of sitting through something terrible (as much as I may want to).

    Cinematic Considerations is about starting a conversation and getting your interest piqued in a movie or genre you hadn’t considered before, but in the end, you’re going to be the one to decide whether or not you should go see whatever film I happen to be reviewing.

    Be a smart moviegoer. Watch the trailer before you go see a movie, read my review and head on out to the theaters. Know what you’re getting into in advance. Don’t be the person who walks into a movie hoping to see Meryl Streep, wait two hours for her to appear and then bitch when she isn’t even in the film you saw.

    I read a lot of movie reviews – typically after I watch a movie, but sometimes to pique my interest as well. Even us critics don’t want to watch EVERYTHING Hollywood tries to cram down the throats of the general public.

    Nine out of ten reviews will spend an inordinate amount of time telling you what happens in the movie, and with the word counts prevalent in print media across the country, all too often you’re getting 80 percent plot synopsis and 20 percent actual review of the film. That’s ridiculous.

    image

    You didn’t check out a review of American Sniper to have the writer spend most of his space telling you who Chris Kyle is or what he was doing in Iraq that made him so famous. You want to know if the movie’s any good or not (Spoiler alert: it’s amazing) and what the deal with that fake baby is.

    I refuse to dumb things down in my reviews because I believe you, the reader, aren’t dumb. (You’re reading Cinematic Considerations, so that makes you pretty damn smart in my book.)

    As a result, I’m not going to waste time writing about what happens in a movie you’ve either already seen and remember what happens, or haven’t seen the film yet and don’t want to be spoiled. Enjoy the movie on your terms, not based on what a critic thinks or doesn’t think is important for you to know before you see a movie. That’s what trailers are for.

    I’m going to give it to you straight with no frills and no apologizes. If a movie sucked, I’m not going to say it wasn’t that great. That movie sucked.

    What I will offer you, readers of Cinematic Considerations, is unfiltered analysis and opinions on today’s newest releases with hopefully some conversation starters, classic movie reviews and independent film highlights along the way.

    You’ll usually get references to other movies in my reviews, which are mainly there to spark a dialogue, get people thinking about other films in the context of the one I’m reviewing and to possibly give you something else to watch on Netflix or the like when you get home from the theaters.

    The power of cinema is something unrivaled by other mass media these days. Good movies can give you just what you need, bad movies can put you on the wrong track and great movies can inspire beyond anything you might have dreamed possible.

    Thanks for letting me help guide you along the way.

  • What we talk about when we talk about Birdman

    What we talk about when we talk about Birdman

    It shouldn’t come as a total shock that “Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)” — a very inside acting film — would continue the trend of movies like “The Artist” and “Argo,” winning the Best Picture prize at Sunday’s Academy Awards.

    Now three of the last five films to win the most prestigious award in Hollywood are about Hollywood, actors or some combination of both, and that’s certain to upset a lot of members of the general public, whether they’re indie die-hards who were mystified by Richard Linklater’s 12-year filming odyssey “Boyhood” or patriotic Clint Eastwood backers supporting a box office smash hit in “American Sniper.” But when you watch or re-watch “Birdman” — now out on DVD and Bluray — it’s important to realize just how complete a film “Birdman” is and what exactly we should be talking about when we talk about “Birdman.”

    From the opening seconds, “Birdman” establishes itself as a film that’s going to draw moviegoers in with its visual brilliance, then keep them entranced with stunning performances from its deep and talented cast of actors.

    Newly crowned Best Director Alejandro González Iñárritu, whose previous films include “Babel” and “21 Grams,” provides the initial hook, opting to stage the film in narrow, tight hallways inside the backstage of the St. James Theater in New York City to provide added tension, then flipping cinematic standard on its head by fusing each scene together so that “Birdman” feels like one never-ending, 120-minute shot.

    Each scene is stitched together seamlessly thanks to the artistic savvy of “Gravity” cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki — recent winner of back-to-back cinematography Oscars — and editors Douglas Crise and Stephen Mirrione.

    Each scene transitions to the next without interruption, mostly done through extended segments of 10 minutes or more. The necessary technique to pull off such a terrific stunt is a beautifully choreographed dance between actors and crew.

    A great deal of technical care has been taken in the movie, which rivals “Gravity” as the most forward-thinking and visually dynamic film in years.

    This sort of digital skill is becoming commonplace — especially in the superhero film genre “Birdman” constantly derides — but never with such grace. It’s a breath of fresh air to see the technical wizardry of a film accent highly skilled and complete acting performances, rather than having gimmicks or special effects operate as a replacement for quality acting.

    Much in the same way that David Fincher used who Ben Affleck is as a public figure to great effect in “Gone Girl,” Iñárritu’s choice of former “Batman” star Michael Keaton as the titular “Birdman,” given Keaton’s struggles to overcome the shadow of his role as Batman parallel his character Riggan’s difficulty separating himself mentally from the super hero character Birdman that made him a movie star 20 years ago.

    As a moviegoer, it’s nearly impossible to completely separate Keaton, the actor, with Riggan the character and in the case of “Birdman,” the film takes full advantage of this duality to create a deeply personal and emotionally rich character wanting to prove himself to the world while mistaking adoration for love.

    Keaton, who narrowly lost out to “Theory of Everything” star Eddie Redmayne for a Best Actor Oscar, gives the performance of a lifetime in the role, which ironically enough, should redefine Keaton as a passionate actor outside of the comic book realm.

    Edward Norton, who would have won Best Supporting Actor in a year where J.K. Simmons didn’t blow people away in “Whiplash,” provides Keaton with a sounding board to lob emotional volleys to, both in the film itself and in the Broadway stage show Riggan is producing, an adaptation of the Raymond Carver short story, “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.”

    Emma Stone — who is slowly, but surely proving herself to be something much more than the limited characters she’s been playing on screen — makes the absolute most out of every second in her performance as Keaton’s drug-addled daughter looking to stay clean while helping her dad reform his own image. The subtle co-dependence the two characters share in their mutual rehabilitation is one of the many great sub-plots in an intricately woven tale.

    Outside of “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” moviegoers would be hard pressed to find such quality acting from so many talented performers — Naomi Watts, Zach Galifianakis, Amy Ryan, Andrea Riseborough.

    But the question still remains: What do we talk about when we talk about “Birdman?”

    How do you explain a meta, highly self-referential dramedy that seems to demean its audience by lavishly deriding the common blockbuster experience?

    Quite simply, “Birdman” is the next step forward in a cinematic evolution that began with James Cameron’s visually transformative “Avatar” and continued with Guillermo del Toro’s space adventure “Gravity.”

    Adding new depth in acting to lofty and innovative cinematography makes “Birdman” the obvious next step in filmmaking, led by Iñárritu, who is up to the task of making all the moving pieces work fluidly and beautifully.

    “Birdman” checks off on all the critical elements of a complete cinematic experience — visual brilliance, acting talent giving top notch performances, elite technical skill and a blue-chip script — and is worthy of its Best Picture statue.

  • Revisiting Boyhood: ‘I just thought there’d be more’

    Revisiting Boyhood: ‘I just thought there’d be more’

    Coming-of-age films are nothing new.

    Boy starts out young and naïve, things happen, boy matures, end of film.

    Filmmakers have always circumnavigated lengthy time jumps in these sort of movies by casting multiple actors to play the same part at different ages.

    In the case of the Golden Globe-winning drama “Boyhood,” director Richard Linklater took the slow approach, filming segments of his movie over the past 12 years as young actor Ellar Coltrane grows up in the film around him.

    The film, which missed out on the Cinematic Considerations 10 best films of 2014, is worth a second look following an initial review in September.

    A lot is made of the 12-year filmmaking process, and indeed, “Boyhood” and Linklater need to be commended for their dedication to the project.

    There certainly isn’t another film like “Boyhood,” but that fact alone doesn’t make the film any good, just unique.

    Imagine a film where events feel like they’re happening around the main character rather than to the character, where the character doesn’t really experience any growth or development besides physical appearance and you’d have Mason, “Boyhood’s” defacto protagonist.

    A voyeur of his own life, Mason idly watches as things happen around him. Life affects him only peripherally.

    “Boyhood” is the “Seinfeld” of cinema; it’s a film about nothing.

    You can easily see Coltrane becoming disinterested in the filmmaking process throughout the years, as his character Mason becomes disillusioned from the world.

    Nothing can be done about the film’s significant pacing issue. “Boyhood” cannot shortchange any of the 12 years of filming, making it difficult to leave scenes on the cutting room floor. The film does not move crisply from year to year and two hours into the film, “Boyhood” can easily leave the viewer exhausted past the point of enjoyment.

    There are moments where “Boyhood” rises above its 12-year gimmick and provides quality scenes — most notably sequences featuring Marco Perella’s daring portrayal of Mason’s first alcoholic step-father attempt to propel “Boyhood” in an actual direction.

    Ethan Hawke offers up the film’s best performance and shows the most character development as the frequently absent hippie father turned square dad.

    Groundbreaking not for the content, acting or cinematography, “Boyhood” is heralded for its actual 12-year filming time, allowing characters to naturally age physically on screen.

    There’s been a large amount of groupthink among critics who feel compelled to congratulate Linklater’s determination and creative vision to attempt such a different style of filmmaking that valid critiques of the film’s actual merits have been largely absent.

    These reviews of the film suffer from the same lack of individuality that Mason bemoans to his girlfriend Sheena during a road trip late in the film.

    Set aside the time element of “Boyhood” and what is left? Twelve separate short films loosely tied together based on common characters. Is that truly noteworthy?

    The film is a kitsch time capsule that elevates the mundane for two hours and then laments how boring the journey was.

    When Mason prepares to go off to college, his mother Olivia (Golden Globe-winner Patricia Arquette) cries for her own lost life as much as the departure of her son.

    “I just thought there’d be more,” she laments.

    For “Boyhood,” a critically acclaimed, ground-breaking film, I just thought there’d be more.