The Canyons

The Canyons explores the dark side of human nature, while trying to offer critiques on the technology obsession of modern society and a dying film industry.  The film follows the story Christian (James Deen) a manipulative movie producer who makes movies to keep his father off his back and to keep his trust fund.  Trouble stirs when Christian suspects that his girlfriend Tara (Lindsey Lohan) is seeing another man.  The Canyons is a twisted and erotic tale of the darkest parts of the human mind.

Director Paul Schrader does a good job of creating the sexually tangled and sadistic lifestyle of his characters on the surface.  But the characters feel a little flat, in part due to some bad acting and the direction of the movie goes astray is with its attempt at cultural critiques, the critiques end up to thinly spread over multiple subject matters.  Whether it is society’s obsession with technology or The Canyons perceived decline of the film industry it’s hard to identify the message that the film is so desperately grasping for.  The cinematography is rather beautiful for the most part and the movie is competently edited.  However this goes out the window during the opening scene for the most part, which is awkwardly shot and edited together.  The film does have an overbearing use of cutaways that can become annoying at some parts.  For instance in the opening scene in the middle of a conversation in a restaurant the film has a sweeping crane shot of a bar on the other side of the restaurant, this all done in the middle of the dialog.  

The Canyons is a movie that features one of the strangest acting ensembles ever assembled in a movie. A cast that ranges from porn star James Deen to award winning director Gus Van Sant who plays Dr. Campbell, Christian’s therapist.  It’s a daring move to cast a porn star as a leading man and judging from James Deen’s performance it’s a move that won’t be attempted again anytime soon.  A reason behind Deen’s casting though could be the movie’s various sexually twisted scenes.  The movie sports some of the most sadistically erotic scenes that I have ever seen in a film, the scenes will leave you disgusted (or aroused depending on whether that’s your thing or not) which I’m pretty sure is the movies intention.  The movie at times borders on being soft-core porn, but one that sports a sinister quirk.

The big draw of the movie, or the big question that everyone wants to know is if Lindsey Lohan puts on a good performance.  While it’s not the cannonball into the pool sort of performance that some may be hoping for out of Lindsey, it is a foot in the water, towards the right direction.  She puts on a solid performance and is undoubtedly the best actor/actress in the film, though her performance is nothing to rave about.  

The Canyons is a movie that I would tell people to go see, not because it’s a good movie, but that it is an experience much in the way that Harmony Korine’s Spring Breakers is an experience.  The movie creates a stylistic, materialistic and infernal hell, but the bad acting occasionally pulls you out of the experience of the movie along with the movie being over packed with commentary.  The movie is gorgeous at parts and stylish, but it’s bad acting and lack of execution and direction keep the movie from becoming an in-depth exploration into the dark and sexually twisted hellscape of the human experience.

Rating: 44/100

World War Z

World War Z is the zombie’s genre first real attempt at a big budget action blockbuster.   World War Z’s giant budget has given it the ability to do what few zombie movie can, bringing the zombie apocalypse to a worldwide scale.  For the most part World War Z works, it balances its action packed thrills, with intense and suspenseful moments that are paced well throughout the film.  This all however maybe comes at the expense of the film’s heart.

For a movie that was apparently riddled with issues during production and almost didn’t even get made, even having a Vanity Fair article written about the film’s production missteps, however among a disastrous film production a comparable zombie movie emerges.  World War Z follows former U.N. investigator Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) as he searches the globe for a cure to stop the zombie apocalypse.  This worldwide search for a vaccine lends itself to some impressive and widely varied action set pieces.

One of the big questions when you have a zombie movie is, what kind of zombies are we dealing with? Is it your typical run of the mill slow walking zombies, or the hyper rabies zombies?  World War Z’s zombies most closely resemble the hyper rabies zombies, with the turn time after bite being incredibly fast, faster than any other zombie movie I’ve seen.  The fast moving disease lends itself to the movie’s scale and intensity and make for some interesting moments in the film.  For the most part all the zombie stuff is believable with a few small potholes popping up here and there but never really distract the viewer and the movie is still able to maintain it’s suspension of disbelief.

The writing in World War Z is good enough to get by, but ultimately where the movie has its biggest issue is its inability to make Gerry’s relationship with his family anything more than generic.  This wouldn’t be so much of an issue if the movie didn’t take so much time emphasizing family and bringing up the fact that Gerry has a family whenever it can.  There’s nothing that stands out about his relationship with his family, leaving that whole storyline rather uninteresting.  Causing the movie to lose some of its heart and personality along the way.  I would be remiss if I forgot to mention the painfully bad inner monologue by Pitt’s character at the end of the movie.

The thing that stands out about World War Z is its use of suspense, which makes for some intense and thrilling sequences.  World War Z not only features the traditional run n’ gun/shoot ‘em up zombie scenes but also intricate and well presented stealth scenes that make for suspenseful moments.   World War Z should also be commended for being able to break new ground for the zombie genre.   Able to put that obscenely large 200+ million dollar budget to some use, by not just plugging and chugging the typical zombie movie set pieces into the film.  Instead it takes the zombie action set pieces to places that the low budget zombie movies are never able to go.

After World War Z’s opening weekend they have already announced a sequel, which follows Pitt’s plan of hoping to turn the movie into a trilogy.  As a big fan of the zombie genre (I’m the person who watches all those zombie short films on youtube) I was genuinely surprised by World War Z and look forward to see what direction Pitt guides this trilogy as both a producer and an actor.  World War Z is impressive, smart and sure to entertaining enough to overcome it’s lack of heart to create one of the biggest zombie movies to date.

Rating: 72/100

The East

The East is a political thriller that is the spawn child of co-writer and Lead Actress Brit Marling, one of film’s up and coming young women.  The East follows Sarah Moss an agent for a private intelligence firm that provides their corporate clientele protection from eco-terrorism.  Sarah played by Brit Marling is assigned to infiltrate the eco-terrorism group known as The East, an anarchist group that plans to carry out three “jams” or attacks on three different corporations.  The East does a good job of balancing it’s thriller side of the film with it’s indie soft spot.

In preparation of the film Marling along with her co-writer and director Zal Batmanglij spent two months immersed in freeganism, the act of eating discarded food and living without the use of money.  This culminates into a thriller movie that all the hippies have been waiting for, integrating an environmental conservation message into an interesting and adept thriller.  Which is something to be appreciated, to make a thriller that works for the most part and making it about something more by having a topical message behind the film.  The East starts a conversation and asks it’s fair share of question though it fails to provide compelling answers for a few of them.  Leaving the theater I found myself not thinking so much about the film, but it’s message.

The political group, The East is what you would get if you combined the online Internet hacking group Anonymous with those 1970’s hippies that drove cross-country in their Volkswagen van.  For a good chunk of the film the group of people that make up The East come off as rather cultish.  However The East separates itself from typical thriller territory again by bringing Sarah into each member’s own very personal world simultaneously connecting the viewer with the members of this anarchist group using the human element.  Each character’s backstory helps the viewer feel more connected and with each personal story The East becomes less of a scary cult and more just a group of people trying to do some good while battling their own demons.    

The movie is well shot and newcomer Batmanglij continues to pave his way as good director among the Sundance circuit.  One of my favorite moments in the film included a montage that was scored with a haunting piano soundtrack, which came from one of the characters playing piano on screen.  This film has knack for making some of it’s intense moments in the film both emotional and touching as well.   At points in the film it can become a little difficult to maintain you suspension of disbelief, but the scripts careful and personal treatment of the characters are able to pull the audience back in to the film for the most part.

 

The East is a little disjointed, but should be commended for it originality and it’s daring subject matter, which unfortunately shouldn’t be considered so daring.  It separates itself from other thrillers through it’s message and humanity.  Overall it’s a good film with some slight issues here and there, but it’s humanity, intensity and it’s ability to break new ground keep the audience engaged.

Rating: 77/100

The new season of Arrested Development and what it means for the future of Television.

(This review contains minor spoilers, a few specifics but mostly talks about the overall concepts of the new season.)

If you are like me you may have spent a good chunk of your memorial weekend binge watching the new season of Arrested Development.  I must admit when I first delved into my binge I was skeptical of the new season.  The Fourth season follows a new format with each episode revolving around one character (Micheal’s Arrested Development, Lindsey’s Arrested Development etc.); this presumably was to accommodate all of the actor’s busy schedules.  Through the first few episodes the new format left me uneasy about the new season, but as the season went on the old jokes that I loved (her?) and the shows familiar cast of characters put me at ease. This isn’t the same Arrested Development that we all remember, but after seven years off the air, a completely new storytelling format and being brought back through online streaming instead of traditional TV it would have been impossible for it to stay the same.  This time around Arrested Development is different but is still good and a worthwhile reboot of the show.

The new season’s grandest accomplishment isn’t it’s comedy, but it’s mode of storytelling as you see events from the perspectives of multiple characters, similar to Van Sant’s Elephant without all of the annoyingly long following shots.  However this does make for some confusion as to the chronology of some events and I found myself losing my bearings in a few episodes.   This leads to interesting use of suspense and surprise that adds another dimension to the comedy of the show. The comedy doesn’t quite measure up to the first few seasons, though I probably missed 100 hidden jokes throughout the season.   The show is still funny and full of laughs especially for loyal viewers of the show as some running gags from previous seasons continue into the new season; it’s just near impossible for the show to measure up to its previous three seasons.  

The new season also suffers from making this show’s dysfunctional family even more dysfunctional.  Even the characters of Michael and his son (George Michael) have become as dysfunctional as the rest of their family and have now assumed new roles as pathological liars.  At times it becomes almost annoying how incapable the members of the Bluth family are, the show in some ways has lost a little bit of it’s heart.  This mostly likely stems from the fact that due to the actor’s complex schedules we rarely get a scene where we get to see the entire Bluth family together, or more than two Bluths together in the same room for that matter.

Fans of Arrested Development will be happy to hear that the show still lays on a heavy social commentary behind all it’s comedic genius.  Heavy on the religious commentary as always, on episode in which Gob makes a joke that he thought a painting of certain famous prophet was a real person.  This along with the new season poking fun at the entertainment industry much like its predecessors helps us appreciate the sheer complexity and detail of the show. 

The entire season seems to building up to a final event or something of the sort.  However the end to the anticipation doesn’t really seem to payoff.  The season doesn’t end with a great sense of closure, which is ok since it’s clear that this most likely won’t be the last we see of the Bluths.  Netflix unfortunately has already made it clear that they won’t be bringing Arrested Development for a fifth

season. I’m confident however that if the fans and creators of the show could make a fourth season happen, making the much talked about possible Arrested Development movie shouldn’t be a problem.

So What Does This All Mean For Television?

This new season of Arrested Development is another step towards Netflix push to create original programming.  But Netflix isn’t the only subscription based online streaming company that has begun create original programming Hulu and Amazon have been doing the same as well.  Hulu (from what I can tell from Ads) has been creating many British online show and Amazon recently released the Pilot for Zombieland the series.  This all adds up to being a bad sign of things to come for traditional television programming.

The Internet’s power to provide and produce quality content online is continuing to grow, something that could lead to the death Cable, broadcast and satellite TV.  As Internet becomes more readily available to people across the country, websites that provide online streaming will become serious competition for Television.  There are majorities of people, mostly young that already watch television shows on their laptop instead of their TV’s.  A move for TV networks to release their content online along with their regular programming is a very important to help stay relevant in the digital age.  This move also make’s financial sense, Arrested Development was illegally downloaded 100,000 times, pennies compared to 1 million illegal Downloads of HBO’s Game of Thrones that occurred when the third season first premiered.  Netflix is incredibly more affordable and allows access to a larger range of content, than a costly premium cable package plan that contains HBO.

It is very possible that a few decades from now that TV in the traditional sense could be dead and instead families across America could have what functions as a giant computer monitor as the centerpiece in their living room.  A study found that eighty three percent of people under the age of 25 watch at least some of their Television show online, with a quarter of respondent saying they watch ALL their TV online.  TV is moving from cable and satellite as its medium to the Internet, for better or worse. 

The Kings of Summer

The Kings of Summer was the latest coming of age comedy to hit Sundance, where it received rave reviews.  I got someone at work to cover my shift while I went to an advanced screening movie, so I had relatively high expectations and Kings Of Summer did not disappoint.   

Kings of Summer is the story of three friends Joe, Patrick and Biaggio in search of freedom from their parents, build a house in the middle of the woods.  Joe lives with his divorced father Frank who every time Joe gets in a fight with he ends up calling the police unnecessarily to the house.  Patrick is trying to escape his overbearing parents, while Biaggio just seems to come along for the fun of it.

I’m a sucker for coming of age stories, but the pleasant surprise of this movie was the how well the comedy worked.  The perfect combination of writing and actor delivery had me laughing the entire movie.  Biaggio is one of the most interesting and effective comedic characters ever developed.  Part of this is due to the amazing performance Moises Arias who makes Biaggio’s character just creepy enough.  Even with a cast that includes Nick Offerman from Parks & Rec, Moises Arias steals the comedic thunder with a performance that will make you forget about his days as Rico on Hannah Montana.  Arias is one of the few Disney stars that has been able to make the post-Disney transition to the big screen, unlike Ashley Tisdale or Sara Paxton who can only seem to find roles in terrible parody movies.

The movie balances it’s comedy perfectly throughout, making some of the more serious scenes in the movie much more heart wrenching.   Kings of Summer taps into the very primal urge for freedom, much like the way Into the Wild did.  After all everyone has had times were the dreamed of running away from home when they were a kid.  A coming of age story is something that has been done many times before, but Kings of Summer is able to put a refreshing twist on it, mostly thanks to it incredible cast.  This coupled with impressive cinematography for an indie comedy makes Kings of Summer a complete package.  It’s worth mentioning that this was Jordan Vogt-Roberts (a fellow Michigan native) directorial debut, a strong first feature has me looking forward to what the future will bring for the young director.

The movie however does feel condensed through it’s over use of montage sequences, which deprives us from being even further embedded in the experience of the movie.  This movie would have definitely benefited from being 10-15 minutes longer by replacing the montage sequences with some more scenes of the daily life in the woods for these three friends.  However this is merely a small chink in the armor of what is an outstanding movie.   The Kings of Summer is certainly worth going to see and may be the best movie this summer that no one is talking about.

Rating: 88/100

So with the Oscar just a few hours away it's time to roll out the oscar predictions.

Oscar for Actor in a Leading Role.

Who should win: Daniel Day-Lewis, His acting in Lincoln was phenomenal and from what I here he used some pretty extreme methods in order to get in to character for the movie.

Who will win: Daniel Day-Lewis This is one of the most sure bets of the night.

Oscar for Actress in a Leading Role.

Who should win: Jessica Chastain, she made Zero Dark Thirty her movie and was a big part of what made that movie work.

Who will win: Emmanuelle Riva, I don't think the Academy will pass up a chance to be this pretentious .

Oscar for Actor in a Supporting Role.

Who should win: Christoph Waltz, His biggest competition wasn't even nominated, Waltz was awesome in Django should be an easy win.

Who will win: Christoph Waltz, the Academy loves Waltz and he put on a great performance.

Oscar for Actress in a Supporting Role.

Who should win: Helen Hunt, had a good performance, this category is one of the weaker categories of the year.

Who will win: Anne Hathaway, I'm Against Les Mis getting award recognition, but I wouldn't have any quarrels with Anne Hathaway winning.  For the little amount of time she was on-screen she stole the show, a close second in my book.

Oscar for Best Cinematography.

Who should win: Lincoln, It didn't have any beautiful visuals or amazing landscapes to really on, this movie looked beautiful even though it was a dialogue driven movie.

Who will win: Life of Pi, The Academy won't be able to resist all of the sparkly objects.

Oscar for Costume Design.

Who should win: Anna Karenina, Extravagant costumes that contributed to the great mise en scene in the movie

Who will win: Les Miserables, it's not like it has a ton of competition.  I mean Snow White and the Huntsman got nominated in this category, come on Academy get you shit together, what is this the people's choice awards?

Oscar for Best Directing.

Who should win: Lincoln, Steven Spielberg.  This category had a ridiculous amount of snubs, Spielberg wasn't the best this year, but he's the best of the nominees.

Who will win: Lincoln, Steven Spielberg.  He's got the Oscar pedigree.

Oscar for Film Editing.

Who should win: Zero Dark Thirty, the editing did a great job of adding tension and the progression of the movie was seamless.

Who will win: Argo, Eh whatever.

Best Foreign Language Film.

Who should win: No, Chile.  Honestly the only movie I've seen in this category is Amour and wasn't a fan of it.  I've seen the trailer for NO and I love the movie's premise and I'm fairly certain it's not worse then Amour.

Who will win: Amour, book it.

Oscar for Makeup and Hairstyling.

Who should win: The Hobbit an Unexpected Journey, Make-Up is great.  BUT HOW DID CLOUD ATLAS NOT GET NOMINATED?  We'll save that conversation for another day.

Who will win: Les Miserables, While accepting this award they should have to thank the mud that they made their actors role around, to make them look dirty.

Oscar for Best Original Music Score.

Who should win: John Williams, Lincoln.  You can just feel the vast amount of emotion in this score.

Who will win: Mychael Danna, The Academy will love the "bollywoodish" sounding score.

Oscar for Best Original Song.

Who should win: Skyfall, "Skyfall" by Adele.

Who will win: Skyfall, "Skyfall" by Adele.  It'll win because Adele.

Oscar for Best Production Design.

Who should win: Lincoln, It did a great job of recreating the 19th century and bring it to the screen

Who will win: Les Miserables, some of the Production Design looked a little ridiculous, let's hope it doesn't win.

Oscar Short Film - Animated

Who should win: Head over Heels, Incredibly clever and a sweet short.

Who will win: Paperman, It's incredibly endearing, plus it's disney the kings of Animation.

Oscar Short Film - Live Action

Who should win: Henry, It's a much better and psychological version of Amour.

Who will win: The Buzkashi Boys, All the shorts were really good in my opinion, I don't think I would have a problem with any of the 5 nominees winning it.

Oscar for Sound Editing

Who should win: Django Unchained, I don't think there is anyone in the industry cares and focuses on sound as much a Quentin Tarantino.

Who will win: Django Unchained, just taking a shot in the dark.  It makes sense to me, so why not the Academy too? Right?

Oscar for Sound Mixing.

Who should win: Lincoln, I don't really have a compelling argument......

Who will win: Les Miserables, ugh.

Oscar for Visual Effects.

Who should win: Life of Pi, The effects are beautiful and it would be nice to see a movie win this award without using big explosions

Who will win: Life of Pi, I could tell that the Tiger was CGI, but apparently a lot of other people couldn't....

Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay.

Who should win: Beasts of the Southern Wild, such a great and unique story, which you don't see to often.

Who will win: Argo, Oh boy another movie about how America and the CIA are awesome.

Oscar for Best Original Screenplay

Who should win: Django Unchained, there are some laughs and the dialogue seems genuine to the time period.

Who will win: Amour, there goes the Academy showing off how pretentious they can be again.


Oscar for Best Picture

Who should win: Django Unchained, stylish, witty, and tackles extremely tough subject matter.  Django is everything I want in a movie and more.

Who will win: Argo, It's been surging recently, and Affleck's fellow directors are gonna trying to stick to the academy for not giving him that director nom.  Unfortunately in the midst of all that they forget that they're supposed to pick the best movie.



* categories not mentioned Animated Feature, Documentary Feature and Documentary Short

Supporting Characters

Supporting characters is a movie about two editors and best friends as they work on editing a movie together while also trying to navigate their relationships with each other and their significant others.

The movie is well written with some very interesting scenes, however at times the movie and dialogue can feel a little dry. The story is an original tale and the movie has that charming indie sort of feel to it. After watching the movie I felt as though it was more of a buddy comedy than a romantic comedy.   The movie is a very laid back movie, which is displayed through the color scheme of the movie which was very soft and cool toned with many plain colors.

The acting is neither good or bad, a lot of the character's have an indifferent quality to them.  The biggest problem I had with the movie was at time the background noise or music was to overpowering.  It sometimes made the dialogue difficult to hear and with scenes that had music, it gave the movie a feeling of over dramatization and melo drama that detracted from the experience of the movie.  The movie at times has a very raw feeling to it, however that can be quickly disrupted through the editor's use of overly loud music during the dialogue.

The thing I enjoyed about this movie as a personal pleasure that since it was about film editors, it's a movie that's very relatable for those of us who are or aspire to be a part of the film industry.  You get see problems that a job in a film industry and the unique challenges it presents to a person and their relationships.  The state of how the film production is also a reflection of the state of each characters personal relationships.  The successes of the movie are mirrored by bliss of their personal relationships  when it seems like the movie is falling apart so are their relationships with their significant others.

This is a movie that also provides a view of what it is like work behind the scenes and an examination of the struggle that many filmmakers have of giving up some control of their project even though it may be in the best interest of the film.  The director (the character in the movie not the director of the film) believes that his vision is being tarnished and ruined by the producer an the editors of the film.  This goes to the point in which the director tries to block the film from even being made.  The struggle of the filmmaking process and the clashing of ideas, it very much accurately represents the power struggle behind the making of a film.  The film I think in the end sends an important message to aspiring filmmakers and those in the film industry, that is the idea of working as team and working together creatively.

Overall a relatively good film, that people who make movies will be able to relate to personally. Overdramatized through sound editing but has a very sincere and charming indie feel to it.

My final rating: 71/100

The Carrier a Hometown Review

I thought it might be fitting to do my first film review on the movie The Carrier. The Carrier is a horror comedy movie made back in 1988 that was almost entirely shot in my hometown of Manchester Michigan where I grew up.  Growing up I often heard it referred to as "that horrible horror movie that was made back in the 80's".  Being a film student I knew I had to see this movie, It being the only film history my hometown has really ever had.  After a brief search I was able to track down a VHS copy on eBay.

This movie is about the small town of Sleepy Rock, which has been falling to victim to attacks of a monster that the locals refer to as the "black thing". One night the main character Jake Spear is attacked by the black thing, however he fights it off, kills it and is left with only a scratch.  However Jake later discovers he is now a carrier of a dangerous disease that spreads to every inanimate object he touches. In a frenzy of fear the town of Sleepy Rock goes on a comical witch hunt to find out who among them is the carrier.

The Carrier is an original movie that delivers some great laughs. The movie is incredibly campy which is what makes some parts of this movie so funny.  The ridiculous actions of the of the townspeople is satire gold and reminds me of Monty Python on some level. However where the movie goes wrong is when it strays from the campiness that made it great and tries to be serious, especially in the beginning.  I have trouble telling if the actors are just really bad actors or just masters of satire which made it hard to tell when the comedy ends and when the seriousness begins.  This problem isn't helped much by the fact that the pacing in this movie is all over the place.  

Jake's love interest in this movie is completely unnecessary, has some terrible dialogue, never does anything that makes sense and is probably the worst actor in the movie. This movie had spectacular potential which ended up being somewhat squandered.  Also the outro to this movie is absolutely terrible

The costumes in this movie crack me up, they're just hilarious feats of satire.  However the downfall of this is I can't keep straight who is who and what characters are important.  Besides three of the central characters it's really hard to follow the story of any of the other characters, but then again I don't think you're really supposed to be able too.  The one big plot hole I just couldn't get myself to ignore was the fact that it was the 1980's and people running were around with axes and pitchfork as weapon's.  None of the character's end up breaking out a gun until then end, I was sitting there thinking to myself; well where the fuck was that the entire time?

In early parts of the movie there are some great use of foreshadowing through imagery.  However the director seems to make it his goal to name drop the title of the movie whenever he can.  With Jake at one point even complaining about all the things he's had to "carry" throughout his life.  But the most surprising part of watching this movie to me was the social commentary.  This movie was made in the late 1980's right around the same time people started freaking out about AIDS.  It's very easy to see how the disease of Jake Spear's character was very much a commentary on the fear and frenzy surrounding AIDS during this time in our history. There is also a noticeable commentary on religion in this movie while not as strong as the AIDS commentary it is still ever present.  The second to last scene in this movie in fact without giving to much away about the movie, depicts an upside down cross, a symbol of the anti-christ.  Not only that this movie bits science against religion through the two opposing viewpoints of how to deal with the disease between the preacher and the doctor

So in conclusion this is a campy movie with great entertainment value that has problems when it tries to take itself seriously and the bad acting doesn't do it any favors. However the comedy is done so well at times you almost forgive the plot holes and unnecessary bits of this movie...... almost.

My final rating: 58/100