So what's better than a sports movie? A sports movie with underdogs! As a movie lover, there are few things better than rooting for the underdog against some behemoth favorite. And wouldn't you know it? Most of the best underdogs are the real ones. Take the true story of the 1971 season for the Marshall Thundering Herd football team. A remarkable story, one that was turned into one of the most underrated sports movies around, 2006's We Are Marshall.
It's November 14, 1970 and the Marshall football team has just lost a late-season game to East Carolina. Flying back to campus in Huntington, the plane crashes just a mile short of the runway, killing all 75 people on-board including the coaching staff and most of the team. It is a tragedy that rocks the campus and college town, leaving the administration to decide if the next football season should be suspended. Following raucous, loyal support from the fans, Marshall decides to go forward with the upcoming season, hiring a little-known but energetic coach, Jack Lengyel (Matthew McConaughey), to build the program up from nothing. With just a trio of players remaining from the team, Lengyel has his work cut out for him as one barrier and roadblock after another awaits. As Jack says though, sometimes it's more than just about winning. It's about giving it your all.
What a crazy, incredible true story. Director McG turns in a gem, an excellent sports story that hits all the right notes. It's difficult watching this in 2016 without thinking "How would a tragic incident like this play out in '16?" Like so many other sports movies tend to do, 'Marshall' actually does a good job of sticking to the truth, to the real-life people and events that developed following the plane crash. Maybe some smaller, quieter moments are tweaked and twisted, but the history and guts of the story are spot-on. That really appeals to me because McG and Co. aren't pandering to the audience for emotional responses. It's a heartfelt story about how the people, the students, the families, the football players coped with such a horrific. life-taking incident.
This is an interesting leading part for star Matthew McConaughey, featuring some of the best of his work. He plays Jack Lengyel, a coach who takes on the gargantuan task of starting a program from the ground-up with just three returning players, no coaching staff and lingering doubts about if they should do this. McConaughey brings a ton of energy to the part, and that's what Marshall needs. Quirky, funny, and very real, it is an excellent performance. He's taking on this difficult job for all the right reasons, which we see in a couple of the movie's most effective scenes. In the football scenes, he throws himself into the action with reckless abandon and it shows, adding something necessary to the proceedings. This isn't a part that will go down as one of McConaughey's best, but I certainly think it should. He's rarely been better.
Watching the new coach arrive, we see how he interacts with so many different people in so many different ways. In a movie featuring several very strong performances, Matthew Fox is a scene-stealer as Red Dawson, a coach who was supposed to be on the doomed plane but changed plans last second. Now, he's dealing with horrific amounts of survivor's guilt. His scenes with McConaughey are heart-breaking, funny, and like two brothers getting to know each other. Next up, Anthony Mackie (a favorite here) as Nate Ruffin, a star player who wasn't on the plane and now feels he must start up the team again as if it is his calling. He pushes and pushes himself through injury and the pain of losing his teammates. And last but not least, David Strathairn as Marshall President Donald Dedmon, tasked with making the decision to not suspend the football team and then back Jack in his crazy plan to get the team going again. Three excellent supporting parts.
Because this isn't a movie just about football, also look for Ian McShane as the father of one of the players who died in the accident. His son was engaged to a cheerleader, Annie (Kate Mara), who similarly struggles with what to do in the wake of the crash. January Jones and Kimberly Williams-Paisley have thankless roles as the coaches' wives.
Running 131-minutes, 'Marshall' covers a ton of ground with a lot of characters, but things never feel too rushed. We go from the crash to the aftermath to the coaching hire to building the team, practice through the first two games. The football -- from the practices to the games -- has a great energy, especially the movie's last game as Marshall looks to do the impossible. The soundtrack? A drum-heavy college marching band playing as the different plays develop, drumming in step with the on-screen action. It's a cool, stylish moment that anyone who's ever been to a college sport event with a marching band will definitely appreciate. The soundtrack itself is heavy with some classic 1970's rock, adding another welcome, nostalgic layer to the story.
A gem, one that as I read some critics' reviews, I see I may be on an island with my love of 'Marshall'! I'm a sucker for sports movies across the board, but this one is really, really good. Highly recommended.
We Are Marshall (2006): *** 1/2 /****
The Sons of Katie Elder
"First, we reunite, then find Ma and Pa's killer...then read some reviews."
Showing posts with label Matthew McConaughey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Matthew McConaughey. Show all posts
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Interstellar
There aren't a lot of huge, big name directors making movies in Hollywood right now. You know, those directors that if they're behind a film makes it a must-watch film. I put Christopher Nolan high up on that list. The director of the most recent Batman trilogy, Nolan is a big old talent so I was more than curious when I first saw the trailer for his Batman follow-up, 2014's Interstellar. Where does it come down?
It's sometime in the not too distant future and Earth is in trouble as a crop blight is causing the planet to slowly but surely run out of food. Society has changed in countless ways with those people still alive forced to become farmers in hopes of continuing to provide food, among them a former NASA pilot, Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) and his family. Something needs to be done if humanity has any hope of surviving long-term, and Cooper and his daughter may unknowingly hold the key to it all. The former pilot begins to work with NASA on quite the alternate solution. A wormhole has been discovered around Saturn that can transport a spaceship and its crew into far-off galaxies that otherwise would have been impossible to reach. Could there be an alternate galaxy that offers a planet that can sustain human life? Can it be reached? Knowing that the trip will take years to complete, will Cooper go along? The depths and mysteries of the universe await through the wormhole.
In the same way I loved the Batman movies, Inception, The Prestige, I loved Interstellar. This most recent Nolan film has flaws -- no doubt about it -- but there's a sense of what movies could and should be. Even those who are critical of Nolan should be able to admit that this talented director tries something different. He aspires to direct something more, something bigger and something you can't look away from. The story is obviously pretty big (can't do much bigger than the end of Earth) with stunning visuals, solid casting, a memorable score from composer Hans Zimmer, and overall, just something different that I thought worked so smoothly and ridiculously well together. It's a long movie at 169 minutes and could have been trimmed here and there but this is an excellent movie. Highly recommend this one.
Say what you want about Nolan as a storyteller, but I think he's at his best as a big picture sort of guy. Unique ideas, scope and scale, the bigger the better. Where better to bring that to life than the science fiction genre? Nolan tweaks the world we know, adding a few years but a world that seems pretty inevitable for our planet. The plight that ravaged crops worldwide is never addressed head-on. It happened. Let's try and fix it. Humanity's time on Earth is running out with the end fast approaching. With a few quick scenes, some dialogue here and there, we're introduced to this world. What does our future hold? That's the beauty of Nolan's vision. We see future technologies, including robot assistants (voiced by Bill Irwin and Josh Stewart) with unique movements. We see a world far less populated where the accepted ways of living have changed. That's what Nolan does so well. He creates a world with broad strokes laying out the groundwork. He aspires to do something different, something better.
Before I delve into some technical "analysis" (or at least as much as I can imagine), let's deal with some casting. McConaughey makes the most of his first film with Nolan, his Cooper a kind of wild-eyed dreamer with an inventive streak and intellect that makes him seemed destined for bigger and better. I wish McConaughey didn't mumble so much, but the performance itself is very strong, especially his relationship with his 10-year old daughter, Murph (Mackenzie Foy). There's a human side that works really well here, a single father who makes an impossibly difficult decision that could take years away from his time with his daughter and son (Timothee Chamalet) but could potentially preserve mankind's existence. That question pervades much of the second half of Nolan's film. With so much on the line, do you think selfishly or do you think for the bigger good?
There's plenty more in the old casting department. Anne Hathaway plays Brand, a scientist who travels with Cooper into the Saturn wormhole, another intellectual trying to wrap her head around their situation, about making decisions that could cost years and millions of lives. Michael Caine plays her brilliant scientist father with Wes Bentley and David Gyasi playing the other two members of the Saturn wormhole. Now who else to look for? Here's some semi-SPOILERS for you. SPOILERS I don't want to explain much about the rest of the cast in terms of characterization, as in who and what the roles are. That's the fun of where this story goes with some unexpected appearances and characters twists. Those names include Ellen Burstyn, John Lithgow, David Oyelowo, William Devane, Topher Grace, and with some big old-fashioned star power, Jessica Chastain, Matt Damon and Casey Affleck. Chastain and Damon especially leave the best lasting impressions. END OF semi-SPOILERS.
It's hard not to watch Interstellar and not see influences from previous sci-fi movies, most notably Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey but also including Contact (also starring McConaughey), Planet of the Apes and Armageddon among many others I'm probably forgetting. With the openness of our galaxy and beyond, Nolan is like a kid in the candy store. Much like last year's Gravity, the spacial visual is a stunning backdrop as we see the spaceship Endurance heading into deep space, unexplored space to find something, anything. We're introduced to two quasi-Earth like planets -- one as frightening as the other -- in a galaxy centered around an immense black hole dubbed Gargantua. You get a sense of the immensity of space, of the vastness of what surrounds us and the time it would and does take to get there and back. The screenplay has some fun in the department, time in one dimension moving far slower than someone close by. What's an hour for one character in real-time is several years for another. It's a unique, thought-provoking technique that's used well throughout Nolan's film.
I'm writing this review almost a week after seeing it in theaters. I definitely needed some time to process it, to really think things out. What was my conclusion? There are some plotholes, some issues in storytelling that I thought could have been tightened. As many other far better writers than me have written -- check out Chris' review HERE over at Nothing is Written -- Nolan has a knack for long scenes of exposition that explain everything that's going on. For me, I appreciated these scenes because I wasn't always sure what was actually going on. So yeah, there are issues but none of them did me in to the point where I couldn't take anymore. I loved the idea and thought behind the film, I loved the execution from the spectacle to the visual to the musical score to the cast to a mind-bending story and a moving ending.
Highly recommended. Definitely worth seeing in theaters if you get a chance. It feels like a movie where it will lose some of its impact on a TV.
Interstellar (2014): ****/****
It's sometime in the not too distant future and Earth is in trouble as a crop blight is causing the planet to slowly but surely run out of food. Society has changed in countless ways with those people still alive forced to become farmers in hopes of continuing to provide food, among them a former NASA pilot, Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) and his family. Something needs to be done if humanity has any hope of surviving long-term, and Cooper and his daughter may unknowingly hold the key to it all. The former pilot begins to work with NASA on quite the alternate solution. A wormhole has been discovered around Saturn that can transport a spaceship and its crew into far-off galaxies that otherwise would have been impossible to reach. Could there be an alternate galaxy that offers a planet that can sustain human life? Can it be reached? Knowing that the trip will take years to complete, will Cooper go along? The depths and mysteries of the universe await through the wormhole.
In the same way I loved the Batman movies, Inception, The Prestige, I loved Interstellar. This most recent Nolan film has flaws -- no doubt about it -- but there's a sense of what movies could and should be. Even those who are critical of Nolan should be able to admit that this talented director tries something different. He aspires to direct something more, something bigger and something you can't look away from. The story is obviously pretty big (can't do much bigger than the end of Earth) with stunning visuals, solid casting, a memorable score from composer Hans Zimmer, and overall, just something different that I thought worked so smoothly and ridiculously well together. It's a long movie at 169 minutes and could have been trimmed here and there but this is an excellent movie. Highly recommend this one.
Say what you want about Nolan as a storyteller, but I think he's at his best as a big picture sort of guy. Unique ideas, scope and scale, the bigger the better. Where better to bring that to life than the science fiction genre? Nolan tweaks the world we know, adding a few years but a world that seems pretty inevitable for our planet. The plight that ravaged crops worldwide is never addressed head-on. It happened. Let's try and fix it. Humanity's time on Earth is running out with the end fast approaching. With a few quick scenes, some dialogue here and there, we're introduced to this world. What does our future hold? That's the beauty of Nolan's vision. We see future technologies, including robot assistants (voiced by Bill Irwin and Josh Stewart) with unique movements. We see a world far less populated where the accepted ways of living have changed. That's what Nolan does so well. He creates a world with broad strokes laying out the groundwork. He aspires to do something different, something better.
Before I delve into some technical "analysis" (or at least as much as I can imagine), let's deal with some casting. McConaughey makes the most of his first film with Nolan, his Cooper a kind of wild-eyed dreamer with an inventive streak and intellect that makes him seemed destined for bigger and better. I wish McConaughey didn't mumble so much, but the performance itself is very strong, especially his relationship with his 10-year old daughter, Murph (Mackenzie Foy). There's a human side that works really well here, a single father who makes an impossibly difficult decision that could take years away from his time with his daughter and son (Timothee Chamalet) but could potentially preserve mankind's existence. That question pervades much of the second half of Nolan's film. With so much on the line, do you think selfishly or do you think for the bigger good?
There's plenty more in the old casting department. Anne Hathaway plays Brand, a scientist who travels with Cooper into the Saturn wormhole, another intellectual trying to wrap her head around their situation, about making decisions that could cost years and millions of lives. Michael Caine plays her brilliant scientist father with Wes Bentley and David Gyasi playing the other two members of the Saturn wormhole. Now who else to look for? Here's some semi-SPOILERS for you. SPOILERS I don't want to explain much about the rest of the cast in terms of characterization, as in who and what the roles are. That's the fun of where this story goes with some unexpected appearances and characters twists. Those names include Ellen Burstyn, John Lithgow, David Oyelowo, William Devane, Topher Grace, and with some big old-fashioned star power, Jessica Chastain, Matt Damon and Casey Affleck. Chastain and Damon especially leave the best lasting impressions. END OF semi-SPOILERS.
It's hard not to watch Interstellar and not see influences from previous sci-fi movies, most notably Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey but also including Contact (also starring McConaughey), Planet of the Apes and Armageddon among many others I'm probably forgetting. With the openness of our galaxy and beyond, Nolan is like a kid in the candy store. Much like last year's Gravity, the spacial visual is a stunning backdrop as we see the spaceship Endurance heading into deep space, unexplored space to find something, anything. We're introduced to two quasi-Earth like planets -- one as frightening as the other -- in a galaxy centered around an immense black hole dubbed Gargantua. You get a sense of the immensity of space, of the vastness of what surrounds us and the time it would and does take to get there and back. The screenplay has some fun in the department, time in one dimension moving far slower than someone close by. What's an hour for one character in real-time is several years for another. It's a unique, thought-provoking technique that's used well throughout Nolan's film.
I'm writing this review almost a week after seeing it in theaters. I definitely needed some time to process it, to really think things out. What was my conclusion? There are some plotholes, some issues in storytelling that I thought could have been tightened. As many other far better writers than me have written -- check out Chris' review HERE over at Nothing is Written -- Nolan has a knack for long scenes of exposition that explain everything that's going on. For me, I appreciated these scenes because I wasn't always sure what was actually going on. So yeah, there are issues but none of them did me in to the point where I couldn't take anymore. I loved the idea and thought behind the film, I loved the execution from the spectacle to the visual to the musical score to the cast to a mind-bending story and a moving ending.
Highly recommended. Definitely worth seeing in theaters if you get a chance. It feels like a movie where it will lose some of its impact on a TV.
Interstellar (2014): ****/****
Friday, February 28, 2014
The Wolf of Wall Street
So big money, huh? Yeah, it scares the hell out of me mostly because the only time we ever hear about Wall Street and huge international corporations is when they're getting taken down for all sorts of tax frauds, insider trading and stock manipulation. How can the rich get richer basically. Like politics, right?!? Yeah, the world's a scary place. Nowhere is that more evident than in director Martin Scorsese's latest, 2013's The Wolf of Wall Street.
Arriving on Wall Street in 1987, Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a young, ambitious and even naive stock broker looking to make a career for himself. He also has horrific timing. Within months of becoming a full-time broker, Jordan is out of work as quick as he had it, a result of Black Monday. Looking for work, Jordan ends up working in a New Jersey boiler room selling penny stocks. The money is there, his aggressive selling style winning over customer after customer. It's not enough though. Jordan wants more. He needs more. He gets it his own way, starting his own start-up scam selling stocks with the very official sounding name, Stratton Oakmont, and a new right-hand man, Donnie Azoff (Jonah Hill), goes to work. He gets an office, gets some salesmen, teaches them the selling techniques, and it works....a lot. Money starts flowing in, ridiculous amounts of money, and Jordan's empire grows. Millions of dollars, a luxurious, self-indulgent life of sex, drugs, and everything in between, everything is attainable. Has Jordan's company gotten too big though?
You know what's the most terrifying thing to take away from this movie? It happened. This all happened. Read about the real-life Jordan Belfort HERE and know that as ridiculously over the top, as self-indulgent, as ludicrous as the movie is, IT HAPPENED. Belfort's story also served as the inspiration for 2000's Boiler Room. 'Wolf' doesn't delve in too much to the gory financial details, trying to introduce what's going on and moving on to the life and empire Belfort has created for himself. Not surprisingly, it has picked up some Oscar buzz, garnering nominations for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor, picking up five overall. It's a loaded Academy Awards so it will definitely be interesting to see what comes of it all.
What's the end result here? A terrifying, truly funny, unsettling, amazingly entertaining story. Scorsese's style is there at all times. DiCaprio's narration -- mostly heard over the action, at times seen as Jordan addresses the camera -- is almost non-stop, keeping things going, explaining all the new developments that the ever-crooked Stratton Oakmont is up to. 'Wolf' clocks in at a robust 179 minutes (that's almost 3 full hours for you non-math fans like me), the script from Terence Winter covering a ton of ground and a lot of years, but it never feels rushed. If you didn't know this was real, you'd think it was a drugged-up fantasy, a dream-like trip into a bizarre nightmare. There isn't one linear story, no one plot, just an ever-building doomsday scenario we all know is coming. The first hour is the rise to power, the second the stay at the top, and the third the inevitable and crushing downfall. Replacing mobsters with Wall Street brokers, 'Wolf' did remind me of Scorsese's Goodfellas at times in terms of that rise to power story arc.
As the appointed Wolf of Wall Street (earning the nickname 'Wolfie'), DiCaprio picked up another Best Actor nomination, his third Best actor and fourth overall (he remains winless), for his part here. It's a part that is hard to look away from. It is a trainwreck, and we're just waiting for the train to wreck. DiCaprio's performance is a gem as we watch Jordan's rise to power and inevitable fall from grace. He learns the ins-and-outs of the stock market from a veteran broker, John Hanna (Matthew McConaughey, a truly scene-stealing part, and he's on-screen about 10 minutes, maybe), and from there, Jordan is on his way. It's ego. It's pride. It's vanity. It is having everything the world can offer. His life becomes a cliche of the rich and famous as he visits prostitutes on a regular basis, does ridiculous amounts of drugs, becomes addicted to quaaludes, and commits himself to a life he loves and embraces, a life that will lead to his doom. From the narration to the decadence, DiCaprio brings this scumbag to life. It's not a likable character. Jordan is a deplorable individual, but he's epically, grandly good at his profession. Will DiCaprio win the Oscar? I don't know considering the opponents -- Dern, McConaughey, Bale, Ejiofor -- but he more than deserves that nomination.
DiCaprio isn't alone though, 'Wolf' featuring an impressive list of performances. Some are like McConaughey, quick, effective and lasting in terms of influence, while others figure more prominently, like Jonah Hill's Best Supporting Actor nominated part as Donnie. It's hard to put this character into words, a motor-mouth, a troublemaker, a loyal right-hand man, and just as greedy as Jordan, especially when the money starts to pile up (quite literally). Another really strong part goes to relative unknown (but not for too much longer) Margot Robbie as Naomi, Jordan's second wife, a former model and the definition of a trophy wife....who becomes much more. Adding to the scene-stealing list (how many such parts can a movie have?) is Rob Reiner as Jordan's Dad, helping his son with the business but quite aware where his son is heading. The link for these three parts -- and really the entire cast -- is the chemistry. As ridiculously goofy and off the wall as the story can be at times, it's at least somewhat grounded because of the chemistry, the believable qualities.
Also look for Kyle Chandler as Denham, the FBI agent leading the case against Jordan, Jon Favreau as Riskin, the security officer trying to help Jordan around the S.E.C. sanctions, Jean Dujardin as Saurel, the helpful Swiss banker, and Jon Bernthal, P.J. Byrne, Kenneth Choi, Brian Sacca, and Henry Zebrowski as Jordan's crew of "vice presidents" who become his inner circle. Even look for actor/director Spike Jonze in a small, effective part.
I have a concept of Best Picture nominations as being almost exclusively dramatic. This year's nominations certainly back up that assumption, from 12 Years a Slave to Captain Phillips, Nebraska to Dallas Buyers Club (American Hustle obviously had some laughs too). So what to take away from 'Wolf'? It is funny, ridiculously funny. This isn't physical humor laughs. These are scenes so far out of the ordinary that their unique qualities are funny just because. These are scenes played straight that produce countless laughs. My personal favorite? Jordan and Donnie overdo it on some old quaaludes (Lemmon 714) thinking they've lost their potency. Well...they didn't. The extended scene as both try to overcome some heavy duty effects are hilarious. I was crying. 'Wolf' has plenty of these moments, from analyzing a contract of a little person who agrees to be used as a throwing dart to McConaughey's Hannah's monologue about how to truly become a successful stock broker. It's incredibly dark humor, often uncomfortable, but these were genuine laughs.
Is there a complaint here? Yeah, the length of the movie. It never drags but the almost three-hour movie.....yeah, it felt as I was walking out that I'd been there three or four days. I don't know what you cut, but just be known it's a long movie. Mostly though, it's really good. It's the general negative outlook on, well, everything. Lost in the shuffle of the drama and debauchery is such a negative tone and outlook on life. Everyone is out for themselves, and no one really cares who gets caught in the wake. A trip of a movie full of drug use, nudity (some scenes far more graphic than others), truly interesting characters, lots of illegal stock and Wall Street activity, style to burn, and just a treat to watch. Scorsese does it again. I can't wait to see what, if any, awards it takes home at next month's Oscars.
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013): *** 1/2 /****
Arriving on Wall Street in 1987, Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a young, ambitious and even naive stock broker looking to make a career for himself. He also has horrific timing. Within months of becoming a full-time broker, Jordan is out of work as quick as he had it, a result of Black Monday. Looking for work, Jordan ends up working in a New Jersey boiler room selling penny stocks. The money is there, his aggressive selling style winning over customer after customer. It's not enough though. Jordan wants more. He needs more. He gets it his own way, starting his own start-up scam selling stocks with the very official sounding name, Stratton Oakmont, and a new right-hand man, Donnie Azoff (Jonah Hill), goes to work. He gets an office, gets some salesmen, teaches them the selling techniques, and it works....a lot. Money starts flowing in, ridiculous amounts of money, and Jordan's empire grows. Millions of dollars, a luxurious, self-indulgent life of sex, drugs, and everything in between, everything is attainable. Has Jordan's company gotten too big though?
You know what's the most terrifying thing to take away from this movie? It happened. This all happened. Read about the real-life Jordan Belfort HERE and know that as ridiculously over the top, as self-indulgent, as ludicrous as the movie is, IT HAPPENED. Belfort's story also served as the inspiration for 2000's Boiler Room. 'Wolf' doesn't delve in too much to the gory financial details, trying to introduce what's going on and moving on to the life and empire Belfort has created for himself. Not surprisingly, it has picked up some Oscar buzz, garnering nominations for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor, picking up five overall. It's a loaded Academy Awards so it will definitely be interesting to see what comes of it all.
What's the end result here? A terrifying, truly funny, unsettling, amazingly entertaining story. Scorsese's style is there at all times. DiCaprio's narration -- mostly heard over the action, at times seen as Jordan addresses the camera -- is almost non-stop, keeping things going, explaining all the new developments that the ever-crooked Stratton Oakmont is up to. 'Wolf' clocks in at a robust 179 minutes (that's almost 3 full hours for you non-math fans like me), the script from Terence Winter covering a ton of ground and a lot of years, but it never feels rushed. If you didn't know this was real, you'd think it was a drugged-up fantasy, a dream-like trip into a bizarre nightmare. There isn't one linear story, no one plot, just an ever-building doomsday scenario we all know is coming. The first hour is the rise to power, the second the stay at the top, and the third the inevitable and crushing downfall. Replacing mobsters with Wall Street brokers, 'Wolf' did remind me of Scorsese's Goodfellas at times in terms of that rise to power story arc.
As the appointed Wolf of Wall Street (earning the nickname 'Wolfie'), DiCaprio picked up another Best Actor nomination, his third Best actor and fourth overall (he remains winless), for his part here. It's a part that is hard to look away from. It is a trainwreck, and we're just waiting for the train to wreck. DiCaprio's performance is a gem as we watch Jordan's rise to power and inevitable fall from grace. He learns the ins-and-outs of the stock market from a veteran broker, John Hanna (Matthew McConaughey, a truly scene-stealing part, and he's on-screen about 10 minutes, maybe), and from there, Jordan is on his way. It's ego. It's pride. It's vanity. It is having everything the world can offer. His life becomes a cliche of the rich and famous as he visits prostitutes on a regular basis, does ridiculous amounts of drugs, becomes addicted to quaaludes, and commits himself to a life he loves and embraces, a life that will lead to his doom. From the narration to the decadence, DiCaprio brings this scumbag to life. It's not a likable character. Jordan is a deplorable individual, but he's epically, grandly good at his profession. Will DiCaprio win the Oscar? I don't know considering the opponents -- Dern, McConaughey, Bale, Ejiofor -- but he more than deserves that nomination.
DiCaprio isn't alone though, 'Wolf' featuring an impressive list of performances. Some are like McConaughey, quick, effective and lasting in terms of influence, while others figure more prominently, like Jonah Hill's Best Supporting Actor nominated part as Donnie. It's hard to put this character into words, a motor-mouth, a troublemaker, a loyal right-hand man, and just as greedy as Jordan, especially when the money starts to pile up (quite literally). Another really strong part goes to relative unknown (but not for too much longer) Margot Robbie as Naomi, Jordan's second wife, a former model and the definition of a trophy wife....who becomes much more. Adding to the scene-stealing list (how many such parts can a movie have?) is Rob Reiner as Jordan's Dad, helping his son with the business but quite aware where his son is heading. The link for these three parts -- and really the entire cast -- is the chemistry. As ridiculously goofy and off the wall as the story can be at times, it's at least somewhat grounded because of the chemistry, the believable qualities.
Also look for Kyle Chandler as Denham, the FBI agent leading the case against Jordan, Jon Favreau as Riskin, the security officer trying to help Jordan around the S.E.C. sanctions, Jean Dujardin as Saurel, the helpful Swiss banker, and Jon Bernthal, P.J. Byrne, Kenneth Choi, Brian Sacca, and Henry Zebrowski as Jordan's crew of "vice presidents" who become his inner circle. Even look for actor/director Spike Jonze in a small, effective part.
I have a concept of Best Picture nominations as being almost exclusively dramatic. This year's nominations certainly back up that assumption, from 12 Years a Slave to Captain Phillips, Nebraska to Dallas Buyers Club (American Hustle obviously had some laughs too). So what to take away from 'Wolf'? It is funny, ridiculously funny. This isn't physical humor laughs. These are scenes so far out of the ordinary that their unique qualities are funny just because. These are scenes played straight that produce countless laughs. My personal favorite? Jordan and Donnie overdo it on some old quaaludes (Lemmon 714) thinking they've lost their potency. Well...they didn't. The extended scene as both try to overcome some heavy duty effects are hilarious. I was crying. 'Wolf' has plenty of these moments, from analyzing a contract of a little person who agrees to be used as a throwing dart to McConaughey's Hannah's monologue about how to truly become a successful stock broker. It's incredibly dark humor, often uncomfortable, but these were genuine laughs.
Is there a complaint here? Yeah, the length of the movie. It never drags but the almost three-hour movie.....yeah, it felt as I was walking out that I'd been there three or four days. I don't know what you cut, but just be known it's a long movie. Mostly though, it's really good. It's the general negative outlook on, well, everything. Lost in the shuffle of the drama and debauchery is such a negative tone and outlook on life. Everyone is out for themselves, and no one really cares who gets caught in the wake. A trip of a movie full of drug use, nudity (some scenes far more graphic than others), truly interesting characters, lots of illegal stock and Wall Street activity, style to burn, and just a treat to watch. Scorsese does it again. I can't wait to see what, if any, awards it takes home at next month's Oscars.
The Wolf of Wall Street (2013): *** 1/2 /****
Monday, January 6, 2014
Mud
Somewhere in the mid 2000s, Matthew McConaughey became a punchline for jokes. It seemed like after a strong start to his acting career -- A Time to Kill, Lone Star, Amistad -- he began to play caricatures of himself. Well, something clicked because over the last two or three years, McConaughey has gotten back down to business with roles that allow him to show off that genuine acting ability, including 2012's Mud.
Living on the Mississippi River in De Witt, Arkansas with his parents, young Ellis (Tye Sheridan) spends his days hanging out with his best friend, Neckbone (Jacob Lofland), exploring the river on his boat. Their latest search involves a boat out on an island in the river that was supposedly thrown into a tree during a recent flood. Ellis and Neckbone go searching for it, finding it fairly easily, but that's not all they find. There's some pretty obvious evidence that someone is living in the boat, footprints in the sand that are clearly very recent. It doesn't take long to find who it is, a man with questions hanging over him who nonetheless bonds with the two boys. He goes simply by Mud (McConaughey), and he's hiding on the river island. More than that though, he needs their help in getting off the island meeting up with someone...urgently. What exactly is he up to though? Is he in trouble, and will he bring the boys down with him in the process?
As I read reviews for this film from director Jeff Nichols, the description "modern fairy tale" kept coming up. Is it a fair, apt description? I suppose so, emphasis on the modern part. It's a couple days later since I watched this movie, and I'm still processing it. I think I liked it, but I'm not sure why. Other than the coming of age story, I'm not sure what the message was. I don't know what it's trying to say in general. It was universally liked, reviewed in positive fashion by anyone who can put two words together, and I went in with high hopes. So will I be the one person in the entire world who didn't like this movie? Sit tight and find out.
No, it won't be me. I liked this movie, even if its hard to peg exactly why I liked this one. McConaughey's performance is obviously key (more on that later), but it's more than that. It is a fair description to call this a modern fairy tale with more of a reliance on a coming of age story. Nichols wrote and directed the film, choosing the Mississippi River as the backdrop to his story. 'Mud' reminded me in that sense of Mark Twain's Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn stories, not to mention Stand By Me. Filming on location in Arkansas, Nichols made a wise decision. The American South with its rural, backroads (not intended in a negative way) is like we're watching a different world. It's a small town, not much to do, one that's struggling with the economy, a poor town trying to survive and adapt with changing times. It does have a lyrical feel to it -- credit to composer David Wingo and his score for adding to that -- and feels removed from our world in a sense, and it all works.
Getting some Oscar buzz for his performance here, McConaughey deserves all of that buzz. He seems to be back on the right track in picking his roles from here to Dallas Buyer's Club to The Wolf of Wall Street, not to mention his parts in Magic Mike, The Paperboy and Killer Joe. I liked how he brought Mud to life from the second we meet him. The odd name is never explained, but everyone who knows him never questions it. The character is a bit of a mystery, his backstory slowly parceled out as we find out why he's hiding on this heavily-wooded island in the Mississippi. We learn maybe everything isn't so ideal, so perfect, but McConaughey makes him charming, his Southern drawl putting us at ease, his homespun stories making it hard not to like him. Mud is a trusting, fiercely loyal, honor-bound and completely genuine. He believes in what he's doing, only questioning involving the boys in his plan late in the movie. McConaughey makes Mud a great lead character, hinted at a little of his special abilities/powers, but mostly he's just a good, if flawed, guy.
The coming of age story in Arkansas river country works so well in addition to McConaughey's performance because of Sheridan as Ellis and Lofland as Neckbone (another great name never explained). This doesn't feel like two young actors working, just two teenagers and best friends going about their day-to-day lives. When they stumble on Mud on the island, it's an adventure, if a possibly dangerous one. I loved what both of them brought to the story, a believable, human development that never feels forced. They're in that messy teenage period, trying to figure out life, their families, what they want to be, Ellis becoming the main character, Mud his unlikely teacher of life of sorts. Ellis has a crush on May Pearl (Bonnie Sturdivant), an older girl in town, is dealing with his parents (Ray McKinnon and Sarah Paulson) possibly divorcing, all on top of what Mud needs their help for.
The rest of the cast kinda got lost in the shuffle of McConaughey's excellent lead performance, Reese Witherspoon playing Juniper, Mud's seemingly doomed girlfriend, Sam Shepard as Tom, Ellis' neighbor across the river who knows Mud from years past, Michael Shannon as Galen, Neckbone's Uncle who he lives with since his parents passed away, Paul Sparks as Carver, a man pursuing Mud, Joe Don Baker appearing briefly and in intimidating fashion as Carver's menacing father.
I really wasn't sure where this one was going. I really wasn't sure what the message was, basically every woman we meet a really poor representation of anything good, all of them nagging, cheating, manipulative individuals. I've done my best not to give too much away, but don't be confused. It's worth watching and even better going in with a clean slate. I will say I don't think it's the modern classic that some have made it out to be, but I did enjoy Mud a lot. McConaughey especially is pretty perfect, heading an enjoyable movie that gets points just because it tries to do something different from the norm and succeeds on just about every level. An easy movie to recommend.
Mud (2012): ***/****
Living on the Mississippi River in De Witt, Arkansas with his parents, young Ellis (Tye Sheridan) spends his days hanging out with his best friend, Neckbone (Jacob Lofland), exploring the river on his boat. Their latest search involves a boat out on an island in the river that was supposedly thrown into a tree during a recent flood. Ellis and Neckbone go searching for it, finding it fairly easily, but that's not all they find. There's some pretty obvious evidence that someone is living in the boat, footprints in the sand that are clearly very recent. It doesn't take long to find who it is, a man with questions hanging over him who nonetheless bonds with the two boys. He goes simply by Mud (McConaughey), and he's hiding on the river island. More than that though, he needs their help in getting off the island meeting up with someone...urgently. What exactly is he up to though? Is he in trouble, and will he bring the boys down with him in the process?
As I read reviews for this film from director Jeff Nichols, the description "modern fairy tale" kept coming up. Is it a fair, apt description? I suppose so, emphasis on the modern part. It's a couple days later since I watched this movie, and I'm still processing it. I think I liked it, but I'm not sure why. Other than the coming of age story, I'm not sure what the message was. I don't know what it's trying to say in general. It was universally liked, reviewed in positive fashion by anyone who can put two words together, and I went in with high hopes. So will I be the one person in the entire world who didn't like this movie? Sit tight and find out.
No, it won't be me. I liked this movie, even if its hard to peg exactly why I liked this one. McConaughey's performance is obviously key (more on that later), but it's more than that. It is a fair description to call this a modern fairy tale with more of a reliance on a coming of age story. Nichols wrote and directed the film, choosing the Mississippi River as the backdrop to his story. 'Mud' reminded me in that sense of Mark Twain's Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn stories, not to mention Stand By Me. Filming on location in Arkansas, Nichols made a wise decision. The American South with its rural, backroads (not intended in a negative way) is like we're watching a different world. It's a small town, not much to do, one that's struggling with the economy, a poor town trying to survive and adapt with changing times. It does have a lyrical feel to it -- credit to composer David Wingo and his score for adding to that -- and feels removed from our world in a sense, and it all works.
Getting some Oscar buzz for his performance here, McConaughey deserves all of that buzz. He seems to be back on the right track in picking his roles from here to Dallas Buyer's Club to The Wolf of Wall Street, not to mention his parts in Magic Mike, The Paperboy and Killer Joe. I liked how he brought Mud to life from the second we meet him. The odd name is never explained, but everyone who knows him never questions it. The character is a bit of a mystery, his backstory slowly parceled out as we find out why he's hiding on this heavily-wooded island in the Mississippi. We learn maybe everything isn't so ideal, so perfect, but McConaughey makes him charming, his Southern drawl putting us at ease, his homespun stories making it hard not to like him. Mud is a trusting, fiercely loyal, honor-bound and completely genuine. He believes in what he's doing, only questioning involving the boys in his plan late in the movie. McConaughey makes Mud a great lead character, hinted at a little of his special abilities/powers, but mostly he's just a good, if flawed, guy.
The coming of age story in Arkansas river country works so well in addition to McConaughey's performance because of Sheridan as Ellis and Lofland as Neckbone (another great name never explained). This doesn't feel like two young actors working, just two teenagers and best friends going about their day-to-day lives. When they stumble on Mud on the island, it's an adventure, if a possibly dangerous one. I loved what both of them brought to the story, a believable, human development that never feels forced. They're in that messy teenage period, trying to figure out life, their families, what they want to be, Ellis becoming the main character, Mud his unlikely teacher of life of sorts. Ellis has a crush on May Pearl (Bonnie Sturdivant), an older girl in town, is dealing with his parents (Ray McKinnon and Sarah Paulson) possibly divorcing, all on top of what Mud needs their help for.
The rest of the cast kinda got lost in the shuffle of McConaughey's excellent lead performance, Reese Witherspoon playing Juniper, Mud's seemingly doomed girlfriend, Sam Shepard as Tom, Ellis' neighbor across the river who knows Mud from years past, Michael Shannon as Galen, Neckbone's Uncle who he lives with since his parents passed away, Paul Sparks as Carver, a man pursuing Mud, Joe Don Baker appearing briefly and in intimidating fashion as Carver's menacing father.
I really wasn't sure where this one was going. I really wasn't sure what the message was, basically every woman we meet a really poor representation of anything good, all of them nagging, cheating, manipulative individuals. I've done my best not to give too much away, but don't be confused. It's worth watching and even better going in with a clean slate. I will say I don't think it's the modern classic that some have made it out to be, but I did enjoy Mud a lot. McConaughey especially is pretty perfect, heading an enjoyable movie that gets points just because it tries to do something different from the norm and succeeds on just about every level. An easy movie to recommend.
Mud (2012): ***/****
Saturday, September 8, 2012
Reign of Fire
Usually post-apocalyptic movies like to throw some natural calamity at us. If it's not nature -- an epic tsunami, a world-ending storm -- then it is something man-made. How about something else though, something different? How about dragons? Yeah, I thought it sounded kind of silly too. I never consciously avoided 2002's Reign of Fire, but I never actively sought it out until recently. While reviews and ratings are mixed, I liked it.
It is 2020 in the countryside outside of London, and a man named Quinn (Christian Bale) is leading a small group of survivors in the ruins of a castle. For some 20 years, immense, destructive dragons have been wreaking havoc all over the Earth, and now the few remaining people have been forced to band together to survive. Hoping to defeat or at least outlast the dragons, Quinn and his group are surprised one day to see an armored convoy approach their gates. Leading this American contingent is Van Zan (Matthew McConaughey), an obsessed dragon slayer hell bent on wiping out the dragons. The two men differ on what to do. Quinn wants to survive, Van Zan wants to go on the hunt. The right answer? Somewhere in between, forcing the men to work together.
Maybe the biggest reason I never sought this flick out was that the premise just sounded too silly. Dragons wiping out mankind? Desperate, poorly-supplied survivors trying to fight back? I don't know. Maybe I was thinking of Pete the Magic Dragon from growing up, but it didn't sound too appealing. Well, I was wrong. I liked it (didn't love it) because director Rob Bowman keeps it serious. If anything, even a little humor -- dark though it may have been -- would have aided the cause. But as is, it's an end of the world story. The backstory with the dragons is actually pretty cool, the creatures periodically coming from the depths of the Earth to ravage the planet, then retire back to deep, cavernous cavities. It isn't anything ground-breaking, but it's better than what I expected.
Playing the two leads, Bale and McConaughey provide an interesting Odd Couple at the forefront of the movie. A pre-Batman Bale is the more sympathetic (if not more interesting) of the two; a grown man trying to help other survivors keep living one more day. As a boy, he saw his mother killed when the first dragon escapes from under London. He's spent the rest of his life trying to right that wrong. The scene-stealing, more showy part goes to McConaughey as Van Zan, an American military officer obsessed with defeating dragons. His look alone -- Mad Max meets Neo-Nazi -- with a shaved head, heavy native tattoos on his arms, sleeveless bomber jacket, wicked goatee, and big old biceps is enough for a badass, but I thought McConaughey does a fine job with the character. He sneers and growls, giving Van Zan quite that dramatic edge.
Also look for a pre-300 Gerard Butler as Creedy, Quinn's long-time friend and right hand man, Izabella Scorupco as Alex, Van Zan's highly trained and effective helicopter pilot, Scott Moutter as Jared, a teenager Quinn saved as a young boy, and David Kennedy, Alexander Siddig and Ned Dennehy as three of Quinn's men who help him combat the dragon attacks.
Post-apocalyptic. That must mean the world looks pretty dreary, right? The look of the movie certainly reflects that sentiment. It's a dreary, dark, cloudy world without sun after years of fire have ravaged the Earth. 'Reign' was filmed in Ireland and down to the sets and costumes, it looks like a modern Middle Aged story developing. The musical score from composers Ed Shearmur and Brad Wagner is good in that epic Hans Zimmer vein as well.
So how do you combat fire-breathing dragons? Well, you don't really, and if you try.....it sure ain't easy. 'Reign' has some fun with that issue as Quinn and his survivors basically hide when a dragon appears, but when Van Zan's heavily armed crew arrives, we're in for a treat. His attack on a raiding dragon is a high point of the movie featuring a complicated, suicidal plan. The action overall is the best part of the movie, and the finale in a desolated, demolished London is surprisingly cool too. Does this one deserve the rating I'm going to give it? Maybe not, but I liked it just the same. Entertaining, exciting rainy day type of movie that's good with a bucket of popcorn.
Reign of Fire <---trailer (2002): ***/****
It is 2020 in the countryside outside of London, and a man named Quinn (Christian Bale) is leading a small group of survivors in the ruins of a castle. For some 20 years, immense, destructive dragons have been wreaking havoc all over the Earth, and now the few remaining people have been forced to band together to survive. Hoping to defeat or at least outlast the dragons, Quinn and his group are surprised one day to see an armored convoy approach their gates. Leading this American contingent is Van Zan (Matthew McConaughey), an obsessed dragon slayer hell bent on wiping out the dragons. The two men differ on what to do. Quinn wants to survive, Van Zan wants to go on the hunt. The right answer? Somewhere in between, forcing the men to work together.
Maybe the biggest reason I never sought this flick out was that the premise just sounded too silly. Dragons wiping out mankind? Desperate, poorly-supplied survivors trying to fight back? I don't know. Maybe I was thinking of Pete the Magic Dragon from growing up, but it didn't sound too appealing. Well, I was wrong. I liked it (didn't love it) because director Rob Bowman keeps it serious. If anything, even a little humor -- dark though it may have been -- would have aided the cause. But as is, it's an end of the world story. The backstory with the dragons is actually pretty cool, the creatures periodically coming from the depths of the Earth to ravage the planet, then retire back to deep, cavernous cavities. It isn't anything ground-breaking, but it's better than what I expected.
Playing the two leads, Bale and McConaughey provide an interesting Odd Couple at the forefront of the movie. A pre-Batman Bale is the more sympathetic (if not more interesting) of the two; a grown man trying to help other survivors keep living one more day. As a boy, he saw his mother killed when the first dragon escapes from under London. He's spent the rest of his life trying to right that wrong. The scene-stealing, more showy part goes to McConaughey as Van Zan, an American military officer obsessed with defeating dragons. His look alone -- Mad Max meets Neo-Nazi -- with a shaved head, heavy native tattoos on his arms, sleeveless bomber jacket, wicked goatee, and big old biceps is enough for a badass, but I thought McConaughey does a fine job with the character. He sneers and growls, giving Van Zan quite that dramatic edge.
Also look for a pre-300 Gerard Butler as Creedy, Quinn's long-time friend and right hand man, Izabella Scorupco as Alex, Van Zan's highly trained and effective helicopter pilot, Scott Moutter as Jared, a teenager Quinn saved as a young boy, and David Kennedy, Alexander Siddig and Ned Dennehy as three of Quinn's men who help him combat the dragon attacks.
Post-apocalyptic. That must mean the world looks pretty dreary, right? The look of the movie certainly reflects that sentiment. It's a dreary, dark, cloudy world without sun after years of fire have ravaged the Earth. 'Reign' was filmed in Ireland and down to the sets and costumes, it looks like a modern Middle Aged story developing. The musical score from composers Ed Shearmur and Brad Wagner is good in that epic Hans Zimmer vein as well.
So how do you combat fire-breathing dragons? Well, you don't really, and if you try.....it sure ain't easy. 'Reign' has some fun with that issue as Quinn and his survivors basically hide when a dragon appears, but when Van Zan's heavily armed crew arrives, we're in for a treat. His attack on a raiding dragon is a high point of the movie featuring a complicated, suicidal plan. The action overall is the best part of the movie, and the finale in a desolated, demolished London is surprisingly cool too. Does this one deserve the rating I'm going to give it? Maybe not, but I liked it just the same. Entertaining, exciting rainy day type of movie that's good with a bucket of popcorn.
Reign of Fire <---trailer (2002): ***/****
Labels:
2000s,
Apocalyptic,
Christian Bale,
Gerard Butler,
Matthew McConaughey
Friday, February 10, 2012
Two For the Money
Having suffered a possibly career-ending injury in a bowl game, quarterback Brandon Lang (Matthew McConaughey) has possibly hit it big helping bettors by picking scores of NCAA and NFL college scores. He's done so well in fact that he's been noticed by Walter Abraham (Al Pacino), the owner of one of the country's most successful sports gambling/counseling companies. Walter takes Brandon to New York to join his firm, and all he asks is that he keeps on doing what he does so freakishly well, picking winners and making money. Brandon does just that -- picking winners at an alarming rate -- but can his extraordinary luck hold out?
When I did stumble across this on late night TV, I didn't necessarily love it, but I was intrigued if nothing else. Having seen the entire movie now, I wasn't even intrigued by the end of this overlong, dull and predictable story from director D.J. Caruso. Nothing about it feels real. It feels forced from the beginning, even entirely fake at specific moments. Some of that stems from the "NFL teams" and the footage of games that looks like it's from the 1980s in Canada. But more than that, 'Money' reeks of style over substance. There's never really any question where it's going, but even the ride getting there isn't entertaining.
The showiest part in the movie goes to Al Pacino as Walter, a former gambler turned hugely successful consulting company owner. This movie continued a trend of parts like this that had Pacino playing a caricature of himself more than actually playing a part. This is a part that could and should have been pretty good, but it's so ridiculously over the top and showy that I never bought it. He screams, he mugs, he gets intense. Rene Russo plays his wife, Toni, a woman with similar past demons. Jeremy Piven has a good part as Jerry, one of Brandon's in-company rivals, Armand Assante sneers as Novian, one of the world's biggest sports gamblers, and Jaime King apparently got blackmailed into a part as a conquest of Brandon's.
What throws me depending on the role is McConaughey's continued success in movies. His aw-shucks demeanor and overly confident -- even arrogant -- ways works in movies like Sahara or We Are Marshall. But in a quasi-dramatic role like this, it just doesn't work for me. Brandon is supposed to be ultra-confident, and I bought into it, but by the end of the movie I just hated this character. Hated. McConaughey doesn't do a great job developing him, and his rise and inevitable fall can be predicted from the moment the movie starts. Mostly though, I just don't think much of him as a true dramatic actor. Going up against Pacino and his exaggerated style, his underplaying style does not go over well. Not a good mix at all.
By the time the ending nears, I thought I'd seen every stereotype possible. 'Money' deserves to be beaten with the cliche stick. The rise and fall, the possible relationship with Russo's Toni, the back and forth dynamic, it's all there. And then there's the one big game where everything that went wrong can be righted. Didn't see that one coming, did you? I'm somewhat surprised by how negative this review has gone because as I finished the movie I thought it was pretty average if nothing else. The more I thought about it, the more I disliked it though. Who knows what would have happened if I waited another day to write?
Two for the Money <---trailer (2005): */****
Labels:
2000s,
Al Pacino,
Jeremy Piven,
Matthew McConaughey,
Rene Russo,
Sports
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
