REBECCA Review

First, some context: I haven't exactly been a big fan of director Ben Wheatley's films thus far. On the other side of this coin is the fact I've only seen two of the man's films in High-Rise and Free Fire. So, not a wealth of evidence on which to base my presumption that the filmmaker's take on Daphne du Maurier’s beloved 1938 gothic novel and the second major film adaptation after Alfred Hitchcock's 1940 version wouldn't live up to its acclaimed predecessors. Some further context: I haven't seen Hitchcock's film nor have I read du Maurier’s novel, so at the very least Wheatley's iteration of this story would not be viewed under the shadow of those former works. In turn, this works well for a viewer and viewers with the same circumstances given the mystery of the piece undoubtedly works better for those previously unaware of the specifics of the narrative. That said, the two films I have seen from Wheatley both very much fit into a small, very specific kind of niche genre in that both seemed to have been heavily influenced by the style and color palette of the seventies while carrying an equally sardonic tone if not admittedly varied when it came to themes and ideas. If nothing else, Rebecca would offer an opportunity for the director to branch out stylistically and tackle a different genre altogether in this very British, very romance-infused thriller as adapted by the likes of by Jane Goldman (Kick-Ass) and screenwriting duo Joe Shrapnel and Anna Waterhouse (Seberg). The idea is certainly ripe given Rebecca purports to be something vastly different than that of anything Wheatley has made before, but would seem to take a turn into terrain that the director is not necessarily accustomed to, but is likely more comfortable in. It is in this hope that Wheatley's mentality and strong penchant for bringing an attitude and point of view out of his images and into the tone of his films might make Rebecca more than a by-the-numbers account of jealousy incarnate, but it is in this hope that this latest endeavor ultimately fails as it more often than not feels like this new adaptation of du Maurier’s work could have been made by anyone. Despite having not read the novel and not having seen any other versions of the work Wheatley's film moves along at a pace that fails to ever make viewers fully invest in either the characters, the drama, or the character's drama. This is an adaptation that is just enticing enough to pique interest in the source material yet couldn't feel more like a condensed version of the literature; the depths of Wheatley's film only reaching so far as Mrs. Danvers' compassion rather than that of Rebecca's grave.

CALL ME BY YOUR NAME Review

The adjective you're searching for is "tender." From the first series of title cards through to every instagrammable frame of Luca Guadagnino's Call Me by Your Name it is the tenderness that remains pungent to each of the senses. While it may not always feel or seem as if there is a particular tenderness to the love story being told here-the film takes its sweet time introducing this inevitable aspect-there is always a tenderness to each of the characters as they exist in this bubble of eternal warmth brought on by the summer season and their escape to Northern Italy. Tenderness breathes through every ounce of Guadagnino's film whether he is highlighting the see-through indigo waters of the Ligurian Sea or the intimate brush of soft skin between two human beings. This consistently gentle, but still strikingly beautiful aesthetic paired with the large amounts of sympathy we, the viewers, continue to feel as we grow more and more involved in the story paints this overall portrait of seventeen year-old Elio (Timothée Chalamet) and his budding relationship with the visiting Oliver (Armie Hammer) in gentle motions of complete tenderness. Suffice to say, Call Me by Your Name is not simply a film about the coming of age of a young, gay male in the early eighties, but it is a complex character analysis of this young man who has been given every academic advantage, but still struggles to figure out who he is among his liberal Jewish family that has refined his cultured and delicate personality. Elio is a personality that is wholly understanding and forthright about the circumstances that have led to his upbringing and how such has shaped the person he presently is, but this level of perspective has also brought about a level of self-awareness that allows Elio to understand how little he understands about the more vital, emotional aspects of being. Though I've yet to see Guadagnino's 2009 breakout hit I Am Love I wasn't all too impressed with last year's A Bigger Splash as it was more a melodrama where the characters had nothing better to do than create their own drama while yearning to be of huge emotional resonance, but ultimately failing to do so because those characters brought so much of their strife upon themselves. With his latest, Guadagnino adapts André Aciman's novel from James Ivory's screenplay and transcends the intellectual bubble of privilege and emotional consumption by submitting itself entirely to the tender love story that is its essence.

First Trailer for CALL ME BY YOUR NAME

One of the biggest stories to come out of Sundance earlier this year was that of director Luca Guadagnino’s (A Bigger Splash, which I wasn't a huge fan of) follow-up based on André Aciman's 2007 novel titled Call Me By Your Name. The film, which is being released by Sony Pictures Classics and that I plan to make one of my must-see films at the Toronto International Film Festival next month, takes place in the midst of the summer of 1983 and is the story of a sudden and powerful romance that blossoms between an adolescent boy (Interstellar's Timothée Chalamet) and a summer guest named Oliver (Armie Hammer) at his parents' cliffside mansion on the Italian Riviera. During the restless summer weeks, unrelenting but buried currents of obsession, fascination, and desire intensify their passion as they test the charged ground between them and verge toward the one thing both already fear they may never truly find again: total intimacy. Though I generally try to avoid reviews prior to seeing a movie, much like with Manchester by the Sea last year-the buzz coming off this thing was unavoidable and this first trailer certainly puts its praise to use as it is plastered with pull-quotes describing the film with such adjectives as ravishing, piercing, classic, and sublime. That's all without even mentioning the fact it has also been labeled as both a masterwork and a knockout of a film. One hates to assign such descriptors prematurely, but the love here looks to be unanimous and while I will try not to allow too much of this to filter into my expectations I'm certainly looking more forward to seeing what the film has to offer because of it. Also, the Sufjan Stevens song choice here couldn't seem to be more fitting. Call Me By Your Name also stars Michael Stuhlbarg, Amira Casar, Esther Garrel, and openson November 24th, 2017.

CARS 3 Review

I could not have been less excited about the prospect of a third Cars movie. Most would say it is fair to classify this now trilogy as the weakest link in the ever-growing Pixar brand, but I don't bring this up to quickly cut down the third installment in this franchise that has borne nothing more than extended or unnecessary narratives, but rather to commend it for stepping up its game with what is likely the last chapter largely featuring Lightning McQueen if not the beginning of a new generation of Cars films as Cars 3 actively attempts to correct much of what has dragged these films down to sub-par Pixar levels from the beginning. In 2006, an idea such as a world filled with talking vehicles and a story that paid homage to the racing world, where it'd been, and where it might be going was an inspired enough one especially considering the combination of Disney and Pixar had yet to fail to meet if not surpass expectations. There seemed so much energy and so much enthusiasm for this first endeavor and while, having re-watched that first film recently, Cars is certainly a fine enough experience it didn't transcend the genre of animated movies in the way many of its predecessors had. Rather, Cars was more along the lines of an animated movie made strictly for the kiddos rather than one that had the ability to both appeal to the children in the crowd as well as emotionally resonate with their parents. That isn't to say it didn't try, but it is in the same kind of middle area where the purpose is present yet the payoff doesn't totally work that we find Cars 3. Many will agree Cars 2 was a total misstep and deviated from what at least made the first film charming and even if the Cars movies didn't make them buttloads of cash via merchandising it would seem Pixar might be intent on course correcting for the sake of artistic credibility as Cars 3 makes a genuine attempt to steer this franchise back into the arms of what inspired it in the first place-the good ole open road. While we are eleven years down the road from the first Cars in the future the dynamic will be rather jarring as the original Cars and Cars 3 more or less bookend the career of McQueen; chronicling both how he learned to be the racer he always aspired to be as well as helping him cope with the passing of time, the passing of the baton, and understanding there might be more to life than crossing the finish line first.

New Trailer for CARS 3

In always looking forward to what Pixar might come out with year after year it was always going to be something of a disappointment when the inevitable Cars 3 came around and now...here we are. This summer we will not be graced by a new, inventive piece from Pixar nor will we see a sequel to one of their more beloved films (Ratatouille 2, anyone?), but rather we will have the only trilogy capper in Pixar history outside of Toy Story for what is easily the weakest two films on the studios slate. I'm trying really hard here to be positive about what the film might offer as this new, official trailer is marginally intriguing, but there simply seems to be no balance of audience awareness and content maturity. The Cars franchise, like Planes, should strictly be for children, but this trailer looks to hint at a story with complexities that we know Pixar is capable of conveying convincingly, but that we know the world of Cars can't exactly deliver like, say, Woody and Buzz might be able to. Directed by Brian Fee (a storyboard artist on the first Cars) this looks like to be a darker film than what its predecessors might have indicated. The worst thing about the previous two Cars films were that they left no lasting impression, especially when compared to their peers. It may be that Fee is attempting to break that stigma around the franchise with this third film by going in an unexpected direction and if any of the marketing so far is any indication-things are definitely not looking the way I imagined a Cars 3 would look. That said, we still have a story dealing with Owen Wilson's Lightning McQueen as he attempts to prove to a new generation of racers that he's still the best race car in the world. With this new trailer we get a better idea of what Cars 3 will look and sound like and while I'm intrigued by the implications of what the movie could actually be about there is still a lack of any genuine excitement. Cars 3 also features the voice talents of Armie Hammer, Bonnie Hunt, Tony Shalhoub, Larry the Cable Guy, Katherine Helmond, Cheech Marin, Paul Dooley, and opens on June 16, 2017.

FREE FIRE Review

"Everyone's from somewhere," says gun runner Vernon shortly after his introduction in director Ben Wheatley's (Kill List, High-Rise) Free Fire. Vernon, as played by South African native Sharlto Copley, is observing the plethora of people who have ascended upon an abandoned warehouse in Boston in 1978 to buy some of his guns. These people come from all over; some from Ireland, others from America, and further there are those of different ethnicities to be considered. This melting pot of participants bring history, prejudice, and a laundry list of assumptions about one another to the table. These preconceptions inform the tone of where each individual might register in the likelihood of who they're going to snap at and could potentially inform us of how this particular scenario was going to play out even before it did, but instead such quirks are only relied on for humor. Each of these men, these proud, overcompensating men tell us the clichés of their ancestry and fire insults back and forth with one another that same heritage being the punchline of most of them. Given the odd amount of time devoted to jokes and jabs about it, we assume there might be a point to it all in that they come to see past the error of such ways and that despite what someone might have heard or been told about a culture that it doesn't necessarily apply to all or that, at the very least, the stereotype might be something of an embellished truth. But no, Wheatley along with co-writer and frequent collaborator Amy Jump have no time for depth, leaving such ideas on the table and only using those clichés and stereotypes for the aforementioned comedic purposes. That isn't to say that a film can't have fun and be good while having no substance whatsoever, but it is saying that if this is the route your movie chooses to go it better be damn good at accomplishing what it sets out to accomplish and Free Fire just isn't. The idea is there, that is clear. The ambition is admirable, no doubt. Still, Free Fire never seems able to reach the heights of what Wheatley or Jump likely had in their heads when they were writing and storyboarding the project. Having only seen High-Rise prior to this and not being a fan of that film there might be an inherent hesitance toward the director's work, but there seems an obvious disconnect between the idea that spawned such a movie and the execution that has delivered the disappointing final product we see play out on screen.

Teaser Trailer for CARS 3

In always looking forward to what Pixar might come out with year after year it was always going to be something of a disappointment when the inevitable Cars 3 came around and now...here we are. This summer we will not be graced by a new, inventive piece from Pixar nor will we see a sequel to one of their more beloved films (Ratatouille 2, anyone?), but rather we will have the only trilogy capper in Pixar history outside of Toy Story for what is easily the weakest two films on the studios slate. The cards have been dealt though and despite the fact it always seemed the Cars franchise was something of a "baby" to Pixar and Disney chief creative officer John Lasseter it seems even he is too busy now to mess with this third installment as Brian Fee (a storyboard artist on the first Cars) has taken over and has seemingly delivered a much darker film than what its predecessors might have indicated. The worst thing about the previous two Cars films is that they are more or less forgettable, especially when compared to their peers. It may be that Fee is attempting to break that stigma around the franchise with this third film by going in an unexpected direction and if the first teaser was any indication-things are definitely not looking the way I imagined a Cars 3 would look. This meaning that rather than the bright colors and zooming sounds of stadiums packed with racing and cheering automobiles that instead we have a story dealing with Owen Wilson's Lightning McQueen attempting to prove to a new generation of racers that he's still the best race car in the world. That first teaser showed us McQueen crashing on the track with the tagline, "From this moment. Everything will change." Pretty grim for a franchise that has made its name on merchandising and brand appeal rather than tapping into genuine emotion as most Pixar films do, but again...here we are. With this new trailer we get a better idea of what Cars 3 will look and sound like and while I'm intrigued by the implications of what the movie could actually be about there is still a lack of any excitement. Cars 3 also features the voice talents of Armie Hammer, Bonnie Hunt, Tony Shalhoub, Larry the Cable Guy, Katherine Helmond, Cheech Marin, Paul Dooley, and opens on June 16, 2017.

NOCTURNAL ANIMALS Review

Editing. Editing is key in director Tom Ford's follow-up to his 2009 debut A Single Man titled Nocturnal Animals as the narrative begins by introducing Susan Morrow (Amy Adams) as a woman who seemingly has it all together, but whose world it tears to shreds in less than two hours. It accomplishes such a visceral effect on the viewer due largely to the skill in which it is cut. To unravel the neatly wrapped facade of Morrow's life is to cut back and forth between her present timeline, her past detailing how she reunited and fell in love with first husband, Edward Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal), as well as the story in which she is reading. The key factor being the story that she is reading comes to her from Sheffield as a novel he wrote that will soon be published, but as it was inspired by Morrow he thought she deserved to read it first. The book, also titled "Nocturnal Animals", is the story of a family on a road trip whose car is hijacked by a band of troublemakers that includes a nearly unrecognizable Aaron Taylor-Johnson where terrible things happen. The representation of this novel as put to screen is what will come to garner the most attention from the viewer as it is high-tension drama filled with moving and effective plot points as well as performances. What makes Nocturnal Animals, the film, more than just a stirring adaptation of the work within the work though, is the foresight it utilizes in the outside stories and how they will influence our reactions to the actions taking place within that most engaging storyline. How is this accomplished though? How are these two outlying narratives so effective in both supporting and drawing from the narrative that undoubtedly holds the weight of the film on its shoulders? Through the editing. The film is cut in such an extraordinarily unpredictable fashion that, as an audience member, when it cuts we are never allowed to know what it might be cutting to. There are even long pauses that fill the screen with darkness designed to make the audience think a certain segment is over only to drop us back into the same story moments later. This unpredictability not only ups the tension in terms of seeing where certain plot strands might go, but in ultimately structuring the story in such a way that when the payoff for everything each of the three individual storylines has been building to finally arrives it hits you. And I mean really hits you. Nocturnal Animals is an exercise in sheer audacity and nearly every one of its risks pays off.

THE BIRTH OF A NATION Review

Nate Parker's The Birth of a Nation plays with the title of D.W. Griffith's 1915 silent film to reappropriate its phrase of a title to no longer be used in a deprecating manner towards black people. Griffith's film (which is a requirement in any film school due to it being widely accepted as the first feature length motion picture) used blackface to portray African American characters while, given the time in which it was made, is also wildly racist in many regards. For Parker to be willing to challenge a term and the cultural baggage that goes along with it that has now been established for over a century is bold. This boldness ultimately works in his favor though as his film certainly stands to make a statement. Coming off a whirlwind debut at the Sundance Film Festival at the beginning of this year the film scored a record for the most expensive acquisition deal in the festivals history with Fox Searchlight snatching up Parker's slave drama for an astonishing $17.5 million. Of course, in the months since that acquisition stories have re-surfaced about the seventeen year-old case in which The Birth of a Nation's director, writer, producer, and star Nate Parker was accused and acquitted of sexual assault and that four years ago the woman who accused him committed suicide. Such allegations can of course not be taken lightly and it doesn't exactly bode well for Parker that he depicts or suggests two savage and humiliating rape scenes in his film as performed by malicious and one-dimensional Caucasian villains, but to let those allegations influence the judgement of this piece of art he has created feels unnecessary. Sure, this is solely a product of Parker's doing as he had a hand in every stage and facet of this production and thus his particular view of the world undoubtedly made its way into the DNA of the film, but to allow such outside influences such as actions from nearly two decades ago to come into account for a piece of art made by an individual who has no doubt grown, matured, and maybe even changed in that time period isn't wholly fair. And I understand-neither was what he was accused of doing. It wasn't fair that the repercussions of his actions might have contributed to the accuser's death, but taken on its own terms-only as a piece of filmmaking depicting an ugly time in history that simultaneously attempts to re-write multiple generations worth of certain interpretations of history- The Birth of a Nation is a powerful and unapologetic film that uses that aforementioned boldness and an appealing saga of revenge to craft something memorable if not exactly transcendent.

First Trailer for NOCTURNAL ANIMALS Starring Jake Gyllenhaal

The second directorial effort from fashion designer Tom Ford (A Single Man) was undoubtedly one of my most anticipated of the year and after the largely glowing reviews it received out of both the Venice and Toronto film festivals I am only all the more excited to finally see the follow-up to Ford's striking 2009 debut. With the likes of such top tier talent as Jake Gyllenhaal and Amy Adams in your film it is hard to imagine how one could go completely the wrong way, but given the short teaser for today's full trailer that I saw yesterday and the fact it immediately called to mind Ridley Scott's curiously questionable The Counselor (which had a beyond amazing line-up of stars) I can only be reassured by the positive reviews in that Nocturnal Animals will not share the same fate as that 2013 misfire. With this film, Ford has adapted the Austin Wright novel Tony and Susan with the film actually taking its name from a story within that story. In the film, Adams plays Los Angeles-based art dealer, Susan Morrow, who receives a novel called "Nocturnal Animals" that was written by her ex (Gyllenhaal) after her husband (Armie Hammer) leaves on a business trip. From here, the narrative is described as, "weaving in and out of this book that can be interpreted as a veiled threat." The idea of seeking revenge or vindication from an ex-lover is nothing new, but doing it through such symbolic ways as mailing her a copy of your book that intentionally elicits many an interpretations is certainly an intriguing way to go about framing such a tale. The full trailer certainly makes such intrigue all the more inviting as its clear Ford has again brought his impeccable sense of style to the medium of film and each of the high profile performers seem to be giving invested performances. Here's to hoping the positive reviews can be trusted on this one. Nocturnal Animals also stars Michael Shannon, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Laura Linney, Isla Fisher, Ellie Bamber, Karl Glusman, Andrew Riseborough, Michael Sheen, Imogen Waterhouse, and opens on December 9th, 2016.

First Trailer for Sundance Favorite THE BIRTH OF A NATION

Back in January the big talk of the Sundance Film Festival was actor/director/writer Nate Parker's The Birth of a Nation, not only because it received several standing ovations, but largely due to the fact it ended up selling to Fox Searchlight for a record-setting $17.5 million. Searchlight beat out competing bids from The Weinstein Co., Netflix, Paramount and many others with the likes of streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon being cited as game changers as far as the typical market at film festivals go. Having written, directed, and starred in the film this could be a potentially huge year for Parker as Searchlight has set the film up with an awards-friendly October release date and no doubt plan on rolling out an awards worthy campaign for the multi-hyphenate. In the film Parker plays Nat Turner, a former slave in America, who leads a liberation movement in 1831 to free African-Americans in Virginia. While it is easy to peg such a film for awards season glory I'm sure this was not the pure motivation for Parker to sink so much of his time, talent, and heart into the film. Rather, he undoubtedly felt it was time for Turner's story to be told and felt not only a responsibility to do so, but at a certain point that he could do the material justice. With an astounding supporting cast and this first trailer that features some haunting and hauntingly beautiful images set to Nina Simone's "Strange Fruit," it seems as if Parker has certainly captured a certain tone and hopefully hit something of an emotional core that, should this become the awards favorite it seems destined to be, won't feel redundant of Steve McQueen's masterpiece from three years ago. The Birth of a Nation also stars Armie Hammer, Aja Naomi King, Penelope Ann Miller, Aunjane Ellis, Jackie Earle Haley, Mark Boone Jr, Colman Domingo, Dwight Henry, Esther Scott, Roger Guenveur Smith, Gabrielle Union, and opens on October 7th, 2016.

THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. Review

Though it doesn't indicate the quality of the film in the slightest, The Man From U.N.C.L.E. will always fall under the unfortunate circumstances of having to open two weeks after Mission: Impossible-Rogue Nation. This is unfortunate due to the fact it will mean The Man From U.N.C.L.E. will have less of a cultural impact than the already slight one it was going to have without having to follow-up the last great action hurrah of the summer. This isn't really relative to the film itself, but while it seems there was never much expected of The Man From U.N.C.L.E., it's worth noting it is something of a shame due to the fact it now will definitely not come to mean much in the larger pop culture landscape. A shame because the film is actually quite fun and therefore rather satisfying when taken on the terms of what it is intended to be. Coming to us courtesy of director Guy Ritchie (Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, Snatch, the Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes films) this film, based on the NBC show that ran from 1964-68 about two secret agents who work for a secret international counter espionage and law-enforcement agency called U.N.C.L.E. or the United Network Command for Law and Enforcement, is everything you'd expect from the director and all you could want from the genre in general. Enlisting Superman (Henry Cavill) and The Lone Ranger (Armie Hammer) to star is another way of suggesting this could possibly be another sub-par take on an old television property, which is a trend in and of itself that feels dated now (how ya doin' 2000?), but Ritchie and his team (including first time feature writer Lionel Wigram) have somehow managed to cobble together a pile of standard spy movie cliches and make them into something astonishingly direct and abundantly stylish that completely owns what it is and, as a result, comes off as confident and self-assured as Cavill's Napoleon Solo.

First Trailer for THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E.

Even when the summer movie season feels like it might be a rather dry one compared to previous years it always begins to reaffirm its status as the premiere time of year for would-be blockbusters by the time March rolls around as we're knee-deep in trailers for non-superhero properties that we didn't necessarily know a lot about before they went into production. In the last twenty-four hours we've received trailers for what could possibly be the biggest comedy of the summer, Cameron Crowe's latest and now we have our first look at Guy Ritchie's (Snatch, Sherlock Holmes) re-imagining of the 1960's television show, The Man From U.N.C.L.E. I have no prior knowledge of the British television show that starred Robert Vaughn and David McCallum, but given the credentials this new version has going for it I'm definitely intrigued. Henry Cavill (Man of Steel) and Armie Hammer (The Social Network) star as two opposing agents from the CIA and KGB who are forced to team-up in order to stop a mysterious criminal organization working to create numerous nuclear weapons. The trailer looks to be a lot of fun as Ritchie's trademark energy is fully intact and any number of the frames could be taken from a bygone era Bond film. The film looks to perfectly balance the style, action, humor and depth in a way that Cavill and Hammer will be doing much of the complimentary lifting to Ritchie's distinct style. Hammer especially looks to be having a lot of fun here while Cavill seems to purposefully be playing it so straight the humor will naturally float to the surface. The Man From U.N.C.L.E. also stars Alicia Vikander, Hugh Grant, Elizabeth Debicki, Jared Harris and opens  on August 14th.

THE LONE RANGER Review

It's hard to complain about a movie when you know so much hard work and care went into the production of it. The movie adaptation of The Lone Ranger has traveled a long and rugged road in order to reach the big screen and along the way I'm sure has seen many more tribulations than the common cinephile has been exposed to. As the whispers of production issues didn't come into play with World War Z's box office success a few weeks ago I was hoping the highly-publicized budgetary problems with Gore Verbinski's latest might play out the same way, but where the reviews were surprisingly glowing for the Max Brooks adaptation it almost seems critics were ready to jump on this latest Johnny Depp adventure before it was even out of the gate. Quite the opposite happened last summer when hopes were high for the Depp/Tim Burton collaboration Dark Shadows, but released only a week after The Avengers the film was lost in the shuffle and word of mouth was not kind. Still, I found myself enjoying the film rather immensely and have since re-watched it more than once on blu-ray trying to find what was so repulsive about it. I can't help but feel the same way about The Lone Ranger. I can certainly see where some of the criticism is coming from. The biggest issue the film faces is that of a tone and pacing crisis. There is never anything that jump starts the film and allows the audience to settle into their seats and enjoy the adventure about to take place and while there are fits and starts of rather harsh violence the film predominantly tries to take a comedic if not mostly slapstick approach to things. These kind of blunt tonal shifts can sometimes take us out of the experience we are trying to become a part of, but in the end it would be a disservice to this film and the people who might count on your opinion to decide if they'll see it or not to call this a bad movie. It is not a bad movie, it is a beautifully shot film with a layered story and some fine performances. It took a while to get going and though it doesn't really find its stride until the last half hour, one has to at least ask themselves what did they expect? It certainly couldn't have been much better than what we've been given.

Trailer Roundup: SUPER BOWL XLVII

As we draw closer to the biggest game of the year this weekend most movie fans are more excited about catching a glimpse of some of the most anticipated films of the year. As things have gone since the birth of youtube these ads have appeared online a few days prior. Naturally, this continues to be the trend as we've already seen a few of the trailers set to air during Super Bowl XLVII. I will be updating the videos as they come out., but you can hit the jump now to watch those already released and unlike during the game you can replay them until your heart's content. The official list is suspected to include 30-second spots for Brad Pitt's World War Z, J.J. Abrams highly anticipated sequel Star Trek Into Darkness, our very first look at Fast & Furious 6, Johnny Depp and Armie Hammer in The Lone Ranger, Marvel studios first film of their Phase II initiative, Iron Man 3, the latest from The Rock titled Snitch as well as an extended look at OZ The Great and Powerful. Super Bowl XLVII begins at 5:30pm Central, February 3 on CBS.

Full-Length Trailer For THE LONE RANGER

Summer 2013 is starting to look all the more interesting as we've had several trailers coming out over the past few days. We've already seen a glimpse of Armie Hammer and Johnny Depp as The Lone Ranger and Tonto in a teaser back in early October but now we get our first full, fleshed out look at what is sure to be one of the more interesting stories of summer '13. The film has already encountered many problems in getting to the screen, but now that the dust has settled all that is left to discover is how good the quality of the film will be and if any of the budget concerns or production woes will ultimately affect the quality. I have not jumped off the Depp train yet, though I believe he needs to steer clear of any more Jack Sparrow roles. I know the guy is good at what he does and the collaboration between he and director Gore Verbinski in 2011 made my top 10 list of the year, so needless to say I have high hopes for this one. With Verbinski at the helm Depp has created Jack Sparrow and Rango; I only hope that magic continues with Tonto. Still, the sidekick is not the focus here and as this trailer proves Armie Hammer seems to be handling leading man duties just fine. The film looks gorgeous and besides Hammer and Depp contains an all star cast that includes Tom Wilkinson, Barry Pepper, and Helena Bonham Carter. The Lone Ranger is set to open July 3, 2013. Hi-yo, Silver!

MIRROR MIRROR Review

When the first trailer for this appeared online back in November it honestly looked pretty horrible. Director Tarsem Singh had just come off the successful opening of "Immortals" and then this comes rolling around in what looked to be a race to beat the more serious "Snow White & the Huntsmen" to theaters in June. While I initially had a horrible feeling about the film and a great hesitation to even see it, as the marketing campaign continued it seemed to get smarter in realizing the fact it did not need to compete with the other Snow White film coming out this year but instead what it needed to do was distinguish itself by showing what was valuable about the many different forms a story could take. In this case, both the darker version and this one aimed more at the younger crowds can both be taken with equal credibility. That is a hard thing to believe and I almost refused to believe it before sitting down and actually taking in what "Mirror Mirror" had to offer. Now, I don't think this is a great film by any means, but it isn't reaching for the stars either, it is simply trying to tell a fun tale that we all remember as an animated movie. It is what we would actually expect a live action version of the Disney film to be while "Snow White & The Huntsmen" likely skews closer to that of the Brothers Grimm tale. There is an audience for both and while I, as a 25 year-old, will probably enjoy the other version of this story more, I cannot say that "Mirror Mirror" fails to entertain its target audience.

The Evil Queen (Julia Roberts) and Prince Alcott
(Armie Hammer) attend the ball together.

It has been a long time since I have actually sat down to watch the Disney version of "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs' and to be honest, chunks of the story had escaped me. I still don't know if I recall all of it correctly but the other thing that surprised me about "Mirror Mirror" was the refreshing feel of familiarity that came with it while still carrying a good set of originality (mainly in its visuals and musical score). The story, as you may remember, focuses around princess Snow White who is played here by Lily Collins (The Blind Side and also Phil Collins daughter) and her stepmother, the evil Queen (Julia Roberts). Evil Queen Julia has sent the village she oversees into shambles only to request more tax money from them when a handsome, rich Prince arrives and she insists on throwing a party to win him over and convince him to marry her. Prince Alcott (a perfectly cast Armie Hammer) becomes interested in the beautiful princess instead, forcing the evil Queen to kill her off so she will  continue to be "the fairest of them all". We all know Snow doesn't die and instead meets up with the dwarfs in the woods and stages a rebellion against the Queen. Collins is certainly capable of the protagonist role here though seeming somewhat overwhelmed at times by the scope in which Singh is operating. The real star here though is Roberts. I have always kind of been hit and miss with the star, but here you can tell how much fun she is having, how much she is really enjoying herself playing the baddie. It comes through in her campy, yet poignant dialogue that is made up more of sarcastic quips than fully formed thoughts.

The seven dwarfs.

Director Singh is a master of visual storytelling and he again puts this on full display. In "Immortals" I was blown away by his ability to take something we have seen countless times before and give them little twists of strangeness that made them more original but more importantly made it feel different. Where "Immortals" failed was in the fact the story had nothing new to offer. This could be said about "Mirror Mirror" as well, seeing as we have seen the movie before, but I felt this aspect is actually where this movie had an advantage. The script doesn't take itself too seriously and instead relies heavily on the humor and intentional farcical tone. The color palette, which ranges from the solid whites and grays of the Castle to the stark colors of the Queens dresses to the Bollywood-inspired finale that is literally an explosion of bright colors fits this tone perfectly. The way it compliments one another meshes to form a very calculated type of self-awareness while still keeping the basic elements and themes of the story intact. Singh was also smart to focus on the dwarfs in his film, they provide the majority of the fun here and are at the core of why children will love the film. They were always the characters that stood out in the animated version, that didn't necessarily stick to any archetype, but instead brought real inspiration to the audience and lead characters to fight for what they knew was right.

Snow White (Lily Collins) and Prince Alcott hide from the
monster the Evil Queen has hiding in the woods.

Even with the somewhat disappointing "The Lorax" hitting theaters earlier this month, it has been a good while since a full-fledged, fun family film has hit the cineplexes. That is the charm of this movie that will keep the kiddies entertained all the way through while providing plenty of good appealing moments to the adults that will be taking them to see it. Singh even throws in a musical number at the end that is sung by Collins herself and really exposes the importance of why his films so heavily rely on their style. "Mirror Mirror" is a feast for the eyes and is a pleasant diversion from everything else that is in theaters at the moment. There is not much substance to delve into when it comes to this project as we all know the story and the director and his team don't focus on too much on developing themes or making some kind of metaphor to our real world. No, this is simple, basic fun and should be celebrated for being just that in a time where studios are constantly trying to tell the dark, brooding side of things. I didn't expect to like "Mirror Mirror" much less enjoy it, but I did and I hope the crowds give it a fair chance as it certainly deserves it.

MIRROR MIRROR Review

When the first trailer for this appeared online back in November it honestly looked pretty horrible. Director Tarsem Singh had just come off the successful opening of "Immortals" and then this comes rolling around in what looked to be a race to beat the more serious "Snow White & the Huntsmen" to theaters in June. While I initially had a horrible feeling about the film and a great hesitation to even see it, as the marketing campaign continued it seemed to get smarter in realizing the fact it did not need to compete with the other Snow White film coming out this year but instead what it needed to do was distinguish itself by showing what was valuable about the many different forms a story could take. In this case, both the darker version and this one aimed more at the younger crowds can both be taken with equal credibility. That is a hard thing to believe and I almost refused to believe it before sitting down and actually taking in what "Mirror Mirror" had to offer. Now, I don't think this is a great film by any means, but it isn't reaching for the stars either, it is simply trying to tell a fun tale that we all remember as an animated movie. It is what we would actually expect a live action version of the Disney film to be while "Snow White & The Huntsmen" likely skews closer to that of the Brothers Grimm tale. There is an audience for both and while I, as a 25 year-old, will probably enjoy the other version of this story more, I cannot say that "Mirror Mirror" fails to entertain its target audience.

J. EDGAR Review

If "J. Edgar" were a research paper it would certainly get an "A". The new film from Clint Eastwood that stars Leonardo DiCaprio in the title role is deeply engrossing and incredibly detailed. The screenplay is penned by Dustin Lance Black, the man who's first script won him an Oscar (Milk), and is rich with important moments throughout history that shape the man who is our subject matter. The film is an engaging watch simply for the fact of the people involved with the project. DiCaprio is one of our finest actors and has given plenty of great performances that this one will indeed join. For his performance is not the issue with the film as a whole. If anything, his dedication and disappearance behind the prosthetic make-up help this film rise above the standard history essay that it is. The usually effective Eastwood seems to be lost in his own film here. It jumping so much from the 20's to the 30's and then to the 60's. It is difficult for us to know what point we are at some times and though this may have spawned from the script, it is the directors job to make clear his intentions, his themes that he wants the movie to emphasize, but instead of seeing those unfold in the storytelling we simply catch glimpses, hints of what this creative team is going for in DiCaprio's performance. It is actually strange how interested I was in the film, but at the same time so very bored with it. Maybe it was the anticipation that at any moment the film might pick up, that it might actually delve into what John Edgar did to in fact create the FBI, but instead we stay just above the surface. Skimming it and hitting the historically correct points while the motivation for what caused Edgar's entire mentality to develop as it did is scarcely shown. When the film does work up the courage to jump into speculative territory it quickly retreats as if hoping you didn't notice. This tactic works only for a short time before we realize the type of biopic this is and sadly, leaves us with a faint idea of what this film could have been had it really taken some chances.

Helen Gandy (Naomi Watts) holds the cue cards for
Hoover as he makes a public address.

The first problem with a film like this is the its subject matter. The story of J. Edgar Hoover spans such a length of time and includes so many different aspects of a story that could be told it is difficult to even imagine where one would start (it probably would have worked better as a mini series a la John Adams). This gives way to the constant time hopping contained in the film, but it also detracts as the majority of the film can really be boiled down to two storylines. One being the case in which he tracked down the kidnapper of Charles Lindbergh's baby. The other being that of his lack of a personal life (he lives with his mother up until her death) and the possibility that Hoover might have been gay. He certainly tried with women; early in the film he takes out Helen Gandy a new colleague in the secretary pool at the time but decides to take her on a tour of the card catalog system he created for the Library of Congress rather than to dinner and a movie. Gandy seems to have been a vital role in Edgar's life, but is a relatively small role in the film that is played with great respect by Naomi Watts. Through the short moments we see her on screen we see the unwavering loyalty she has to the man while her expressions question his every move.

It is with a real vile feeling that we see Hoover's motivations begin to show. The film does a fine job of giving us the inspiration of his mother (Judi Dench) and how he comes to see himself. As someone deserving of high regard, of more importance to the world, as simply a better human being. It is with that kind of idea of one's self that gives him a craving for power. A power he will do anything to keep. He buries himself so deep in securing his position that he becomes a stunted human being. He stops growing, he never changes. Even as his supposed enemies change from the communists in the 20's to the gangsters of the 30's and social rights activists of the 60's Hoover sees them all as threats to a way of life that is constantly changing in the world outside but for him has always been the same. He is afraid, even in death, to disappoint what his mother thought she raised and so creates a life-long goal of pushing what his heart yearns for to the back and instilling his legacy as the face of the FBI to the forefront.

Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer) and J. Edgar
(Leonardo DiCaprio) attend a court hearing.

What that heart yearned for we will never actually know. Hoover apparently had as many secrets himself as he kept filed away on others. As said before, the one this film draws attention to is the speculation he was gay and had a relationship with Clyde Tolson,  an associate director of the FBI who was Hoover's heir. When I say the film feels hesitant to jump into speculative territory this is what I mean. I would have been perfectly fine with a film that instead chronicled the actual process of what it took to create the centralized database devoted to the fingerprinting methods he instilled. I would have liked to have seen more the process of Hoover making the collection of forensic evidence a priority. Of how integrating experts from other fields into investigations would help solve crimes, and the film shows this happening to an extent, but it doesn't give us the back story on how it all came to be, on what Hoover had to go through to actually have these things happen. We hear dialogue about it, but the storytelling, the action of it is absent. Instead the film does decide to investigate his sexuality. This is done with a hesitant hand though as we only see DiCaprio's performance suggest this type of behavior when he is put into awkward situations with women or is in the presence of Mr. Tolson. This mysterious relationship, one that is never truly acted upon, is truly the tragedy of J. Edgar. Armie Hammer of "The Social Network" does a fine job of creating this role that is one thing to the public with implications of so much more. It is that combination of his mother and the need to retain his status that keeps Hoover's heart buried and in doing that to himself it has also created a film that feels very much the same. Cold and distant.

Hoover thinks back on his life.

There is ambition in this film and what it was meant to be yet the execution has produced a final product that while feeling full and grand also leaves you with a sense of emptiness as you leave the theater. Eastwood is a master filmmaker and his skills are certainly appreciated here. Bringing a cold gray palette to reflect the time period and the stone like shell our titular figure presents gives the movie a definitive mood. It is more the pacing that presents the issue with the aforementioned crosscutting between time periods that ends up proving to be a little too much while creating a lack of focus. It is as if the film jumps around so much that we never get to know Hoover that well, and for who he was at that point in his career. It doesn't help that when we fast forward to the 60's when he is attempting to keep the Kennedy's in line and do away with Martin Luther King that Leo is in old age make up that is hard to take him serious at times. Even worse is Hammer's make-up that creates a wax doll look for him as he lumbers around after a stroke. Needless to say the film has many missteps and ones that could have been corrected with a few more drafts of the script. The direction is certainly more than capable and DiCaprio is more than eager to deliver a performance that will win him a statue. He certainly does that here, but in the wrong film. As with the real J. Edgar Hoover, we may never know what this film really could have been but we can always speculate.

    
  

J. EDGAR Review

If "J. Edgar" were a research paper it would certainly get an "A". The new film from Clint Eastwood that stars Leonardo DiCaprio in the title role is deeply engrossing and incredibly detailed. The screenplay is penned by Dustin Lance Black, the man who's first script won him an Oscar (Milk), and is rich with important moments throughout history that shape the man who is our subject matter. The film is an engaging watch simply for the fact of the people involved with the project. DiCaprio is one of our finest actors and has given plenty of great performances that this one will indeed join. For his performance is not the issue with the film as a whole. If anything, his dedication and disappearance behind the prosthetic make-up help this film rise above the standard history essay that it is. The usually effective Eastwood seems to be lost in his own film here. It jumping so much from the 20's to the 30's and then to the 60's. It is difficult for us to know what point we are at some times and though this may have spawned from the script, it is the directors job to make clear his intentions, his themes that he wants the movie to emphasize, but instead of seeing those unfold in the storytelling we simply catch glimpses, hints of what this creative team is going for in DiCaprio's performance. It is actually strange how interested I was in the film, but at the same time so very bored with it. Maybe it was the anticipation that at any moment the film might pick up, that it might actually delve into what John Edgar did to in fact create the FBI, but instead we stay just above the surface. Skimming it and hitting the historically correct points while the motivation for what caused Edgar's entire mentality to develop as it did is scarcely shown. When the film does work up the courage to jump into speculative territory it quickly retreats as if hoping you didn't notice. This tactic works only for a short time before we realize the type of biopic this is and sadly, leaves us with a faint idea of what this film could have been had it really taken some chances.