Top Ten Movies of 2o14

Nice & Not So Nice:

Woodie’s Favorite Movies

2o14

Disclaimer

Okay, I didn’t see EVERY movie released in 2014! Reason? Because not EVERY movie came to my little Norman Town and since I don’t have a car to shuffle off to OKC to see a flick . . . well, you do the math. Another reason for not seeing ALL the movies that came out in 2o14? Hey! I’m retired. I can’t afford to go to EVERY movie even if they do show up in my town, and my friend who goes with me (he has the car) may not want to see every movie that was made in 2o14! Yes, I do own a bicycle, and yes, I do go to the movies by myself . . . but still I can’t see everything! So, get off my cloud! {smile} Anyway, here are my “Nice & Not So Nice” movie lists for 2o14:

 

Nice

1o. I, Frankenstein

Yeah, that’s right; I liked this Frankenstein rip-off brought to you by the same guy who created the graphic novel, I Frankenstein. Critics and fans pretty much buried this one. And to tell the truth, when I saw the previews for it, I decided to pass on it. But one day, I’m looking for a DVD at Walmart and saw I, Frankenstein on the discount rack and bought it. Much to my surprise it wasn’t as bad as the previews, reviewers and movie fans made it out to be. What’s not to love about a movie that has Frankenstein (the original loner/bad boy), gargoyle-angels and demons from hell kicking CGI ass on each other? Actually, it’s a pretty entertaining little film.

 

o9. Godzilla

I disliked this film at first because of the false advertising by the studio. First, it is NOT a remake of the original (1954). Secondly, Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad) has only a bit role in the film. I hate it when advertisers “mislead” me. But that aside, the movie is pretty good. The actors do okay, but they really don’t have much to do acting wise other than to look worried, frightened or simply unhappy when G and his band of rampaging monsters kick the crap out of each other . . .  and every skyscraper they come in contact with! The wonderfulness of this film is the CGI monsters. They are very affective. It’s worth the watch.

 

o8. Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Okay, Marvel and Chris Evans are starting to show me a little something with this movie. Although it doesn’t go into great depths, it does play around with political issues facing the
US of A right now. The fight scenes are better, But the director is still using schlocky camera techniques that he THINKS makes the action sequences more interesting to a “younger” audience, but they don’t. And Chris Evans as Captain America does appear a bit more human and less the pretty boy/actor robot that he was in the first Captain America movie.

 

o7. The Lego Movie

Surprisingly, this CGI cartoon based on a toy franchise has a lot of adult appeal to it. They create a universe where these Lego characters really come to life. Very funny, very charming and a stunning use of computer generated images. “Everything is Awesome!”

 

o6. The Maze Runner

Another big surprise. I try to stay away from movies based on popular (or obscure) YA novels. I mean, come on! For most of these movies you’d have to be a thirteen year old girl to appreciate them. But this one is a bit different. Not so much the story of youngsters flirting with the idea of sex, this one focuses more on the idea of being trapped, imprisoned by a totalitarian society. Yes, of course, teenagers are the imprisoned and the adults are the ones doing the incarcerating, but the story is pretty good, and unlike most of the YA movies out there. I found myself identifying with characters. Particularly interesting is how the audience views the movie, through the experiences of a new arrival. It’s an engaging film. Hats off to the producers who made it AAV: Appropriate for Adult Viewing.

 

o5. The Drop

Now, I’m finally getting down to the more “adult” movies. And The Drop is that. If you enjoy dialogue and really engaging acting, this movie about low life thugs who dream of becoming “made” is for you. Neatest thing about this movie: nothing is what it appears to be. Enough said.

 

o4. John Wick

This is the BEST damn action film I have seen in a long while! Directed by stunt performers, David Leitch and Chad Stahelski, this movie kicks the right amount of ass, and does it without a bunch of jump cuts and camera tricks. I’m not kidding; this movie is a well-greased ballet of violence. Some critics have said there’s not enough dialogue to the movie, and they are right there’s not a lot. But what little there is, is well placed and well used by the actors. See this and learn what the term “old school action” really means.

 

o3. Gone Girl

Man, if you love Hitchcock and/or Agatha Christy you are going to love this tale about a man whose wife goes missing. I really don’t want to say more about it. I will say . . . go see it.

 

o2. Snowpiercer

Another film that barely got out to American audiences, but not because of production quality. Politics between the director and distributor almost sank this gem of a political action film. Seems the Weinstein Company wanted to cut some of the film for Americans, but the director wouldn’t allow it, and so the WC decided NOT to give the movie a wide release. It’s possible you’ve never heard of this movie loosely based on a French graphic novel . . . but see it you should. Chris Evans does his best acting in this taunt little film. Congrats to all involved with it.

 

o1. The Grand Budapest Hotel

When I go see a movie, I hope to see something that I’ve never seen before, and The Grand Budapest Hotel is like not nothing else I’ve seen this year. I think it can be best described as an absurdist farce. It’s highly stylized, extremely colorful and uses film techniques that come straight out of the slapstick era of silent film. A beautifully crafted, visually stunning film with wonderfully crafted, over the top characters.  A must see movie for the movie junky!

 

That’s it for the Nice list. There are a few honorable mentions that I should . . . well . . . mention!  {another smile} They are: Lucy, Guardians of the Galaxy, The Judge, Divergent, X-Men: Days of Future Past and Big Hero 6

 

& Not So Nice 

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

My friend David shook his head as we came out of the 1pm showing of the third hobbit movie. “I don’t know,” David said, “I should like this movie but I don’t.” And that’s pretty much it. I went to see all three of The Hobbit movies just out of respect for The Lord of the Rings series. The third film in this The Hobbit trilogy is probably the best of the three but that’s not saying much. The cast, the directing the writing, the usually stunning CGI work from WETA lacked inspiration. Shakespeare has a workable quote for this short review, “. . . It is a tale/Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury/Signifying nothing.” Yep, that sums up my feelings about the whole The Hobbit trilogy.

 

Fury

One of those naturalistic looks at a tank crew during WWII that’s both gripping and grizzly enough to make you hope you never see a real war. Why is it on my Not So Nice list? Because of the use of CGI muzzle flash from the tanks and the rifles fired by the actor/soldiers. Nothing ruins naturalism more than cartoonish weapon fire. I mean, we are supposed to be in WWII not Star Wars.

 

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part 1

I know that a book can’t be translated as is to the screen. But the whole story of The Hunger Games trilogy is based on a realistic description of what it’s like to be in a war. Maybe because they need a PG-13 rating for this film, the production cut back on the graphic violence, which makes it rather bland and uninteresting to this adult-child. MJ Part I tries to explore the role of propaganda in a war, but it too is just bland. The big problem with this movie is that it never changes gears. It tries to be thoughtful . . . but misses the mark.

 

The Giver

If the production team of The Giver wants to give me something, they can start by giving me back the popcorn money I spent on this lack luster movie! The storyline isn’t the problem with this film. The leaders of this futurist government have figured out a way to rid their dystopia society from  unpleasant emotions. They’ve blanked out everybody’s memory through genetic engineering, eliminated art, music, war . . . Hell, they even eliminated changes in weather, and no color! Yes, a black and white world they’ve created where people are always pleasant, always smiling, always unemotional.  However, there is one person in the community that carries all those bad things around in his head just in case they need some good old human behavior. He’s called the Keeper, and he’s old. And the community sends him a disciple that he can train to be the Keeper of the history of humanness. And that’s where the story begins with the training of the next Keeper. The story idea is a good one. We the audience can learn to appreciate things we take for granted as the fledgling Keeper sees for the first time color, emotion, art, etc. But most of the human feelings are not explored in enough depth. We really don’t get involved in the plight of this young human experiencing for the first time what it feels like to be human.

 

That’s it! See you in 2o15!

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1 November 2o14



or

The Crying Games: Mocking JLaw – Part 1

Okay, I admit it! I like the three books that make up The Hunger Games series better than the movies! The books are an exceptional exploration of war and its effect on everyone in the community who experiences it either by direct participation or indirect inclusion. The books are well written, personal, grim and very gritty. I’m rather surprised that a YA set of novels would be quite as grizzly and horrifying in its depiction of war.

 

So, why are the movies NOT as “good” as the books? Well, wanting a PG-13 rating may well be the main reason since most of the people who read and fell in love with the books are 13 to 16 year olds AND wouldn’t be allowed into an R rated film which is this movie needs if you want to honestly explore the ideas created by the books.

 

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1 tries to express ideas about the propaganda of war, but doesn’t quite investigate it as well as it should. Mostly, Mockingjay - Part 1 is a movie about Jennifer Lawrence’s character, Katniss, crying. The character cries about everything. She cries when she’s reunited with her family, cries when people try to make her the symbol for the “revolution,” when she sees that her lover (boyfriend, I should say) is alive, she cries, and guess what she does when she goes back home to find the whole town wiped out by the Capital’s army? I mean, you could make a decent drinking game out of it, “Okay, guys, take a drink every time Katniss cries.” You’d get quite a buzz.

The problem with this movie is that it’s more a trailer for Mockingjay - Part 2 than an actual self-sustaining movie. I was surprised when the movie was over and they rolled credits. I thought they were just getting started! The movie is mostly exposition than anything else.  I’m guessing that the thought of bigger box office receipts had a lot to do with deciding to make four movies instead of three. Now I gotta wait a WHOLE YEAR before I find out what happens! Thank God I read the books!

P.S. It may sound like I’m “mocking” Jennifer Lawrence in this piece, but I’m not. She’s an exceptional actress. I do believe that the powers that be lead her down a bit of the wrong path in this particular movie venture.

 

Interstellar November 2014

Sorry. Took me awhile to get into writing this review. No SPOILERS, I hope.

Interstellar is one of those movies that I watched intently, didn’t miss a beat of it, and I was totally engrossed in the whole thing. However, once the experience was over, I wondered why they made it? It’s not that Interstellar is a bad movie. The production value is high, the acting works well, and the script . . . well there’s the problem. The script just isn’t deep or specific enough for me.

 

The best parts of Interstellar are the scenes between the father and daughter. There’s a deep connection there between the characters, a good sense of a specific relationship that is still universal, the love between father and daughter. However, the final scene of that relationship (I won’t tell you what it is) is rather dissatisfying.  Also working for this film (for the most part) is the sound. Yes, it’s damn loud but it helps create such a visceral response in the audience. Best example: when the spaceship is leaving the Earth there is this bone rattling (I mean, it physically SHOOK the audience) sound of the rocket engines, and then when it finally left the Earth’s gravity and entered outer space

. . . dead quiet. But not wanting to let go of a good thing, they use the same sound level in another part of the movie when the spaceship is in trouble (again), and it only got in the way of the audience hearing important dialogue. I mean, I “think” it was important dialogue because I couldn’t understand a word of it, AND in turn, I couldn’t understand what was happening in the movie!

 

Although Christopher Nolan has great ideas and a good eye for visuals, the script seems more of an outline for a movie leaving this audience member feeling a bit underwhelmed. And the “science moments?” Yeah, I know, there’s a whole group of scientists out there who get their equations all in a bunch if you don’t get the science “right,” but every “science moment” they have in Interstellar stops the action, it’s not incorporated into the film as well as it needs to be. I ain’t kidding. Every time they started talking science I felt like somebody walked on with a giant dry erase board and I was back in junior college sitting through another boring lecture. Don’t get me wrong, getting the science  “right” is important but you must make it a part of the action, and not just shove it down our throats because you’re afraid  that Dr. deGrasse Tyson will jump on his iPod show and get all “better than thou” on us “uneducated,” low life movie goers. 

John Wick October 2o14

 

John Wick isn’t the Boogeyman. He’s the man you send to kill the Boogieman!

Thank you, movie gods, for finally answering my prayer! And the answer is . . . John Wick! What a wonderfully executed movie. A Hand-to-hand combat movie where you can actually SEE the characters fight! Yeah, I’m talking to you (AGAIN!), Antoine Fuqua! Study this movie and learn how it is done, or please, please give up on making action films.

 

This movie is just chucked full of beautifully choreographed fight sequences, and not a lot of flying kicks and wire work (if there is any at all). This is, for the most part, just straight up  jiu-jitsu and MMA fighting with guns . . . and sometimes . . . CARS! Lots of close up combat filmed (again, for the most part) in wide shots and medium shots. Did I say fight scenes? Nay! Each scene is a ballet of blood and violence. Just the most wonderful thing I have seen in an action film in a long time.

 

However, the fight scenes aren’t the only star in this film. The “talking” scenes are also brilliant, the dialogue is exceptional. Most action films blow off these scenes as fast as they can, but not John Wick! The directors are just as specific in the “smaller” scenes as they are in the big action sequences. For example, the whole reason for Wick to put on his ass kicking suit and go to town on the baddies is that they . . . KILL HIS DOG! Any other director (again and again, Fuqua!) would probably just get ANY old dog for the scene, I mean, why not? It’s not like it’s an important scene! Let’s get to the action! But not our director(s). They went out and found the cutest damn puppy that ever lived (or is it CGI?) so that we, the audience, would fall in love with this rascally pup and be even more outraged at the evilness of the bad guys, and  be all crazy for John Wick to get off his butt and lay down so retribution.

 

So, If you haven’t got it all ready . . . I LOVE THIS MOVIE! And it is really worth watching.

SnowPiercer 2o14

I try very hard to stay away from SPOILERS in my reviews while still giving you, the reader, something worth reading. However, I’m not perfect. I may have inadvertently slipped a SPOILER or two in here somewhere. Be advised.

"Passengers, this is not a shoe. This is disorder. This is size ten chaos. This. See this? This is death."—Minister Mason, Snowpiercer

Snowpiercer is one of those movies that is so enthralling that you can respectfully overlook the few flaws in the script and in the visuals.  There’s something for everybody in this movie. If you’re a straight up action junky, there are a herd of incredibly crafted riot scenes, one on one, hand to hand combat scenes (hey, Antoine Fuqua, you should pay attention to this part) that outshines every fist smashing, jaw breaking film that has come along in quite a long while.  Very little jump cutting or close-ups, you can really see the work of the stuntmen/actors. However, if you are the film goer that likes a little “intellectual” meat with his smorgasbord of movie ass kicking, then Snowpiercer has plenty of that to go around also. Political wrangling and intrigue, class struggle, child abuse . . . hell, there is so many different social/political ideas and issues woven into this movie that it takes more than one viewing to find them all.

 

The acting is impeccable in this film. I mean, even Chris Evans, an actor I really don’t care to watch much, is just smoking it in this film. The whole cast is brilliant, but I do have to say that Tilda Swinton is just one of the most underrated actors of our times, or maybe not “underrated” but just not use enough in mainstream films to suit this audience member. Her portrayal of Minister Mason is tragically funny, disturbing and downright evil . . . all at the same time. Checkout this deliciously sadistic monologue:

Mason

Order is the barrier that holds back the flood of death. We must all of us on this train of life remain in our allotted station. We must each of us occupy our preordained particular position. Would you wear a shoe on your head? Of course you wouldn't wear a shoe on your head. A shoe doesn't belong on your head. A shoe belongs on your foot. A hat belongs on your head. I am a hat. You are a shoe. I belong on the head. You belong on the foot. Yes? So it is. In the beginning, order was proscribed by your ticket: First Class, Economy, and freeloaders like you. Eternal order is prescribed by the sacred engine: all things flow from the sacred engine, all things in their place, all passengers in their section, all water flowing. all heat rising, pays homage to the sacred engine, in its own particular preordained position. So it is. Now, as in the beginning, I belong to the front. You belong to the tail. When the foot seeks the place of the head, the sacred line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.

 

Bong Joon-ho is just one of a handful of directors in the 21^st century that are making films that are enlightening and entertaining. We film lovers should support artists like Bong Joon-ho, Kathryn Bigelow, Quentin Tarantino, and Wes Anderson, and politely say “NO” to the directors of films like The Equalizer, The Purge (1 & 2) and the other unfortunate wastes of film that promise something special and never ever deliver.

 

Mason did not include in her diatribe that shoes are also good for kicking ass! Let’s be shoes and “stomp out” mediocre filmmaking in America!

 

Fury October 2o14

or

How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Loved the CGI!



 

Naturalism

1. (in art and literature) a style and theory of representation based on the accurate depiction of detail.

2. a philosophical viewpoint according to which everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted.
 

Wardaddy: Ideals are peaceful. History is violent.
 

You know, everything about this naturalistic movie is working. They just plop the audience down smack in the middle of WWII, and brother, it's a jolt. This isn't a story about WWII, it is as close as we can get to the experience of WWII without actually being there. Sure, Saving Private Ryan does most of that, but this is even more surreal, horrifying without being preachy about the wrong or right of war.

 

And the characters are so existential. We really don't know much about them except for their job description: "We kill Nazis." But we do identify with them because no matter how they try to hide it this killing Nazi thing gets to them.

 

So, this is a great film with one giant drawback: CGI muzzle flashes! I know, it's the thing today. I guess it saves money on blank ammunition, maybe safer for the actors, and maybe they use it to get the gamer crowd to put down the Halo or whatever phony baloney first-person video game kids are playing these days and watch, actually watch a movie . . . or maybe they, the production team just thinks its cool to turn WWII into Star Wars. Whatever the excuse . . . I hate it. I hate it with such a passion. I'm surprised that Brad Pitt let them get away with it. It doesn't fit in a naturalist WWII film to have "cartoonish" animation for gunfire. It looks ridiculous. Why aren't more people offended by this? Anyway, if you are going to try and depict an actual war, the way war really is get rid of the CGI!

 

 

Gone Girl October 2o14

Gone Girl
A Sort of Review,

Sort of

 

I like to consider myself an adventurous movie goer, somewhat like Frank Buck: Bring ‘Em Back Alive . . .only I do my big game hunting with a medium popcorn (no butter) in one hand and a large ice tea (LOTS of ice!) in the other, sitting in my favorite seat, in an air-conditioned, big screen movie theatre with whomever I can talk into going with me. I don’t like to know much about the movie I’m going to see. I don’t read reviews because I don’t want to know the story or what some other "big game hunter" thought about the film. I do look at posters, and I’ve gotten pretty good at deciding whether or not a movie is worth my time by watching a little bit of the trailers. Sure, trailers are design to con you into believing that the movie they advertise is “The greatest movie in MOVIE HISTORY!” But if you know what to look for in a trailer, you can tell whether or not the advertisement guys are lying to you about the quality of the movie being promoted. Word of mouth is a good device for making your decision to see or not see a certain movie.

ME: How was the movie?
Mouth: Oh, it was okay . . .

or

ME: How was the movie?

Mouth: Man, That movie really SUCKED!

Either one of those answers to my question, "How was the movie?" is not a great indicator as to whether or not a movie is worth my viewing time. Let’s face it, people have different tastes. An audience member might not like a movie for other reasons than the movie itself. For example: back in 1989, I'd just finished watching Field of Dreams when I ran into an old (girl) friend of mine who had also just seen it. “How was the movie?” I asked. She replied, “It was all about MEN! Why was it all about what MEN WANT? What about us, WOMEN? Why isn’t there a Field of Dreams for WOMEN?!”  Hmmm, a good point, but it doesn’t really have anything to do with whether the movie was good or not. The only word of mouth review of a movie you can trust is:

ME: How was the movie?
Mouth: (smiling) Go see it.

Me: Okay, but how was it?
Mouth (bigger smile): Just go see it.

There’re a couple of important points you should get from my dialogue with Mouth: 1. Mouth is reluctant to tell me anything about the movie. 2. Mouth is smiling. Those two things tell me that it’s a sure bet that if I go to that particular movie, I'm going to see something . . . good/bad? Who knows, but I'm definitely gonna see . . . something worth my time.

 

So, what the hell does all this have to do with a review of Gone Girl? Actually, it has everything to do with Gone Girl. Gone Girl is one of those movies that you should go see without knowing much or anything about it. For me it’s one of those films that I really WANT to talk about, but only with people who have already seen it. Hell, I may have said too much all ready. Anyway, stop listening to me or to any reviewer, get you popcorn, ice tea, find a great seat in a theatre and just watch . . . Gone Girl.