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.

Beneath the Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Back when there was such thing as a Late Show – the free TV Friday night after-hours movie – one of my favorites was the original “Planet of the Apes.”  I was literally the first kid in my class to see it, and I often talked about the movie in enthusiastic hyperbole.  Since the year was 1981 and I was in First Grade, not everyone in the world knew the infamous ending and very few kids believed my fantastic tale.

Flash forward to 2014 and after several new versions and remakes, the movie is such an iconic franchise that a new “Apes” flick is as common as a new “Star Wars” or “Batman.”  Which is to say not so exotic anymore.  I really liked 2011’s “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” as it told the very early stages of how earth became “The Planet.”  So I approached this summer’s “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” with enthusiasm to see the next chapter.

When we left off, the Human Race had just been infected with a killer flu virus, and the new breed of genetically advanced apes were striking out on their own.  When “Dawn” begins, humans have been almost entirely wiped out, while the apes are thriving.  They have built their own city in California’s Muir Woods while developing greater language skills including reading and writing.  At first I was disappointed that we jumped ten years, skipping over the epic demise of humans and the proliferation of the apes.  But that would be a different movie, and I can’t judge a movie that wasn’t made.

What was made is a CGI extravaganza with yet another spectacular motion-capture performance by Andy Serkis (Gollum from “Lord of the Rings”).  As the apes swing, fight, think and speak, we see the latest animation technology at work.  It’s pretty, it’s modern cinema, and it’s impressive.  I have no doubt this was an incredibly hard movie to make.  But I found myself thinking more about the filmmaking and less about the story.

And there’s the big problem with “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” – the lack of a central plot.  The story kicks into gear when a group of humans (led by Jason Clarke and Keri Russell) enter the Apes’ woods looking for a hydroelectric dam to power up their refugee city in San Francisco.  One side doesn’t trust the other, but they set aside their differences and agree to work together.  Until. . .a little deception and betrayal leads to an all out war as the apes fight the humans for survival . . .for one scene.  The dam subplot goes nowhere and then it really becomes about man on ape action.  It’s not very epic, and nothing we haven’t seen before.  The human characters are underdeveloped and one-dimensional, which emphasizes the role of these apes - they are the protagonists here.  It's their coming of age story.  I get it, which is certainly a different and bold move by the filmmakers.  But that doesn't make it good and enjoyable for the audience.  

Without giving away the (weak) climax, the movie ends on a more optimistic note than a “Planet of the Apes” movie should.  I mean, these are supposed to be bleak, cautionary tales of human fallibility, right?  At the end of the original, Charlton Heston famously screams “You maniacs!” referring to the humans who destroyed the Earth.  But are these humans the same maniacs?  Am I wrong for wanting more?  I miss the Late Show.