THE FLASH Review

The dominance of the comic book movie over the last twenty-something odd years has admittedly brought me plenty of joy and moments of pure cinematic euphoria, but as we reach what is at least our sixth multiverse film in the last five years (and the second in the last three weeks) I think I've reached the acceptance phase of letting go. Letting go not necessarily because I want to, but because it has become more and more apparent that it is time. While it would feel easy to be angry, depressed, or even regretful about the direction of the genre and what super hero films have collectively become over the past few years it would seem simpler (and easier) to just accept that The Flash is a prime example of why these types of films have begun to feel like they're eating themselves and thus, as much as I hate to say it, why it's time to take a break. 

Letting go, not just of the possibilities that have both been fulfilled and lost, but of the individuals who pioneered these characters as flesh and blood. Listen, I get it, letting go is hard because it means freeing one's self from aspects of their past, things that have become such a big part of a person's life they may even define part of their personality and it's understandable why, rather than moving forward, one might want to remain in this state of familiarity - there's a comfortability in it - but director Andy Muschietti's The Flash is a watershed moment in the super hero genre not because it breaks new ground or re-energizes the kind of escapism these movies can provide, but because it brought upon the realization there is a difference in being comfortable and being resistant and that one can only resist change for so long before what was once a source of comfort becomes discomfort as the seeds of doubt and truth that what once was no longer is begin to grow and further, that a person can only tolerate discomfort for so long before admitting that change is necessary.

Official Trailer for ZACK SNYDER'S JUSTICE LEAGUE

I've had little stake in the "Release the Snyder Cut" movement, but as someone who has always appreciated Zack Snyder's dark, almost sinister take on how super heroes might be received and/or implement themselves into modern society his films have always proved daring if not necessarily successful each time out. Man of Steel was one of my favorite films of 2013 and I absolutely adored the myth-building, Ben Affleck's approach to Bruce Wayne, and the sheer scope of Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice three years later which was only made better by the ultimate edition released later that year. Of course, all of this momentum - despite being stifled by a fair majority of critics - came to a screeching halt in late 2017 when Joss Whedon's re-configured Justice League hit theaters on November 17th. Snyder was already shooting his planned two-part Justice League when Batman V. Superman was released in March of 2016 and I can recall reading about set visits that June, many of which were attempting to course correct the BvS narrative and assure those that weren't fans of Snyder's vision for the DC Universe thus far that Snyder was listening and taking note. Of course, by May of 2017 Snyder - dealing with a family tragedy - decided to take a break from the project despite having completed principal photography and already screened a cut of the film for friends and fellow filmmakers. The story was Whedon was only being brought in to assist in some additional photography and to assist the remainder of the post-production process. A story in The Hollywood Reporter published in May of 2017 even stated, “The directing is minimal and it has to adhere to the style and tone and the template that Zack set,” said Warner Bros. Pictures president Toby Emmerich. “We’re not introducing any new characters. It’s the same characters in some new scenes. He’s handing the baton to Joss, but the course has really been set by Zack. I still believe that despite this tragedy, we’ll still end up with a great movie.” Needless to say, by the time Whedon's version of the film was released in November it was clear this wasn't the film Snyder intended it to be and large portions of the film had been re-shot and re-configured in order for Warner Bros. to get out from under the weight of Snyder's ambitious vision allowing them to move forward with more single-shot, director-driven films that Wonder Woman had proved could be just as successful earlier that summer. Five years later though, we're finally (somehow) getting a proper Justice League film and sequel to Batman v. Superman that Snyder always intended. As someone who was completely on board for Snyder's vision from the get-go I can't wait to see what this film holds and if/how it will change the course of DC films moving forward. In addition, this official trailer for the project does not disappoint and seems to hint that Snyder has delivered everything he promised his epic to be. Zack Snyder's Justice League premieres on HBO Max March 18th.       

JUSTICE LEAGUE Review

I guess I should start out by saying that I am and always have been a fan of Zack Snyder. Without much effort I can recall sitting in the theater and experiencing Dawn of the Dead along with that moment when it clicked that this wasn't just a fun horror flick, but it was a good movie. I can remember seeing 300 several times if not for the admittedly thin story, but for the ways in which the director was pushing the boundaries of the visual medium. My heart almost dropped out of my chest upon first glimpsing that opening credits sequence to Watchmen in glorious IMAX and with Man of Steel it felt as if Superman had never been so epic; that the whole scope of his being had been presented, warts and all, even if most didn't agree that Superman should have warts. I loved Man of Steel and to a certain degree, I loved Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice as well. I'm not one to say that film is without its flaws, there is a convoluted nature to the proceedings that are unnecessary and it devolves into a CGI crapfest for the last forty minutes, but for me BvS was very much a personal film and one that was as grand in scale as it was deep with heart and rich with themes. Though the marks against it have their validity it is a film that arguably has more to say and more at stake than any other superhero film produced in the last seventeen years and certainly in the last nine or so since Marvel has streamlined the process. This brings us to Justice League, a movie that is hard for me to even call a Snyder film for, despite having the trademark look of the director during certain sequences, is undoubtedly the least Zack Snyder film to have ever been produced. It's sad and disheartening in the way that Justice League, or what Snyder began in 2013 and has been building through to up until recently has culminated with this, a vanilla action film with people dressed like characters we know and love, but to the benefit of a story that is paint by numbers if not the simplest example of such, a barrage of unfinished CGI and shortcuts, with no real stakes to be felt. Say what you will about those civilian casualties or the lack of awareness for them in previous films, but they added a weight to these proceedings that reinforced that in order for evil to be avenged evil first has to occur. Warner Bros. and Geoff Johns have gone out of their way to ensure Justice League took into consideration the complaints from previous endeavors and it does, resolving it to be the broadest and most generic theater-going experience one might have this year. The masses will no doubt love it.

ASSASSIN'S CREED Review

I won't pretend to know anything about the Assassin's Creed video game series or, for that matter, much about video games in general given the last one I played was probably Crash Bandicoot on the original PlayStation circa 2001. This is to the point that I'm typically indifferent to the idea of video game to film adaptations especially given most tend to be financial failures with the few I've seen being rather forgettable as well. It is with this Assassin's Creed adaptation though that my interest was piqued as not only had it attracted Michael Fassbender to star in another potential franchise, but that it also gave Fassbender cause to recruit his Macbeth director, Justin Kurzel as well as cinematographer Adam Arkapaw, it felt as if there might be a chance to break the mold. Despite the fact Kurzel somewhat shortchanged Shakespeare's story he indisputably made a visually stunning representation of The Bard's play and with Assassin's Creed coming from a medium very much based on the visual storytelling element it seemed as if this was a logical choice and that both Kurzel and Fassbender were very much intent on keeping the same visual style intact. That's what Kurzel does best, that's why Fassbender imagined he would make a good fit. They do, but the fact the visuals the film offers via its flashbacks to Spain in 1492 aren't the highlights of the film speak to how much better this is, but still how much better it could have been. Granted, the sequences in Spain are certainly the most breathtaking in terms of visuals and contain well-paced and seemingly well executed action sequences, but they aren't developed nearly as much character-wise as the other sections of the film. This is all to say there is an interesting premise here. Like I said, going into the film I had no idea what the objective of the game was or even who or what the titular assassins or their creed might be, but as we get to better know Fassbender's Callum Lynch (a character apparently made up specifically for the movie) we come to better terms with this world that three screenwriters have seemingly cobbled together from what I assume are the most interesting parts of the game. Faithful or not though, Assassin's Creed, the film, is an average enough action flick that has a core idea it certainly could have done more with and in more interesting ways, but takes shortcuts around the deeper questions posed by its central premise while hoping to garner enough return so as to potentially explore such questions and ideas in a sequel that will likely never happen.

New Trailer for ASSASSIN'S CREED Starring Michael Fassbender

Like I said back in May when the first trailer premiered, I won't pretend to know anything about the Assassin's Creed video game series or video games in general to the point I'm typically indifferent to the idea of video game film adaptations especially given most tend to be financial failures with the few I've seen largely being forgettable. It is with this Assassin's Creed adaptation though that my interest is piqued. Not only for the fact it has Michael Fassbender in the starring role, but that it has the actor re-teaming with Macbeth director Justin Kurzel and his cinematographer Adam Arkapaw who, despite shortchanging Shakespeare's story, made a visually stunning representation of The Bard's play. With Assassin's Creed it seems as if Kurzel and Fassbender were very much intent on keeping the same visual style intact as this new trailer gives us an even better glimpse at the visual prowess of their interpretation and how gorgeous it will be if nothing else. As far as story goes, I was don't know what to expect and while the little bit of plot offered here concerning the fact Fassbender's character is key more for his bloodline than any traits his person might currently possess is interesting I'm curious to how things will unspool from that premise. Given the game is said to be set in a fictional history of real world events and follows the centuries-old struggle between the Assassins, who fight for peace with free will, and the Templars, who desire peace through control-it seems screenwriters Bill Collage, Adam Cooper, and Michael Lesslie have plenty of mythology to work with. This trailer, while naturally delivering more footage, alsograbs my attention by giving a protagonist in Fassbender's Callum Lynch that is initially against whatever he us about to undergo, but seemingly comes to enjoy it. It may be a slight detail, but I like what that could mean for the tone of the film overall. Assassin's Creed also stars Marion Cotillard, Jeremy Irons, Brendan Gleeson, Michael K. Williams, and opens December 21st, 2016.

First Trailer for ASSASSIN'S CREED Starring Michael Fassbender

I won't pretend to know anything about the Assassin's Creed video game series or video games in general to the point I'm typically indifferent to the idea of video game film adaptations especially given most tend to be financial failures with the few I've seen largely being forgettable. It is with this Assassin's Creed adaptation though that my interest is piqued. Not only for the fact it has Michael Fassbender in the starring role, but that it has the actor re-teaming with Macbeth director Justin Kurzel and his cinematographer Adam Arkapaw who, despite shortchanging Shakespeare's story, made a visually stunning representation of The Bard's play. With Assassin's Creed it seems as if Kurzel and Fassbender were very much intent on keeping the same visual style intact as, if there is one thing that stands out about this trailer it is how gorgeous it looks. As far as story goes though, I was unsure what to expect and while a little bit of reading will enlighten one to the fact the game series is set in a fictional history of real world events and follows the centuries-old struggle between the Assassins, who fight for peace with free will, and the Templars, who desire peace through control-I still wasn't sure what to expect. This summary sets up your basic good versus evil situation, but the trailer for the film makes this premise slightly more enticing by introducing us to Fassbender's Callum Lynch, a death row inmate who is taken to a pharmaceutical company known as Abstergo (which seems to indicate some future conflicts) as they go through with a procedure on Lynch that enables him to experience the memories of his ancestor in 15th Century Spain. Consider me enticed. Also, I dig the music choice. Assassin's Creed also stars Marion Cotillard, Jeremy Irons, Brendan Gleeson, Michael K. Williams, and opens December 21st, 2016.

HIGH-RISE Review

Note: This is a reprint of my review for High-Rise, which originally ran on September 21, 2015 after seeing it at the Toronto Film Festival. I am publishing it again today as it hits select theaters and VOD this weekend.

Where to even begin with director Ben Wheatley's (Kill List) latest, High-Rise, is beyond me. If ever there were a muck of a film that thrived on its look and style alone it would seem to be this one. Not even the charisma of insanely charismatic British actors like Tom Hiddleston and Luke Evans can save the hot mess this is, though they try desperately. From the outset, audiences are presented with a dystopic world of chaos and destruction that seems so disconnected from anything resembling familiarity that there is no urgency to care. Instead, this intended metaphor of social hierarchy is an aimless slog through the explanation of a failing system rather than any kind of examination of how social classes are commonly found in societies that are actually developed. All systems fail eventually, we understand that, but what we see in High-Rise is a society that never develops past the embryonic stages. It's always been something of a rule of thumb that a dominant hierarchy is necessary in order to maintain social order and provide a stable structure, but the folks who have created this luxury tower block seem to all want to live in luxury with no one invested in putting in the dirty work. Naturally, those living on the lower floors are the ones believed to be less worthy of their place in the tower and thus what eventually develops is an all-out dangerous social situation that leads the residents of the high-rise to fragment into violent tribes hell-bent on provoking one another into submitting to the other. While the circumstances of this premise would certainly turn into a rather disorderly situation in any film I didn't expect the film itself to do the same thing.

BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE Review

It's important to remember that each individual comes to a movie not only with certain expectations and preconceived notions, but a different life experience up until the point they view a movie that will inform how they respond to a given piece of entertainment. I'm a child of the nineties, a product of Power Rangers and Capri Sun's; a time when what some would argue the best iteration of Bob Kane's Batman character would be brought to life. I'm of course referring to Batman: The Animated Series which ran from 1992-1995 and more or less became the defining Batman in my life-the Batman all other Batman's would be chasing from that point on. Too young for Michael Keaton's movies and too juvenile to initially understand just how bad Joel Schumacher's films were, the animated series brought to life the most genuine and credible version of the superhero my generation (or any other up to that point) could imagine. I adore the Christopher Nolan trilogy and what he did for the genre as a whole. I will forever hold that trilogy in high regard and The Dark Knight as one of the single greatest theater-going experiences of my life. Eight years after the Nolan/Christian Bale epic that will go down in history as the best live action version of Batman thanks to the late Heath Ledger's performance we now have the next attempt to bring the caped crusader to life in what is more or less the sequel to 2013's Man of Steel. Jump-starting the DC Universe in an attempt to catch up with Marvel Studios, director Zack Snyder and his team have delivered a film that seems to want to bring the tone, artistic quality, and believe it or not...the fun of that nineties animated series to life on the big screen, extended universe and all. This is where I come at the movie from. A place of balance between what was my childhood Batman (never having a large affinity for Superman given he never had as influential an animated series) and what is my more mature, realistic Batman in the Nolan trilogy. It's a parallel that worked out well for my progression from child to adult and so, the big question was: where would Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice fit into this scheme and how would everything I've seen and read of these characters inform my response to Snyder's bringing together of these two icons on the big screen for the first time? For this particular viewer: I enjoyed the hell out of it.

RACE Review

Race has good intentions. That is probably the best thing one could say about it which is unfortunate given its subject matter. One hears about the epic talent of Jesse Owens from the time they're in elementary school, when racing one another at recess was just something you did. With this myth and the still spectacular accomplishments Owens achieved as a track and field star very much ingrained in the history of not just American sport, but America in general it's somewhat surprising a movie about the man hasn't already been made. And so, Race has good intentions, clearly. Regrettably, that is all it has going for it though, as director Stephen Hopkins (a spotty director who has credits on well-renowned TV series, but whose feature credits are rather lousy) infuses his film with little to no energy leaving audiences to feel more as if they're walking through a Jesse Owens exhibit at a museum than becoming immersed in his life experiences. The film is a by the numbers biopic that takes us through the year of 1933 when Owens begins attending Ohio State up through the 1936 Berlin Olympics. The film gets points for not being your traditional cradle to grave biopic as it never dwells on the fact Owens was one of ten children and only notes his penchant for running by referencing his equaling of the world records in the 100-yard dash and long-jump competitions while still in high school. Of course, it is this achievement that would gain Owens national attention and the attention of numerous colleges from which Owens would choose Ohio State due to the reputation of their coach, Larry Snyder, for being the best there was. Did I lose you over those last few sentences? Dolling out information that is undoubtedly interesting, but as no soul or feeling were extracted from them you also tended to feel nothing. Well, guess what? That is pretty much how the movie will make you feel as well. It plays out, hitting all the expected beats of a film about a famous figure, sports or any kind of star, and then slogs to its conclusion before delivering the obligatory note cards over real-life pictures of our main characters that tells what the rest of life held for them. All interesting, but never invigorating.

Final Trailer for BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE

It appears that after Warner Bros. dropped that second full trailer in December (you know the one that caught all the backlash for essentially giving away the whole movie?) they felt the need to give audiences one more, hopefully reassuring look at Zack Snyder's Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice before it bows at the end of next month. Well, it seems they've more or less succeeded. Opening with an extended sequence and the boldest look we've had at Ben Affleck's Batman yet this trailer quickly sets up a different tone than that hinted at in the previous trailer and stick with the Batman versus Superman conflict throughout. Due to the fact I still believe there was no need to show us anything more after last years Comic-Con trailer I'm somewhat disappointed there is yet another trailer for the film, but I understand the need and the strategy. All of that aside, I'm as excited for this movie as anyone, but my hope to walk into the film and still be mostly in the dark about what we were getting seems to be getting smaller and smaller. Fortunately, with this latest trailer, the new footage gives us a look at the aspect of the film audiences have been most curious about without completely spoiling anything in the fashion of the previous trailer. We get a quick tease of Batman's hand to hand combat style and then are thrown into a montage of footage we've seen before save for that last, pretty glorious shot. Of course, as I've said before, all of this is said with a sense of optimistic reservation as director Zack Snyder is a master of the movie trailer, but the final product doesn't always live up to such promises. We'll see if Snyder can deliver sooner than later now. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice stars Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne, Diane Lane, Jesse Eisenberg, Jeremy Irons, Scoot McNairy, Jason Momoa, Holly Hunter and opens on March 25, 2016.

New Trailer for BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE

Back in April we caught our first glimpse of footage from Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice, and then in July we received the three and a half minute Comic-Con trailer that was absolutely bonkers. Offering an in-depth look at both how the film connects to MoS and why the caped crusader is so angry with the last son of krypton, that trailer seemingly sold everyone on the idea that this movie could be as epic as it sounded. Given there was still eight months to go until the actual release of the film at that time though, I knew it wouldn't be the last trailer we would see for the film. My hope, however naive it might have been, was that Warner Bros. might simply re-fashion the Comic-Con trailer into a two-minute version with maybe a few new shots included in the montage build-up that would undoubtedly come at the end of the trailer. There was no need to show us anything else, but after the release of the forty second teaser on Monday it was clear this wouldn't be the case. I'm as excited for this movie as anyone, but I still want to be mostly in the dark when walking into the movie this Spring. Fortunately, with this latest trailer, the new footage gives us a look at the humorous side of things in the all too "dark and serious" DC Universe while also offering a glimpse at the bigger plot and main antagonist outside of the titular showdown. Of course, as I've said before, all of this is said with a sense of optimistic reservation as director Zack Snyder is a master of the movie trailer, but the final product doesn't always live up to such promises. Can Snyder's ultimate super-hero smackdown live up to the greatness his trailers have promised thus far? We'll find out soon enough. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice stars Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne, Diane Lane, Jesse Eisenberg, Jeremy Irons, Scoot McNairy, Jason Momoa, Holly Hunter and opens on March 25, 2016.

TIFF 2015: HIGH-RISE Review

Where to even begin with director Ben Wheatley's High-Rise is beyond me. If ever there were a muck of a film that thrived on it's look and style alone it would seem to be this one. Not even the charisma of insanely charismatic British actors like Tom Hiddleston and Luke Evans can save the hot mess this is, though. From the outset audiences are presented with a dystopic world of chaos and destruction that seems so disconnected from anything resembling familiarity that there is no urgency to care. Instead, this intended metaphor of social hierarchy is an aimless slog through the explanation of a failing system rather than any kind of examination of how social classes are commonly found in societies that are actually developed. What we see in High-Rise is a society that never develops past the embryonic stages. It's always been something of a rule of thumb that a dominant hierarchy is necessary in order to maintain social order and provide a stable structure, but the folks who have created this luxury tower block seem to all want to live in luxury with no one invested in putting in the dirty work. Naturally, those living on the lower floors are the ones believed to be less worthy of their place in the tower and thus what eventually develops is an all-out dangerous social situation that leads the residents of the high-rise to fragment into violent tribes hellbent on provoking one another into submitting to the other. While the circumstances of this premise would certainly turn into a rather disorderly situation in any film I didn't expect the film itself to do the same thing.

Comic-Con Trailer for BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE

This post might now be late to the game, but it is content worth posting none the less. A lot of things were talked about and released over the weekend with San Diego Comic-Con taking place, but the new trailer for Zack Snyder's Man of Steel follow-up was arguably the biggest. We caught our first real glimpse of footage from the film back in April, but this new, three and a half minute trailer is absolutely bonkers. Offering in-depth looks at both how the film connects to MoS and why the caped crusader is so angry at the last son of krypton, Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice looks to be every fanboys dream come true. Mind you, this is all said with a sense of optimistic reservation as director Snyder is a master of the movie trailer. I can remember seeing the Watchmen trailer for the first time in front of The Dark Knight and despite not being familiar with the source material, adoring it. The same could be said of Sucker Punch which looked insanely cool and was an original property to boot. That the final products for both of these films turned out to be somewhat underwhelming was disappointing given their promise, but also makes it tougher to get too excited for a Snyder film based on their trailers. MoS also had a fantastic trailer, but I am among those who really enjoyed that film and that affinity has not faded with repeat viewings. Can Snyder's ultimate super-hero smackdown live up to the greatness this trailer promises? We'll find out soon enough. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice stars Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne, Diane Lane, Jesse Eisenberg, Jeremy Irons, Scoot McNairy, Jason Momoa, Holly Hunter and opens on March 25, 2016.

Teaser Trailer for BATMAN V. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE

My apologies for being late to the game with this one, but I've been away from the internet for the majority of the day (and man, did it feel pretty good). This is the biggest kind of news though so I imagine I should write something up about it considering it's what any die hard movie or comic book fan has been looking forward to for nearly two years now as it was at 2013's San Diego Comic-Con that director Zack Snyder announced his sequel to Man of Steel and that Batman would officially be joining Superman on the big screen for the first time. Since then it seems every bit of information surrounding the film has been teased out into news story after news story. Well, after a quick twenty-second tease yesterday (Thursday 4/16) on Twitter from Snyder the official teaser trailer leaked online late last night while Warner Bros. has now officially released that same trailer online with promises that those attending the special IMAX screenings of the trailer on Monday will still be the only ones to see extra footage. I can only imagine how long it will take for that footage to leak online. For now though, go ahead and hit the jump to check out the trailer as well as my thoughts on what we've seen so far. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice stars Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne, Diane Lane, Jesse Eisenberg, Jeremy Irons, Scoot McNairy, Jason Momoa, Holly Hunter and opens on March 25, 2016.

BEAUTIFUL CREATURES Review

Personally, I've been rooting for Beautiful Creatures since first seeing the trailer and its stellar mix of southern goth and Florence & the Machine soundtrack. Though I haven't read the young adult novel by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl the film is based on, I was intrigued by the setting, the fantasy and trying to assure myself that the next teen-lit adaptation featuring witches, wizards, or vampires had to be better than those Twilight movies. While it seems the buzz has been slow to build around this series I truly hope it becomes a talking point among its target audience and even beyond as I would love to see this series continue and have the opportunity to tell all four of its stories on film. While I enjoyed the movie plenty, there is much left to be desired and to a certain degree this takes away from the experience of the film. In some ways, it is as if this is only exists to set things up for what might come in the future and granted, that might just be due to the fact that there is still very much to come in the future. Still, for a first chapter there is much to enjoy here as the film adaptation of Beautiful Creatures features an impressive and very likable cast that executes its somewhat familiar story with a flair for the fun in it. There was a film a few years ago called Stardust and I always wished it had become a bigger success than it was. Based on a Neil Gaiman story it was a fun, enjoyable, very good film that took itself just seriously enough to feel credible while also not feeling overly cheesy when dealing with such things as witches and wizards. Beautiful Creatures is not as good a film as Stardust, but in the same vein it is a none too serious take on the fantasy world that gets overlooked or under cooked these days. Any movie that can involve elements of such genres and still manage some humor and honest drama is a welcome treat.

THE WORDS Review

No matter how much one loves film and loves to write about them there is always that passion for the writing aspect that comes first. There is just something to the process of it that is fascinating and we love to see that at work on screen. Or at least, I do. I have always imagined myself as a writer first even if that is not what you would call my official profession. Still, it informs everything I do and can certainly tell you a lot about me or someone who feels that same way about themselves. I also happen to love movies. Not just watching them, but dissecting them and learning about their motivations, why they were made, and what they mean to different people. They can be such a fascinating art form and I think we forget that sometimes. Thus, I couldn't help but to start writing about film. I do this not for any other reason that the fact I get pleasure out of it, a sense of gratification that I am actually contributing in some way. A way that has nothing to do with a sense of responsibility. This is not an article about me though, this is a film review of the latest film starring Bradley Cooper and a host of other recognizable faces who tell the story of a man who aspires to be what he has always thought himself to be. A man facing certain truths that he doesn't want to confront and a man who has to deal with a decision that he made to fulfill those dreams of his childhood that were made impossible by adulthood while stealing from him that sense of accomplishment. This film is The Words and it is about a writer. I'm a sucker for movies about writers, and this one sucked me in from the very beginning.

Author Clay Hammond (Dennis Quaid) and new friend
Daniella (Olivia Wilde) speak with a fan.

The main issue with The Words though is in fact the story so many writers are trying to tell. This is a multi-layered affair that would have benefited extremely from taking a few away. It isn't a fact that bothered me to the point I disliked the film, if anything what most people will complain about is the lack of a definitive ending, but there was something quietly poetic about the whole thing. We start with Dennis Quaid as Clay Hammond, an accomplished writer at a reading of his latest work. He tells the story that is at the center of the film and that story eventually gets around to telling the story of the story that Cooper's Rory Jansen steals and claims as his own novel. Sound a little confusing? It's not really. We hardly see Quaid's character and when we do he is interacting with a much younger college student (an underused Olivia Wilde) who is used as a plot device to extract the vague truth about the book he just finished reading to a room full of people that creates the countless conclusions moviegoers will discuss and come to about the ending. His is the layer that could have been completely removed from the film without losing much of the impact while probably making more audiences happy about that conclusion. What this character does serve to do though is add a bit of ambiguity to the mix. How distinct is the line between real life and fiction? The heart of the story truly is Cooper and his lovely wife Dora (Zoe Saldana), a young couple who live in New York and as we all do, are struggling to find their place in the world, in their own lives. Cooper's Jansen has been given the opportunity to write as a full time profession but has been unable to turn it into a successful career. We believe he is a good enough writer, but what he writes we are told would be difficult to market. Why? It is never explained, we just know what he does end up getting published is much better. Such a piece of the character I was disappointed did not come through in a story that revolves around him being a writer. We are told his style is internal, yet we never get a glimpse of the real Rory it seems.

Dora (Zoe Saldana) and her new husband Rory
(Bradley Cooper) find an old briefcase in Paris.

There has to be a bigger point to the film to drive the story forward though and so when Rory discovers an old manuscript in a briefcase Dora bought for him on their honeymoon in Paris he is taken aback by the story it holds. To know what it feels like for such a different kind of storytelling, such distinctive words (so we are told, we never really get a glimpse at the magic others are reading on the page) to cross through his mind he goes through with copying it onto his laptop. Dora sees it, loves it, thinks he should show it to a publisher and he can't help but to feel like a winner for once and so he does. The book is published and in this world is a huge success. Naturally, there will be consequences, but Rory doesn't ever imagine they will hit so close to home. So when an old man interrupts him on a park bench and provides more than enough proof (we get the old mans life story in flasbacks starring Prince Caspian himself Ben Barnes) Rory comes face to face with the full effect of what he's done. The story within a story within a story format doesn't mesh as well as I would have liked it to and the actual writing never comes off with a credible flair, but first time director and close friend of Cooper Brian Klugman succeeds in not allowing his story to go where it very easily could have. This doesn't turn into a battle over authorship or any type of revenge tale but instead it is about the ripple effect that one persons choice can have on the lives of so many others. In that way, and with such a good cast, the film is elevated above what my expectations held for it.  Still, as the credits rolled I felt the film had only scratched the surface on the what it could dig through and bring to the surface about such a strong subject as consequence. The conflict takes a little too long to come up and is never truly resolved yet I was still happy with the film even if I didn't find it completely satisfying.

Rory attempts to make what he has done right with the
old man (Jeremy Irons) who actually wrote the book he
took credit for.

There is a film every now and then that I will enjoy much more and see more merit in than the critics ever give it credit for. This seems to be one of those as it has been criticized for having too many plotlines going with no concrete connection or the fact that so little was done with so much. I can certainly see where they are coming from as I obviously have a few qualms with the film myself. Naturally, the premise is engaging but my biggest qualm, as I mentioned earlier, is the lack of the process in which a writer writes being better documented on screen. There are excerpts, especially in the flashbacks where we see the way an author receives motivation or lack thereof and how it can affect their writing. At the same time it is when that idea hits where does one go from there? At the inception of an idea there must be a spark and we see that when Jeremy Irons is on screen. We never learn his name, we just know him as the old man, but Irons has a voice like no other and he relays the heartbreak of his circumstances and how they led to such inspiration. It doesn't address the process his mind goes through in some artistic or innovative way, but it shows us why he needed to write and in the end that seemed to be good enough for me. Irons is a powerful presence that is really the only actor in the film that is able to stretch what he is given and turn it into something more than the type of melodramatic material the others are dealing with. Though Cooper, Saldana, Quaid, and Wilde are all good enough talents to raise their somewhat standard words to a level where they at least sound charming and Barnes does some impressive work with hardly any dialogue it is Irons who, as his character should have been, we will remember most.

  

THE WORDS Review

No matter how much one loves film and loves to write about them there is always that passion for the writing aspect that comes first. There is just something to the process of it that is fascinating and we love to see that at work on screen. Or at least, I do. I have always imagined myself as a writer first even if that is not what you would call my official profession. Still, it informs everything I do and can certainly tell you a lot about me or someone who feels that same way about themselves. I also happen to love movies. Not just watching them, but dissecting them and learning about their motivations, why they were made, and what they mean to different people. They can be such a fascinating art form and I think we forget that sometimes. Thus, I couldn't help but to start writing about film. I do this not for any other reason that the fact I get pleasure out of it, a sense of gratification that I am actually contributing in some way. A way that has nothing to do with a sense of responsibility. This is not an article about me though, this is a film review of the latest film starring Bradley Cooper and a host of other recognizable faces who tell the story of a man who aspires to be what he has always thought himself to be. A man facing certain truths that he doesn't want to confront and a man who has to deal with a decision that he made to fulfill those dreams of his childhood that were made impossible by adulthood while stealing from him that sense of accomplishment. This film is The Words and it is about a writer. I'm a sucker for movies about writers, and this one sucked me in from the very beginning.