Showing posts with label Michael Keaton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Keaton. Show all posts

Saturday, November 14, 2015

SPOTLIGHT Is a Powerful Film About the Power of the Press



SPOTLIGHT Review:

- Awards-season movies tend to be flashy, melodramatic, showy films. But like the sleeves-rolled-up characters that inhabit its story, SPOTLIGHT is a nose-to-the-grindstone procedural that nonetheless is a quiet stunner. It's a movie about journalistic investigation in the tradition of old-school classics like All The President's Men - and like that film, the dogged determination of its protagonists uncovers a scandal that runs so deep and is so horrific in its implications that it's hard to believe. SPOTLIGHT builds and builds so as to hit an eventual fever-pitch level of intensity. Its story serves the dual purpose of shining a well-deserved spotlight on its heroes - the intrepid reporters at the Boston Globe's Spotlight section - and of serving as a stark reminder of the evil that these reporters uncovered; the Catholic priest abuse scandal that, for decades, had not just plagued Boston but major cities around the world. This is a movie about the importance of good journalism and of *real* journalism. This is a movie about the way that evil can fester and thrive in communities too paralyzed by fear to report it or stop it. This is one of the absolute top films of the year - a jaw-dropper that is a can't-miss, unforgettable film.

SPOTLIGHT follows a small team of journalists at The Boston Globe circa the early 00's. Led by Walter "Robby" Robinson (Michael Keaton), the team is tasked with finding big, complex stories and attacking them from every angle - investigating them over a long period and then crafting feature-length, in-depth stories for the Globe's Spotlight section. After a new editor from New York, Marty Baron (Liev Schreiber) takes over the paper, he wants the Spotlight team to focus on big stories that will generate real buzz and get people talking. Baron quickly settles on the Church, and the ongoing allegations of priests abusing children, as his first target. Baron - an outsider as a New Yorker and a Jew - is met with a lot of skepticism at the Globe and by the greater Boston community. But he doesn't relent - hounding the Spotlight team to use whatever scraps they have as a starting point in order to piece together the story here. Slowly but surely, the story begins to unravel, becoming something far bigger than Baron or the Spotlight team could have imagined. Little by little, Robinson and team uncover evidence of priests having abused minors - on a scale that makes it more a full-blown epidemic. As the investigation proceeds, the Church protests and denies the allegations. Even many of the victims and their families are not forthcoming, for fear of bringing shame to themselves and to the Church - which they hold in high and sacred regard despite what had happened. But the Spotlight team claws tooth and nail for every shred of evidence.

In some ways, SPOTLIGHT is two films. At its core, it's a crackling investigation movie. But as that investigation proceeds, the horror of the truth about what is being uncovered makes this a movie about something more than just an investigation. Director Tom McCarthy brilliantly takes us down this rabbit hole alongside the characters. Looking at McCarthy's IMDB page, it's sort of shocking - this guy's previous credits include things like the universally-panned Adam Sandler vehicle The Cobbler. But after SPOTLIGHT, McCarthy is undoubtedly one to watch. The film sizzles with old-school cinematic tension and mounting drama, in the vein of the classic paranoid thrillers of the 70's. The film never puts character melodrama front and center, but it cleverly and effectively reveals new layers of its characters as the movie marches on.

A huge part of what makes the film work so well is the phenomenal cast. Within the Spotlight team, Michael Keaton continues his recent hot-streak as Robinson. An institution in the Boston media, Robinson's easygoing likability belies his intense determination to get to the truth, regardless of what skeletons he has to unearth to do so. It's an understated but near-career-best performance from Keaton. Understated but great could also describe the work of Rachel McAdams as Sacha Pfeiffer, a key member of Robinson's team. McAdams has been doing great stuff in general over the last few years, in movies like A Most Wanted Man and TV series like True Detective (she was, by far, the highlight of a flawed season). Here, she is the reporter tasked with seeking out and working with actual victims of priesthood abuse - and she does a fantastic job of conveying both empathy and a relentless drive to get what she needs to nail the abusers. Another major standout here is Mark Ruffalo as Mike Rezendes, a reporter focused on working with a lawyer played by Stanley Tucci to gain access to sealed court records that could directly implicate the priesthood. Ruffalo absolutely kills it here, going all in in a performance in which he's altered his dialect, posture, mannerisms, and tics in order to fully inhabit this character. As Rezendes, he plays the wildcard of the team - in contrast to Keaton's congeniality and McAdams' coolness, Ruffalo's character is a jittery, at times fiery, slightly awkward writer who nonetheless shares his colleague's drive to bring down the abusers. It's a Hulk-sized performance that is undoubtedly worthy of awards-season recognition. Brian d'Arcy James rounds out the Spotlight team, delivering yet another excellent performance. His character, Matt Carroll, is a family man who brings an everyman's perspective to the group. He isn't just worried about the story - he's worried about the implications for him and his kids.

Several other notable performances round out the cast. Shreiber is absolutely great as Baron - and the script smartly shows us different sides of the character that allows him to continue to defy expectation. Tucci's testy lawyer is another great character - a guy who seems like an unsympathetic prick at first glance, but who, we learn, has been through battles that have left him emotionally scarred. 

In a way, the movie can be looked at as a pretty bleak and depressing look at an evil that was, for far too long, allowed to thrive within a sacred institution - all but swept under the rug by Church leaders and politicians. At the same time though, SPOTLIGHT is a potent reminder of the power of and need for real, thorough, fact-based, unrelenting, hard-hitting journalism. The movie earns well-deserved applause for the real-life Spotlight team that exposed the Church's crimes. But it also makes you think about the kind of media coverage that we're saturated with today - barely a decade removed from the events of the film. In an age where longform journalism is disappearing in favor of tabloid, Twitter-friendly, clickbait-grabbing, perpetual news-cycle-feeding "reporting," you have to wonder whether we are missing out on real news and real information that gets lost in the endless clutter - or, worse, never gets reported at all since it requires the kind of time and investigation that doesn't lend itself to daily website or Twitter-feed updates. SPOTLIGHT is a condemnation of the Catholic Church scandal. But that much is obvious. What it also is: a celebration of the power and importance of journalism. Real journalism. The kind that topples kings and opens eyes.

That said, this is not a "everyone wins and goes home happy" sort of movie. No - like those 70's thrillers that preceded it, SPOTLIGHT ends with a real gut-punch - a reminder that as much as the work of the Spotlight team did to expose the truth about the abuse going on in the Church, the problem was and continues to be bigger than even the Spotlight team could have foreseen. And so, the film serves as a rallying cry of sorts. We still need Spotlight teams. We still need relentless search for truth, even when said truth is unpleasant. 

SPOTLIGHT really floored me. 2015 was a year saturated with movies about the media, but this one is something special. It honors and pays tribute to the Boston Globe's reporters not by being a flashy film that lionizes them. Instead, this is a movie about the power of rolling up your sleeves and getting the job done - about pursuing the truth doggedly and without bias or political or institutional influence. A movie about the power of the press. One of the absolute best of the year.

My Grade: A

Sunday, February 22, 2015

OSCAR 2015 - Pre-Show Thoughts & Predictions & Rants



OSCARS 2015 Thoughts and Predictions:

Oscar time, once again. The Oscars have gotten a lot of flack this year, but hey, I give 'em flack every year. The fact is, the Academy Awards rarely seem to really reflect the year's best films. And this year is no exception. From the complete lack of major awards love for the masterpiece that is Nightcrawler, to the stunning omission of deserving directors like Selma's Ava DuVernay, this year's Oscars seem to have dropped the proverbial ball in multiple ways. That said, what's often worse than the Oscar omissions is the unfounded backlash against deserving films that actually do get nominations. This year, there is tons of hate being thrown in the direction of movies like Boyhood. Wake-up call, people. Maybe it's not to everyone's tastes, but Boyhood is a landmark movie from a director who is both one of our best and one of our most historically under-appreciated. I have to shake my head at the same people who long griped about Richard Linklater not getting his due who now claim that perhaps his greatest work is overrated Oscar-bait (as if ... to work on a quirky side project for twelve years with the intention of it being Oscar-bait would be flat-out insane). In any case, while there are some clear omissions this year from the Oscar race, and some nominated films that to me are mere B+ players, there are also some fantastic movies in the mix that, should they win, would be more than deserving of Oscar gold.

To kick things off though, here are my Top 10 OSCAR SNUBS of 2015:

1.) Best Actor - Jake Gyllenhaal in Nightcrawler

- WTF. This was a performance for the ages, a De Niro in Taxi Driver-esque turn that was both mesmerizing and nightmare-inducing. This omission is flat-out embarrassing for the Oscars, because this is one that will be talked about for a long, long time.

2.) Best Picture - Nightcrawler

- Again, WTF. A clear top-tier film of 2015, it's shocking to me that this one was omitted at the expense of the good-but-not-even-Wes-Anderson's-best Grand Budapest Hotel and the overrated Birdman.

3.) Best Animated Feature - The LEGO Movie

- Once again - are you freaking kidding me? The LEGO Movie was one of the best animated films in YEARS, not even just of 2015. It was hilarious, poignant, and smartly self-aware. Crazy that it wasn't nominated.

4.) Best Director - Ava DuVernay - Selma

- It got a Best Picture nom, and yet the director of the masterfully-directed Selma got no nomination? But the director of Foxcatcher did? Say it ain't so.

5.) Best Actor - David Oyelowo - Selma

- Similarly ... are you serious, bro?! David Oyelowo kills it as MLK Jr., and brings humanity and dimensionality to an impossibly tricky role - and yet no nom? Completely crazy.

6.) Best Supporting Actress - Rene Russo - Nightcrawler

- Meryl Streep is nominated for Into. The. Woods?! But Rene Russo's incendiary turn in Nightcrawler is snubbed? Oscar, what hath thou become?

7.) Interstellar ... for anything.

- I suppose some of the backlash to this film kept it out of the Oscar race. But to me it was on par with Inception and other top-tier Nolan films. Nolan should have been nominated. McConaughey should have been nominated. And Jessica Chastain.

8.) Best Actor - Philip Seymour Hoffman - A Most Wanted Man

- One of the best ever gives you one final performance for the ages ... and no Oscar love? Guess it's fitting, as Hoffman was the kind of actor so good that he was sort of too good for the Oscars, anyways.

9.) Best Actor - Tom Hardy - Locke

- Tom Hardy destroys in Locke. He's the only actor on-camera the entire movie. And the whole thing takes place in the dude's car! And it's totally riveting. If that doesn't spell Oscar-worthy, then the Academy is on crack.

10.) Funny Women

- 2014 was a landmark year for women in comedy. Jenny Slate in Obvious Child. Kristin Wiig in Skeleton Twins. Amy Poehler in They Came Together. But as per usual, comedy is completely ignored by the Oscars unless it contains Wes Anderson quirk or whatever it is that Birdman has. Lame. Oscars, get a sense of humor.

2015 OSCAR PICKS AND PREDICTIONS:

BEST PICTURE:

Should Win: Boyhood or Whiplash

- Boyhood was, to me, a masterpiece. A flat-out modern classic in a year that produced few of them. Hate on it if you will, but I think this is the ultimate Richard Linklater film. Meanwhile, Whiplash for me was a very close second. A movie so intense that it's practically a horror movie. JK Simmons was *the man* in this film and his is a performance for the ages.

Will Win: Boyhood

- Despite some eleventh-hour backlash, I think there is some degree of consensus that Boyhood is the film to beat this year. Linklater's moment is now, and it's time that the rebel-slacker indie darling gets his moment in the sun.

BEST ACTOR:

Should Win: Eh ...

- I don't absolutely love any of the actual nominees this year. Eddie Redmayne was pretty amazing in The Theory of Everything, but it's also not a role that produced any super-memorable moments. Benedict Cumberbatch was fantastic in The Imitation Game as well, but again, not sure if there was truly a huge, classic, Oscar-worthy moment in the film. Gyllenhaal and Hardy should have been nominated here.

Will Win: Michael Keaton

- It seems like the momentum is in his favor. And who doesn't love Michael Keaton? But the fact is, he's great in Birdman, but the movie itself is a jumble of ideas and concepts that doesn't really amount to a fulyl cohesive statement. Plus, to me it was actually Emma Stone who stole the movie.

BEST ACTRESS:

Should Win: Rosamund Poke

- Pike killed it in Gone Girl, giving us the perfect balance of pulpiness and legit-disturbing psycho-killer creepiness. Without her, Gone Girl would not have worked as well as it did, and she deserves the gold.

Will Win: Julianne Moore

- I have yet to see Still Alice, but the movie just seems like the sort of dour prestige pic that the Oscars love. And Moore is a great actress long overdue for a win. I'm not opposed, but I'm not all that enthused either.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:

Should and Will Win: J.K. Simmons

- If there's one sure thing this year, it's Simmons - no question. Bet on it. Sometimes a performance is so damn awesome that there's no choice but to give it all of the awards. And Simmons' work in Whiplash is just such a performance. Not quite your tempo? If that's the case, I seriously question your movie taste, dude.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:

Should and Will Win: Patricia Arquette

- I liked all of the actresses in this category (save Meryl Streep in the messy Into the Woods). But Arquette was legendarily good in Boyhood - funny, heartbreaking, and pretty much awesome. She made it as much her story as anyone's (which makes you wonder why she's not in the Lead Actress category, but whatever). But Arquette - long an underrated actress - deserves awards for killin' it in Boyhood.

BEST DIRECTOR:

Should and Will Win: Richard Linklater

- This is a tough one to call, but again, I think this is the year Linklater get his due. I could see Alejandro Inarritu with an outside chance, but I'm guessing enough people agree with me that Birdman's single-take style was more gimmicky than great to keep him from taking the top prize. I don't think you can underrate Linklater's achievement with Boyhood. To weave twelve years' worth of story into a compelling and moving narrative is no easy feat.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:

Should Win: Nightcrawler

- Seriously, what an innovative, dark, funny, satirical, crackling screenplay. But given its omission from every other major category, I'd be shocked if the deserving Nightcrawler and Dan Gilroy won here.

Will Win: Birdman

- Deserving? Not really? There are some great little monologues in the movie (Emma Stone's kills it), but thematically and tonally, this one is all over the map. Still, the combo of quirky and meta and commenting on Hollywood (we know how Hollywood loves that!) will give it a victory.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:

Should Win and Will Win: Whiplash

- I've got to think that Whiplash will take this one. I mean, it's by far the most quotable movie of this Oscar season, with J.K. Simmons' "Not my tempo!" now in the pop-culture lexicon. Maybe The Imitation Game plays spoiler, but I think Whiplash gets the edge.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE:

Should and Will Win: Big Hero 6

- Disney's film was action-packed, stylish, smart, and had an awesome pro-science message. In LEGO Movie's absence, it's my pick. I also loved Book of Life, so wouldn't be upset to see it with an upset. I will caveat by saying that the Japanese films Song of the Sea and The Tale of Princess Kayuga could also play spoiler. I haven't seen these, but both have received rave reviews. So it's a tough one to call, no question.

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS:

Should and Will Win: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

- There is room, I suppose, for an upset here. But come on, APES for the win. I mean, the movie made me care, a lot, about warring armies of intelligent apes. And Ceaser and Koba were the best hero/villain rivals of 2014 - and again, they were mo-capped monkeys! (er, apes). No monkey business, Oscar!

BEST FILM EDITING:

- Should and Will Win: Whiplash

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY:

- Should Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel
- Will Win: Birdman

BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN:

- Should and Will Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel

BEST ANIMATED FILM SHORT:

- Should and Will Win: Feast

BEST DOCUMENTARY:

- Should and Will Win: Citizenfour

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT:

- Should Win: ?
- Will Win: Joanna

BEST LIVE ACTION SHORT:

- Should Win: ?
- Will Win: The Phone Call

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM:

- Should Win: ?
- Will Win: Ida

BEST COSTUME DESIGN:

- Should and Will Win: The Grand Budapest Hotel

BEST MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING:

- Should and Will Win: Guardians of the Galaxy

BEST SOUND MIXING:

- Should and Will Win: Whiplash

BEST SOUND EDITING:

- Should and Will Win: American Sniper

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE:

- Should and Will Win: Interstellar

BEST ORIGINAL SONG:

Should and Will Win: "Glory" from Selma

And there you have it. As I always do, I urge everyone to enjoy the Oscars but also not pay them too much attention. 2014 was an amazing year for movies - but a lot of the year's best were films that the Oscars simply doesn't and won't recognize. I'm talking about action films like The Raid 2 and Snowpiercer, blockbusters like Edge of Tomorrow and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and Guardians of the Galaxy, horror like The Babadook, thrillers like The Guest, and comedies like Obvious Child, Top Five, and They Came Together. Remember, the Oscars are just one narrow slice of the movie universe. Be sure to explore it.

Friday, November 28, 2014

BIRDMAN Is Strange, Ambitious, Doesn't Quite Hit Its Mark


 BIRDMAN Review:

- I really, really wanted to love BIRDMAN. From the trailers, I pre-fell in love with the concept of Michael Keaton as a former cinematic superhero star who was now grappling with a showbiz career on the decline, all while being haunted by the ghosts of his past triumphs. The meta-heavy setup was intriguing, and Keaton is an actor who has been underutilized in recent years. BIRDMAN seemed to have all the ingredients to be something special. After seeing it though, I don't know. I recognize that some will love the movie's twisty, unique narrative style. And Keaton *is* pretty amazing in this role, playing an exaggerated version of himself with all kinds of charisma and self-effacing humor. But director Alejandro González Iñárritu's offbeat vision never quite gels into something that 100% works. I was impressed by the film's ambition, but never fully got what it was trying to say. Ultimately, the film's message, I think, is muddled by Inarritu's drive to be clever.

In the film, Keaton plays Riggan, a middle-aged actor who once starred in the much-loved superhero franchise Birdman. Riggan famously turned down the opportunity to make another Birdman film (just as Keaton, in real life turned down the chance to do a third Batman movie), and he's now writing and producing and starring in a play that, he's hoping, will reestablish his artistic cred and finally help him move beyond Birdman. And yet, Birdman haunts him. Riggan has strange visions of the superhero he once played - visions that egg him on and try to convince him that he *is* Birdman, and that, by-god, he should embrace it. Riggan tries to put his past behind him, but part of him insists that Birdman is not only something to be proud of, but an innate part of his being that makes him a real-life, no-joke superhero. 

Here's the thing though: the whole Birdman aspect of the film - this nagging part of Riggan's psyche that just won't die - is the most interesting part of the film. But Inarritu downplays it - having Birdman appear only sporadically, and with little consequence. Inarritu never seems quite sure where he wants to go with the whole Birdman thing, and so the nature of Riggan's hallucinations (or are they ...?) are never fully addressed or resolved in a satisfying manner. What Inarritu seems much more interested in is the play that Riggan is producing. And so BIRDMAN becomes, ultimately, much more about the theater than it is anything else. The director shoots the movie in a way that makes it seem like we're watching one long, uninterrupted take. It seems that what Inarritu is really interested in is capturing the experience of theater. But the play-within-the-movie of Birdman is, sadly, only mildly interesting.

What is interesting is the eclectic cast of characters that populate Riggan's production. Though not actually a cast member of the play, the show-stealer of the film is Emma Stone, as Riggan's daughter, Sam. Stone has a couple of real barnburner moments in the movie, including an absolutely fantastic monologue in the film's first act that is perhaps the best thing she's ever done as an actress. As good as Keaton is here, my number-one takeaway from BIRDMAN was: hot damn, Emma Stone *kills* it in this one. Sam is a girl who has gone through the obvious trauma of having a barely-present movie-star dad, but who is also a walking reality-check for Riggan - never afraid to tear him a new one when needed. She does act out though - and that includes striking up a cringeworthy relationship with the hot-shot star of her dad's play, the much-older Mike (Edward Norton). Norton is also really good here, and also playing a sort of self-parody character. Mike plays off Norton's rep as a self-involved would-be intellectual who tends to try to exert creative control over his projects. And indeed, Mike quickly has a lot of changes he wants to make to Riggan's play. Naomi Watts also appears as Mike's wife - also an actor in Riggan's production. Watts is always great, though her character here feels a little hot and cold and perhaps underwritten.

As for Keaton - he really is excellent here. He's such a naturally funny and charismatic actor, and BIRDMAN lets him show the full range of his talent. I especially loved the scenes where the Birdman persona takes over and Keaton goes full-psycho. I only wish that there was more of a real narrative drive to those scenes, and that they added up to something more than a collection of showcase-pieces for Keaton. But yes, all that aside, BIRDMAN is a great reminder that Keaton is not just good, but great. This is a guy who should be doing Oscar-worthy films. He sinks his teeth into this part, and seems to relish the fact that his character is seemingly inspired by his actual career. Clearly, there's something cathartic for Keaton in playing a role like this, and that comes out in the sheer power, humor, and commitment on display here.

But ultimately, what does it all mean? BIRDMAN squanders a couple of opportunities to at least end with an exclamation point, and instead keeps going past its ideal end-point, concluding on a whimper rather than a bang. The film's dizzying, one-take visual style deserves major kudos for originality and ambition, but it too, seems just a bit gimmicky. I struggled to find a real thematic reason for that style to be used. Just as I struggled to find real meaning in the use of Birdman as a recurring motif and as an actual character that would appear to Keaton in the film. It's a shame, because you sense that there's a truly great film buried beneath the rubble here that is close to getting out. But I'm not sure that Iñárritu is able to get to the real core of the story he wants to tell here, or to find the exact right tonal balance between humor, introspection, and weirdness. Keaton, Stone, and Norton do some absolutely great work in this one, and it's worth seeing for them, and to see a movie that is juggling some really interesting themes, and that's striving for something original and thought-provoking. But there's an uncertainty to this film that keeps it from hitting its mark. Credit it though for swinging for the fences.

My Grade: B