Oscars 2019 Predictions

And just like that, the Oscars have rolled around again and crept up and surprised me by being on TOMORROW!  Eeek, no time for my usual detailed predictions.  Here's what I think though.

Best Picture - Roma is my best guess.  The Favourite or Green Book would be the other potentials but The Favourite is still too odd and Green Book perhaps a little too mild.

Best Actor - Rami Malek is a lock for this category for Bohemian Rhapsody.

Best Actress - I think Olivia Colman or Glenn Close could win this.  I'm going out on a limb to say Olivia Colman - it's an amazing performance.

Best Supporting Actor - Mahershala Ali for sure here.  Some of the others in this category were very small roles in their films.

Best Supporting Actress - this is the toughest main category to choose.  Amy Adams is brave and bold as Mrs Cheney in Vice, but both Rachel Weisz and Emma Stone are fabulous in The Favourite.  Do they cancel each other out?  Surely not.  Emma's is the showier performance but I want to guess Rachel Weisz for her wounded lover putting on a big fight.

Animated Film - Isle of Dogs was my best film of last year, but I think Into the Spiderverse might have this one for sheer creativity and humour.

Cinematography - Roma has this all sewn up.

Costume Design - Black Panther will probably take the gong for this one.

Best Director - I would so love to see Spike Lee win this as BlackkKlansman is explosively relevant, but I think Alfonso Cuaron will take it for the extremely personal work of art Roma.

Best Foreign Film - Roma again for sure.

Music (Original Song) - Shallow from A Star is Born is the most likely winner.

Visual Effects - I'm hoping First Man is the deserving winner here.

Adapted Screenplay - Really hard category.  Between A Star is Born and BlackkKlansman and Ballad of Buster Scruggs I reckon.  I'm going out on a limb again here for the Coens for Buster Scruggs.

Original Screenplay - I like Green Book and Roma but The Favourite must just edge them both out in this category.  Go Aussies!

The rest, I don't know, we shall see!

Oscars 2018 Predictions

Wow, time flies and it is the Oscars ceremony again tomorrow, a week later than last year but still so sudden for me!  I have seen all but 2 of the films nominated for Best Picture and that has covered most of the Director/Screenplay/Actor/Actress awards, so I'm hoping I will get more than a few right this year.  Although for me, I don't think there is a clear frontrunner due to a strange combination of how much they always follow tradition but then also the mood of Hollywood this year after the Weinstein problem and the powerful #metoo campaign.

So here I go again:

Best Picture
There are so many possible winners in this category.  The Shape of Water was the early frontrunner with 13 nominations and a lot of love from critics.  But I worry that there has never been a Best Picture winner in recent history that sits so firmly in the 'fantasy' genre apart from Lord of the Rings: Return of the King, and that was a bit of a surprise.  Will the Academy give it to a romance between a woman and fish-man?  But if not that, what would win?  3 Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri seems to be the next favourite but it may be a bit troublesome with a fairly casual dismissal of racism and probably a too sudden behavioural switch that was key to the film. Get Out was excellent, funny and original but is the criticism of liberal white people going to block it given the make up of the Academy?  Or will the perception of it be that voting for it is a strong anti-racism statement?  Could go either way.  Dunkirk was a fantastic film, technically excellent but many felt it lacked a soul.  Lady Bird is a strong contender too, and as the only nominated film directed by a woman (not just this year but in many a year) it could capture the Academy's imagination for some good vibes from the public following all the sex and gender issues of the last year. The others are probably very outside chances despite being quality films.

This is really tough to pick and while I think The Shape of Water deserves to win, I think 3 Billboards might just edge it out, just as Moonlight edged the hot favourite La La Land last year.

Best Director
While I would love Greta Gerwig to take this one out for her lovely film with its raw and honest relationships, I think Guillermo del Toro has this one all wrapped up for The Shape of Water.  As always he is completely in control of his material and vision.  The colouring of the film, all blues, greens and then reds as his leading lady falls in love is a stunning way of subtly enhancing the feeling that the viewer will have.

Best Actress
Sheesh, I'd hate to be an Academy voter with this field of nominees to choose between.  All are truly excellent and giving their all in these films.  Probably the first year in many where Meryl Streep is the weakest chance, the film was just a little too mild.  Margot Robbie was fantastic as Tonya Harding and she even learned figure skating people!  But this is a 3 way fight between Sally Hawkins, Saoirse Ronan and Frances McDormand who are all fierce as hell in these roles.  I think Frances McDormand has got this in the bag, very sorry for Sally Hawkins though

Best Supporting Actress
I've seen 60% of these performances so I'm not confident on choosing this one.  Allison Janney is a tour de force as the stage mother in I Tonya is probably the frontrunner.  Lesley Manville could steal it by all accounts but I am going with Allison Janney.

Best Actor
I've only seen 2 of these performances but on the back of wins to date and hype, I feel confident to say that Gary Oldman will be collecting the statue.  He practically disappears into the character and gives Winston Churchill a small vulnerable side to balance out the gruff exterior.

Best Supporting Actor
I haven't seen one of these performances but apparently Christopher Plummer is amazing.  But I am assuming the hype for Sam Rockwell is going to put him over the line in this category.  It is yet another in a long line of strong but kooky performances, so maybe he will be seen as 'deserving'.  The growth of his 3 Billboards character is what is nominated here but does the lazy scripting that achieves it undercut his chances?  I personally enjoyed Woody Harrelson more in 3 Billboards and also liked Willem Dafoe in Florida Project a lot.  Tough choice again but I'm going with Sam Rockwell.

Cinematography
There are only 2 horses in this race!  Will it be Bladerunner 2049 or Dunkirk?  I really thought Dunkirk was stunningly filmed but Bladerunner 2049 is just going to get the nose in front I think.  There's a dark horse there in The Shape of Water though.....

Visual Effects
Another really tough category after just re-watching War for the Planet of the Apes, I really believed those apes were riding, shooting, talking.  Kong: Skull Island was similarly realistic and seamless. But Bladerunner 2049 should definitely have this sewn up. with those futuristic vistas.

Production Design
I think The Shape of Water has to win this one despite being up against Bladerunner and Dunkirk.  It is just beautiful and perfect to the time it is set in.

Adapted Screenplay
Some real quality films and screenplays in this group although I have only seen 2 of them.  I haven't seen Molly's Game but it's only really nominated because it was written by Aaron Sorkin I believe.  I loved The Big Sick and it's a very clever and funny script.  Logan is the best written superhero movie ever.  Call me By Your Name is by all accounts a beautiful movie with a stunning late monologue but without much dialogue it may be tough to win this category.  That leaves The Disaster Artist and by all accounts that is excellent.  I am not really qualified to pick this one, I feel it's either Logan or Disaster Artist although the Big Sick deserves it.  So..... The Disaster Artist?

Original Screenplay
Lady Bird!  Raw, real and happy and sad.  Written by a very talented woman so this would really show the world that Hollywood is ready to change.  Except it won't.  So I think 3 Billboards might win this category.  Sweary and talky but Frances McDormand is up to every salty line.

And the others:

Makeup and Hair - Darkest Hour
Costuming - probably Beauty and the Beast or Phantom Thread, I will go with B & B.
Editing - Baby Driver could take it, as could Bladerunner, but my money is on Dunkirk for those stunning aerial combat scenes
Sound Editing and Sound Mixing - Baby Driver
Animated Film - Coco
Original Score - lots of possibilities but I think The Shape of Water although I really liked the 3 Billboards score and soundtrack
Original Song - This is Me from The Greatest Showman is a killer!

OK let's see how I go in less than 24 hours from now!

Oscars 2017

I'm not able to do my usual Oscars' predictions this year - I simply haven't seen enough of the movies to have an educated guess at what will happen.  But here is what I hope will happen!

I would have to guess that Emma Stone is going to win Best Actress for La La Land, and she was very very good and appealing in it so I wouldn't mind.  But it will be a shame for Natalie Portman who I hear is fantastic in Jackie (haven't seen).

You can't even make a dollar on betting that Casey Affleck is going to win Best Actor for Manchester by the Sea.  Again I haven't seen any in this category except La La Land and Ryan Gosling is not going to win for that.  Shame for Denzel and Andrew Garfield who I hear are both fantastic as well.

For Best Picture, it's probably a two horse race between Moonlight and La La Land.  The favourite doesn't always win this category so I really hope Moonlight wins!  It was excellent and much more of the traditional Oscar Best Picture type of thing.  La La Land was enjoyable but if it wins it just really shows how shallow and self-obsessed Hollywood is.  Like we didn't know that anyway, but this will just put the nail in the coffin.  Hidden Figures would also be a worthy winner but far too light and breezy of a crowd pleaser to stand a chance.

Jeff Bridges probably has Best Supporting Actor sewn up (one I have seen) but don't discount the dark horse of Michael Shannon in Nocturnal Animals (haven't seen it).  Mahershala Ali was good but the role was pretty small.

Best Supporting Actress is a really tight race by all accounts.  I have only seen 2 out of 5 but I think I would have to predict that it will be either Viola Davis or Michelle Williams, but most likely Viola Davis?

What I would love to see win in the other big categories:
Cinematography: Arrival
Costume Design: Jackie, although Fantastic Beasts was excellent, one of the things I commented on
Directing: Damian Chazelle - while I don't find the movie worthy of winning, I thought the directing was excellent - some really bold choices
Music (original): Audition from La La Land - Emma Stone's piece was really affecting.  Not as catchy as the other one but was really touchingly fragile.
Visual Effects: Dr Strange for the win here.  Blew me away! Some really new stuff here.
Writing (Adapted Screenplay): Arrival.  Fantastic script and structure.
Writing (Original Screenplay): Tough to choose. My guess would be Manchester by the Sea from this group.

Oscars 2016 Predictions

Time for my annual Oscars predictions.  It's pretty tough this year - there are so many different films nominated in all the different categories and many did not get released in Australia until the last few weeks.  I've driven my partner pretty crazy trying to cram in Oscar nominated films in the last few weeks but even then we haven't been able to see them all.  So some of these are just guesses based on what the consensus view seems to be.

Best Picture
Nominees: The Big Short, Room, Brooklyn, The Revenant, Spotlight, Bridge of Spies, The Martian.

I've seen all of these except Bridge of Spies.  All are very good and my personal favourite is the Martian, but that's too commercial (and released too long ago) to win.  For me this is between The Revenant and Spotlight.  The Revenant has so much momentum but I am going out on a limb (it's scary out here) and picking Spotlight to win as it is the more traditional type of film that Oscar loves.

Best Actor
Nominees: Leonardo diCaprio, Bryan Cranston, Eddie Redmayne, Matt Damon, Michael Fassbender.

What a difficult category to really and truly compare.  How do you even begin to compare Leo's raw, brutal and almost wordless struggle for survival and revenge to the delicate, emotional and brave portrayal of one of the world's first transgender people by last year's winner Eddie Redmayne?  Matt Damon's survival story in the Martian is even different than Leo's.  Fassbender has to make a popular figure real and flawed while still underlining the genius.

I haven't seen most of these performances due to late release dates on 3 of the films.  However there is no denying the roll that Leo is on and I'd be a fool not to pick him.  A shame for Eddie, whose performance is likely to be even better than the one he won for last year, but won't win.

Best Actress
Nominees: Brie Larson, Saoirse Ronan, Cate Blanchett, Charlotte Rampling, Jennifer Lawrence

Brie Larson is as strong a favourite here as Julianne Moore was last year, but that's because her performance is just so amazing.  She has been wowing us in small and under the radar things for a few years now, but this raw and touching portrayal of a young mother is excellent deserves to win.  I haven't seen the others except for Saoirse who is fantastic in Brooklyn, but Brie is the clear favourite and I'm backing her.

Best Supporting Actor
Nominees: Tom Hardy, Mark Ruffalo, Mark Rylance, Sylvester Stallone, Christian Bale

Probably the year when the supporting actor category has been fairly week on standout performances.  I watched Creed the other day to see why Sylvester Stallone won the Golden Globe and is the favourite and I don't really see what the fuss is about.  I think it's just the fact that we love this character of Rocky Balboa and it gets more poignant the older and frailer he gets. Someone described it as "moving and funny" but I did not see anything funny about it so it seems to be getting blown out of proportion with distance (it is not the freshest release in the roster).  Mark Ruffalo was pretty good in Spotlight but both he and Christian Bale struggle to really stand out in a large ensemble cast with no particular character focus.  Tom Hardy is great if a little mumbly in The Revenant and I'm surprised he isn't a bigger favourite given the momentum of that film right now.  By all reports, Rylance probably would have had this if not for Sylvester.  I'm going for Stallone as the sentimental winner but it's not my favourite performance.

Best Supporting Actress
Nominees: Alicia Vikander, Rooney Mara, Rachel McAdams, Jennifer Jason-Leigh, Kate Winslet

I've only seen 2 out of the 5 performances here and they are the ones least likely to win.  Rachel and Jennifer also struggle to really stand out in a strong ensemble cast performance.  That leaves Kate, Rooney and Alicia.   The only thing I can do here is go with the consensus and guess Alica to win for the Danish Girl.

Best Director
Nominees: Tom McCarthy, Adam McKay, Alejandro Inarritu, Lenny Abrahamson, George Miller

I so want George Miller to win this for the gobsmacking action thrills and long road to completion of his vision for Mad Max: Fury Road.  Plus also there should be a bit of the "it's time" feeling for him going on.  But I fear it is going to be Alejandro Inarritu taking home the statue for The Revenant, for the second year in a row after Birdman last year.  But on second thought, Inarritu's vision for The Revenant was pretty uncompromising and risky and also deserves to be rewarded.  It looked a bit crazy at first and couldn't be more different than Birdman, but once you saw it, it totally worked.  This is a really strong field of contenders and in another year, any of these could have won.  Special mention to Abrahamson for his obviously great directing skills to draw such a naturalistic performance from a small boy in Room.  Excited to see what he does next.  But I'm naming Alejandro Inarritu as the winner here.

Best Cinematography: Has to be The Revenant for this one.  Beautifully shot using only natural light, it's an amazing achievement.

Best Adapted Screenplay: Very hard to call. I would have said Room as the best here, but I think the cleverness of the way the complex financial terms were explained for the layman viewer in The Big Short has it as the runaway favourite.  As a financial person, I thought the film was a bit clumsy and the tricks unnecessary but I am still going to guess it as the winner.

Best Original Screenplay:  Another varied and difficult to call category.  Spotlight is a cracking story but fairly traditional in structure.  Straight Outta Compton had to cram a lot into the running time and just managed but could take the win due to the perceived lack of diversity in the awards overall.  Inside Out would probably win for taking a complex idea and making it accessible, if not for being an animated film.  Ex Machina was intriguing, thought provoking and unexpected but seems very low on champions. Bridge of Spies I haven't seen.  I'm going with the sentimental favourite of Spotlight here.

Technical Awards: I'm going to guess that Mad Max will clean up the categories of Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, and Best Film Editing.  Best Visual Effects will probably go to Star Wars: the Force Awakens.  Best Costume Design is a tricky choice and I'm going to pick Cinderella for this category.


Let's hope that I do better in my predictions than I did last year.  Let's also hope that Chris Rock can make it an entertaining and fun night without too much controversy.  As for the 'diversity' issue, my belief is that the overall Hollywood system needs to have a look at itself rather than the Awards themselves.  You can't choose non-White nominees and winners when there aren't any non-White people acting in major roles in well regarded, major drama motion pictures that tend to be Oscar bait.  I'm sorry but Straight Outta Compton isn't as great as some people are making it out to be and it seems that Concussion (Will Smith's movie) isn't either although possibly his performance was good enough to get nominated (I haven't seen it but have heard good reports about him).  A recent episode of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver had a very good 'skit' on why Hollywood whitewashing is the problem e.g. getting Caucasians to play Asian characters since the dawn of time.  Selma, 12 Years a Slave and The Help are examples of recent films centring on black issues which were nominated for various Oscars and were worthy contenders, so I think pointing the finger at the Academy is not really illuminating the true issue. I'm not a fan of tokenism or quotas so I think that the entire Hollywood system needs to have a good hard look at itself and a very good start would be using actors who are the same race as the character they are playing.  It will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow.

Oscars 2015 predictions

After my success last year, I thought I'd take another shot at predicting who is going to walk away with those little, but heavy, golden statues on Monday (Australian time).

The main categories this year are littered with biopics or serious films based on true events.  The Oscars have always leaned toward awarding dramas and biopics with little consideration given to comedies and action films, which can still feature great performances and entertain us but for some reason are not considered 'worthy' of the big awards.  Comedies can take out Best Screenplay awards without being nominated for Best Picture, Actress or Actor.   While in the early years of the Oscars we see a few comedy films that have won, the chance of a comedy film winning anything else seems to be dwindling away to nothing.  Many films touted as comedy films that have won awards are really just dramas with some black humour added (looking at you American Beauty, As Good as it Gets et al).  Bridesmaids was the only recent notable exception in nominations for out and out comedies. Action and fantasy films usually scoop the technical awards but hardly get a look in elsewhere - a fun exception being when Lord of the Rings: Return of the King memorably won Best Picture as well as 10 other awards in the presentations for films of 2003.  However, this year could not be further from awarding any light films (Grand Budapest Hotel being a surprising and pleasing exception), so it has been a heavy month of trying to watch all the Oscars contenders for me.

My tip for the winner of each category is highlighted in blue in each list.

Best Film
Nominees: American Sniper, The Grand Budapest Hotel, Boyhood, The Theory of Everything, Selma, Birdman, The Imitation Game, Whiplash

There has been much talk that this year's crop of Best Picture nominees are some of the lowest grossing films of the year - meaning that not many people went to see them.  However, that is usually the case due to the aforementioned bias against comedy, action and fantasy films.  

I think this one is a 3 horse race between Boyhood, Birdman and The Imitation Game.  Grand Budapest Hotel is ruled out because it's a comedy.  Whiplash is just too niche.  The Theory of Everything was nice but lacked bite.  Selma was oh so worthy but ultimately it's a bit dull (afflicted with the same problem I had with Lincoln - wordy speeches that nobody would ever say). American Sniper is too political (even though the movie actually isn't that political) and the 'fake baby controversy' won't help it.  I loved The Imitation Game, it's been the film I've enjoyed the most out of this category.  I don't know why it isn't a more serious contender but it just doesn't seem to have the sentiment.  Maybe just too British. 

My money is on Boyhood.  Birdman has had rave reviews and was daring in its construction, but is Hollywood going to vote for  a movie that makes fun of Hollywood?  No, I don't think so.  Boyhood has a unique structure, strong performances and a great screenplay.  I think it will just get there.

Best Actress:
Nominees: Julianne Moore (Still Alice), Reese Witherspoon (Wild), Rosamund Pike (Gone Girl), Felicity Jones (The Theory of Everything), Marion Cotillard (Two Days, One Night)

I haven't seen Marion Cotillard (sorry girl, I love you but the film was in cinemas in Brisbane for about 2 days in total so it was too hard) but have seen all the others.  Felicity Jones was nice as Steven Hawking's wife, but the script never gave us a chance to understand why she was so strong and cheerful through such difficulty, which would have probably given her a better chance to win.  Rosamund Pike should probably win for her extraordinary portrayal of a psychopath, but this one is between Reese and Julianne.  Julianne has the form in all previous award shows and the subject matter of an intelligent woman going through early onset Alzheimers is award bait.  I would prefer Reese to win for her totally raw and uncompromising performance as a lost young woman walking her way back to life, but I think Julianne has this one in the bag.  It will be seen as 'her time'.

Best Actor
Nominees:  Bradley Cooper (American Sniper), Eddie Redmayne (The Theory of Everything), Steve Carell (Foxcatcher), Benedict Cumberbatch (The Imitation Game), Michael Keaton (Birdman)

These are 5 very good performances in very similar roles.  Virtually all of these characters are men of very few words, most are socially awkward or outcasts and all are struggling against something trying to stop them achieving their goals.   All but Michael Keaton were playing a real person, and some would argue that Michael Keaton was really just playing a version of Michael Keaton.   All were fascinating to watch in their roles as they used facial expression and body language only to express what these men could not say.  However, the award will definitely go to Eddie Redmayne, who takes it to the limit of physical contortion to play Professor Stephen Hawking over a roughly 30 year timeframe as his body wastes from Motor Neurone disease.  He convincingly portrays Hawking as both an intelligent, funny charmer and a bit of a rogue, being especially trying to his wife at times.

Best Supporting Actress
Meryl Streep (Into the Woods), Patricia Arquette (Boyhood), Laura Dern (Wild), Emma Stone (Birdman), Keira Knightley (The Imitation Game)

This is one year Meryl Streep is not going to win - as good as she is in general (I haven't seen the film) it is not the usual type of role to be nominated for in this category.  Apart from that it is another strong field.  Laura Dern's role is probably just too brief.  I'm not a Keira Knightly fan usually but thought she was a great peppy shot in the arm for the otherwise too blokey Imitation Game.  Emma Stone is raw and sassy as the ex-junkie daughter in Birdman but again I think it was a little brief.  Patricia Arquette is exquisite in Boyhood though, taking you on a roller coaster ride of mothering through a series of bad choices of men while trying to make a living for her family and have a career.  Her final words in Boyhood have stayed with me for a long time afterwards. So poignant.

Best Supporting Actor
JK Simmons (Whiplash), Ethan Hawke (Boyhood), Edward Norton (Birdman), Robert Duvall (The Judge), Mark Ruffalo (Foxcatcher)

I've missed two performances in this category this year, including JK Simmons.  So I'm going with the weight of sentiment in choosing this winner rather than making my own assessment.  Kinda sad for the other guys though - Mark Ruffalo could have had this any other year, and Edward Norton is hilarious in Birdman.

Best Director
Alejandro G Inarritu (Birdman), Richard Linklater (Boyhood), Bennett Miller (Foxcatcher), Wes Anderson (The Grand Budapest Hotel), Morten Tyldum (The Imitation Game)

Tough one to call.  There are two groundbreaking technical achievements in this pack, two directors who drew excellent performances and built great tension in moody historical dramas, and one who continues to further his wacky vision and obsession with centring shots (search for Wes Anderson - Centred on Vimeo and watch this awesome video).  Since I didn't really like Birdman as a film, I'm going with Richard Linklater for his amazing vision to film a movie over a 12 year period with strong continuity, great screenplay and involvement from his actors.

And the rest of the categories I dare to attempt:

Best Cinematography - hands down this will go to Emmanuel Lubezki for Birdman.  How on earth they achieved these continuous long takes we may never know!

Best Animated Film - I've seen none of them but feel it will be How to Train your Dragon 2 based on what I've read and heard about it.

Best Original Screenplay - I'm going with the out-of-the-box choice here of The Grand Budapest Hotel for the snappy dialogue.

Best Adapted Screenplay - Extremely difficult to call as any could win.  I'm going to go with Whiplash.

Best Production Design - The Grand Budapest Hotel has to have this one.

Visual Effects - It will be a crime if X-Men: Days of Future Past doesn't win this for the Quiksilver scene alone. Go Aussie!

Let's see how I go!


 

Movie #9 - Foxcatcher

Sunday morning and we were planning to go and see The Interview for a giggle.  Then I realised "The Oscars are on next Monday - eek!  Better go see the rest of the movies I haven't seen".  So after a quick comparison of options for the remaining films on the list, we decided to go and see Foxcatcher which obviously hasn't been as popular as the other films.  Couldn't be further from The Interview!

Foxcatcher is another 'based on true events' story that seem to be very popular with the Oscars voters this year (competing with American Sniper, The Imitation Game, Selma, The Theory of Everything).  It comes directed by Bennet Miller, the guy who brilliantly reinvented sports films with Moneyball a few years back.  This one also puts sport into the background of a character study and mood piece, although the mood is a lot darker here.

We are introduced to Mark Schultz (Channing Tatum) who, despite winning a gold medal in wrestling at the 1984 Olympics, seems to be pretty down on his luck and a loner.  His older brother Dave (Mark Ruffalo aka The Hulk), also a wrestler and gold medallist at the same Olympics, seems to be the only close friend he has as he struggles to make enough money to survive as well as train for the next World Championships and Olympics.  We don't need too many scenes of Mark's lower lip jutting out to know that he's going to say 'yes' pretty quickly when he's approached by multimillionaire philanthropist, philatelist, ornithologist and amateur sports enthusiast John du Pont (Steve Carell) to join a wrestling team he's putting together.  John has set up his family's estate, known as Foxcatcher Farm, to be the ultimate training facility and he even puts Mark on the payroll and lets him stay in the Chalet full-time.  He allows Mark to pick a team of guys to train and compete with, and John particularly wants Dave to come and be his assistant coach, an offer which Dave initially refuses as he doesn't want to uproot his young family. 

Within minutes of meeting John du Pont, you will be ill at ease.  He is a strange individual, sometimes warm and friendly but more often than not cold and detached.  He looks down his rather large nose at everyone (great makeup effects on Carell) like a king surveying his peasant subjects.  At once superior and inferior.  He pulls people to him then shuts them out if they get too close.  He is obviously trying to please his snobbish mother but seems not to know how.  He is delusional over his abilities as a coach and athlete (he became a wrestler after age 50).  It's a magnetic, creepy performance by Carell, who comes across like a tightly coiled spring where you never know what he's going to do next. 

The story follows a very linear path from Mark firstly enjoying du Pont's patronage and then becoming disillusioned, bringing big brother Dave along for the roller coaster ride of emotions as they hurtle towards the 1988 Olympics.  Channing Tatum is good as Mark, if a little too simian for my liking, but Mark Ruffalo is really excellent as Dave the peacekeeper and key to Team Foxcatcher's success.  If not for JK Simmons in Whiplash, I think this would have been his year at the Oscars for Best Supporting Actor.  He really looks like a wrestler, even in everyday conversation he stands with his hands out and shoulders hunched, ready to rumble, but is actually a very nice guy.

The outcome of this triangular relationship all with the same goal in mind is best left for you to discover.  It's a little slow-moving and probably won't need multiple viewings due to the linear structure, but it's a compelling film and interesting view into the mind of a man with a lot of money and very few friends and also the sad state of overlooked sports in America. 

I give this 7 out of 10 for great performances and being something a little different than the norm.

Movie #5 - American Sniper

Much like the subject matter of this movie, I'm on a mission. A mission to see all the Oscar nominated films (Best Picture, Actor and Actress categories only) before the Oscars, so I can try to predict the winners.  Apart from that though I was also interested to see this movie that has caused a little bit of controversy in the United States - is it pro-war, neutral or anti-war?  As someone who was watching out for this carefully, I have to say I found that the ultimate message was anti-war.  So don't let the fact that it's directed by Clint Eastwood and there's a hoo-ha about it being pro-war and pro-US put you off, as it's actually an excellent film.

The film tells the true story of Chris Kyle, a Texan who joined the military at the age of 25 after his first career choice, a bronco rider, didn't work out after an arm injury.  With the shooting skills learned from hunting with his father from a young age, Chris is right for the Navy Seals and becomes a sniper - the guys who sit on rooftops that can pick off anyone attacking the main military force's operation. Chris Kyle, the real person, was credited with 160 confirmed kills from a probably 255 kills during his military career of about 10 years.  While still in training, he meets Taya (Sienna Miller, who is almost unrecognisable here, not sure what she has done to herself though), falls hard and they marry before he is even deployed on his first overseas mission.

While the film appears to deviate from or leave out some parts of Chris Kyle's true story, it hews close enough to the key events to be a worthy document of his life.  The film switches between Chris' time in Iraq through four tours, his wife at home raising their two children, and his time at home between tours.  While Chris' 'absence' from life at home even when he is home must surely be exaggerated (why would Taya remain in love with such an empty shell), it certainly serves to show that the impact of war on those in the military and their families is extreme.

Bradley Cooper is very good as Chris Kyle.  He worked out and ate a bunch (every 50 minutes) until he gained the size of the real guy, making a more believable character, but more importantly he nails a mix of Texan charm, gung-ho patriotism and brooding intensity over the horrible things he has to do at times.  Chris' belief is that his role is essential in protecting American soldiers and the homeland he loves so much and he seems, on the surface, to be able to use that to ignore any criticism of his job and America's wars.  However, Cooper does a great job of showing the deeper feelings of trauma or sadness, even if they are only seen for a few fleeting seconds before he firms again.

There are really no other name actors in the cast of fellow soldiers and the people trying to help Chris Kyle 'become human again' after his honourable discharge from the Navy in 2009, when he started to work with injured vets to find meaning and purpose after the horrors they experienced.  The only other big role is that of an enemy sniper, a Syrian former Olympian who was plying his trade in the same area in Iraq against the Americans, who becomes Chris' nemesis and obsession to take down. 

Clint Eastwood is assured in both the action scenes (no shaky cam here thank God) and the family drama, with excellent pacing throughout.  While we can't agree with his pro-gun stance in his personal life, I truly don't think this has been made as a pro-war film.  If you don't walk out of here thinking "What a mess these wars make" I'd be very surprised.  It's tense, it's interesting and it's a quality film that deserves to be seen before it's judged.

I'm giving this 7 out of 10.

2014, What you should have Seen

2014, wow what a year in film. I think you could say there was a lot of quality films made and not a lot of junk, so much so that I've found it difficult to pick my Top 10 films of the year because everything I saw was generally pretty good so to pick the standouts is hard.

Top 10 films of 2014

1. Boyhood.  A truly unique film experience that was also moving and fun.  Filmed in small bites every year over 12 years, we see Mason grow from the age of 6 to 18. Great performances all round.

2. Predestination.  A mind bending noir, sci-fi, mystery, thriller with great production design by Brisbane twins The Spierig brothers.

3. Dallas Buyers Club.  Heartbreaking stuff from Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto as they brought to life the struggle of an outsider community for acceptance and appropriate healthcare.

4. The Raid 2.   I thought the first one was brutal - then I saw this one.  Absolutely top notch action sequences but not a replay of the first film, as this one introduces a nailbiting 'undercover in a crime family' angle.

5. Guardians of the Galaxy.  Who needs Star Wars?  I loved the humour, warmth, bright colours and space chases.

6. Captain America: The Winter Soldier.  I know, so many blockbusters in my list.  But this was a clever political thriller dressed up as a big blockbuster.  Thought provoking stuff for our times crossed with great visuals.

7. Her.  The most unique storyline of the year reminded us of the ups and downs of love.

8. Grand Budapest Hotel. Wes Anderson's most accessible movie to date?  Which doesn't say much as it's still quirky as all get out. A madcap comedy caper with a great ensemble cast.

9.  The Babadook.  A scary little movie on a taboo topic (mothering a difficult child) that didn't get the recognition it deserved in Australia, but has received huge international acclaim.  Stephen King declared his admiration! Great direction by Jennifer Kent and acting by Essie Davis plus a very spooky monster.

10. 22 Jump Street.  The funniest movie of the year for me (end credits are a must watch) joins the small club of sequels that are better than the first movie.

So close to making it: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, X-Men Days of Future Past, Sin City 2: A Dame to Kill For, Interstellar.

Worst/Most Disappointing
1. Sex Tape.  Just really bad and infrequently funny.
2. Lords of Salem. Straight to DVD nastiness from Rob Zombie.  Just pointless, not scary and depressing.  Waste of time.
3. Transcendence.  Nobody even tried with this one, what a waste of a half-decent idea.
3. The Rover - a very disappointing follow up for director David Michod.  It was actually a good film, but we just all expected so much after 'Animal Kingdom' and from such a great cast.  Give us a hero to cheer for!
4. Snowpiercer - I thought I was going to love this so much.  It had some good ideas but just didn't land the knockout punch.

Best Performances of the Year
1. Sarah Snook in Predestination - a star is born.  So brave. 
2. The cast of Boyhood - all gave highly naturalistic and convincing performances as a family over a 12 year period.
3.  Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto in Dallas Buyer's Club.  Opposite in views but both very touching.
4. Chiwetel Ejiofor and Lupita Nyong'o in 12 Years a Slave. Tragic dignity.
5. Essie Davis in The Babadook. Again very brave
6. Joaquin Phoenix in Her.  A superb one man show of vulnerability.

Best Movie Moments of 2014
1.  Quiksilver's exit from the prison in X-Men: Days of Future Past was the best scene in any film I saw last year.  Super fun. 
2. Starlord's impromptu dance-off with Ronan the Accuser in Guardians of the Galaxy was almost as good.
3. An attacker clinging to the door of a car in the Raid 2 being met with automatic weapon fire straight through the motorcycle helmet.  Bye!
4. The realisation of who the Unmarried Mother is going to meet when they go back in time. Woah!
5.  Jonah Hill's 'Walk of Shame', Ice Cube's buffet destruction and Channing Tatum's reaction to finding out Schmidt's date, all in 22 Jump Street.

B's Top 10
This year we had a few more in common than last year!

Interstellar
Her
Guardians of the Galaxy
Grand Budapest Hotel
Predestination
Dallas Buyers Club
Chef
Gone Girl
What we do in the shadows
Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Australian Box Office for 2014:
The top 10 for 2014 was no real surprise - it was either a sequel to already popular franchises, adaptations of books (Wolf of Wall Stret, Gone Girl, Hunger Games) or comics with one exception: The Lego Movie at #2.  Although to be fair, Lego also came with a built in fanbase from the toys.  But nobody really could have forseen how cool the movie would be. Guardians of the Galaxy was a risk that paid off, being one of Marvel's lesser known properties.

Sadly it was a bad year for box office for Australian movies even though there was a reasonable output.  The Rover, Predestination, The Babadook, Tracks, Felony, These Final Hours, Charlie's Country, The Little Death were all decent quality films that should have done some business but most barely made $500,000 in total box office.  Wolf Creek 2 at #62 and Tracks at #90 were the only ones to crack the top 100.

1	The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1	Roadshow	$28,005,111	11/20
2	The Lego Movie	Roadshow	$27,757,563	4/3
3	The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies	WB	$26,295,611	12/26
4	Transformers: Age of Extinction	PPI	$24,862,352	6/26
5	How to Train Your Dragon 2	Fox	$24,827,367	6/19
6	Guardians of the Galaxy	Disney	$23,291,983	8/7
7	The Wolf of Wall Street	Roadshow	$21,883,506	1/23
8	Gone Girl	Fox	$21,750,665	10/2
9	X-Men: Days of Future Past	Fox	$21,121,336	5/22
10	22 Jump Street	Sony	$21,000,729	6/19

I would love to hear your favourite movies and moments of 2014.  Please share your comments below (you can use Anonymous if you don't have a Google account).

Movie #25 - Guardians of the Galaxy 3D

Well, this is the best Star Wars movie I've seen in ages!  We've got a ragtag crew on a mission to save the universe, a cool dude and his mostly silent but loyal sidekick, one tough but nice chick, some father/son issues and a lot of spaceships flying around shooting at each other: pew, pew pew! The challenge has been thrown down to JJ Abrams & co! Oh wait, it's a Marvel movie, not a Star Wars movie?  Could have fooled me!

This movie is the first in what is sure to be another hugely successful franchise for Marvel Studios who are not content with their Avengers stable of stars (Thor, Iron Man, Hulk, Cap'n America) and want to gobble up several billion more dollars of your hard-earned cash.  So it's strange that they picked this relatively unknown property from their comic book back catalogue.  However, it could be the best idea they've had, as there are a lot fewer expectations riding on it and they could take it to a slightly crazier place and let it build a fanbase up.  And although this first instalment is pretty heavy on explaining the backstory of the characters and universe, it still has fun and sets up nicely for the next one to get straight into the action.

We follow our hero, Peter Quill (Chris Pratt), who likes to go by the moniker Starlord.  He's a treasure hunter who stumbles on our all-important MacGuffin, the Orb, which he wants to sell for a lot of 'units' ($) but a lot of others want to get their hands on it too.  Bounty hunters Rocket (a raccoon like character voiced by Bradley Cooper) and his offsider Groot (a walking tree who speaks about 3 words during the movie - I am Groot - and is voiced by Vin Diesel) want Quill and the Orb, as does Gamora (a green skinned Zoe Saldana this time, she must have enjoyed being blue in Avatar a lot) who is an assassin working for Ronan the Accuser (Lee Pace) who wants the Orb to destroy his many enemies.  We also get Drax the Destroyer (ex wrestler Dave Bautista) joining the crew not because of the Orb but because he wants revenge against Ronan. 

Guardians of the Galaxy is super dumb fun.  Getting the gang together involves a number of fun action heavy setpieces spiked with some pretty zany dialogue and jokes.  The gang trying to keep the Orb out of Ronan and his henchmen and henchwomen's hands ups the action even further but still takes time out regularly for a silly joke.  Drax in particular has some really funny lines, usually stemming from his race's inability to understand metaphors, so listen closely whenever he is speaking.  The soundtrack, which should be filled with 80s classics given Starlord's 80s origins on Earth, instead leans towards the late 70s as Peter clings to a cassette tape of his Earthling mother's favourite songs.  It is unexpected but a real hit.

The 3D throws everything but the kitchen sink at you, which is kinda unnecessary, but I couldn't fault the action scenes or visual effects at all.  Everything gels, and the only thing holding me back from giving this 5 stars is that there is just too much explanation required and yet sometimes not enough given, so it just doesn't quite fly in parts.  The humour is quite bizarre, which I liked, so I am looking forward to the next one which should expand the universe and get us into some fun places!

Movie #26 - Boyhood

Mason (Ellar Coltrane) is a 6 year old boy living in the 'burbs with his Mum Olivia (Patricia Arquette) and sister Samantha (Lorelei Linklater).  Life is a bit of a struggle for single mum Olivia, with Dad Mason Senior (Ethan Hawke) out of the picture most of the time after the two split up fairly acrimoniously (we guess).  Occasionally Mason Senior comes to town, takes the kids out for a fun day and presents, then drops them back to Mum for the serious parenting.  The kids hope that Mum and Dad will get back together, but that doesn't look like happening based on the argument being held in the front yard.  After breaking up with her latest boyfriend, Olivia decides to move the kids to Texas to be near her mother.  This is the first in a series of moves that the movie follows, mostly from Mason Junior's point of view, over a 12 year period as Mason grows into a young man and Olivia tries to do what she thinks is best for the family.  

While the film is ostensibly about Mason and how he navigates growing up, it is also much more than that.  It is also about family and looks at issues of both the parents.  The most touching part of the story is probably Olivia's arc as the Mum who goes out with the wrong guys, moves the family from place to place and struggles to make ends meet.  But all the decisions she makes are clearly motivated by love for her children and wanting to better herself and their lives.  Mason Senior is a complex character too, as he moves from slacker to responsibility while still trying to be the cool guy.  He gets many of the best scenes, whether it's having 'the talk' with Samantha, to helping Mason get over his first real romance.

What really makes this a most unique filmgoing experience is the fact that it was filmed over a period of 12 years to allow the actors to actually grow and age naturally.  Yeah I know what you're thinking, 7 Up has already been there, done that.  However, 7 Up was a documentary.  Boyhood is a fictional movie written and directed by Richard Linklater (known for Before Sunrise/Sunset/Midnight, Dazed and Confused and several others) and filmed over several weeks each year, for 12 years, with the same actors playing their characters over that whole time.  This has never been done before, and probably will not be done again.  Certainly it won't be done to the same level of quality in my opinion, as you have to realise how hard it would be to get working actors to commit to filming a movie over that long a period, and also to build continuity and stay in character.  It's an amazing achievement by all.

The concept makes this an absolute winner in my opinion.  It's the closest thing to real life you will ever see at the movies without being a documentary.  The director doesn't give us any obvious cuts to show when we have jumped forward a year in the life of the family; the only way to tell that time has passed is different haircuts/faces and different houses/partners/cars.   The dialogue is really relatable and doesn't sound like movie talk, which makes me think it was at least partly improvised by the core group of actors who would have gotten to know each other pretty well over 12 years.  Nothing overly dramatic or unrealistic happens - there is no cliché like the most awesome party ever, no massive fight between parent and child, no showing of the loss of virginity etc.  This is not a criticism by any means.  As I said earlier, it's just like peeking in at key moments of real people's lives.  Made all the more real by the fact that as time passes, these actors look older, get different haircuts and different body shapes without any use of prosthetics or visual effects. 

The overall effect is a warm and fuzzy feeling.  While Mason's mumbling gets a little annoying towards the end, when we leave him at the age of 18 you get the impression that this nice, intelligent and talented kid is going to figure out what he wants to do with his life and get on and do it.  You realise that nobody has all the answers or can make good choices all the time, but if there is love there, you can forgive and forget.  Just a warning though, it is very long - 2 hours and 45 minutes - so allow plenty of time for this gentle, joyous, unique experience. Five stars!

Movie #27 - Predestination

It's been a big week for me, as I think I've seen the two best films this year in the space of 3 days!

Please don't go into this movie thinking it's a time-travel, action thriller, because that's not what it is and I hope the marketing doesn't muck it up because you could be disappointed if that is your expectation.  And it doesn't deserve disappointment, because it is a remarkable film.  What it actually is, is a noir film wrapped around a character-driven mystery with some sci-fi touches.

The plot (what I can reveal anyway) centres around a man who is trying to prevent a large scale bombing in New York in 1975.  The man is unsuccessful and suffers horrible burns from which he is saved and eventually recovers.  The man (Ethan Hawke) is a decorated field agent who we discover can travel through time (called a temporal agent in this movie) and has been doing so for a while to try to find and stop "The Fizzle Bomber".  Once recovered, The Organisation send him on a mission back to 1975 to try one last time to apprehend the Fizzle Bomber.  One night, a man enters the bar and after a few drinks, bets The Bartender that he has the most unbelievable story the Bartender has ever heard.  Thus proceeds an incredible tale of what has happened in the life of this man who was once born a woman.  However, that story is really just a framing device for our movie, as at the end of the tale, the Bartender asks the man if he wants to find the man who ruined his life and kill him.  This sets in train a series of events using time travel to put all the pieces into place for our final destination.

So you can see how detailed the movie's plot is if the above long paragraph is only the small part I can reveal without spoiling the mystery.  It requires concentration and focus to keep up with what's happening.  The first part with the conversation serves to provide both clues to and distractions from the mystery which gradually gets solved over the second part which has the faster scenes as we move towards the capture of the bomber and understanding of how The Bartender and Unmarried Mother (the pen name of the man) are connected.  It's not an earth shattering twist in the end, but it has been so elegantly built with red herrings and clues that the more you think about it, the more wormholes you can go down.

The direction by Brisbane's own Spierig twins, Michael and Peter, is superb and I congratulate them on making an Australian movie with Australian talent in front of and behind the cameras, but having no 'Australian-ness' about it, which should give it a broad appeal.  Some may criticise this but I don't see any need for this particularly story to have an Australian setting and I really liked the noirish production design.  The Spierigs also wrote the film so all credit to them for making the year's best brain-bender to date.

But the story, direction and design would not have been enough to make a great movie had the wrong actors been chosen as it's essentially a three-hander.  Ethan Hawke is solid as The Bartender/temporal agent who kind of has to blend into the background and obviously works well with these directors (he also led the Spierig's second film Daybreakers, a great little vampire film).  Good ol' Noah Taylor does well to make you wonder if he is a goodie or baddie as Agent Robertson from The Organisation.  Sarah Snook, however, is amazing as Unmarried Mother/the man.  You have probably been reading/hearing this a lot in the last week or two, but it is definitely true that this is an absolute standout performance.  I first saw her in an ABC telemovie about wartime nurses where she really stood out, then she was in a couple of films: Not Suitable for Children and These Final Hours.  She was good in those, but this is her breakout role for sure.  Acting as both a woman and a man should be challenge enough, but the script adds so much heartbreak and weirdness in this character.  She is utterly convincing as both genders and in both happiness and pain. She is a star now.

It has been just over 24 hours since I walked out of the movie and I am still obsessed with thinking about it.  I really want to get out a whiteboard and markers and try to get a really good handle on what happened.  But I don't think I'll really understand everything.  Think I might try reading the 1958 short story "All you Zombies" on which it was based! But even that may not help since the Fizzle Bomber aspect has been added for the movie and that is where more of my questions lie. 

I'm giving this my first 5 star rating for the year.  Mind = blown. A must-see movie.  Unless your favourite genre is rom-coms.

Competition in action! Update on Brisbane Cinemas

The re-opening of the New Farm Cinemas (previously known as Village Twin) seems to have really shaken up our local cinema industry.  I've noticed a few changes going on and thought I'd give Brisbane residents an update on what is happening around town.  Apologies to my readers who live elsewhere, this is not relevant to you.
 
So we have a new cinema in town which is pretty exciting!  New Farm Cinemas is the new name for the iconic cinema complex on Brunswick Street at New Farm (on the corner of Moray Street) which was established in 1921 and was part of many people's childhood.  Having been closed for many years, it has finally been dusted off, refurbished and re-opened a few weeks ago.  They are still building 4 of the cinema rooms but 2 are open.  I haven't been yet, but the styling looks great, they have bean bags, and the prices are very attractive.  General tickets for adults are $11.50 and they only charge $2 extra for 3D (most cinemas charge $3).  Cheap day is Tuesday where all tickets are $7.50.  A range of concessions are available.  However, deal of the year has to be joining the "Purple Club" which costs $16 per year but gives you the ability to buy tickets for $9.50 for you and a friend all the time, plus a free ticket on joining and special offers.  With a Lounge and Café selling pizza, light meals and sweet treats from local gelato bars plus my favourite ever brownies from Dello Mano, this place cannot go wrong!  Look forward to the range of movies showing expanding when all theatres are open.
http://newfarmcinemas.com.au/
 
The opening of this cinema seems to have injected some competition into the market, unless it's just coincidental that it opened its doors and a bunch of other places have dropped their prices?  Of course, there have been other discount options around but most of those are suburban or at South Bank so they don't seem to have prompted the same amount of competition.  Let's see what else has happened around town?
 
The biggest change I've seen is that the Palace Cinema chain has dramatically slashed prices and shifted discount day from the universal Tuesday, to Monday.  At Palace Barracks and Centro (also at New Farm - hmmm), Monday night prices are now $7 for all films.  On other days, adult tickets are now $11 and concessions $8.  This is a pretty big reduction given they were charging around $17 per adult ticket prior to 31 July (from memory).  Palace Cinema Club now only costs $8 to join per year, which gives you $8 adult movie tickets at any time plus 1 free ticket a year.
http://www.palacecinemas.com.au/

I was at Dendy Portside (Hamilton) the other day and noticed a large sign promoting cheaper ticket prices.  Their website is still showing Adult ticket prices of $18, but I swear they had a sign up saying all adult tickets were now $11.  You can join the Club Dendy program for $18 for 1 year or $24 for 2 years, which gives you tickets at $11.50 all the time plus discounts at local retailers and a frequent movie card which gives a free one every 5th movie.  Tuesday is cheap day at Dendy.  If you are thinking of going there hoping for $11 tickets when you are not a member, it may pay to phone ahead and check, because that sign I saw might have been just for the day I was there (a public holiday).  However, I'm sure it's not going to take them long to catch on to what everyone else is doing.
http://www.dendy.com.au/Page/Home

The cheapest chain in town has always been Cineplex, who own South Bank Cinemas, Balmoral, Hawthorne and Victoria Point.  No changes here, as they were already pretty good prices. Tickets prices here depend on when you see the film.  Weekends and weeknights after 6pm are $8.50, Sunday after 4pm is $7.50, cheap Tuesday and any other weekday before 6pm is $6.50.  Then there are concessions on these prices for students, seniors and children.  Balmoral and Hawthorne cinemas are smaller and more intimate so you may want to skip seeing the latest 3D blockbusters here but they are good for small films and arthouse stuff.  Southbank has the giant 35 metre screen in Cinema 5 for all the blockbusters, but it gets pretty popular.   Parking is a problem so catch public transport if you go.   It's also been messy and dirty on our last few trips.  Victoria Point is by all reports pretty nice and has decent screen sizes, but it's way out of town unless you live in the Redlands area!
http://www.cineplex.com.au/index.php

The Schonell theatre at St Lucia (inside the Uni of Qld campus) is a great idea if you've missed a movie on its first release and want to catch it before it goes to DVD.  There are 2 screens, relatively small, but that's OK as they generally show arthouse/indie fare that doesn't need a big screen and ear-punishing sound.  It's fun to go here for a movie and pizza from the iconic Pizza Caffe.  Tickets are $12 for all sessions, $6 UQ Students and $8 for concessions.  The best deal is the Movie and Pizza deal available from the Caffe.  For $25 you get 2 movie tickets and 1 pizza.  Or for $50 you get 2 movie tickets, 2 pizzas and 2 glasses of wine.  You may to have to pay for parking though and prepare to get lost!
http://www.schonell.com/buy-tickets

Blue Room Cinebar at Rosalie doesn't advertise the ticket prices and seems to have remained a relatively expensive 'premium' option.  An advertised gift card for $46 seems to get you 2 tickets to a movie - that's $23 a ticket.  Way out of touch with the others but nice if you want that "Gold Class" experience I guess.  You can get food and drink served in the cinema here.
http://www.blueroomcinebar.com/

This leaves only our 2 big chains which are Event Cinemas and Hoyts (Redcliffe, Stafford, Sunnybank).   Neither of these are feeling the pressure yet, probably because they are suburban based (apart from the Myer Centre event cinema).   Ticket prices are still $17.50 for adults at Event and $16.50 for Hoyts.  If you have to attend these cinema chains because they are your local, I would recommend that you join their Reward programs and try to take advantage of any deals they offer.  Both clubs have a 'movie of the week' which usually costs $10, which is a good saving if you are happy not to see a movie when it first comes out.  These movies are usually ones which have been out for a few weeks and are on their way out.  RACQ members can also buy discounted Event Cinema tickets for around $11 and there are now e-vouchers that can be bought from RACQ online, but these cannot be used Fridays and Saturdays after 4pm.  I also understand that Telstra and Optus both offer their mobile phone customer discounted tickets for Event Cinemas or Hoyts, check with your provider if you're not aware of these.

So there are still some expensive nights out to go to the movies, but if you are willing to travel a bit further or go on certain days/nights, then it should be affordable to go to a movie.  Keep this information above in mind and you should be able to take advantage of discounts and avoid paying full price, which is pretty out of reach for many families.


 
 

Movie #23 - Lucy

Lucy is a new film continuing on the concept of 'what if we used all of our brain's capacity' which has been explored previously in the films Limitless and sort of in Transcendence as well.  The first thing you need to do to enjoy this movie is suspend disbelief, because the idea that humans only use 10% of their brain capacity has been proven to be a myth.  We use all areas of our brain on a regular basis and there is no area that cannot be damaged without impairing our performance.  Can we get smarter by training our brains?  Definitely, but the idea that we can increase 90% is false.  So, the idea is flawed but if you just go with it, this is a really fun ride.

Lucy is a young American girl (played by Scarlett Johanssen) studying in Paris and partying her time away.  She meets a guy in a bar who after a week, takes her to a hotel where he has to deliver a briefcase as a job.  He's too nervous though, and asks Lucy to do it, but she refuses.  He then handcuffs her to the briefcase and forces her to go inside and ask for Mr Jang.  When a bunch of dangerous looking gangsters emerge from the lift, you know Lucy is in a lot of trouble.  We discover that the briefcase contains a powerful new drug which is expected to become the new drug of choice.  In a nasty development, Lucy and a group of other unwilling participants have a packet of the drug inserted inside their bodies and are then sent to a different city of the world where they have to meet up with a distributor.  However, on Lucy's journey, she accidentally ingests the drug and things start to get pretty crazy as her brain increases in capacity at a rapid rate.

This is where the similarities between Limitless and Lucy start to end, because in Limitless the extra brain capacity is mainly used for personal gain, whereas Lucy has two missions in mind: revenge against the gangsters and sharing of the knowledge of what is happening to her with a scientist (Morgan Freeman bringing his typical gravitas to the movie).  What I really liked about this movie was the visual style.  It was written and directed by Luc Besson, the man who has given us such visual treats as The Fifth Element, Leon: The Professional and The Big Blue.   The visuals are kinetic and beautiful at the same time.  There is a lot of nature documentary style stuff inserted between scenes which seem designed to add more weight to the science of the film (even though we know it is actually not scientifically accurate).  One person at our screening thought they were in the wrong film during the opening scene of an early human drinking water at a riverbank, and given the timing of this film being released at the same time as Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, it's quite understandable!

What could have been pretty silly is just anchored enough by Scar-Jo's performance as a woman dealing with an extraordinary situation in a kick-ass way.  It is an interesting parallel role for her following her voice role in "Her" which both dealt with an expanding consciousness.  However, her playful, sexy character in Her is a far cry from the increasingly less human/business like revenge seeker in this film.   She's backed up well by Mr Freeman as usual.  Without them, this would have been dumb but for some reason I really liked it!

Movie #21 - Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

The sequel to the recent "re-imagining" of the Planet of the Apes franchise 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes', this movie is set around 8-10 years after the first film.  The virus released at the end of the last film has spread and killed many, and wars as society broke down have wiped out many more.  The apes who emancipated themselves in the last film have retreated and set up their own community in the hills of San Francisco, a safe and prosperous place where they can avoid human contact.  A small band of humans, resistant to the virus, have survived and built a fortress to keep anyone else out, but they have no electricity.  They need to get a hydro electricity plant running again.

So sets up a strong film that follows on from the almost as strong first film.  Where the first one explored the moral issue of testing experimental drugs and how we treat animals, this one is more concerned with themes of family and how there can be bad apples in every bunch even when you think you know who is the 'baddie' and who is the 'goodie'.   People and apes can certainly be both.

Our two central characters are Caesar (Andy Serkis mo-cap performance again being a standout) who now has a mate, a son and another baby chimpanzee on the way; and Malcolm (Aussie Jason Clarke in what might be a breakout role for him) has formed a new family unit with his son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) a vet Elli (Keri Russell from Felicity).  Malcolm leads a small band of humans including his son and girlfriend into ape territory, hoping to ask Caesar for permission to work on the hydro-electricity plant and co-exist peacefully with the apes.  Being very similar in outlook, Caesar agrees to Malcolm's request and even sets his community to helping get the job done so the humans can leave them in peace.  But distrust on both sides causes a series of events which set in motion a war between human and ape.

I think the timing of the release of this movie could not have been more (accidentally) perfect than it was to make the film resonate more than it would have otherwise.  While I was watching the film I felt very much 'in the moment' and concentrating on watching the events unfold, but immediately on walking out of the film I realised it was very coincidental how much it reflects real world events.  Because in this movie I feel we have a representation of the current Israel-Palestine conflict - two very different groups, both of whom in the main probably just want to be left alone to live their own way and ignore the others, both with right on their side (or so they think), but because of a series of mis-communications and/or misunderstandings between one or a few people, they come to disagree and eventually to fight and each side feels the need to seek revenge/justice for their community.  It's amazing how much in both the movie and its real world counterpart, you just want to reach out and say "Stop - can't we just talk this over and find a solution before any more lives are destroyed".  That might be too much information, I hope not, but I'm sure anyone going to see this has a general understanding of the storyline arc of this series.

On a technical note, the CGI and motion capture employed provide some amazing visuals, especially in 3D.  I felt so immersed in the film, with the producers wisely deciding not to use it to throw things at your face but instead just make you think that these apes are real, and really are riding horses, holding guns and other things that occur.  Every bit is believable.  The location is excellent too and the direction is very good from Matt Reeves (leveraging his experience with fast-paced action from directing Cloverfield but blending in the quiet character beats from the remake Let me In).  There is no real standout performance in the human cast but all are at a high level so it doesn't matter.

I felt very strongly about this movie, I really really liked it and found it pretty thought provoking.

Movie #22 - Sex Tape

Sex Tape is neither a bad nor a good movie.  It's not good enough for me to recommend anyone go and pay money to see it at the cinema, but it's not bad that I'd say don't watch it on a Friday night on the couch.  It's okay.  It would be better if you hadn't seen the trailer for the movie, because that right there pretty much has all the funny bits in it.  Of which there are a couple of really hilarious moments, but only a few.  So if you want to skip the 90 something minute running time, just watch the full trailer and there you go.

The plot is pretty much just married early thirty-somethings have lost the mojo, decide to get drunk and film themselves having sex, accidentally send video to everyone who has a sync-ed iPad to their iPad, couple do whatever it takes to get the iPads back.   Jason Segel (Marshall from How I Met your Mother) as Jay and Cameron Diaz as Annie have pretty good chemistry but even they can't save this movie which I think should pretty much be blamed on a lame script.  Rob Lowe has some pretty funny scenes and in fact, most of the funny stuff happens when he's in it, but the rest of the time it's all just what I'd describe as.....awkward.

The point is pretty much "if you just remember why you liked bonking in the first place, you'll get the urge to bonk again" which is kinda dumb and it leads to some very unbelievable conversations toward the end of the movie.   Jay looks over at Annie and says "This situation has shown me that you are kind, generous yada yada yada" and yet at no time during this movie have we seen Annie being kind or generous to anyone let alone Jay (who was responsible for the tape getting out with his crazy Frankenstein syncing program to all his former iPads which are just given away to friends, family and the mailman because Jay has such amazing taste in music everyone wants his playlists - What???).  And then Annie says a bunch of nice stuff I've forgotten about Jay which is also stupid because he did none of that either in the last 90 minutes.

All I can say is I'm thankful for receiving free tickets to this movie and did not pay to see it, and my goodwill towards Jason Segel for all his previous good work (The Muppets, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, I love you Man etc etc) just went down a notch.  Eat a sandwich too boy!

Movie # 18 - The Rover

This movie review I have struggled with for several weeks now.  You see, I just can't really tell how I feel about it.  During the movie, I was kind of wandering off and thinking I wasn't really liking it.  Immediately afterwards I thought I didn't really like it.  But several weeks later and having read a lot more about it and what the director was trying to do, I do think it is an interesting film and it was very well executed.

The Rover is the second film from director David Michod, whose debut film Animal Kingdom was one of the most critically acclaimed debut films ever and deserved everything that was said about it.  The difficult thing about The Rover is that it is just as well written, acted and shot as Animal Kingdom, but it asks you to go on a journey with a set of characters that you cannot care about.  It will be clear within the first few minutes that there are no stereotypical heroes in this movie.

It is set in the near future in the South Australian outback, with a simple title card stating "10 years after the collapse".  What collapse is not explained although a little more exposition might have helped set the context earlier.  Clearly not a nuclear/environmental apocalypse but more of an economic one, we seem to have a barely functioning society remaining based around mining activity.  Stuff can still be traded (in US dollars strangely) and there are still police and army, but times are pretty desperate and dangerous.

We open with our lead character Eric (Guy Pearce) pulling into a karaoke bar seemingly at the end of the world for a drink of water.  In the meantime a car full of criminals on the run, from what we don't know but one is bleeding so something has gone down, crashes their car.  Opportunistically stealing Eric's car for their getaway, Henry (Scoot McNairy), Archie (Aussie David Field) and Caleb do not know what they're getting into.  For Eric really, really wants his car back.  So begins a dogged pursuit of Henry's gang by the single minded Eric.  Eric lucks out by finding Henry's kid brother Rey (Robert Pattinson) in a very bad way and after getting him stitched up he takes Rey as a hostage to track Henry.  But Rey is a very unusual character and the question is whether he will help or hinder Eric in his mission.

The performances from everyone involved are universally strong, which might have something to do with the difficulty of the location and the non-stop flies and dust.  Very immersive.  Guy Pearce is on almost career best form as the steely, desperate rover of the title and does a huge amount with very little dialogue.  Robert Pattinson (Twilight's Edward the sparkly vampire) does a huge about face here as the almost mentally incompetent Rey, but he makes himself very hard to understand because he puts on a very strange accent to go with some facial tics for the character.  It is certainly a big step up for him.  The supporting roles are all strong.  But, despite the efforts of all involved to inhabit these characters, it is a film about a villain chasing a group of villains and with so little dialogue and backstory, it is impossible to care about anyone getting out with what they want.  You don't even know what they want or why they want it for most of the running time.  But it does become a mystery you want to solve.

Based on how I felt during the movie and afterwards, I think I would rate this as a film I didn't like very much despite the respect I feel for the direction, cinematography and acting.  I just need someone to cheer for in my movies to feel like I really related to it.  Having read into it a little more, I can see that they were trying to evoke that sense of 'what will a human being do when pushed to the absolute edge by their circumstances and society'.  And with reflection there is an exploration of that but I think they have just gone too spare with the dialogue and it is left a little too much to your interpretation.  I'd give this 2.5 stars out of 5.

Movie #20 - 22 Jump Street

Although the first film didn't blow me away back in 2012 (3 star review out of 5), the teaser ads had me looking forward to seeing the next instalment to reunite our bumbling heroes Schmidt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum).  And this time around, I really liked it, mainly because the jokes come really thick and fast and are really funny.

The plot: Schmidt and Jenko attempt a takedown of a drug trafficker, screw it up, get demoted to 22 Jump Street (the office has moved across the road) and have to go undercover at a university to find a student who is dealing a drug that has recently killed a female student. Hilarity ensues.

Does any of this sound familiar?  Yep that's right, the plot is identical to the first movie.  But don't worry, the filmmakers get it and have used this as the key running joke of the film.  There are numerous references sprinkled from beginning to the end of the movie about how this is just the same movie again plus riffs on how sequels usually suck.  But there is one difference this time around: Jenko gets to embrace his jock roots as he infiltrates the NFL team while Schmidt works the arty/poetry crowd angle that plays to his nerdy background.  So this time the humour derives less from the fish out of water characters in unfamiliar roles, and more from the relationship between Schmidt and Jenko as slightly homoerotic buddies.  While they initially work well together, the investigation takes them separate ways which is hard for Schmidt to let go.  A scene where they start to put all the pieces of the drug dealer mystery together while pretending to need couples counselling is really funny.

The film rides on the strength of the leads and both are better this time around after the awkward settling in phase of 21 Jump Street.  Channing Tatum's comedic talent is well and truly out in the open now (as are his or his stuntman's parkour skills which are employed as much as possible and as unnecessarily as possible to hilarious effect), and Jonah benefits from holding back a little more than usual. His walk of shame is absolute perfection though.  Ice Cube is again fantastic as the boys' angry boss and he absolutely steals the film in one scene.  Most of the other supporting characters such as the uni students they must bond with are fairly lightly drawn and don't make a huge impact, but the identical twins are pretty funny.

Ultimately, there's not a lot to it but everything that's there is consistently funny, surprisingly not too low-brow, and the momentum just keeps on building.  Do not leave before the end credits, which are the funniest end credits I've ever seen, by a long shot.  I'll be back for 23 Jump Street for sure.  This is a 4 star comedy which adds to the short list of sequels that are better than the original. 

Movie #15 - The Trip to Italy

The Trip to Italy is the sequel to The Trip but it is probably not essential to have seen the first film.  There is so little storyline and so much beautiful scenery and comedic dialogue that you won't really be feeling left out, except for one little sub-plot that carries over from the first film.

The Trip to Italy is a faux-documentary comedy.  It follows British actors Steve Coogan (well known here for his character Alan Partridge as well as his acting in films such as Tropic Thunder and Night at the Museum) and Rob Brydon (not well known here at all) as they travel around picturesque Italian locations trying fancy restaurants and reviewing them for a magazine.   Which they actually weren't doing for real, just for this 'movie' where they are playing exaggerated versions of themselves.   That's pretty much the whole story.  The movie focuses on Steve and Rob's conversations, mostly unscripted I suspect, while travelling by car (a Mini of course for these Michael Caine fans!) to their restaurants or while eating. These are punctuated with pop culture analysis and spot-on impressions of famous actors as the two try to out-do each other.  Michael Caine gets another series of impressions (already done very well in The Trip) but they add a few more this time around.  The scene with them doing Michael Caine, Tom Hardy and Christian Bale and how hard they were to understand in Batman is quite hilarious.

The movie is bigger and better than the Trip thanks to the gorgeous cinematography of the Italian seaside and rolling hills and food (don't go on an empty stomach) but ultimately it is still just a very light and easy way to waste an hour and a half with a handful of belly laughs.  A little bit of middle aged angst, this time it's Rob's temptation to cheat on a partner instead of Steve's, pulls it into dramatic territory but not for long.

I'd give this a 3.5 out of 5 - 3 for the movie overall and an extra 0.5 for the Alanis Morrissette bashing and the Tom Hardy impressions.

Movie #16 - The Double

What can I say about this movie?  Not much without giving anything away.  The Double is a bit of a sci-fi film based on a novella by famed Russian author Fyodor Dostoyevsky.  It's sci fi in theme more than setting though as the setting is a fantastic blend of futuristic time period but retro industrial setting.  It's like the future turns into the 1950s somehow.  The basic storyline follows a young man, Simon James, who is struggling to make an impression - at work, on the co-worker he admires, on the waitress at his local café, at life in general really.  Simon's life is extremely drab.  Then a new employee arrives at his work, named James Simon.  James is everything Simon is not - popular, climbing the corporate ladder, good with the ladies.  So why does nobody but Simon realise that James looks exactly like Simon?  Mystery!

This film is really quite unusual and I found myself thinking "what the hell is going on here"?  But if you just go with it and let yourself be swept up in the mystery you will find a very satisfying conclusion to work through.  But it is pretty unusual.  And that I lay at the feet of second-time director Richard Aoyade, still best known here for playing Moss on The I.T. Crowd (tv show).  The plot, setting and theme could not be more different than his first film, Submarine.  And yet both films have a strong quirk factor and a very light directorial touch which lets the characters find their own way almost.

Jesse Eisenberg is a huge favourite of mine and here he gets to show a new side of himself playing both Simon and James.  Simon is Jesse's usual sympathetic shy awkward guy but he excels at playing James, Mr Confident.  On double duty exploring the concept of what you sometimes have to do to be the person you want to be, he never lets the performance slip.  Mia Wasikowska (Alice in Wonderland) is luminous as Hannah, the co-worker Simon admires from both afar and up close at work.  There are very few other roles in the movie to comment on.

Hopefully this review has made you curious enough to give this little film flying under the radar some attention.  In Brisbane it's only showing at one cinema - Schonell Theatre at the Uni of Queensland, St Lucia.  A pain I know, but we had a fun date night eating delicious authentic Italian style pizza at the Schonell Pizza Caffe and then the movie.  Two movie tickets and a pizza big enough to share for dinner for $25 total.  Value!

Movie #14 - The Babadook

I'm skipping ahead to review this film while it's still on at the movies and my recommendation may get a few more 'bums on seats' for this worthy Australian psychological drama/horror film.  For those who don't like scary movies, this would not be for you as it could definitely bring on a few nightmares.

Amelia (Essie Davis) is the frazzled mother of Samuel (first-time actor Noah Wiseman) who is a very unusual 6 year old boy who is obsessed with a fear of monsters and building elaborate home made weapons to defend himself and his mum from these monsters.  Samuel is not doing well at school, is not well liked and is a total handful at times. Amelia is unfortunately a single mother due to her husband Oskar being killed in a car accident while driving Amelia to the hospital in labour with Samuel (shown in the opening scene so this is not a spoiler).   Six years on, she is still struggling with her grief at losing her great love, raising this sometimes painful child, her drab home, a lack of sleep and drab job at an aged care facility.

Into this sad existence suddenly pops a new children's book entitled "The Babadook".  It only takes one reading of this illustrated book about a monster coming into your home to Samuel for Amelia to decide it's way too sinister and throw it away.  But somehow it makes its way back into the house.  This coincides with a series of unsettling events that start to occur with Amelia and Samuel, as well as a loss of support from Amelia's sister.  Both mother and child start to unwind as the Babadook steps up the nightly torment and Amelia gets less and less sleep.

This film is a very brave mix of psycho drama and (mostly mild) horror.  It's an unusual film that explores the not very often talked about concept of parents who don't actually love their children.  Amelia defends and protects Samuel to all outsiders, but struggles to display real affection towards Samuel in a one on one situation - not an understandable thing but kind of relateable given the tragic circumstances around his birth.  You do kind of want to smack him a few times yourself.   It's a subtle thing that you may not even notice had I not said anything (I had read something in advance which put me on alert for this) but it creates a very interesting milieu for the Babadook to insert his presence into and gain a foothold.  Is the bond between Amelia and Samuel strong enough to ward off this evil being?

Tension is built very effectively by first-time director Aussie Jennifer Kent.  Classic horror films played on the 'idiot box' as Amelia struggles to/against sleep, great sound effects, the spooky illustrations of the book which point towards events yet to come, and the eerily retro design of the monster all combine to have you gripping your armrest.  So much so that at the Brisbane premiere screening I attended, a person knocking over their wine glass up in the back row elicited a bunch of audience giggles for the 'jump' moment it added in a quiet scene.

The performance of the usually so glamourous Essie Davis (Miss Fisher in ABC's Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries) is fantastic here.  Bravely allowing herself to be shown in frequent close ups with the makeup department making her look washed out, tired and with little or no makeup, she is the very essence of a woman on the edge.  As the tension ratchets up, she slowly unwinds with no support mechanism until you're not sure what she is going to do next.  The young boy playing the often unlikeable Samuel is also excellent.  Both contribute to an emotionally gripping movie to go with the effective scares.

I would highly recommend this movie to anyone who can handle horror (nothing too gross in here apart from 1 or 2 brief horror scenes) and is looking for something a bit different.  I'd give this a 4 out of 5.