Godzilla (2014)

Godzilla is a film I very much enjoyed in the same way that I did Pacific Rim last year. It is polarizing and flawed, but the film is best enjoyed by immersing yourself in the two hour ride and letting the experience take you over. Don’t think too much about the ride when it’s done because you will be able to pick it apart and the whole thing will come tumbling down.

Let’s start with things I liked because the flawed elements of the film are numerous and I want to emphasize that I did, in fact, enjoy this movie. The cinematography and shot compositions are top notch. Director Gareth Edwards frames the monsters in amazing ways that conceal as much as they reveal which lets the audience’s imagination fill in the blanks. He also shoots everything from the perspective of the human characters enabling the scope and size of the monsters to be more fully realized. There are no Michael Bay-esque omniscient cameras floating around the sky. This grounding of the camera lends itself to our perspective and gives the creatures a size and weight that is usually missing from big budget blockbusters. Perhaps Edwards’ most interesting achievement is the way he makes Godzilla a CGI spectacle that still moves like a guy in a rubber suit. Everything about the monsters works on every level with a couple of fantastic battles in the third act that are completely satisfying.

Godzilla also serves as Gareth Edwards’ loving homage to Spielberg. That influence is felt throughout is ways both big, small, and on the nose. For example, the main character’s name is Ford Brody. Edwards also cribs Spielberg’s tendency to very slowly reveal the elements that are larger than life. Edwards himself stated in an interview that Jaws was a huge inspiration for this film and it is evident throughout. Edwards tries to evoke the same awe and wonder that Spielberg mined so well in films like Jaws and Jurassic Park. The reason Godzilla doesn’t live up to those films is that it lacks the human and emotional elements that Spielberg has mastered.

The humans are truly the worst aspect of Godzilla. They are terrible. It is terrible acting with a terrible script. Aaron Taylor-Johnson, in particular, gives one of the most bland, uninterested, and devoid of emotion performances ever put to film. With a rich cast that also includes, Bryan Cranston, Juliette Binoche, Ken Watanabe, Elizabeth Olsen, Sally Hawkins, and David Strathairn it is amazing how much talent Godzilla wastes in its actors. Each actor is allowed to bring one dimension to the table and that’s it. Elizabeth Olsen plays crying wife. David Strathairn plays straight-laced Naval officer. Etc. Bryan Cranston is the only one who makes a go of it and even that is ultimately wasted due to the script. The human element is far and away the worst aspect of the film. However, in a movie called Godzilla I wonder how much leniency can be given to a film that gets the humans so wrong but gets Godzilla so right.

I would also like to make particular mention of the atrocious and mind-bogglingly bad editing in this film. It is easily one of the worst edited films I’ve seen this year. There is a scene near the beginning where three characters are running away from something and they are in different positions depending on whether they are being shown from the front or behind. From the front, the female character is in the lead, and when they are shown from behind she is shown to be tailing the other two men. There are scenes that end before reaching their climax. There are scenes that end before the action is done. It is just so sloppy as to be appalling at some points.

All of this being said, I enjoyed Godzilla. I was willing to overlook the bad parts in order to enjoy the good. For me at least, a half hour of bad human characters talking nonsense was erased by the breathtaking halo jump sequence. The last half hour of the film features almost zero dialogue and it is little wonder why it is the most successful portion of the movie. This film also features some amazing sound design. From the creature roars to silence this film utilizes sound in a wonderful way that enhances the visuals. Gareth Edwards has a keen sense for visual composition but clearly needs to brush up on storytelling logic and human emotion. This is a monster movie that takes its time getting there, which can be frustrating, but the last portion of the film is exquisitely done. Godzilla is going to be polarizing in exactly the same way Pacific Rim and Cloverfield were. I enjoyed both of those films as I did this one. My enjoyment, and ultimately my grade, is based on my recognition that these films are bad, but I enjoyed them nonetheless. Grade: B

X-Men: Days of Future Past

X-Men: Days of Future Past is a reminder that with the right passion and in the right hands a comic book movie can still be thrilling and wonderful. This film is an all-out spectacle with visual panache and competent storytelling. It manages to weave in elements from the four previous X-Men films without being overbearing, hokey, or cluttered all while telling a unique story that makes sense within the context of the universe. It is a glorious return to the characters for Bryan Singer and fans of superhero movies should embrace this reunion with open arms.

The story is set in the future where mutants and humanity have both been ravaged in a war with robots known as sentinels. In a desperate last ditch effort, a group of mutants including Professor X, Kitty Pryde, Iceman, Wolverine, and Magneto attempt to send Wolverine’s consciousness back in time so that they can prevent the sentinels from ever being built. This allows Wolverine to seek out the younger versions of characters as they were portrayed in X-Men: First Class. To say much more would be spoiling some of the fun so I will let it be.

There will undoubtedly be backlash over some aspect of the time-travel plot. There always is. For me, in a universe where people can control metal and turn into blue hairy beasts I was able to let the time travel elements fly through with no objection. Suspension of disbelief is required for just about everything involved in an X-Men movie so I don’t understand why time-travel logistics would be a point of dissent. Bryan Singer handled the time travel as well as can be expected and it never seemed to defy its own internal logic so I never had a problem with it.

X-Men: Days of Future Past manages to bring back nearly every actor to appear in an X-Men film, but the focus is clearly on five main characters and an antagonist. Wolverine, played for the 642nd time by Hugh Jackman. Professor X, mainly the James McAvoy version. Magneto, again the younger version played by Michael Fassbender. Mystique, played by America’s darling Jennifer Lawrence. The young Beast as portrayed by Nicholas Hoult. Finally we get to the antagonist- Bolivar Trask, played by Peter Dinklage. Trask sees mutants as a threat to humanity and develops the sentinels as a protective measure. Part of the brilliance of this film is that there is no mustache-twirling evil plot. Everyone is at odds with everyone else, but solely due to their beliefs. Everyone acts in accordance with their character. It is a masterful juggling act by Singer and screenwriter Simon Kinberg to keep everyone involved in meaningful and realistic ways without resorting to contrivance and convenience.

Especially against the backdrop of the recent deluge of lackluster comic book movies X-Men Days of Future Past stands as a vibrant epic as well as an effective emotional drama. Man of Steel managed to deliver some minor thrills during its superhero moments, but fell flat on its face during character moments. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 had a wonderful love story that was routinely sidetracked by uninspired superhero moments. This new X-Men film marries both beautifully. We are invested in the drama of the characters which makes the superhero action bonanza scenes more thrilling. It is invigorating to get a comic book movie that lets the drama play out in ways that make sense to the characters and not just as an excuse to show things blowing up.

I have an up and down relationship with the X-Men movies. I was lukewarm on the first film, but X2 is wonderful. X3 had moments that were ok but otherwise it was a pretty mediocre film. Wolverine: Origins may be one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen and the sequel didn’t fare a whole lot better with me. I did, however, quite enjoy X-Men: First Class, but it seemed like an offshoot more than an official entry in the series. I had major concerns heading into Days of Future Past seeing that I only really enjoyed 2 of the 6 films. The fact that it rivals X2 as the best in the series speaks volumes about how well made this film is.

I will finish this off with one criticism and one praise. The only true flaw I felt throughout the movie is that every character speaks either in speeches or exposition. There is very little banter or small talk. Every line is laced with meaning. It is a credit to the script and the actors that the lines don’t come off as forced. My praise is for every moment that Quicksilver is on screen. Quicksilver is a minor character in terms of the plot, but he has one magnificent scene that is breathtaking, original, funny, and majestic. Quicksilver’s one scene is worth the ticket price alone and is very reminiscent of the Nightcrawler opening scene from X2. I truly hope the future X-Men films find a way to utilize more of Quicksilver.
Just at a point when I was starting to tire of the endless superhero cacophony here comes Bryan Singer’s X-Men. It is a fun film with something to say and I hope that other studios take notice so that maybe we can get a bit more films like this and a bit less like Man of Steel. Grade: A-

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

I must admit that I had low expectations for The Amazing Spider-Man 2. I tire quickly of the comic book movie tropes and formulaic approach. So imagine my surprise as I watched the film soar past my expectations, come near greatness, and then fall back into a middling mess at the end. There is too much stuff going on in Spider-Man 2 for it to really achieve greatness. It wants to have Marvel studios style levels of universe continuity, which is a shame because if they had cut out the nonsense and streamlined the plot this could have been a masterpiece.

Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone reprise their roles as Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy respectively. Their relationship forms the crux of the film and it’s at its best when the plot stays focused on Peter trying to balance his responsibilities as Spider-Man, his love of Gwen, and his fear and guilt of endangering his loved ones. The film also introduces Jamie Foxx as a nobody turned Electro, and Dane DeHaan as Harry Osborn. There are plot threads all over the place and that is what ultimately holds the movie back. Peter is dealing with his relationship and feelings for Gwen, while he’s also trying to uncover the mystery of the disappearance of his parents, intercut with him doing his typical superhero stuff. Jamie Foxx’s Max Dillon is a hapless electrical engineer who suffers a terrible accident and must acquaint himself with a very different mindset. All of this happens while Harry Osborn returns from boarding school as his father passes away and he is handed the reins of Oscorp while he is simultaneously trying to find a cure for the disease that has been passed down his family line. That’s an awful lot of plot for one film and even the two and a half hour running time isn’t enough to let each of those stories breathe on their own.

The most fleshed out storyline, and not coincidentally the most effective, is Peter Parker trying to deal with the implications of his superhero life on his personal life. Hidden in The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is a wonderful romantic love story about a guy who just happens to have superpowers. It is heartfelt and realistic and you can feel director Marc Webb’s sensibilities most often in these scenes. I was completely engaged in this storyline and the film suffers when it strays from it. I feel that this is partly because the villains seem tacked on. We have no investment in those characters and there isn’t enough time to give their backstories any weight. Too often when the film switches away from Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy the emphasis is on world building for sequels and spin-offs. It feels cheap and fake and detracts from the good thing they had going.

What infuriates me about this film is how utterly useless and contrived the additional plot elements are. It infuriates me because I really enjoyed vast portions of this film. With a little tinkering this whole film could have been streamlined into something wonderful. The 10 minutes fight sequence on a plane should have been cut completely due to it being totally unnecessary and the way it’s shot makes it incomprehensible to watch. The last ten minutes are virtually a trailer for The Amazing Spider-Man 3 and have no bearing on the plot whatsoever, and I think it’s those last ten minutes that really really drove me crazy. There is a logical endpoint to this film that carries emotional resonance and brings the story to a satisfying conclusion. Instead of ending the film there we are given ten minutes of marketing material. Ending the film in that way tainted my whole experience and is still irksome to me long after seeing it.

There are a few technical issues I had with the film as well, but they seem like minor inconveniences when presented next to the story problems. There is some truly awful editing in this film and at times is actually appalling. The CGI does a pretty respectable job of envisioning the web slinging scenes through New York, but the battle sequences get a bit muddled. There are many scenes, especially in the Spider-Man/Electro battle, that look like they were stolen straight from a video game. There are no realistic elements and the fakeness is glaringly obvious. I found much of the sound design to be muddled as well, but that could easily be chalked up to personal taste. The technique of the film is not the problem and this is certainly the best looking Spider-Man movie we’ve had yet.

I thought I would hate this film, I wanted to love it, and I ended up just liking it. With some editing this could be one of my favorite superhero movies of all time. Instead I thought it was decent enough that I would recommend people see it in the theater, but not the great movie that it so easily could have been. There was far too much wasted potential and clear studio interference to elevate it as one of the greats. Sad, because it was so close. I think the best option for audiences is to walk out of the theater about five minutes or so before it ends and you will have seen a much better film. Grade: B

Transcendence

Johnny Depp has become something of an enigma. Depp excels at playing wildly over the top characters with very little grasp of what anyone would consider reality. In Transcendence however, Depp makes a completely different choice. Unfortunately, that choice is to sleepwalk through a performance. His character is completely muted with a monotone speech pattern that never displays any hint of emotion. It mirrors the entire film in many ways. This is a one-note, one-theme movie that never stretches out to reach its potential and becomes a logistical nightmare by the end.

Depp plays Will Caster, a brilliant doctor in the field of artificial intelligence. A terrorist organization attempts to assassinate him, but instead of outright killing him they give him radiation poisoning. He is given a month to live and in that time Caster’s wife (also a brilliant scientist) decides to try and upload his consciousness into a computer. Whether or not they are successful is a question that the film tries to answer.

In some ways Transcendence is akin to the Spike Jonze film Her from last year. It is science fiction, but delves into topics that are not far off from our own reality. Our technology is expanding at an exponential pace and these films deal with what will happen when that technology begins to intersect with humanity. What does it mean to be human? Can a computer understand human emotion? Is artificial intelligence the next logical step in human evolution? Transcendence broaches these topics but never weaves them into its reality in the way Her did. I will give credit to the film makers for attempting to deal with some thought provoking issues, but the film is a mess and never feels like it actually has something to say.

This is the first directorial feature for longtime Christopher Nolan cinematographer Wally Pfister. I believe that Pfister would have been much better served by starting on a smaller film and getting his bearings before tackling a hundred million dollar film with a star studded cast. This has all the trappings of a first time director: shots that look very nice but don’t mean anything to the story and are flourishes with no point, camera angles that feel just a tad off, a complete set piece to set piece story with scenes that feel separate from the whole. The last of those is something that Pfister’s mentor Nolan is still guilty of so the carry-over there is understandable. There are just too many little problems for the film to add up to anything great.

This is also the first screenwriting feature for Jack Paglan. Again there are numerous problems that more established screenwriters would have found ways around. The Cillian Murphy character is completely pointless and from a logic standpoint shouldn’t even be in the film. The Morgan Freeman character is inconsequential. The terrorist organization is never fully fleshed out so their agenda seems vague at best. Caster’s wife, played by Rebecca Hall, is forced to change emotions and motivations on a dime depending on what the script is requiring of her in that scene. The script is a draft or two away from being something poignant, but as is is messy and needs some polish. Transcendence feels like a film that either needs to be longer or shorter. It introduces too many characters and plot threads for the film to deal with in the running time. It should be either significantly longer to give the film time to run with its ideas, or stripped down to eliminate the side characters that are unnecessary in the final version.

It is sad that a film that discusses the logic of computers being able to understand and mimic human emotion falls victim to logic problems throughout. For instance, a terrorist group that wants to rid the world of dangerous technology uses every technological weapon at their disposal. Or the fact that someone was able to build a gigantic underground secret lab with the most high powered computers in existence over the span of two years and no one noticed. It is these kinds of problems that hold the movie back. Transcendence has ambitious ideas that are completely let down by the filmmakers’ lack of experience. In more capable hands this could have been something special, but what we received was mediocre at best. Grade: C-

The Raid 2: Berandal

The Raid: Redemption was a breathtaking surprise out of Indonesia in 2011. It was a no-frills, all out action fest with some of the most incredible hand-to-hand and martial arts scenes ever filmed. Writer/Director Gareth Evans crafted a very tight 90 minute one location action movie that put aside any real character development or unnecessary plot in favor of a cacophony of brutality. Now in 2014 we are given a sequel that picks up mere hours after the first ended. However, where the first film reveled in its stripped down approach The Raid 2 favors a far grander scope. Gareth Evans gives us his version of The Godfather and Goodfellas mixed with Infernal Affairs (or the American remake The Departed if you’re so inclined.) This is an ambitious film and it is a wonder to behold. The only caveat is the penchant for ridiculous violence that is all over the film.

The Raid 2: Berandal follows the Iko Uwais character Rama from the first film. He is a police officer that is desperately trying to stop the corruption that is plaguing the police force and government. He is enlisted to go undercover and infiltrate the Bangun crime family by getting thrown in jail so he can befriend Bangun’s son Uco. After his release he worms his way into the family and must remain ever vigilant as Uco and the syndicate clash with the rival Japanese. This is a story that’s been told before, but what those films didn’t have was the brilliance that is this film’s action scenes.

Gareth Evans films action in ways that have never been seen. The camerawork is impeccable and he shoots in ways that don’t seem possible. The choreography, camerawork, and editing combine to make one of the most unique film going experiences you will likely ever have. There is even a car chase scene that rivals the very best that have been filmed. The most amazing element is how seamless all of the action is considering how many special effects must be used. Bones are breaking and blood is flying, but the camera never flinches. As a further testament to all of the above elements, the film is mostly shot hand-held, yet we never lose track of what’s going on. Most hand-held fight scenes are purposely shot so that the audience feels the chaos of the situation but can’t really tell what specifically is going on. That is not the case with The Raid 2. The hand-held method here allows us to move with the fight. The audience sways with the action and feels the hits. It is marvelous, innovative, and inventive.

Iko Uwais is stellar as Rama and brings an emotional weight to his actions that wasn’t seen in the first film. For me though, the standout was Arifin Putra as Uco. Putra is magnificent throughout the film as the ambitious son of a crime boss that is tired of waiting for his turn to rule. He makes the dynamic between his father and himself relatable and brings a tragic character majestically to life. This is his most high profile role to date and it bodes well for his future.

The Raid 2: Berandal is a visceral experience that is not to be missed for fans of the genre. There is nothing quite like it. It’s almost as if Tarantino mashed up Reservoir Dogs with Kill Bill. Gareth Evans served as writer, director, and editor on the film. He served as action choreographer on the first film and lends his hand here as well, along with three others, two of which are Iko Uwais and Yayan Ruhian who star in the film. There is so much to love here that I could rattle on and on for hours, but I didn’t want to understate how amazed I was at the work of these men. This is the kind of film that genre fans will sit around and gush over saying things like, “Oh Oh remember that one scene with hammer girl on the train? That was awesome.” And everyone will smile because they do remember that scene and it was fantastic. Then someone else will break in with a recollection of another scene and the smiling will go on and on. Grade: A

Captain America 2: The Winter Soldier

I struggled somewhat with my thoughts on Captain America 2. On one hand, this is a finely executed comic book action movie. On the other hand, it’s nothing more than a finely executed comic book action movie. This stands as the best Marvel film behind The Avengers with a nice balance of action and character moments. All of the actors do their best with the material and we are given a few more moments of an actual storyline than we are used to with Marvel’s films. I was entertained and completely enjoyed myself during the film. All of that being said, I can’t help but be underwhelmed by the whole affair. The enjoyment I felt during the movie had faded by the time I made it to my car. There was nothing new in the film and all I was left with was a vague sense of sameness. Marvel’s brilliant marketing strategy that has led to this interconnected universe has overtaken any attempt to make a unique film experience. The template is firmly in place and there will be no deviations much less any surprises. What we are left with is a mildly enjoyable two hour teaser for the next Marvel movie.

Chris Evans returns as Captain America. He is more versed in today’s age and the fish out of water elements so prevalent in The Avengers have faded away. He is joined by Scarlett Johansson as the Black Widow as they try to fight back against bad guys, or who they think are bad guys, or who appear to be bad guys and might in fact be good guys. To be honest it’s hard to tell for vast portions of the movie what’s actually going on. I’m not sure that it matters anyway. We come to Marvel films to watch gloriously over the top action sequences and they do not disappoint here. Every action set piece is well staged even if they don’t make a lick of sense. A Nick Fury car chase scene, in particular, is quite well done. Captain America and Black Widow are given a bit more room to flesh out their relationship, which is a welcome diversion, and their interplay is surprisingly good.

Rehashing the plot is kind of pointless seeing as Marvel has rehashed the same story over and over again. Captain America 2 is essentially Thor 2 except where in that film there was Nordic gods and magical battles, here they are replaced with military action and espionage tropes. I’m sounding more and more down on this film as I go on, but I just can’t help myself. If you are a fan of Marvel’s movies you will undoubtedly enjoy the two hours and fifteen minutes you spend in the theater. There is enough here to like that I don’t begrudge anyone enjoying this film. For me though, I’m starting to feel like Marvel is churning out two hour trailers and I’m tiring of the routine. Grade: B-

The Grand Budapest Hotel

The Grand Budapest Hotel is the latest film from Wes Anderson that exists in the universe that only he inhabits. It is a love letter to nostalgia and technique that seeks to justify not only his particular place in cinematic history, but perhaps film as a whole. It also serves as being the most Wes Andersonish film Wes Anderson has made while alternately being the most accessible. The film is a story within a story within a story, while also being a comedy/ heist/ jailbreak/ war/ chase film. Grand Budapest is incredibly ambitious and dense yet never feels too cluttered. It even manages to sneak in some stop motion sequences for good measure. If this had only been an exercise in style and technique Wes Anderson would still deserve praise. As it is, The Grand Budapest Hotel is all of that plus being brilliantly acted, a study in comedic timing, and delightfully charming as well.

The story begins with an author recounting a story that he was told years earlier that actually took place many years before that. The main plot concerns Gustave H. who is concierge at the titular hotel as he trains, and somewhat befriends, a young lobby boy during rather tumultuous times during a fictionalized version of Eastern Europe in the 1930’s. To give away much more would deprive the pleasure found in letting this story unfold. Comedies in particular suffer when too much is known about the plot, so I will leave it be and instead focus my attention on other matters.

Wes Anderson has assembled every third actor in Hollywood for this film. Ralph Fiennes and newcomer Tony Revolori have the most screen time, but there are supporting turns from Jude Law, F. Murray Abraham, Tom Wilkinson, Jeff Goldblum, Saoirse Ronan, Willem Dafoe, Adrien Brody, Edward Norton, Harvey Keitel, and Bill Murray among others. Each and every actor feels perfectly placed in the world even when they shouldn’t fit. Edward Norton, for example, plays the nicest faux-Nazi ever and never even attempts to act German, yet it feels completely organic. This is a testament to Anderson’s ability to realize his particular vision on screen.

Ralph Fiennes anchors this film as the charming English dandy that is both eloquent and profane. Fiennes is remarkable in this role. While he is widely known for playing the baddies and creeps (Lord Voldemort et al.) he shows a brilliant comedic timing and oozes charm into a role that could easily have been either viciously snide or wandered into parody. His tone is perfect and energizes the film in addition to landing the most laughs. The cast is stellar all around, but I believe particular mention must be made to this wonderful and somewhat unexpected turn from Fiennes. This was a tight rope of a role and Fiennes walked it as very few could have.

Wes Anderson has long been criticized for making the same movie over and over and his detractors will make the same complaint here. Anderson has found a style uniquely his own and rather than abandon it he has embraced the whimsy with a great zest. However, The Grand Budapest Hotel also shows signs of Anderson experimenting in some new ways. There are his typical dolly shots and swish pans to be sure, but here he also highlights different aspect ratios and utilizes symmetry even more forcefully than normal. The difference in aspect ratios for different segments of the film is notable because Anderson uses sight gags that only work when they are presented in the format that they appear in. He is pushing beyond the boundaries of being quirky for quirk’s sake and framing his shots in ways that complement the material. The Grand Budapest Hotel is a definitive step forward in Anderson’s career, showing that he is capable of telling a unique story to accompany his unique visual style. Grade: A

Noah

Noah is a sweeping enigma. It is a film in two halves telling two very different stories and those stories don’t gel together but butt up against each other like the waves against the sides of that most famous ark. This is a biblical story told via The Lord of the Rings. Noah is foremost a fantasy film for the first half, then after a clean break, a family drama for the second half. It is a scattering of things for all people and that ultimately is what I believe holds the film back. Noah never feels like one coherent vision but bits and pieces from everyone crammed together into a vessel that can’t quite keep it together.

I don’t plan to argue about the biblical accuracy of Darren Aronofsky’s film. That is a different conversation, but suffice it to say that Aronofsky has taken certain liberties with the plot out of Genesis and created a fable that is much more aimed at the environmentalism of today and the psychological mindset of zealots. I will discuss Noah as a film and the strengths and shortcomings of both the visuals and story are reflective only of the film.

The story of Noah is fairly basic and more or less sticks to the source material. The Creator has decided that mankind has become evil and it is necessary to eliminate the wicked. Noah receives a vision from the Creator telling him that there will be a great flood and that he is to build an ark to save the innocent animals so that after this cleansing the Earth can flourish again. The story in Genesis is fairly short and straightforward, so Aronofsky pads the content with plot elements to make it more dramatic. Unfortunately, the disparate elements don’t add to the story as much as stretch the plot here and there as an attempt to mask the natural shortcomings of adapting a three paragraph story into a two and a half hour film.

I will admit that a large part of the underwhelming feelings I have for the film stem from my affection for the director. Darren Aronofsky has made films that are distinctly his. They are unique looks at the world, and while some are more widely lauded than others, critical consensus has generally been in his favor. I personally am an avid fan of Pi, Requiem for a Dream, and Black Swan in particular. The problem here is that Noah doesn’t seem like an Aronofsky film. It has more of an anonymous feel that is more akin to a studio product and is a far cry from the visual panache he is known for. The only stylistic carry-overs appear to be his use of close-ups and hand-held camerawork, which feel really out of place in this story. While those choices tend to evoke immediacy and intimacy in his other films here they distract. I try not to let my expectations affect my feelings for the finished product, but I admit that Noah was not at all where I thought Aronofsky would take the material. I was expecting something more akin to the far superior Take Shelter from Jeff Nichols which I would rewatch in a heartbeat over Noah.

The cast is led by Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Emma Watson, and Ray Winstone. All are fine choices and do the best they can with the material. Russell Crowe has become so synonymous with period pieces that he just feels like the obvious choice to play Noah. Connelly and Watson fade into the background for most of the picture with just a few glimpses in the spotlight. They both get their chances to have one big emotional moment before shuffling back into the background. Ray Winstone gets credited as the main antagonist, and not only is his entire character wholly unnecessary, but technically he is the second villain behind water. I give credit to the actors for trying, but there is only so much they can do while spewing didactic speeches in lieu of real dialogue. They were doomed from the script phase.

Noah is a frustrating film as it hems and haws its way to nothingness. It isn’t helped by the awful CGI throughout or the pitiful dialogue. There are flashes of brilliance, such as Noah’s recounting of creation, that are so wonderful that it just further serves to show how lackluster the rest of the film is. I was underwhelmed by the spectacle and disappointed in the uneven tone. If the film is a success it will surely lead to more auteur directors being handed over a hundred million dollars to make their epics, but I can only hope that those directors remember to bring with them that which made them auteurs to begin with. Grade: C-

Grand Piano

Grand Piano takes the simplest of plots and turns it into a taut thriller that is worthy of widespread praise. Eugenio Mira directs with an authority and flourish that is sadly lacking from the majority of genre entries, especially of recent vintage, and is savvy enough to know how to let his technique serve the story. While it would be simple enough to dismiss Grand Piano as a knockoff of Phone Booth or any number of Brian De Palma films, this movie elevates itself above the riff-raff and stands as a technical thriller that manages to create a gripping tension for the entire running time.

Elijah Wood stars as Tom Selznick, a gifted pianist that has been away from the concert stage for five years following a disastrous performance that frazzled his nerves and left him with a debilitating case of stage fright. At the behest of his movie star wife Tom is taking the stage again for a special performance in honor of his late mentor and instructor. As he sits in front of the piano and the concert begins he notices the red dot of a rifle scope and that someone has written on his sheet music, “Play one wrong note and you’re dead.”

There is very little to discuss about the plot that isn’t covered in the synopsis. This is as straightforward as it gets with no fluff or filler to pad the run time any longer than it needs to be. Elijah Wood is remarkable in that he plays Selznick as both emotionally out of control while still being physically competent to play the piano. It is a delicate balance and Wood does a fine job throughout. There is also something to be said for Wood’s ability to portray the crippling nervousness of the character without being showy or histrionic. Emotionally unhinged and low-key are two traits that require skill to portray together without the performance swinging wildly one way and then the other, to which Wood manages nicely.

John Cusack costars, in a sense, as the mostly unseen puppet master behind the scenes. The brilliance of Cusack’s casting is the weight he can bring to a role that is merely the voice on the other end of the line. He conveys menace in all the right ways and still manages to be charismatic while he’s at it. There are few actors who could fill this role and still manage to bring it such high regard.

Grand Piano is the third feature film and first I’ve seen from Spanish director Eugenio Mira and based on this I wholeheartedly look forward to his future endeavors. I was amazed at the way Mira keeps the camera constantly moving and still frames exquisite compositions in the frame. There are very few static shots in the film and the consistent motion serves the story well. Not only does the motion ramp up the underlying unease, but when he does settle in on a static shot it really pops. It is meticulous camerawork and both Mira and cinematographer Unax Mendia deserve to be lauded for it.

Grand Piano is a first rate thriller with top notch performances, dazzling camerawork, and wonderful music. Both the score and the onscreen concert performances are quite good with an opening credit sequence that is haunting and beautiful. Eugenio Mira directs a gem here that I hope finds the audience it deserves. Grade: A-

Divergent

There is definitely an audience for Divergent. Fourteen year old girls, in particular, will likely adore the entire two and a half hour running time. Everyone else will fall into two distinct camps: those who recognize the lunacy of the premise and quickly start mentally balancing their checkbooks, and those who recognize the lunacy of the premise and quickly start sending mental hate mail to the screenwriter. I found myself shocked and dismayed for vast portions of the film due to the utter ridiculousness of the world Divergent inhabits. There is nothing that anyone with a basic grasp of logic will be able to cling on to and the filmmakers make no effort to elevate the material above the very young audience they are aiming to please.

The story of Divergent takes place sometime in the unspecified future after a war of some kind has apparently wiped out most of civilization. After this war society has divided up into five factions: Abnegation- the selfless humanitarians, Erudite- the smart people, Amity- farmers, Candor- people compelled to speak the truth at all times, and Dauntless- goth-lite parkour experts who serve as security. There is a giant ceremony where teenagers must decide which faction they are going to live with for the rest of their lives. If a child decides to join a faction other than the one in which they were raised they will never be able to see their family again. It is not explained why. To help in their decision a test is administered that will tell them what faction for which they are best suited. This is where our lead character Tris encounters a problem. She tests as having more than one personality trait. She is a divergent and must hide that fact because if people find out they will immediately kill her.

Tris decides to join the Dauntless because no one would want to watch a movie about the other factions. It is there that she is trained with the worst fighting style known to man and is basically bullied and abused for a good hour of the film’s running time. The movie would like you to believe that being beaten will make you brave. I do not share that belief. During the training and Dauntless initiation Tris falls madly in love with her instructor Four. Yes, his name is Four. The latter part of the film revolves around Tris trying to survive initiation, while hiding the fact that she is divergent, while coyly trying to entice Four, while uncovering a super-secret plot to possibly kill an entire faction. If you’re still following along I applaud your resolve. If this plot sounds interesting you may wish to reexamine the levels of masochism you enjoy.

It is an immense credit to both Shailene Woodley and Theo James, as Tris and Four respectively, that they deliver performances that are not cringe worthy. The same cannot be said of the rest of the cast. Miles Teller does pop up for a few moments at the beginning to play an annoying bully and then disappears until the plot requires him again at the end. Ashley Judd, Tony Goldwyn, Mekhi Phifer, and Kate Winslet all show up in varying degrees in this film in what I can only assume is a plan to stay culturally relevant. The direction from Neil Burger is mediocre to competent and at the very least isn’t distracting, although he brings very little to the table in terms of style. There is also a soundtrack that heavily features Ellie Goulding which may be the highlight of the film.

I’m finding very little else to say about the film because every time I try to think back to the visual elements I am reminded of how they relate to the plot and I am back to mentally berating the script. The most effective dystopian future movies all feature plots that seem like logical extensions of some version of our world. Whether it be Blade Runner or Mad Max it is possible to see how events could have changed the world we know into the world depicted on screen. Divergent asks us to forget what we know about the world we live in and then go ahead and forget what we know about human behavior as well. I would like to forget what I know about this movie. Grade: D+