Red Dawn (*1/2 out of ****)

Red Dawn is a remake that does next to nothing right. Patrick Swayze's 1984 original wasn't a great movie by any means, but there was nothing really wrong with it. The first version worked as a patriotic propaganda message in a time where invasion of the United States was a concern on some minds. The remake substitutes the Russians for North Koreans. So instead of making a movie about some what relevant fear, they decided to introduce a laughable enemy. A country that as around 1/15 of the United States population occupying land in in this gun crazy country seems absolutely ludicrous. The choice of  introducing North Koreans was done after post production as the original enemy was the Chinese, but they will more likely see this film so the change was done to make foreign money. So much for strong american ideas when the producers are worried about the concerns of the Chinese. Enough ranting, time to look at the actual film.

Much like last time a foreign country invades a small town surrounded by wildness. Several high schoolers and a few older siblings escape into the woods and decide to use guerrilla tactics to make occupation impossible for the North Koreans. Instead of going into depth of what it would be like to learn a guerrilla fighter, they mastered the process in two minute montage over a undisclosed period of time. Calling themselves Wolverines, the young adults run around town in action scene after action scene. They outsmart the experienced soldiers at every turn as well as make full sprints while holding large automatic machine guns. It would have been interesting to see how inexperienced youngsters  show concern and debated over what would be the best way to tackle this fight. Discussing key places in their town and talking about the details on how they could tackle this large opposition. Of course as I said before it's simply just the hero's jumping from ambush to ambush for the most part. This all leading to a un-climatic conclusion.

The cast is largely young and good looking people who have some basic acting talent. They don't really add to the problems of the film since they aren't told do much talking anyway (I swear Isabel Lucas maybe has two lines for 90%  of the time she's on screen). Chris Hemsworth and  Josh Hutcherson are working below their talent but I'm sure they and the other actors are happy enough to collect a pay check. Some of the action scenes aren't half bad but most suffer from shaky camera work (Bourne style) that make it hard to follow the sequence of events. If your going to make a movie, let alone remake one, don't phone it in. 

*1/2 out of ****

Silver Lining Playbook (***1/2 out of ****)

Director David O. Russell often knows how to breath life into a stale genre. Three Kings was a fresh take on War films, Flirting with Disaster felt like a bigger movie than just a typical comedy, and The Fighter was one of the few great Sport movies in recent memory. It's not an unusual choice for O. Russell to want to do a romantic comedy with his track record. The director always decides to film difficult and challenging characters and Silver Lining Playbook is no exception to that trend. It's a mini wonder of a film that does something that seems easy in theory but harder in practice. The film gets better as it goes along.

Pat (Bradley Cooper in his best performance to date) has just been released from a mental institution. He was sent here after a violent outburst which led to the court/doctors label him with a form Bipolar Disorder. He's feeling positive now and is looking to get his wife back. Pat's father (Robert De Niro's best performance in years) is an Philadelphia Eagles fanatic who pressures his son do make the decisions he wants. His mother (Jacki Weaver) of course just wants her son to not get in trouble. Pat may be a free man again but his behavior is still erratic. These actions along with the actions of nearly all the characters is off putting at first. Of course it will be a struggle for the characters to reach their full potential, but the initial impression of these people makes it seem like it will be impossible. Yet maybe that's part of the point. This is a film about average people trying to get some victory in an otherwise punishing life. The characters do become more likable as the film progresses and thus the story become more personal. The story progress when Pat meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence) who may just be as messed up as him. They form and odd friendship as Pat helps Tiffany with a dance competition in exchange she will get a message to Pat's wife whom will not see him in person yet.

This rather simple movie is made kind of great by the people involved. David O. Russell has a strange kinetic nature to his film making here that keeps things flowing every so lovely. He works his magic on a few scenes that turn them from standard romantic comedy dribble to satisfying filmmaking. The actors all do great work but the show is stolen by Jennifer Lawrence. Only two years ago the young actress broke out with a tour de force performance in Winter's Bone. Such a different performance from her here but equally as mesmerizing. Silver Lining Playbook isn't joining the trend of ambitious or groundbreaking movie list this year. However it does nearly everything right for the kind of film it's trying to be.

***1/2 out of ****

Skyfall (***1/2 out of ****)

James Bond is back after the disappointing Quantum of Solace with one of the best Bond films ever. Skyfall dives deep into Bond's past and troubles while not coming up short with the material that made the series so beloved. Cool, suave, action packed but rarely compromising in quality makes this something Bond films have been waiting for.

Daniel Craig returns for his third trip as Bond and while his age is beginning to slightly show, that doesn't make him any less capable of being of of the better Bonds. Skyfall has our hero dealing with a villian that close to his own personal home. Silva (Javier Bardem) has mastered the manipulation of information. He uses technology to his own advantage and whim, this most likely leads to the misery of mankind. What's interesting is Silva is a former MI6 agent in the mold of Bond. I dare not see anymore, the film should be enjoyed in person.

Skyfall does many things new while bringing up points that made many Bond films in the past work. Returning characters (notably Q played by Ben Whishaw, and some that need to be seen in person), gadgets, vehicles and a style of action (not entirely science fiction like certain Bond film) make the film work extremely well. Unlike many other films in the series, this film gives the best and more interesting idea of who Bond is as a person beyond the super agent exterior. Yes there are a few unbelievable moments  and lazy writing bits, but the overall product is too strong to ignore. Skyfall is photographed by Roger Deakins who has made perhaps the best looking Bond film to date. Creating a balance of light in shadow that has not been seen in the series before is thrilling. Skyfall is made to be emotional and action heavy, and succeeds often widely. Maybe the film is not is as strong as Daniel Craig's Casino Royale, but it's still grand, one of the top ten Bonds ever.

***1/2 out of ****

Holy Motors (**** out of ****)

Director Leos Carax both infuriates and excites me. What is important is that he always interests me. A french New Wave director in the modern era of cinema, the man has made a  working claim to keep cinema alive. Holy Motors had it's world premiere early this year at the Cannes Film Festival. After it ended the audience applauded (which is common), but instead of a token of respect, the audience cheered like it was the second coming. It was as if they had seen either or even both the rebirth of cinema and a last ditch effort to save it. Holy Motors is bizarre, funny, moving, confusing, interesting and magical.

One thing the audience will learn about the film is that the message is muddled. The film's themes may come across in many different ways. However there is a grand plot. Denis Lavant in a chameleon like way plays 11 characters. The central one would appear to be a business man named Oscar. He is picked up in the morning by a stretch limousine driven by his assistant Celine (Edith Scob). He has nine appointments to keep throughout the day. However these appointments are not of a normal variety. Going to each location Oscar dresses up and acts a role. He acts as a gypsy woman, a motion capture worker, a goblin of sorts (seen in Carax's Tokyo! segment), a working father, a musician (in perhaps the most joyous scene I've seen all year) an assassin, a dying uncle etc. Each character is unique and might not even be tied thematically to the next story at all. What's important is that all of in fact does happen on screen. It may be true or it may be just a film that a man (played by director Leos Carax) dreamily stumbled upon one night.

Many will come to their own conclusions on what the film is about and so I will simply offer mine. Oscar is a movie a character. He plays a many different movie characters when there are simply no cameras to be found. He is not so much an actor as an essence of film. This may be completely wrong but it doesn't matter for it is what I felt. Holy Motors challenges and invigorates the audience to behold a story that shifts and changes at it goes along. Changing from drama, to comedy to musical (with Kylie Minogue supplying a song) Any meaning for the film can be perhaps correct. No, I've not seen a movie like this before (maybe I never will again) and yet it felt like I was waiting for it for years. A compilation of the weird and strange that makes the art form impossible to turn away from. Hypnotic and alluring the film may grow on some nerves, but probably always curious of what will occur next. Holy Motors is a love letter to cinema. It is perhaps the best film of the year.

**** out of ****

Lincoln (***1/2 out of ****)

Lincoln is one of those movies that comes out exactly when it was suppose too. Shortly after a presidential election gives the film some weight and the audience gains a better understanding of how democracy in the USA works. Lincoln is a film that Americans should see.

Daniel Day Lewis plays the president in what may be a more historically accurate portrait. He's soft spoken, kind, and was a warm aura. Lincoln as a film focuses not on the great leader's life, but almost entirely around the ratification of the 13th amendment, the one that would end slavery in the county. The president and his advisors worry about what the amendment will mean to the closing stages of the war as well as how they can get the majority vote. Characters played by Tommy Lee Jones, James Spader, John Hawkes, Tim Blake nelson, Hal Holbrook and David Starthain will due the persuading on the president's behalf most the time.

It's a film that is long and heavy handed. Day dream for a minute and the meaning a conversation will pass you by. This is a intellectual movie that aims to teach and show the importance of these historical events.  Focusing on one aspect of the president's life was the best way to approach this movie. Lincoln's life is historical common knowledge but the methods on which the 13th amendment was passed is not so clear. The film is contains great, sets, acting, pacing and conversation that is worth hearing. It's on the strongest films about politics in years.

***1/2 out of ****

Flight (*** out of ****)

This is a return to form for two particular individuals. Denzel Washington playing Whip Whitaker gives his first great performance since American Gangster. Also director Robert Zemeckis makes his first live action movie since Cast Away (the guy sure does love plane crashes) which was over a decade ago. Both actor and director do some of their finest work of their careers (at moments), but in the end Flight doesn't all add up.

Whip Whitaker abuses alcohol. The film opens with him waking up, still drunk and needing to do cocaine to get up for work. He is a pilot and while good at his job, he has terrible qualities as a person. Early in the film comes the event that shapes what exactly this film will be about. The plane Whip captains is nose diving and ready to crash. Through some miracle work he manages to pull a maneuver and save the vast majority of the souls on board. The flight scene may be the most thrilling work Zemeckis has done as a director. After the crash they find in a blood test that Whip had alcohol in his system. If the root of the crash isn't determined to be a mechanical error, Whip faces life in prison. Much of the focus of the film is on Whip's alcohol problems and the people in his life. His problem affects his lawyer (Don Cheadle), his union representative (Bruce Greenwood), a former heroin addict (Kelly Reilly) he strikes a friendship with, his family, and of course his drug dealer (John Goodman).

The film is unapologetic look at a man battling his inner demons as his life falls apart. Washington plays Whip so convincingly that his struggle is hard to look away from, even though the audience rather not witness such turmoil. At two and a half hours, Flight tells a strong story, but a complicated one. Due to its run time there are scenes that are included that seem puzzling. Many scenes (more than what should usual) come off as funny when the situation probably shouldn't be. I wasn't sure if this was Zemeckis' intent, but it throws off the pacing of the film. I shouldn't be feeling anger while trying to understand Whip to only a few minutes latter see a scene that might be included in a dark comedy. A particular scene featuring James Badge Dale as a cancer patient is confusing, it could have been completely cut and the film would've have the same effect. There are several scenes that don't seem all too important and somewhat useless (I hate saying it but the thought crossed my mind) Whip also by films end makes a decision/realization that seems logical but his character didn't seem to develop there just yet. Still Flight is very good, even great for the most part. It' just confused on what it's trying to be.

*** out of ****

Silent Hill: Revelation (*1/2 out of ****)

I retain the notion that Silent Hill is the best movie based directly off a video game movie to date. That's not really a great title since the majority of video game movies are woeful. Silent Hill is a decent movie with a great movie hidden underneath all the silliness. Those great moments will never be made whole and thus the film will never be all that it could've been. So here a few years too late is a sequel that had the chance to fix the mistakes of the first one. In adapting a video game get rid of the feel of a video game and capture the themes that were presented in the original medium. Silent Hill at points fantastically captured the intended dreadful atmosphere. All the sequel had to do was keep the atmosphere but make the movie feel like what it was... a movie. Silent Hill: Revelation went the other way and made some instances of the film even more video game like. It is a massive disappointment to the source material.

Taking plot elements from the third Silent Hill game this film follows Heather (Adelaide Clemens). She and her father (Sean Bean) are running from an evil order that want Heather to come to Silent Hill for sinister purposes (being able to stop the darkness and what not). This order kidnaps Heather's father and she must go to Silent Hill to rescue him.  Up until the film actually gets to the town is nearly unwatchable. Characters behave oddly, the horror scenes are painful and the pacing is all over the place.  I don't blame the actors, they did the best they could with bad directing, writing, and editing which made scenes feel all over the place. It's a wonder the actors didn't (for the most part) add to the problems. Once heather and her companion Vincent (Kit Harrington) reach the eerie town things do pick up a bit. Of course going from poor to mediocre isn't really praise worthy. I wanted to like the movie, but that was nearly impossible to do. One day or maybe in some other reality, Silent Hill was or will be made to live up to its potential. Silent Hill: Revelation comes nowhere close.

*1/2 out of ****

The Man with the Iron Fists (**1/2 out of ****)

RZA's directing career has begun and the man is not half bad at the job. Him and Eli Roth have succeeded in making a mad rump of action with a wide variety of interesting characters. Every actor has something to bring to the table and so quite well in this tribute to kung fu movies.

Ages past in China there lived The Blacksmith (RZA). he lived in a small village and crafted masterful weapons. One day he is approached by two rival clans to craft some specific weapons. One of these clan is in a state of rebellion and looks to steal a shipment of the Emperor's gold to wipe out all their rivals. Every one nearby is gunning for a piece of this fortune and the last one left alive will claim the prize.

As said before the strength of the movie lies in it's many unique characters. Each with a specific fighting style or gimmick. When the action is going all is right with the film. However the action isn't the sole centerpiece of the film. There is a examination on class struggle and Buddhism etc. Problem there is the ideas presented aren't very compelling, instead they seem to interrupt the action. It's a strange thing complaining about mixing story and action, but when the story is lacking the action looks all so much better. Also perhaps the film would have benefitted from a grind-house feeling. Only certain parts of the film feel like a throw back to the kung fu movies RZA apparently so admires. Still for what its worth the film can pack quite a punch.

**1/2 out of ****

Sound of My Voice (*** out of ****)

Minimalist science-fiction films aren't too common, but often hauntingly lovely. Instead of huge special affects, they focus on a core concept and the emotions surrounding it. It's not necessarily better but I personally find myself less let down by this smaller films. Brit Marling has written and starred now in two films of such a genre. it's refreshing take science-fiction films.

Peter (Christopher Denham) and Lorna (Nicole Vicius) drive into a garage following a set of instructions. They are met by a man who brings them in to the house and tells them to wash and change. From there they are blindfolded and transported to a secret location. Peter, Lorna, and several other blind folded people are led into standards home basement where Maggie awaits. Brit Marling plays Maggie very convincingly. Dressing in all white, creating an ethereal aura she tells them who she is. Maggie claims to be from the year 2054 and doesn't how she got here, but she knows these people's future. Peter and Lora are not here to believe Maggie's tale, but to secretly record her story for journalist reasons.

Besides a simplistic time travel story, the film addresses the theme of individualism and what that means when in a cult. Can one enlighten themselves but remain an individual.? What stories are worth believing? Sound of My Voice is like a combination of two indie hits from last year, Another Earth, and Martha Marcy May Marlene. Both of those films being strong productions, so enjoying or at least finding myself curious of how Sound of My Voice would unfold was rather easy. Is Maggie lying, telling a distorted truth, or sincere? It's a puzzle that deserves some analysis.

*** out of ****

Smashed (*** out of ****)

Smashed is quite the frustrating movie and I'm thankful it was. For the most part the film plays out in such a natural way that every ounce of one's attention will be fixated on the events on screen. The heartbreaks and obstacles feel real or at least not Hollywood dribble. Smashed is a serious movie about alcoholism, but not overly dramatic, often the film is darkly light hearted. This combination makes it easy (or perhaps simply "easier") to sympathize with some character on screen. They don't have to be likable or make the happy choices, much more like actual life.

A married couple, Kate (A fantastic Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and Charlie (Aaron Paul), relish in their drinking. They share the joy it brings them and are quick to forgive each other for their drunken mistakes. Kate has several terrible nights that started from alcohol consumption that has lead her to try to get sober. Perhaps the worst mistake she made was vomiting in front of her students at her job, then lying about being pregnant. She's supported by the vice principal (Nick Offerman) who discovers the true reason for her embarrassment. Kate tries to bring some honesty and control to her life, but how does this affect Charlie. I was reminded of the film Candy, a brutal love story of two young herion addicts who would discover the drug is what kept them together. Charlie is not wrong for wanting to continue drinking when Kate decides to quit, but how does it affect their relationship? Love for a person comes from certain ideals in most cases, without that mutual belief it is only a matter of time before the love is put to test.

A rich supporting cast supports Mary Elizabeth Winstead in her first truly great performance of her career. She plays her character as warm, strong, and above all interesting. Winstead turns a still otherwise good movie until something memorable.

*** out of ****