Stephen Hawking and his "Theory of Everything"

"There's so much I don't know about astrophysics. I wish I'd read that book by that wheelchair guy."  

So said Homer Simpson back in 1995.  When "The Simpsons" were the most cutting-edge show on television, this was a very sophisticated and obscure reference for primetime network TV.  Who exactly is Homer referring to and what do we know about him?  That wheelchair guy is the subject of a fascinating, and unexpectedly romantic biography now in theaters.
 

The Theory of Everything stars Eddie Redmayne as Stephen Hawking, the brilliant physics professor and best-selling author of A Brief History of Time.  The movie begins in 1963 when Stephen meets Jane Wilde and the two form a deep bond that demonstrates the true power of love.  Played by Felicity Jones, Jane is the center of Stephen's universe, and also the author of the movie's source material:  her memoir "Traveling to Infinity:  My Life with Stephen."

The first thirty minutes are filled with nostalgic, romantic images of the young couple meeting, courting, dancing, and following their hearts.  Tragedy quickly strikes as Stephen is diagnosed with ALS and is given only two years to live.  Jane doesn't run away; quite the opposite.  Her devotion grows stronger.  They marry, have children, and fight every obstacle together.

As Stephen gains professional notoriety, his body deteriorates, and he is not only confined to a wheelchair but can no longer speak.  The pressures of such an arrangement begin to wear on Jane, and her devotion is tested when she meets the handsome choir director of her local church.  The movie explores the various stages of love, from passion to family to marriage, and is at it's strongest when it probes deep into the nature of personal relationships.

At times, however, the drama seems contrived as Jane runs out of things to do.  As much as I like Felicity Jones, I could definitely see her acting too hard during the middle stretches of the film where life with Stephen is difficult, and she has nothing to do but frown and look upset.

The movie has several inspired moments where Stephen gets an idea from looking at a fire, or simply staring at a coffee cup and imagining the reversal of time.  These cinematic flourishes are too few and far between, and the end result is a conventional biography. 

Eddie Redmayne is excellent as Stephen, and he plays the challenging character with guts and sympathy.  It's one of the better performances of the year, and certainly the best of this young Brit's brief career.  He joins such great performers as Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot, Javier Bardem in The Sea Inside, and Mathieu Amalric in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.  All played immobile characters who can move only part of their body and must rely on their face to tell the story.  All are exceptional accomplishments and Eddie Redmayne is too.

2014: A Space Odyssey - "Interstellar"

What to make of this Christopher Nolan fellow?  His epic movies are made with minimal CGI, shot on film, and feature old-fashioned sentimentality.  Yet critics embrace him, audiences flock to see his films, A-list actors want to work for him, and the online community seems to worship everything he does.  His new sci-fi spectacle Interstellar is banking on his popularity, as the previews for this big-budget extravaganza lack any explosions, battles, or anything else resembling the Star Wars/Star Trek realm.  The question is what will history make of Mr. Nolan's movies?  Inception got rave reviews and made a ton of money, but I found it a boring and incoherent mess of silliness.  And take away Heath Ledger's Joker from The Dark Knight and you have one dull Batman movie.  Ever aiming for the stars, Mr. Nolan now takes on even bigger, more important issues about man, his future, and the universe.

Interstellar tries really, really hard to be 2001:  A Space Odyssey but it falls short.  It's not even Robert Zemeckis's Contact.  Imagine 2001 with every scene explained in detailed, repetitive dialogue.  Then have astronaut Dave saying how much he misses his family and can't wait to get home.  In every scene.  And imagine if 2001 was stealing shots, images, and ideas from a 40 year old movie.  But that wasn't the case, which is why 2001 is a ground-breaking masterpiece, and Interstellar is not.  So what is it?

 
Interstellar is a technically impressive, philosophical drama about one man's need to save his family.  I emphasize the drama, as the action is few and far between.  When it does happen, it almost seems out of place.  Matthew McConaughey plays the family man in charge of saving mankind, as drought and other natural disasters have taken a toll on Earth.  When a wormhole is discovered just outside of Saturn, Astronaut McConaughey says "Alright, Alright" and hops on a rocket.

Half of the movie takes place on Earth, grounded in real world problems such as family, parenting, love and loss.  And the other half takes place in space.  Some of the space travel is exciting, but most of it is not all that original or imaginative.  Most of Interstellar is like The Dark Knight waiting for the Joker to appear.

And the more I've had time to ponder the movie, the more I dislike it.  Too many plot holes and head-scratchers.  Such as who actually put the wormhole out near Saturn and why all the way out there?  Perhaps I missed something.  I do know that within the first hour much time is spent on plot points that never go anywhere, such as Captain McConaughey's quest to capture the lost drone.  That sure was important.

The movie suffers from a major lack of conflict.  Much like the screenplay to Inception, this is a script that if an unknown writer submitted it to a studio it would be rejected.  In this instance, the lack of solid drama with too much exposition would turn most people away.  Interstellar has no antagonist, and most of the plight that the future Earthlings encounter happens off-screen and out of sight.  Every time I thought something bad would happen, it didn't.  

Another problem is this movie is not about what it is about.  Meaning mankind's interstellar search for a new earth-like home and the possibility of extraterrestrial life.  Those are the issues that set the wheels in motion, but eventually it's all dropped and the movie becomes a father-daughter drama.  That cool water-world we've seen in the previews?  Never explored, never given a second thought.  That really big wave?  We'll never know if it was some evil alien or a really fascinating deity.  It's just a stormy day, now it's time to take off because I miss my kids.  In the end, I can't help but feeling ripped off.  I was expecting (and hoping) for a movie that's groundbreaking, new and imaginative.  Instead, it's a fairly routine story with some intense Hans Zimmer music. 

Like M. Night Shyamalan, Christopher Nolan is a talented director with several bad ideas and delusions of grandeur (interesting note:  they were born seven days apart).  What bothers me is that IMDB has six (soon to be seven) of Mr. Nolan's movies listed in the 100 top-rated movies of all time.  A little pre-mature.  Has anybody ever quoted Inception to you?  Will they in 50 years?  Yet Inception is rated higher than Goodfellas, Star Wars, Casablanca, and Citizen Kane.

Now we have Interstellar - a decent time at the movies, especially when projected in 70mm film.  But better than The Godfather?  It's not even Topher Grace's best movie. 

You filming me? Are you filming me? - "Nightcrawler" movie review

Jake Gyllenhaal redefines creepy as Lou Bloom, a modern day Travis Bickle adrift in Los Angeles.  Like Taxi Driver forty years ago, Nightcrawler follows a rogue square peg unable to fit into the contemporary black hole of society.  Filmed almost entirely at night, Nightcrawler is a gorgeous-looking, yet brutal dissection of 21st Century morals, and how they're influenced by local news.

If anyone remembers the coyote wandering the urban streets in Michael Mann's Collateral, then imagine an entire movie about that coyote.  Jake Gyllenhaal plays the coyote as a fierce, instinctual scavenger who feeds on other people's garbage and scares anyone who gets close.  It's a phenomenal performance, and Mr. Gyllenhaal has never been better - or scarier.

His character begins as an out of work, petty thief, but soon decides that a career as a nighttime videographer of accidents and crime is his calling.  It's fascinating to watch him learn the bare minimum and quickly transform into a success.  Of course, success is a relative term.  He also lacks any sense of right and wrong, and doesn't care much for the law.  Like many recent movies, Nightcrawler features a protagonist that is an unlikeable sinner.  Unlike Taxi Driver or other past anti-hero portraits, Nightcrawler does not highlight any hero qualities, and Lou Bloom never does the right thing.  This results in an unsettling experience for the audience, and ultimately I'm not sure what to think.  Actually, I know what to think but it's a frightening thought about how to succeed in America.  In that sense, echoes of There Will Be Blood rattle throughout this modern parallel.

To help battle his demons, Lou confronts two outstanding co-stars.  First is the local news director played by Rene Russo.  Leading the city's least watched news broadcast, her character's professional ethics are also a blurry signal.  She enables Lou's career by encouraging his work and stroking his personal ego.  She gives him the only lesson he needs when she sums up her industry with the movie's best rallying cry:  "Think about our newscast as a screaming woman running down the street with her throat cut."

Lou recruits a partner-in-crime:  a nearly homeless, uneducated young man played by Riz Ahmed.  An excellent young actor who was the best part of last year's Reluctant Fundamentalist, Mr. Ahmed brings heart and spirit to a man also seeking his American dream, but with a clearer moral judgment.  It's captivating to watch him spar with Lou, as the bullshit is slung, and the two have-nots fight for power. 

The movie is a scathing portrait of local news, reminiscent of such classic films as Network and Broadcast News.  But this is more about the individual.  Who's feeding who?  Who needs who?  It's a compelling debate, and Nightcrawler does an excellent job moderating the discussion. 

"Birdman" - Michael Keaton and the Rhythm of Life

To many fans, Michael Keaton disappeared after wearing the cape in 1992's Batman Returns.  The everyman star of such '80s classics as Mr. Mom and Beetlejuice turned down superhero action roles after the two Tim Burton-directed Batman movies and never again achieved such popular exposure.  In reality, he consistently appeared in many dramatic and supporting roles of his own choosing throughout the last two decades.  He's now back front and center in Birdman - one of the year's most original and entertaining movies.

Mr. Keaton plays Riggan Thomson, a middle-aged actor famous for playing the superhero Birdman 20 years ago.  Divorced, broke, and slightly crazy, Riggan is attempting a high profile comeback by writing, directing, and starring in a Broadway play.  Exhausted and terrified, Riggan rehearses, but is continually distracted as he confronts his past and his own mortality.

He fights with his twenty-something daughter (Emma Stone) over his failures as a father, and how to be relevant in a 21st century social media obsessed world.  He argues with his best friend/lawyer/producer (Zach Galifanakis), who tries to keep the ship afloat as the play teeters on bankruptcy.  And Riggan literally brawls with his co-star (Edward Norton) who is a respected theater actor who tells Riggan the harsh truths about being a movie-star.  Riggan also suffers from superhero delusions as he argues with the voice of the Birdman in his head all while believing he can fly.

 Mr. Keaton at his best makes acting look easy.  Even in his old movies he appeared as if he wasn't acting but playing a version of himself.  All the great actors make the audience believe this, but the truth is we never really know the real person, but we as the audience think we know.  "Birdman" works so well because we really see Michael Keaton up on screen fighting for his career in 2014.  Although Mr. Keaton certainly drew upon his own experiences, his Riggan is a fictional character very different from the real person, profiled here in a recent New York Times story.

His best scenes are opposite the many fantastic actors sharing the screen.  Chief among them is Edward Norton (also a one-time superhero in 2008's "Incredible Hulk").  Their scenes together are acting magic, especially since they are actually talking about acting.  Like Mr. Keaton, Mr. Norton is an outstanding talent who has been relatively out of sight lately.  After bursting on the scene in the late '90s, he's carefully chosen several memorable supporting roles including the last two Wes Anderson movies.  Speaking many of the movie's best lines, Mr. Norton is "Birdman's" explosive catalyst, and his gestures are so expressive and moving that I would have sat through a whole movie based on his character. 

"Birdman" covers many topics, from celebrity culture, to Hollywood's superhero obsession, all the way to second chances and redemption.  It's a big canvas, and not all the themes are fully explored.  The trouble with Michael Keaton the actor being similar to Riggan Thomson the character is that audiences will confuse the two, and read more into Riggan than what's actually there.  As a result, Riggan's character is not fully fleshed out.  For example, his ex-wife says that she can't remember why they got divorced.  And the audience really won't know either until an event is described.  Otherwise we only see glimpses and hints at the true character.  The filmmakers may want us to believe that he's simply crazy, but then it's never explained why.  Because clearly he was sane for the first half of his life - what set him off?   I was left wanting more, but that's often the problem with really good movies.  Like amazing dessert we all want a little more.

"Birdman" is one of the most technically perfect movies of the year.  Everything from the music, editing, production design, and cinematography are exceptional.  The film is assembled to appear like everything happens in one long continuous take.  The camera follows Riggan backstage, down narrow hallways, and even onto the streets of New York City.  It's a bold framework that succeeds in making the audience see Riggan's fractured world through his own eyes.  The cinematographer was Emmanuel Lubezki, who just won an Academy Award last year for his groundbreaking work on "Gravity."  Once again he employs a seamless technique that makes the overall movie rise about the ordinary.

Credit for envisioning this world and sculpting it together is co-writer and director Alejandro González Iñárritu.  Birdman is his fifth feature film, after storming out of the gates with Amores Perros in 2000, yet faltering recently with 2010's Biutiful.  His new film is a deep philosophical work with multiple surrealist flourishes to make it funny, entertaining and one of the year's best.

Rushmore Day - Bill Murray in "St. Vincent"

Fans of Bill Murray will be delighted with his new movie "St. Vincent" as it combines all the traits the actor has perfected over the last four decades.  In the title role of Vincent, he's a witty curmudgeon with a heart of gold.  He speaks his mind, lives by his own rules, and people love him.  Written and directed by first timer Theodore Melfi, "St. Vincent" is a funny, though not very original, independent movie.

Vincent lives alone in Brooklyn, content in his routine of drinking, smoking, and engaging in a weekly visit from a pregnant Russian dancer prostitute (Naomi Watts).  A decorated Vietnam veteran, Vincent doesn't work but lives off his reverse mortgage which is quickly running out.  When Maggie (Melissa McCarthy) and her young son Oliver move next door to Vincent, the young boy forms an unlikely bond with the cranky neighbor.

Vincent teaches Oliver how to fight, how to bet on horses, and introduces him to the term "lady of the night."  Little by little, layer by layer, Vincent reveals a sensitive character worthy of sainthood.  One of the movie's more touching moments occurs when Vincent visits his Alzheimer-suffering wife in a nursing home.  Vincent's true pain shows through, and Murray the actor shines brightest.

Is Vincent a bad influence, or is he the missing father figure?  Oliver and Vincent need each other, especially when they suffer a couple major setbacks.  "St. Vincent" works best when Vincent and Oliver cut loose, each teaching the other about life, laughter, and love.

The film does an excellent job showing the everyday struggles of working Americans.  Each character fights to just barely make it, and I really enjoyed seeing these fine actors embody these very real characters.  I especially appreciated the scenes set in familiar settings - yet updated to their post-recession reality.  For example, a daytime trip to Belmont Park is not a sunny day at the races, but a two-thirds empty depressing vision of gamblers and lowlifes.  Oliver's Catholic elementary school class is neither a cheap jab at religion, nor an optimistic "Boys Town," but a modern melting pot of multiple ethnicities and every faith imaginable.

If the story sounds predictable, and maybe even familiar, it is.  "St. Vincent" is not the freshest film this season, as it follows a formula of redemption for the unlikely saint.  Vincent's rough edges are never too sharp, and Bill Murray is just too likeable for anyone to hold grudges.

Still, it's a fun little film, and credit goes to Theodore Melfi for writing the story and bringing it to life.  His behind-the-scenes story of how he landed Bill Murray in the role is a priceless revelation told here.  A fun anecdote that all writer-directors should read.

"Gone Girl" - A Modern Marriage Fable

The date movie of the year is not a cute boy-meets-girl story, but a creepy thriller about a missing wife and her suspicious husband.  "Gone Girl" is required viewing for any married couples or any couples thinking about marriage because it presents two sides to the struggles and broken dreams that all couples encounter.  Based on the best-selling novel by Gillian Flynn, and directed by David Fincher, "Gone Girl" is a faithful - almost literal - adaptation sure to satisfy readers and surprise the uninitiated.

"Gone Girl" is one of the most perfectly cast movies in recent years.  Ben Affleck stars as Nick Dunne, the suspect-husband who is both loved and loathed.  His character's journey mirrors the actor's:  he's up, he's down, he's a hero, he's a villain.  Is he sincere?  Is he a bullshit artist?  He's Ben Affleck!

On the day of their fifth wedding anniversary, Nick's wife Amy disappears.  The story is told through both Nick's perspective, and through the diary narration of Amy.  Amy is played by the British actress Rosamund Pike, who gives a multi-tiered performance that overshadows everyone around her.  She IS "Gone Girl" and it's great to see this actress finally get a substantive role.  Previously, her talents have been wasted as a Bond girl (in one of the worst entries "Die Another Day"), the token girl in "The World's End," and even as the one-and-done Jack Reacher girl opposite Tom Cruise.  This is an actress everyone will be talking about, and it's safe to say she will no longer be unknown.

Like the novel, the movie is full of twists upon twists, so I almost feel as I've said too much already.  Even the title says too much.  Of course, if you haven't read the book then you're in for a provocative ride that will give couples plenty to discuss afterward.  If you've already read the novel, then you won't find anything new or earth-shattering in the movie.  In a rare Hollywood decision, the screenplay was adapted by the original novelist, so all aspects of plot, theme, and character were preserved.

Is this a bad thing?  As someone who's read the book, I felt a little bored with it all.  I think some opportunities were missed to expand the context off the page and go deeper into the societal conflicts that are hinted at in the novel.  Nick and Amy start off in New York, but when the Recession renders both of them jobless, they are forced to move back to Nick's home in Missouri.  In the film the small town middle-class life plays a tiny background part, never directly affecting the couple's marriage.

But what the movie lacks in scale, it compensates for with amazing acting talent.  In addition to the leads, "Gone Girl" features two standout performances by unfamiliar faces.  Kim Dickens plays the savvy Detective Boney.  Even though she's a small town cop, she's the moral center of the story.  She's funny and tough and absolutely perfect.  Carrie Coon is the other star-in-the-making.  She plays Nick's sister Margo, who's both loving and stern.  In many ways these two actresses portray the only real adult characters in the movie. Surrounded by childish, inexplicable behavior, they are the symbolic parents and keepers of the loony bin.  It's a big responsibility, and these sharp talents shine bright.

"Gone Girl" is a fictitious fable about marriage.  It's about how couples try to control and change one another.  How people evolve based on what they believe their partner wants or thinks.  The original novel told it all brilliantly.  The movie pretty much does the same exact thing, but loses some of the book's subtext by trying to be too faithful.  The movie is twenty minutes too long, and could have said way more with less.

20 Years of "Ed Wood"

"We're about to embark on quite a journey.  4 days of hard work."

Most movies take a lot longer, but not Ed Wood's infamous "Glen or Glenda."  At least according to Tim Burton's 1994 biopic about the worst director of all time.  "Ed Wood" was released twenty years ago this week, and it remains one of my all time cherished films.

"Ed Wood" tells the true story of Edward D. Wood, Jr. the movie director of such 1950s horror movies as "Bride of the Monster" and "Plan 9 From Outer Space."  He follows his Hollywood dreams as he writes, directs and acts in no-budget pictures about monsters, aliens, and transvestites.  When he meets the cranky and retired Bela Lugosi, they form a friendship and creative partnership that gives Ed Wood the credibility he needs to make big movies.

I love the black and white, romantic reimagining of old Hollywood.  The authentic locations are pefect - I'd swear that the entire movie takes place on Hollywood Boulevard.  I love the humor, the acting, and the witty dialogue.  But most of all, I love "Ed Wood" because it's a very true profile of someone in love with movies.  It's about dreamers and their struggles.  Ed Wood tries like hell to make one, but realizes how incredibly difficult filmmaking can be.

Written by Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski, "Ed Wood" was an odd premise that seems unlikely to get made today.  Before DVDs and Netflix, it was much harder to see forgotten movies, so being aware of the director Ed Wood and his movies was a rarity.  Deciding to make a movie about him was a risk, but the end result is such a mainstream entertainment it's a testament to all the filmmakers involved.  Clearly all of the cast and crew love movies - especially the old obscure ones.

 

Of course the movie would not have such charm without Johnny Depp playing the title character.  Before he was Captain Jack Sparrow and other caricatures, Johnny Depp accepted bold and risky roles.  Each one invented an indelible persona, yet this may be his finest work.  His energy and emotion carries the picture; he brings to life this marginalized, weird character taking Ed Wood from the fringe to the megaplex.

During Awards season it was Martin Landau, however, who got all the attention.  He won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his mesmerizing portrayal of Bela Lugosi.  Watching the movie today I still forget that it's not actually the real Bela Lugosi.  It's a brilliant imitation where Mr. Landau uses his whole body and voice to capture the soul of the original Dracula.  It many ways he steals the show.

On one hand, "Ed Wood" is a very funny movie, inviting the audience to laugh at Mr. Wood's amazingly bad choices and even worse movies.  On the other hand, it's a very thoughtful look at the creative process.  No one - not even Ed Wood - tries to make bad movies.  But even the best ideas sometimes crash and burn.  Of course, Ed Wood knew he had no budgets, no time, and actors who were at best beyond their prime.  He approached each movie with passion, found the positives in every review, and he persevered.  In reality, Ed Wood made a living from writing and directing movies for over twenty years.  He's even the subject of a recent retrospective at the Anthology Film Archives in New York.

Were most of his movies really that bad?  It's safe to say they really were.  But "Ed Wood" exists to introduce him to subsequent generations who will be inspired to watch "Plan 9 From Outer Space" and judge for themselves.  In many ways, Ed Wood is more immortal that many of his contemporaries.  

"Worst film you ever saw?  Well my next one will be better."  

"God Help the Girl" - The Belle & Sebastian Movie

When a Kickstarter campaign was launched two years ago by Belle & Sebastian frontman Stuart Murdoch to crowd fund a feature film, it appeared like a creative art project without much mainstream potential.  Featuring several recent Belle & Sebastian songs, the proposed movie musical "God Help the Girl" would be directed by first-time filmmaker Stuart Murdoch, based on his own original screenplay.  It all seemed like a long-shot; something audiences never get to see.  "God Help the Girl," however, was successfully funded, completed and released, and is an inventive, entertaining piece of cinema.

The movie tells the story of Eve (Emily Browning), a songwriting dreamer who frequently escapes from a Glasgow hospital where she is being treated for anorexia.  When she meets James (Olly Alexander), a guitar-playing lifeguard, they become friends and roommates.  James teaches music to Cassie (Hannah Murray), and the three form a band dedicated to the joy of pop songs.

What follows is a full on musical, where the characters break into song and dance at random, imaginative moments.  As their band struggles to reach an audience, Eve battles her emotional issues and returns to the hospital.  She keeps pursuing her goals, submitting demo tapes to the local radio DJs.  Ultimately she must decide whether to remain in Scotland with James, or attend music school in London.

Emily Browning is terrific, singing, dancing and demonstrating a wide emotional tenderness.  The entire cast is very talented, as they bring an authentic charm to a story that manages to avoid the clichés often expected in the romance genre.  Every time you try to anticipate what a character will say or do they surprise with something off the wall.

As expected, the music is excellent.  To fans of Belle & Sebastian, many of the songs will be familiar.  Yet presented here in an original context, and sung by this cast, the soundtrack is fresh and exciting.  The music celebrates all things Pop, and it's hard not to have fun and enjoy the ride.

Credit goes to Mr. Murdoch, for crafting a fun, original film.  The cinematography looks beautiful, showcasing Glasgow in a romantic glow.  The editing is crisp and the overall style is offbeat nouvelle vague.  A very impressive feature film debut for the writer-director-singer-songwriter.  Check it out now in theaters or on-demand.

The 20th Century's Last Great Film - "Natural Born Killers"

"The whole world's coming to an end, Mal."  Mickey Knox, played by Woody Harrelson, says this at the beginning of "Natural Born Killers" a movie released 20 years ago today.  The millennium was coming to a close and the world was a crazy place full of OJ Simpson and Tonya Harding.  At the time no truer words were spoken.

I saw it twice in the theater as a young 19 year old, and watched it again last night with wide eyes and a grin.  I still marvel at it's audacity and brilliance.  Audiences had never seen such hardcore bombast, and we haven't seen anything like it since.  It's pure cinema - a frenetic visual trip with a not-so subtle message.  We (Americans, Humans, Living Things) are all natural born killers.  With or without our culture, media, or government - we are hard-wired aggressors.  It's a brutal message, wrapped in a big budget Hollywood movie - a two hour entertainment that excites, confuses, repulses, and thrills.  It's the perfect movie for a young and impressionable filmmaker.

Much has been written and debated about the themes of violence in our society.  To me, "Natural Born Killers" is a kinetic feast, stylish and iconic, referential and fresh.  It's a brilliantly executed film that pushes the boundaries of what an audience can tolerate.  It's the apex of 20th Century filmmaking because it assimilates all that came before and delivers a unique, mesmerizing story.  It is the ultimate blend of style and substance.

Based on a story by Quentin Tarantino, "Natural Born Killers" is director Oliver Stone's most audacious picture.  It follows "JFK," "The Doors," and "Born on the Fourth of July" as he continues to explore the expression of Americana on film.  Like "JFK" he employs many tricks, such as multiple film stocks, non-linear storytelling, and the random odd flash of incoherence.  "Natural Born Killers" was filmed in color, black and white, and animation.  It uses vibrant 35mm photography, and grainy 8mm shots.  It utilizes video cameras from a TV sitcom, and vintage stock photography from 1950s monster movies.  It's all active and energetic, weaving a story together about life at end of the decade.

When it was released on August 26th, 1994, reality TV was in it's infancy.  The 24/7 news cycle was still young, and the internet was just about to connect us all.  TV was the big bad enemy, and the line between movies and TV was never clearer than at this moment.  No one would ever expect "Natural Born Killers" to play on TV, yet shows are now full of both big ideas and gratuitous violence.  Watching this movie makes you realize the power of the big screen.  Nothing on TV - even the best and most praised shows - looks this cool.

This movie does what the original innovators of the art form intended 100 years previously - it shows pictures that MOVE!  Again, I use the word kinetic.  And that's what's so striking about watching this movie today.  It understands the medium - in a world where very few films do.  Most movies today rely on CGI spectacle to create a bigger, louder, explosion.  But they don't really move with any visual flow - and they certainly don't tie it back to the narrative.

"Natural Born Killers" does all that and more.  It jumps from film stocks and colors while commenting on reality and perception and subconscious thoughts.  It uses all the tools to tell its story and provide deeper meaning. 

Like all important art, and other excellent films, "NBK" draws on it's references, acknowledges them, and creates a new, rich experience.  In this instance, Oliver Stone is clearly influenced by the films of Stanley Kubrick.  "A Clockwork Orange" is all over "Natural Born Killers" in terms of shots, style, and even characters.  The structure is very similar with before and after prison halves.  Even "Full Metal Jacket" comes to mind with it's two distinct halves.  Finally, "Apocalypse Now" comes up repeatedly as Woody Harrelson channels Marlon Brando with his cult rhetoric at the heart of darkness.

Led by Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis, "NBK" is filled with great performances that also includes Robert Downey Jr. and Tommy Lee Jones.  The multi-format cinematography is shot by Robert Richardson, the three-time Oscar winner who is both Martin Scorsese's and Quentin Tarantino's DP of choice. The rock and roll angst-filled soundtrack was produced by Trent Reznor.

20 years later, "Natural Born Killers" is an important film that was way ahead of it's time.  American society is still filled with guns and violence and wars and a runaway media that lacks journalistic integrity.  In many ways, 1994 was just the beginning.  And "Natural Born Killers" is exactly what Leonard Cohen sings about during the end credits:  "I've seen the future, and it's murder."

From Coldplay to The Arcade Fire: "Boyhood"

Much has been written and much has been praised about Richard Linklater's epic new film "Boyhood."  Epic is an understatement - the movie took twelve years to film, using the same actors for a few days each year.  No other narrative feature has ever done this - cinematically chronicling the coming of age of children, and the metaphysical growth of parents.  It was a tremendous risk, and amazingly it worked.  Still, the question arises if it's just a gimmick, or actually a good movie?

"Boyhood" follows Mason from age 6 to age 18, from elementary school to college, from one parent's bad advice to another.  We see him move from town to town, as his divorced mother (Patricia Arquette) remarries, divorces, and remarries again.  Every so often his boyhood-ish father (Ethan Hawke) shows up in the same shirt and vintage Pontiac to whisk him away and offer half-assed wisdom.  Mason makes friends, meets girls, and discovers a passion for photography.  He watches events pass, such as the Battle of Fallujah or the election of Barack Obama.  He even sees Roger Clemens pitch.

Mason grows, starts driving, works a crappy job, and gets dumped.  Most of the events in his life are quiet, everyday moments.  And that's the beauty of "Boyhood" - the movie takes it's time and shows life.  One boy's world from one time and place.  It's a joy to watch Mason grow, and it's a brilliant stroke of luck that writer-director Richard Linklater found the young actor Ellar Coltrane.  He turns out to be an inspired choice, from cute young kid to compelling young man.

Even though I knew what was coming I was still amazed.  Kids grow up so fast, right?  Yet here it was front and center in a movie.  In one scene Mason is a scrappy child with a high voice, and in the next he's shot up several inches and his voice has deepened.  Pretty soon he's got a scruffy chin and girlfriend problems.

The soundtrack is a highlight, as each transition in Mason's life includes authentic period music.  The movie opens with Coldplay's "Yellow" (released in 2000), and ends with The Arcade Fire's "Deep Blue" (released in 2010).  Both are melancholy songs about time and change and remembrance. 

"Boyhood" is not a documentary.  It's a narrative work of fiction.  Yet it is missing the drama.  Mason lives a relatively trouble-free life, never forced to shed too many tears.  In trying to be realistic, Mr. Linklater makes the story too middle-of-the-road.  At one point, Mason's father takes him bowling and Mason complains about not being able to use the bumpers.  Dad warns him that life is tough and doesn't come with bumpers.  It alludes to a moment that never happens.  Mason's problems are more simplistic than just first-world dilemmas - they seem almost privileged.  Actual boyhood is full of scraped knees and head-on collisions.  Failures and frustrations.  It's what makes children ready for manhood.  If Mason experienced this, we as the audience don't get to see it.

And that brings me to another thing missing from "Boyhood" - more boyhood.  Pretend magic through an innocent's eyes.  And mischief.  Rule pushing, curiosity, and rebellion.  I didn't see much of that in the movie either.  Aside from a great scene where Mason asks his father about the existence of elves, Mason doesn't imagine or even play much.  Most of his reactions are responses to things happening to adults.  Without being too sentimental, I would have liked to have seen more of the boy's unique childhood imagination.

The movie (or the editing) seems to underline the passage of time.  Rather than drawing you into the story, this has the opposite effect by focusing attention on the filmmaking.  This is where the twelve year shooting plan becomes a gimmick.  Scenes are deliberately set at specific moments that show where in the past we are.  This includes a Harry Potter book release party, various references to presidential elections, and a cute Britney Spears imitation. 

Near the end, Mason asks his dad what the point of it all is.  His father laughs and rattles off a few thoughts, but he knows as much and as little as Mason.  As we all do.  It's the essence of boyhood.  

"Boyhood" is a very good, yet flawed movie that is definitely worth seeing.  It's a film that will make you think and remember, and quite possibly change your life.  Or maybe it's just a movie and it will be over in an instant.

A Most Missed Actor - Philip Seymour Hoffman's Last Movie

When Philip Seymour Hoffman died on February 2nd, he left behind a legacy full of classic screen characters.  Unknown at the time was that his final completed movie would reveal one of the most quintessential portrayals of his career.  In "A Most Wanted Man" (in theaters now), the late Mr. Hoffman plays Gunther Bachmann, a thoughtful, drinking, chain-smoking, shadowy German.  It's a brilliant performance, in an excellent spy-thriller that is one of the Summer's best movies.

The story takes place in Hamburg, Germany, where the post-9/11 landscape has made every Muslim a suspect in the global war on terror.  Herr Bachmann has his sights set on wealthy Islamic fundraiser Dr. Abdullah, but he quickly targets a new suspect - Issa Karpov - the movie's most wanted man.  Issa Karpov is a half-Chechen, half-Russian Muslim, who arrives in Hamburg with no ID, except an authentic letter claiming inheritance to several million Euro.

As the German and American anti-terrorists get ready to pounce, Gunther Bachmann has the delicate task of convincing them (including a creepy Robin Wright) to wait and see where this leads. . . hopefully to the war's proverbial Big Fish.  The story maintains suspense, as you never know who the real villains are - if any.  Issa Karpov enlists a passionate lawyer played by Rachel McAdams to help get established, and then needs to convince Willem Dafoe's banker that Karpov's inheritance is legitimate.

All the while, Philip Seymour Hoffman holds things together.  "We should take care of all of us," he says, knowing what an espionage life can do.  He's a man with a past, that he wears physically.  Such a great skill of Mr. Hoffman's - the weight of the world seeming to take over his whole body.  He's subtle when he needs to be, and explosive at just the right moments.  When he introduces a coworker, he says, "She sails and spies.  Me?  I don't sail."  It's a brilliant, telling moment that few other actors could have phrased so well. 

Director Anton Corbijn's famous "Joshua Tree" photo

"A Most Wanted Man" is based on the book by John Le Carré, and the story shows the trained eye of a gifted storyteller with a talent for secrets and lies.  Director Anton Corbijn brings a cool, detached vision to the picture, which perfectly fits this grey new world.  As a legendary photographer, Corbijn's compositions are stunning, and this film is full of amazing images.  Here, Corbijn the filmmaker steps up brilliantly as the pacing is taut and exciting.  The ending is pure cinematic beauty - one of the best climaxes in recent memory.  And not just the perfect and inevitable way to end the movie; it's the most poetic end to a glorious film acting career.  RIP Philip Seymour Hoffman.

Guardians of the Mumbo Jumbo

As an avid comic book collector in the '80s and '90s I remember and enjoyed the Guardians of the Galaxy.  I even own a Rocket Raccoon #1.  Yet I was still very surprised that Marvel chose this series as their next big budget extravaganza.  It's a bold move, and they deserve credit for launching a film with a tree and a raccoon as central characters.  The movie, however fun, is still an oddity with an unknown world, and incoherent plot, and a cast of random villains that never seem to matter much.

The story begins on Earth in 1988 as young Peter Quill is abducted by aliens and taken to a far-off galaxy.  Years later, the adult Peter (Chris Pratt) still listens to the same Sony Walkman with the same "Awesome Mix" - only now he's a space scavenger known as the self-anointed Star-Lord.  When he finds a mysterious orb, he becomes the target of the evil Ronan who desires the supreme power that the orb will bring.  An evasive fighter with a price on his head, Quill soon attracts a renegade bunch of space outlaws who want what he's got.  This includes Rocket, the genetically modified Raccoon who resembles Han Solo, and Groot, the strong silent tree who resembles Chewbacca.  Rocket and Groot are voiced respectively by Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel, and their banter and humor is one of the movie's highpoints.

Quill is also chased by green-skinned Gamora (Zoe Saldana, of blue-skinned "Avatar" fame), who has betrayed the evil Ronan and now is also hunted across the stars.  Once these space avengers assemble, they set out on a complex mission to first sell the orb for it's extreme value, but then later to prevent Ronan from getting it in order to control the universe.  Or something similar as this convoluted plot becomes one of the movie's lowpoints.  

Unfortunately, "Guardians of the Galaxy" is saddled with ridiculous space dialogue about odd-named aliens from the planet something, who are fighting with some other species who may or may not be from the original "Star Trek."  It eventually all sounds the same, which is too bad because the movie does have a lot of originality.  I really don't know what the conflict is about, except that the orb creates some really cool explosions and the bad guys wear black.

The filmmakers would have been better off making the whole movie a comedy.  Rather than being SO influenced by the original "Star Wars" they should have learned more lessons from "Spaceballs."  When the characters lighten up, the movie works best.  When they get bogged down with serious saving the universe talk, the movie becomes an unbearable load of clichés ripped from the mouths of comic-con teenagers.  

Original Rocket Raccoon #1

Don't get me wrong, "Guardians of the Galaxy" is an enjoyable summer adventure due in part to the sheer oddness of its existence.  The cast coheres well, bringing a fun likeability to each misfit character.  As the voice of Rocket Raccoon, Bradley Cooper has never been better - no really:  he's the most complex character in the movie.  It's refreshing to see Marvel make a movie outside their comfort zone of Avengers.  Maybe next time out they can have a bit more fun, and tone down the gibberish.

"Begin Again" - an Exceptional Musical Romance

I almost cried twice during the new independent film "Begin Again" - not because it's sad or sappy, but because it's so true and brilliant.  This very 21st Century tale proves to be timeless in it's emotions, yet fresh and original in it's storytelling.  "Begin Again" is also a love letter to the creative process and possibly the best movie of 2014.

Writer-director John Carney's long-awaited follow-up to the 2006 Oscar winner "Once" delves into the familiar themes of love and music.  The filmmaking is more ambitious, not just because it's set on the streets of New York.  John Carney the writer has learned to trust John Carney the director and this is what sets "Begin Again" apart from the rest of the cutesy independent film wannabees.  During several of the movie's finest moments, Carney's camera lets the images speak for themselves with no further explanation required.  It's pure cinema and true beauty.  The final image of Keira Knigthley's face is reminiscent - yet more optimistic - of the famous end to François Truffaut's "The 400 Blows" - a powder keg of emotion worth a thousand words.

Keira Knightley, Hailee Steinfeld, and Mark Ruffalo

The story begins when wasted, burnt-out Dan (Mark Ruffalo) is fired from the record label he co-founded.  Estranged from his wife and teenage daughter (Hailee Steinfeld), he contemplates suicide as he drinks his soul away in the dark New York night.  He stumbles into a bar where singer-songwriter Gretta (Keira Knightley) has reluctantly taken the stage to perform a heartfelt song.  Dan's old magic is rekindled and he sets out to turn Gretta into the next big thing - and hopefully salvage his own career.

Keira Knightley and Adam Levine

Gretta also has a problematic history.  Recently separated from her rock star boyfriend (Adam Levine), Gretta is alone and hurt and ready to fly back to London.  Skeptical at first, she reluctantly agrees to let Dan help, and the two set off to make music.  Dan assembles a band of amateurs and friends (including a fun cameo by CeeLo Green) to record songs live at various landmark locations in New York.  As their careers blossom, they each confront their past.  Most touching of all is Dan's relationship with his daughter (Hailee Steinfeld).  A teen looking to fit in, she surprises her father with talent and maturity that proves to be a hard-earned, yet deserving bond.

Making music on the streets

"Begin Again" is not a traditional love story, but more about the love of life - our friends, families, careers, and art.  The pure joy of the music making scenes are exciting and as explosive as any CGI-laden blockbuster.  The movie nicely addresses both the business and art sides of the creative process, showing the good with the bad.

It embraces the New York setting and dives into the city.  The characters and neighborhoods are expertly weaved together into a believable world that makes everything seem alive and real.  Shot on digital with the Red camera, the cinematography especially pops during the nighttime scenes in Times Square - which appear to have been secretly filmed with real New Yorkers as extras.

Mark Ruffalo and Keira Knightley in Times Square

Mark Ruffalo, as always, brings his A-game and creates a memorable, lovable loser that you can't help but root for.  He's definitely one of the best American actors working today.  It is, however, Keira Knightley's movie, as it begins and ends with Gretta.  Her character undergoes the greatest transformation and the actress deserves much credit.  This may be her best work yet and I hope she's remembered during Awards Season.  Who says there's no great roles for women?  Her character makes tough decisions while never losing strength and the belief in her music.  She's the moral center of this year's most entertaining movie universe.