Change Your Image
darius-azadeh
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Inherent Vice (2014)
PTA's take on Pynchon
Thomas Pynchon's novels have never before been adapted for screen. This could either be because of circumstance of simply because they wouldn't function as well as a film. Nevertheless, director Paul Thomas Anderson takes a stab with this 2009 novel, 'Inherent Vice', resulting in what can only be described as 'trippy'.
When his ex-girlfriend reemerges to appeal for his help, hippie P.I Larry 'Doc' Sportello sets off on a quest to find her missing boyfriend, land developer Micky Wolfmann. Set against the kaleidoscopic backdrop of early 70's L.A, drug-fueled madness is sure to ensue along the way.
This is a very curious film; with a lead character who is constantly high and caught in the tangled web of a neo-noir world, its a safe bet that things will be anything but straight forward, even being dubbed 'Incoherent Vice' by Anderson himself. That it certainly is, as the film's plot, much like the book's, requires your intense concentration from the start. For the first half of the film, this doesn't prove to be too difficult; however, as it reaches the halfway point, the story starts to loose it's feet. It then becomes this top-heavy amalgamation of wayward plot lines and drug-crazed hippies. Although this was deliberate on Anderson's part, it creates this sense that some sort of fulfillment is denied regarding the overall outcome.
That's not to say that the film isn't terrifically entertaining. Taking on a much lighter tone that Anderson's most recent endeavors, it boasts wonderful design, brilliant performances and an authentic 70's joy-ride. As usual, Joaquin Pheonix is constantly great throughout, as the bumbling hippy leading the pack. The real stand outs come from the supporting cast, like Josh Brolin, as the flat-top hippy hating cop 'Bigfoot' Bjornsen, who is often butting heads with Doc yet occasionally plays nice. Brolin pins him as like 'a kid in a grocery store who cant get his fruit loops'. He manages pull this off in a brilliantly comedic way, adding to the films constant comic theme.
The humour is one of the most understated elements in the film. Aside from the inevitable 'What's up, Doc?' quips (it is a Warner Bro's picture, after all), the obvious jokes are cleverly placed throughout, to keep you in tune with the madness as it sprawls beyond comprehension. The book itself is the same, and is one of the many ways in which this is a very faithful adaptation. There are even parts that have been completely recreated from the pages, which indeed do work with this level of direction and performance.
Needless to say it looks stunning. The decision to shoot on 35mm (heat damaged, for some sequences) almost seems like a no-brainer. It brings out Robert Elswists saturated cinematography, bringing across a brilliant psychedelic pastiche. Coupled with set design to have the producers of 'Mad Men' sweating under their collars, it echoes as far back to films from the era such as Jacques Tati's 'Playtime', and is equally as fun.
A cult film in the making, this Thomas Pynchon adaptation is not without some substantial problems. Although the plot is meant to be jumbled and complicated, it is intended to be seen through the hazy eyes of our main hero. Although an interesting concept, its not one that holds up for a runtime that is far too long. It wants you to get lost in the plot as much as the neon lit, laid back and saturated world it unfolds in.
Inherent Vice is a mess, yet a thoroughly enjoyable one.
Her (2013)
If 'Her' is correct, all guys could be sporting high waisted trousers and moustaches in the near future
With talents such as Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams and of course Spike Jonze, it's no wonder why this film was not a disappointment. With it's completely original story, superb acting and incredible design, 'Her' is a profound achievement.
The plot, which focuses around Theodore Twombly, a recently divorced and lonely writer, and his newly acquired OS, with whom he eventually fall 'in love' with. Personally, I've never seen a story like this on screen before, unless you class that Big Bang Theory episode where Raj's Siri calls him 'Sexy'. It was one of the main reasons I really wanted to see this film. It's also great because it raised so many interesting questions; How far will humanities' relations with technology go? Do we rely on it too much? How advanced will it eventually become? It also makes you think about what people are really like in relationships; How far can you be 'in love' with no physical contact? When a movie makes you think of this many questions, it's already easy to guess that it's pretty good.
This narrative is brought out with really brilliant acting. I was surprised with Amy Adams initially. Even though I rated 'American Hustle', I didn't think Adams' acting in it was too great. In this, however, I was completely sold. Maybe because her character was written so well. A relatable, understanding friend who's always by your side. She seemed to highlight the human relationship and the joys it can bring, a dynamic that is hard to show in a story like this. Chris Pratt, who is suddenly in everything now, was great too. He brought a sense of comic understanding to the story, and was another example of how you need to be surrounded by love.
Except for Theodore, i found Olivia Wilde's character to be very intriguing. It's a shame that she is never given a name, because she also raises questions for Twombly and the audience. There's a definite charm and maturity that she brings to Theodore, another way of developing his character with wonderful symmetry.
Of course, though, Phoenix's lead was something brilliant, in the writing and performance. What he does with the character is quite incredible, as we see this man who has been through a lot; divorce, loneliness, etc, but is still quite naive. He still doesn't understand certain things, and sometimes sees things and situations in a child-like way. This was beautiful, as again is shows you what people can be like when in love. He also shows humans as relatable. There are some scenes where you're like, 'I do that', or 'yeah, I'd probably do the same'.
The music is something I can't flaw. This soundtrack is just so perfect and works incredibly with the film. It's almost as if it's a mirror to the emotions you feel. There's a wonderful scene where you literally see nothing, but it's acted so well and intertwined with the music so brilliantly that it's as if your seeing everything, and not just a blank screen. Even though there was a slight over use of sequences of Twombly mopeing around the city, the music mixed with it so well that it was more of a feeling that another sequence.
It looks incredible. The production design, the costumes, the locations, everything. It was pretty believable that this is what L.A would be like in the near future (small details would suggest that it's set around 50 years from now). The only problem I had with the design is that some of the technology feature seemed a bit too far fetched and unbelievable. Aside from this, though, the camera was used in a way that appreciated the small things in life. During an emotional scene, the camera would often cut to a dusty carpet or something on the ground, and even though at times this felt incoherent, It just makes you look and reflect, which you need during this kind of thought process. Sad scenes are also shot and written interestingly. On a few occasions, during an upsetting development, the camera would again cut to something funny. This is so subtle, though. It's like Jonze was saying; 'Yeah, there's a joke here. It's up to you whether you find it funny, because this is still a depressing scene'. The film does have a brilliant sense of humour, though. It's so down to earth yet relatable that it feels so smooth.
The fact that it changes the way you see relationships and to an extent, the world, makes this a unique cinema experience. You really feel the need to ask yourself these questions about technology and how it will eventually effect us. Hopefully, you'll come out thinking the same, and reflecting on how reliant you are on technology and how you act when in love, a 'form of socially acceptable insanity'.
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
How many uses of the F-Word? 506?! F**k, that's a lot!
It's a shame that January is usually known as 'bad movie month" (e.g Movie 43 last year), because this movie is most certainly not. It really is a unique piece of Scorsese's and DiCaprio's track records.
I've gotta start of with the humour. This movie is so hilariously funny. Like, my jaw was aching when I came out of the theatre. At least every 4 minutes pretty much everyone in there burst out in humongous laughter. There was a guy next to me literally howling with laughter (maybe he thought the 'Wolf' mentioned in the title was literal?). I think the reason it was like that, though, is because it was so effortless. I've got to say, it was funnier than 50% of the comedies I've seen in the past year. It was so effortless because regular comedy movies just try to hit one emotion: Laughter. So they need to really try, because that's it's purpose. This film hit so many other levels of emotions that everything about it felt so organic and the humour was placed so perfectly. Even the scenes where the story got deep were full of so many emotions and were hard to watch. You could feel it. It was obviously down to the script (there are some parts where you can tell the actors are about to crack up), but also the editing. It had such great comic timing, and was so subtle that it felt completely natural.
It's hard to believe that Jonah Hill is that same actor that played the goofy kid in 'Superbad' way back in 2007. It's the best performance of his I think I've seen. It went past the point of seeing Jonah Hill with all his Jonah Hill-isms playing a character that Jonah Hill always plays. For those 3 hours he genuinely was Donny Azoff, and played the role perfectly. He even managed to develop the character through the acting so subtly but so effectively.
You can't not mention DiCaprio when talking about performances in this film. Aside from being the brilliant talent he already is, he worked so hard at the role and it defiantly paid off. The parts where he broke the 4th wall while narrating were so seamless, and when his character fell on hard times, he portrayed it with so many different emotions that his character was becoming so complex it was believable. He could have fallen into so many clichés trying to do that, but seemed to have no trouble side-stepping them. I mean, those scenes where he's 'under the influence' show that this guy is prepared to go above and beyond for his roles. Also, even though he was only in it for a short while, McConaughey deserves a shout. I've only seen him in as trailer for 'Ghosts of Girlfriends Past' as one of the ads on my copy of 'Quantum of Solace' (I think. Anyway, beside the point), so had no idea what to expect. But boy, he can defiantly act. It's because Scorsese knew what he wanted to get out of his actors.
He was definitely the genius behind all of this. His direction is another thing you just can't flaw. Everything little thing added so much to the story or the humour or the characters. His way of making everything so surreally extravagant was an incredible medium into a real life situation. To some it probably seems that the amount of profanity and sex was unnecessary, but I think if there was any less the film wouldn't have been as powerful.
A 3 hour thrill ride of hilarious eccentricity and amazing performances, this is a film to be experienced. You'd think that during 180 minutes the pacing would start to drag, but just when you think it does, it'll suck you right back in with underlying comic genius or subtle character development.
In a way, it felt nostalgic. And in a word, it was incredible.
American Hustle (2013)
If seeing Jennifer Lawrence clean a house to 'Live and Let Die' is on your bucket list, then this your kind of movie
'American Hustle' is another movie that I've really wanted to see for a long time. It's probably because I love the 70s, or whatever. When it was finally released in good ol' England, it did not disappoint.
Coming into this with only having seen 'Silver Linings Playbook' as some of O Russell's previous work, I didn't really know what to expect. Although that was very good, it is completely different on many levels, so whatever this was, it was going to be fresh.
As not to spoil anything, I won't go through the film scene by scene, but I have to say this film met and (to an extend) exceeded my expectations. There was noting I didn't like about it, because everything and everyone was just so brilliant. First off, the acting was superb. The improv that the actors pull off made it all so much more real, because you felt that they were just letting themselves run with the story and script. When the tensions rise (which frequently happens during this film), you feel for these characters, because for a second they really are Riche Dimasso or Irving Rosenfelt. It also added a lot of the humour, which showed that, although it primarily felt like a drama, it didn't take it's self too seriously, which is so fresh and needed in Hollywood right now.
For me, J Law's acting talent stole the show. I saw her in 'Silver Linings' and the first 'Hunger Games' a while back, so again I didn't have any real preconception of what she would be like. But in this movie, her acting was just on another level. Every scene she was in carried so many emotions, and you'd couldn't tell if she was going to explode at any point (a'la the bathroom scene with Sydney). The things her character gets herself into in this film, even while she's still at home, are just out right slap your knee hilarious, especially the argument scenes.
Direction was a large positive for this. The way the camera moves is so subtle yet so effective. There are a lot of clichés that it could have fallen into, but O' Russell was very clever, and everything about the way he directed it was planned out perfectly. The camera seems to interact with the characters emotions, so you're really seeing this on more than one level.
The story was another element that made it so brilliant for me. Well, that was at the end. I loved the way it ended. It's just as the film plays out, you're so engrossed in the amazing performances, style, characters and humour, it gets hard to keep track of the story. Not on the level of the new 'Doctor Who' episodes, which have plot lines so ridiculously convoluted. You weren't supposed to get it at the start, as your just thrown into this world of eccentric, self absorbed con-men. You get the general idea throughout, with what's happening and what they're aiming to do, but when it got to the end, I didn't get some of the things they were taking about that seemed important ('Did I miss all of that? Was that when that old guy walked in to the cinema with a 20 year old something girlfriend and I lost focus for a bit?'). I heard that O' Russell was more focused on the characters, and lost a lot of story to allow room for Improv, so I guess it's OK if you don't get all of it. I didn't and still thoroughly enjoyed it. There are times during the film when I thought "Wow, that's a brilliant way to end a movie", and then it suddenly carried on and wasn't over, and the story got even more compelling. The way it wrapped up was a feat of true story telling.
I'm not one for movies about money and mafias and cons and all that, but aside from that, it's just as much a tale about relationships and what people are really like. The story of Irving's relationship with his family and Sydney plays out so well, and you feel things for them as their relationship changes, and when Cooper's character enters their unique workforce.
This film really benefited from the actors improvising, as it lead to some very funny moments. Obviously meaning to be funny, like the scene on the the jet and Roselyn's explanations for everything Irving throws at her. I meant that scene where she cleans the house to Live and Let Die is hilariously awkward to watch, with her little son just sitting there and watching his mom give an angry yet powerful rendition of the Wings song.
Bale portrayed Irving brilliantly. When things get tough for him, he excellently shows how a man of his status and ideology breaks down, bit by bit. You start the realize that even though he's so eccentric and rich, he still only human. I think Jeremy Renner deserves credit for that too. Not in the sense that his character goes through the same stuff as Bale's, but in that he was played with so much heart and honesty.
Something that hasn't been seen for a while in Movie-Land, 'American Hustle' is a unique film that gets in the audience up close and personal with every main character they see. The story could have been clearer, but heck, 'Badlands' had little story and that was brilliant too. It makes way for the improvisation, which adds so much and another dynamic to the story and experience.
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)
"God, you're noteworthy!"
It seems that the later half of 2013 has proved those (including myself) wrong about 2013 being a bad year for films. I'm not saying that this is the best of 2013, just that it's not as bad as I thought this years movies would be.
When I started watching this, I wasn't in the best of moods. Which can be seen as a problem, because this is what's branded as a 'feel good film'. We'd got to the cinema late, in the hope that ads would run for around 20 minutes before the film, as they always do. This time, they did not. We didn't miss a lot, probably just the first 3 minutes. However, finally settling in wasn't made easy by my mother frequently tapping me and stating, "that Ben Siller's quite small, isn't he?" (That's not a typo, by the way, she still thinks his surname is 'Siller').
Anyway, this movie is not bad. Stiller really seems to know what he's doing, and I think this is a brave move for him, as he's usually typecast as a comedy actor. With this film, he's demonstrated that he understands how to use the camera to represent peoples everyday daydreams. Everyone does it, which makes Walter instantly relatable (to some degree). The feeling of escapism is brought across quite well, with clear contrasts to his mundane work life to his wild daydreams and eventual traveling.
The acting is also noteworthy. The problem is, however, I feel that a film like this had a lot of potential for brilliant performances, which it didn't quite fulfill. They weren't bad per sè, but they didn't stand out like they could have. Slightly predictable, in a sense.
Wiig's character is likable, but that's pretty much it. You see her as a love interest, and a kind of asset to him, but she's not enough to make you feel involved. I don't think that's because she can't do it, rather I think that she wasn't in it enough. She's a great actress, but she was mainly in this just for Mitty to daydream and awkwardly stare at.
Stiller gives his signature acting style, however more played down, as this isn't a comedy. This style fits the character, for sure, but it could have been more alive. His Mexican friend and the Parks and Rec guy were pretty good as well, but it just seems too centered around Mitty. Character development was an issue, but that could possibly be because there was a baby sitting behind me making rather interesting chewing noises (though, to be fair, I must say it's parents kept it quiet quite well).
There some decent laughs in this, too. Not like, "HAHAHA oh boy I can't breathe! Really! Call the cinema doctor!" But like, "Aha. Ah. Man, I need the toilet. But I'd rather see how far this joke goes before I go". The daydream sequences are comical, because although they are cleverly done, they are so out of the ordinary and enjoyable.
It's not just the daydreams that were directed with care, though. My favourite scene is one that takes place through an x-day scanner. You seen everything happen through this screen, which is simply effective and comical.
There is a scene that parodies a certain movie from a couple of years back. Now, when I heard that, I was instantly interested and couldn't wait to see what it was. Alas, when it got to it, it just didn't make sense. It didn't fit in, and was just there for an extra laugh, which it didn't need.
A feel good soul searching film that was good, but had a lot of potential that it didn't fulfill, mainly due to the acting and oddly placed comedic scenes. Yeah, that's probably the best way I can put it. It's worth a watch, and it's not on the level of 'Walking with Dinosaurs', but we've seen better films this end of the year.
High Society (1956)
A Bing Crosby picture, in beautiful Technicolor!
OK. It's boxing day, and for some obscure reason Channel 5 (HD) is on. After sitting through a terrible Big Brother commercial and preparing to quickly change the channel, the old time MGM logo appears. "Ok, this could go somewhere".
I've gotta say, this was a fun movie. I'm not usually one for musicals, but boy this had a lot going for it. I mean, it's fun in the sense that it doesn't take itself too seriously. Everything is shown in such vibrancy and enjoyment that its hard not to keep watching.
I don't know if this happened a lot in mid-50's movies, but seeing an Armstrong/Crosby/Sinatra combo in one movie was cool. Grace Kelly and all those guys in moustaches were really good too. Their performances were great comedically and portrayed the narrative very well. I'd say they were good emotionally, but this movie is so light-hearted it would suffer from being emotionally deep in any way.
The introduction of Sinatra and Holm's characters was a standout point for me, because it just lifted happiness levels even more. They're addition to the mix of music and laughs (and husbands) was brilliant, because they were all involved in a charming way. They're musical number was a treat, one that I would usually be disinterested in.
It's not amazing, but it's good for what it is. There were a lot of things that could have been done better, like mild continuity and plot issues, but it wouldn't have been made that much better. There are a number of pretty funny moments, too, especially from Louis Calhern's character. They're not like 'Spit out your milk' funny, but 'chucklable'.
A classic and fun 50's romp, that's fit for family viewing and extended air travel. It's made me want to watch 'Oklahoma!' all over again.
Rush (2013)
"The closer to death you are, the more alive you feel", says Thor
'Rush' is a movie that has been on my watch-list for sometime. I was going to see it when it was released in theaters, but couldn't, which was a bummer.
However, when I did get round to it, it made for one hell of a picture. I purposely didn't read up about the actual events that happened, because I wanted to go in without expectations. Well, I read an article on it in GQ, but that was a while ago, so whatever. I think it helped.
This really is a brilliant movie. The way it's all done was pretty much flawless. The intensity of the racing and drama really made you feel invested, as did the brilliant performances by all the cast. Hemsworth and Bruhl portray such a dynamic yet intriguing relationship, that when it comes to the races, you just can't decide who you want to win, but you want to see where this rivalry goes. It was good to see Stephen Mangan take a prominent supporting role, too. I've only see him in 'Episodes' and follow him on Twitter, so I hope the other stuff he's done is like this.
The style and direction also make this film so impressive. There are times when the camera literally doesn't stop moving, whether it be during a race scene or straight-forward dialogue scene, and you don't even notice it. It like you're on a constant ride. There are films where directors choose unconventional shots just to add diversity or for the sake of it, but not this one. Howard knew what he was doing. Kudos to you, man.
If I'm honest, it didn't blow my socks off, but I just can't flaw it. As far as biopics and dramas go, this is one of 2013's finest.
Badlands (1973)
A beautiful piece of imagery and art
When I first watched this film, I was watching it from a narrative and contextual point of view. This kept me from realizing the stunning cinematography and direction. If you look at the way this film is simply crafted you see much more.
The reason it is better to see it from this way is because the acting and story is not what is usually seen. I originally felt the reactions of the characters, especially Spacek, we're strange and often unusually. It wasn't until I looked back on the film that I realized these reactions and acting styles were a stroke of genius, as a way of portraying this story in a realist and powerful way.
Amidst the incredible backdrops of wide open deserts and lush Forrests, we are given these absolutely incredible performances by Sheen and Spacek. You feel so invested into the characters and plot, you really care for them, even though Sheen's character, Kit, is rather cold-blooded.
Spacek portrays a naive Holly brilliantly, going along with everything Kit says, as she feels they are deeply in love with each other. It's as if she sees the world through these eyes that create a dream-like reality, and these acts that Kit commits are alright, because he's older and loves her.
Kit also looks at the world obscurely. He seems to see himself as a much greater, important man, instead of the mysterious and confused boy-like greaser he is. Sheen plays this brilliantly.
They both believe, in some way, that they deserve more than they can have. Malick's simple yet powerful direction really gets this across, as the young and lost couple make their daring way across the Montana Badlands.