The Hunger Games

               As I've touched on before in this blog, adapting a book into a movie can be quite difficult. From dealing with scenes that have trouble translating to something visual, to the always painful task of cutting detail in order to create a running time suitable for the story and the audience. Then there's always the challenge of having to do this process with a hugely popular best-seller not only in America, but around the world. This can make any fan nervous as we've seen the good and the bad come from this challenge. From the model franchise of Harry Potter to the not so good Twilight series (yes, I know it's made a fortune and I haven't read the books, but I saw the first one and it was terrible, but feel free to disagree),  the question is whether The Hunger Games was able to live up to its fans expectations.
              Though it has already claimed the top spot at the box-office in its first two weekends, are audience getting what they hoped for when forking over $11 a ticket?  In my opinion they are. Writer/Director Gary Ross (Seabiscuit, Pleasantville) has condensed the story into a very well managed 2 hours and 20 minutes. As with any such story details had to be cut, but it includes all of the important aspects of this story as well as what is needed to continue on to the next story in the trilogy. A huge key in this success is the fact author Suzanne Collins is one of the trio, along with Ross, in adapting the screenplay. There's no doubt having her involved so closely in the adaptation process is what helped keep all the major events that happen in the book, to happen exactly the same way in the movie. Another applauding fact to this script is the way they dealt with the book's first person narrative. Due to this there's a lot of information told to a reader that needs to be shown to a viewer. To solve this the writers used many different ways to portray such info to the audience, from plainly showing a narrative text on the screen to coming up with a whole new scene in general, such as the one when the Tracker Jackers are explained.
              For those who are now lost by the lingo just used and are new to the story, The Hunger Games is set in the futuristic ruins of North America, in the country of Panem. The evil Capitol requires each of its 12 impoverished districts to every year volunteer a boy and a girl between the ages of 12 and 18, chosen via a draft, to fight to the death in an arena (and you thought the US was in rough shape). The story follows Katniss Everdeen, played by Jennifer Lawrence (Winter's Bone, X-Men: First Class), of District 12 who volunteers to fight to save her sister. She is sent along with fellow District 12 tribute Peeta Mellark, played by Josh Hutcherson (The Kids Are All Right). He is a non-threatening looking, but surprisingly strong individual who is yet insecure and has a much bigger role then he could ever imagine. From here the plot line travels parallel to that of the book's, as Katniss must find a way to survive in and out of the games in an ever changing landscape while somehow protecting all of those around her with whom she loves and cares for.
            As for the casting of this movie, which is quite important in highly popular adaptations, I believe the casting people hit their mark with most of the characters. Lawrence is perfect in portraying Katniss as the very self-reliant, reserved, person that she is. Some may not be happy with the choice of Hutcherson as Peeta, but when it comes down to it he's a good fit as he portrays the main important qualities Peeta is supposed to have. Those being his sincerity, loyalty, kindness and sensitivity. He may not be that heart throb some people want, but he's not supposed to be. That's more reserved for Gale (Liam Hemsworth), Katniss' best friend, who from the brief exposure seems to be a good fit.
         The best job casting wise has to go to Haymithch Abernathy, the drunken sad-sack mentor to Katniss and Peeta, who is played by Woody Harrelson (Friends With Benefits). Just think of his character in Zombieland and translate it to this film. It's perfect. Other notables are Stanley Tucci (Easy A) as Caeasar Flickerman, Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket, who's hard to even recognize under her Capitol wardrobe, Donald Sutherland as President Snow, and Lenny Kravitz as Katniss' stylist Cinna.
          Overall, I give this movie a thumbs up and 3 1/2 out of 4 stars. For me this movie was pretty much everything I could have hoped it would be when seeing it on the big screen. It's unrealistic to expect it to be exactly like the book. All you can hope for is it's the best version possible when going by the constraints of a movie and this is pretty darn close. What's even better is if you haven't read the book you'll still enjoy this movie. It's that good of a story on its own. However, if you haven't read it there's a good chance the movie will make you want to read it, and that to me is what makes a good adaptation. Just ask Harry Potter. Enjoy!

Editor's Note: Due to my long absence and the fact I have watched a handful of movies in that time I'm not sure which movie I'll review next. As always if I see one in theaters, like The Hunger Games, it gets priority. Otherwise, it could be Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo or a couple others so stay tuned to see what's next!
 

The Tree of Life

             There's a strong possibility this will be the shortest review I have done to date. Why you may ask? Well it's hard to talk about, none the less review something when you don't know what it's about or what happened. That's precisely the predicament we have with this film.
              To begin with there is a lot more wrong with this movie than there is right, and there's not much right with this movie. I wasn't sure what was even happening in this movie until about 30 minutes in. At one point there's a period of about ten minutes where you don't even see an actor and you hear one whispered line that I didn't even understand. This time period is just filled with images of space and nature like you see in the poster above. Then at one point dinosaurs pop in there too! I was so lost and frustrated at this point that I almost turned it off. But instead, I forced myself to watch this film in its entirety. I wish I hadn't. Once this ended it was still hard to follow and to figure out what the heck was going on.
             What this film is about is the eldest of three sons of a 1950s family in Texas and his troubled relationship with his father. That's brief, but it is about as detailed as I can get. The son, Jack, is played by newcomer Hunter McCracken as a boy and by Sean Penn as an adult. Though Penn is barely in this movie. He's in about 20 minutes total, 10 in the beginning and 10 in the end and I'm not even sure he ever says a complete sentence. The mother, Mrs. O'Brien is played by Jessica Chastain (The Help) while the father, Mr. O'Brien is played by Brad Pitt (Moneyball).
             Another trouble with this movie and why it is so hard to follow is because it's all just a bunch of brief sequences and not scenes. It's like the entire movie is a dream scene or a bunch of flashbacks where only a couple of lines are said and then it moves on. Basically there's no flow between scenes and everyone seems to stand on their own, thus making it very hard to follow. Plus, to cap all of this off, the film runs at a length of 2 hours and 20 min. I felt like this movie was never going to end. However, this movie could have only been an hour and a half and I still know I'd be saying all of this negative stuff.
            Overall, this movie is confusing, strange, weird, long, and just plain terrible. Writer/director Terrence Malick is supposed to be a genius, but I just don't see it. At least not in this film. How it was ever nominated for Best Picture and Best Director at this year's Oscars I'll never know.
             I give this movie 0, that's right 0 out of 4 stars and a big thumbs down. It gets a 0 for all of the reasons I said above and the fact I wish I had never watched it, and that no one else should waste their time because they'll never get it back. This movie is out on DVD and Blu-Ray, but please don't buy and don't see it. Learn from me and save yourselves. Worst movie ever! Don't enjoy!

Editor's Note:  The next movie I will be reviewing will be the Best Picture nominee The Help starring Emma Stone, Octavia Spencer, Viola Davis, Jessica Chastain, Bryce-Dallas Howard, and Sissy Spacek.

War Horse

         Up for review today is another one of this year's 9 Best Picture nominees. As like many of the other nominees, I don't think it should have been in contention for the Oscar's highest honor. In all opinion this year was a bit of a dud. Thus because of that is why I believe 9 films still made the contention. The fact that only a couple of films really stood out to people caused all the voters to vote for many films to be in contention. That's my theory anyway, but let's move on to the actual review shall we.
        Well what is there too say about War Horse. It's a WWI set drama and directed by Steven Spielberg. So far, so good right? Well unfortunately it doesn't get much better from here. But let me say, the movie is not bad. It's just not great. When it comes right down to it all you have is a movie about a horse. A miraculous horse, yes, but a miraculous one that isn't real and is the main character of the movie. Thus in lies the biggest problem.
         In other movies about a horse, though the horse is the main center point of the plot of the movie it isn't your lead character. Look at Seabiscuit and Secretariat. First off, both are about true horses with amazing stories. That helps in itself. Secondly, though the story of the horse is what we're watching, there are main characters along side that help the story move forward and progress. In Seabiscuit you have Tobey Maguire and Jeff Bridge's characters and in Secretariat there's Diane Lane who carries the show. But in War Horse, there's just a bunch of supporting characters to the horse that filter in and out of the movie before you can even really form an opinion of them.
         War Horse at its core is a story of friendship between a horse named Joey and his owner Albert (Jeremy Irvine). Albert is the son of a Scottish farmer who buys Joey at an auction. Albert becomes responsible for training Joey and in turn their deep friendship begins. When the war begins, despite Albert's pleas Joey is sold to the British cavalry. From here we watch as Joey goes and makes his way through the war facing many different challenges along the way in an effort to hopefully be reunited with Albert once its over.
          Sadly, this bond of friendship is the driving force behind this movie and it just isn't strong enough. There are some good things though as there's a reason it was nominated for 6 Oscars. However, these are mainly on the technical side. The cinematography is very good as the shots of the vast Scottish landscape and others throughout Europe are quite vivid and beautiful. Plus, John Williams score is quite good as well. As for acting, I think the best job goes to David Thewlis (Lupin in the Harry Potter series) who plays the villainous landlord of Albert's family's farm.
         In the end though, there's just not enough good to make up for the bad or just average. The movie runs at 146 minutes which is far too long. If this had been cut down to a solid two hours it could have potentially helped itself immensely. However, all we're left with is an overly long war story about a horse. At least with Seabiscuit and Secretariat you had the excitement of races to drive the viewers interest. This one doesn't and like I said it just becomes a movie about a horse. Big whoop.
         Overall, I give this movie a thumbs down and 2 out of 4 stars. I'm bumping it up from 1.5 strictly for its technical achievements.  But the story in itself combined with running time only gather a 1.5 for me. This movie may still be able to be found at a random theater here and there, but otherwise you can get it on DVD and Blu-Ray beginning April 3rd. Enjoy!

Editor's Note:  My next film will be the 2012 Best Picture nominee The Tree of Life starring Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain, and Sean Penn.

2012 Oscar Winners!

Well the 84th Annual Academy Awards aired last night. It was a great show. Billy Crystal hosted for the 9th time and was great as usual. Not really any true surprises winner wise from the show, but none the less still entertaining. Here are the winners in the order they were announced last night.

Best Cinematography: Robert Richardson, "Hugo"

Best Art Direction: Dante Ferretti and Francesca Lo Schavo, "Hugo"

Best Costume Design: Mark Bridges, "The Artist"

Best Makeup: Mark Coulier and J. Roy Helland, "The Iron Lady"

Best Foreign Language Film: "A Separation"

Best Supporting Actress: Octavia Spencer, "The Help"

Best Editing: Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall, "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo"

Best Sound Editing: Phillip Stockton and Eugene Gearty, "Hugo"

Best Sound Mixing: Tom Fleischman and John Midgley, "Hugo"

Best Documentary: "Undefeated"

Best Animated Feature: "Rango"

Best Visual Effects: "Hugo"

Best Supporting Actor: Christopher Plummer, "Beginners"

Best Original Score: Ludovic Bource, "The Artist"

Best Original Song: Bret McKenzie, "Man or Muppet"

Best Adapted Screenplay: Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon and Jim Rash, "The Descendants"

Best Original Screenplay: Woody Allen, "Midnight in Paris"

Best Live Action Short: "The Shore"

Best Documentary Short: "Saving Face"

Best Animated Short: "The Fantastic Flying Books Of Mr. Morris Lessmore"

Best Director: Michel Hazanavicius, "The Artist"

Best Actor: Jean Dujardin, "The Artist"

Best Actress: Meryl Streep, "The Iron Lady"

Best Picture: "The Artist"

As you can see The Artist was the big winner, taking most of the major awards. My predictions of the major awards didn't go so well as I only went 2/6, but hey you can't win them all. I guess if I had been able to see The Artist in time for last night's show I may have been able to make more accurate predictions. Thus the importance of seeing all best picture nominees. Oh well. Here's the best video I could find showing Crystal's opening monologue skit from the show. It's hilarious, but the volume is a little low in the video so you'll probably need to turn it up a bit.

Oscar Predictions!

I know the Oscars are ongoing right now, but that's okay because my predictions are for awards that don't happen until the end of the show. So I only was able to watch 6 of the 9 Best Picture nominees this year, but whatever I can still make guesses. Plus, by the way the best picture category is quite sub par this year. The films are good, but nothing blows you away like The King's Speech did last year. Anyways, to the predictions.

Best Picture: The Descendants
Best Actor: George Clooney - The Descendants
Best Actress: Viola Davis - The Help
Best Director: Alexander Payne - The Descendants
Best Original Screenplay: Woody Allen - Midnight in Paris
Best Adapted Screenplay: Alexander Payne, Jim Rash, and Nat Faxon - The Descendants

The Descendants will be the big winner obviously if I end up being correct. Remember, these are who I think will win, not necessarily who I want to win. Let's hope I'm right! Enjoy the show!

UPDATE: So I went 2 for 2 on the screenplay awards, but unfortunately missed all of the others. I really wanted Viola Davis to win and thought she should've, though I'm sure Meryl Streep, who did win, did a great job in The Iron Lady. As for the other awards they all went to The Artist. I will be posting a full work up of the winners shortly!

The Descendants

                Whether you've seen the trailer to The Descendants already or not, on the surface it looks like a good movie. It's set in Hawaii, directed and co-written by already two time (and now three) Oscar nominee Alexander Payne and stars George Clooney. Sounds like a good recipe for success, and I'm glad to say the recipe works. Though like many real recipes it could have used a little tweaking here and there to just be that little bit better. Okay, don't worry I'm done with the recipe analogy.
                The Descendents is just like Alexander Payne's other works (Sideways, About Schmidt) in that it's a dramedy. In case some readers out there aren't familiar with that term that's a dramatic comedy.  Though set in Hawaii, where many like to think of as paradise, is far from that for Matt King (Clooney). King is a real estate lawyer and the sole trustee of a family trust that controls 25,000 acres of land on Kauai and is set to expire in 7 years. Him and his many relatives, who are descended from some of the first white settlers of Hawaii, as well as Hawaiian royalty, must make a huge decision on whether to sell the land or not and if so, then who to as it could have a huge impact on many fronts.
              As if this were not enough for King to be going through, his wife is in a coma after a boating accident. Now he must figure out how to deal with an ailing wife and 10 and 17-year-old daughters. This proves to be even more difficult as he is in his own words "the back-up parent." Think his plate can't get any fuller? Well it can, as he learns that his wife had been cheating on him. From here King goes on a journey to find out who his wife's love was, while along the way trying to connect with his children along the way.
              As with many good movies, it all begins with the story. This one is no original as it is based off of the novel of the same name by Kaui Hart Hemmings. However, though I haven't read the book, from my point of view Payne and his two fellow co-writers have done a great job at adapting it. I'm not the only one as the Academy has nominated the three men for a Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar. Payne is also recognized with an Oscar nomination for his work behind the camera and he rightfully should be. He creates some incredible and beautiful shots of the landscape in Hawaii, but more importantly throughout the movie he is able to shoot and portray the many different emotions and reactions the characters have to their circumstances. Some of these scenes come through with such honesty that it allows the viewer to connect and relate with the characters and what they're going through.
            Now in front of the camera the real applause must go to George Clooney. As many other critics have praised I believe this to be one of Clooney's best performances. Overall, it's a character I find it must be difficult to play with all that's going on in his life. Yet, Clooney seems to be on point as his portrayal of King throughout is one that is real and for lack of a better term, just seems to make sense with everything he does. Having already taken home a Golden Globe for his performance, I think he has a good shot of walking away with the Oscar for Best Actor. With that I don't want to shy away from the great performance by Shailene Woodley (The O.C.) who plays Alexandra King, Matt's eldest daughter. She is great as a troubled older teen trying to make sense of all that is happening in her life. It makes sense she was rewarded with a Golden Globe nomination and that there was some talk of a possible Oscar nomination for her performance.
           Overall, I thought this a creative story with many different pieces to it that bring in many different human elements. It's entertaining to watch it unwind and see the different characters deal with these elements in real ways. The setting of Hawaii is an added bonus as it creates some great backgrounds and scenery. Though I did like the movie, I was not fully taken with it as many other critics were. Though it dives right into it's plot lines, I felt like it was still a bit slow to taking off per say and really grabbing me. It was also a bit heavier than I expected going in, and thought there would be just a bit more laughs than there ended up being. With that said it is still deserving of the 5 Oscar nominations it has received, including Best Picture.
           I give this movie 3 out of 4 stars and a thumbs up. This movie is still in theaters now, though unless you want to go see it before the Oscars it is not one I say must be seen in theaters. If you're willing to wait for it on DVD then I don't see the harm. Enjoy!

Editor's Note:  My next review will be on the Best Picture nominated film War Horse directed by Steven Spielberg. Also here is a pictures of the land they use as the land King owns on Kauai. In the movie King and his family stand just feet from where I took these pictures. It is real privately owned land on Kauai that you can get to on a ATV tour on a private ranch. I highly recommend doing so if you ever visit.

Midnight In Paris

              Nostalgia. It's quite something when you think about it. How something, such as a memory, object, or even a perception of something from the past can make you miss and want that time to happen again so badly. Think of a happy moment in your own life about anything at all. Does it make you happy? Do you wish you could perhaps live that moment again to feel that original happiness the moment brought you? If you could, would you? In Midnight In Paris, a man is given the opportunity to do just that as the undeniable yearning for the past we all get now and then over whatever it may be is the film's major theme.
              Midnight In Paris centers around Gil, played by Owen Wilson (How Do You Know?). Gil is a successful screenwriter, who is at a bit of a mid-life crisis as he tries to transition from screenwriting to novel writing. Or as he puts it, write something of actual artistic value. He is enamored with the era of the 1920s and the artists from it, such as F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, and Gertrude Stein.
             The film begins with Gil and his fiancee Inez, played by Rachel McAdams, vacationing in Paris with her wealthy, conservative parents. While there they run into Inez's friend Paul (Michael Sheen of Frost/Nixon) and his wife. They spend some time together and while Inez adores him, Gil can't stand another minute of his company (Who can blame him? Paul is a pseudo-intellectual. Barf). To break off from their new found friends Gil decides to walk home one night. As he wanders the streets of Paris an old car drives up next to him at midnight and the people in it, all dressed in '20s clothing, invite to come along. Gil accepts and they go to a bar where it doesn't take long for him to notice that he has all of a sudden traveled back to the '20s. He is surrounded by the people and artist's he idolizes. From here Gil is off on a search of self discovery as he continues to visit the past and write his book.
             This movie has the potential to really connect to certain viewers, while perhaps shunning others. Fans of history (such as myself), or perhaps old writers and artists like Gil, will surely be intrigued and delighted by the constant cameos and drop ins of all the old well known artists that appear throughout the movie. I, myself highly enjoyed it, though I must admit I didn't know of everyone that popped up. Though I was constantly Googling names to learn about who I didn't know and I think that's another great affect this movie can have. You may not know all of the historical figures, but if you're interested than I can safely bet you'll probably be trying learn who they are.
            A huge piece to making this movie good goes to the acting of Owen Wilson. His enthusiasm and sincerity he brings to Gil's character is perfect in reflecting how excited he is to meet the people he idolizes, while also how confusing and complicating it's making the rest of his life. His Golden Globe nomination was well deserved, and in perhaps a lighter year with not so many strong candidates he could have scored an Oscar nod as well. But, if he had I don't think many critics would be saying anything against it.
            Rachel McAdams as always is charming and delightful in playing Inez, who though loves Gil, is just not on the same page with him in much of anything. Marion Cotillard (Inception) is wonderful as Adriana, a mistress of Picasso who begins to fall for Gil. Sheen is also perfect as Paul, who is just a tool. Though brief, the cameo roles are great as we get to see Kathy Bates (Revolutionary Road) play Gertrude Stein, and Adrien Brody as Salvador Dali, both of which just seem to fit perfectly.
            This review cannot be complete without mentioning Woody Allen. The great writer/director has done it again with this movie. The story idea is very fresh and original, not to mention well written and funny. Being shot on location in Paris makes it that much better as it really helps the audience get in with the feel of the city and connect with the characters more. It's no surprise this movie is up for 4 Oscars, including Best Original Screenplay and Best Director for Allen, as well as the biggie, Best Picture.
            Overall, I have to give this movie 3.5 out of 4 stars and a thumbs up. I believe it is a story many can enjoy, but can see others not connecting with it and thus not enjoying it as much. However, I recommend you all see it first before you judge. This movie is out on DVD and Blu-Ray now and is also available at your local Redbox. Enjoy!

Editor's Note:  My next movie will be on the Best Picture nominee The Descendants starring George Clooney and directed by Alexander Payne.