Category Archives: Angelina Jolie

Salt-2010

Salt-2010

Director Phillip Noyce

Starring Angelina Jolie

Scott’s Review #522

70118402

Reviewed November 20, 2016

Grade: B+

Salt (2010) is a very good, fast-paced, political thriller starring Angelina Jolie as a woman accused of being a Russian sleeper agent, who must go on the run to clear her name, all the while being chased by officials attempting to accost her.

The film offers nothing that has not been seen countless times before in movies like this, but seeing Jolie in a role typically played by a male (the role was originally written for Tom Cruise), is cool and makes the film unique in itself.

She is great in the role.

There are some twists and surprises along the way that keep the viewer on edge- numerous action and car chase scenes abound and will keep the action flick viewer quite pleased.

It is quite fast-paced and very big budget.

On the downside, I couldn’t help but think are they making movies about the United States vs. Russia again?

They are, but I could not help but enjoy it for what it was.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Mixing

Girl, Interrupted-1999

Girl, Interrupted-1999

Director James Mangold

Starring Winona Ryder, Angelina Jolie

Scott’s Review #461

60000428

Reviewed August 8, 2016

Grade: B+

Girl, Interrupted is a film that I had viewed twice when it came out (1999) and recently viewed again in 2013.

The film is a star-making performance for Angelina Jolie (unknown before this) and warrants a watch just for that alone. Jolie completely steals the show as she portrays a damaged mental patient during the 1960s.

The film itself is interesting as its intended star is Winona Ryder, at this point in her heyday, but completely usurped by Jolie- glaringly so.

Ryder was in prime form when she was the “it” girl during the 1990s. Sadly, her star has since faded.

Besides the “who is the real star of Girl, Interrupted” saga, the film itself is very good, though it has a glossy, happily ever after, Hollywood, vibe to it.

It is not as gritty as it could have been.

Throughout, the film has a very safe feel- even in moments of peril, as when one girl commits suicide, or another suffers from burns, it feels light.

I did not buy Whoopi Goldberg as the kindhearted nurse. Her performance was okay, but nothing special.

Ryder and Jolie are tops.

Despite the subject matter, the film suffers from a chick-flick, cliché, happy ending sort of style, but despite all of this, I still immensely enjoy the film.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Supporting Actress-Angelina Jolie (won)

Unbroken-2014

Unbroken-2014

Director Angelina Jolie

Starring Jack O’Connell, Garrett Hedlund, Domhnall Gleeson

Scott’s Review #260

70305949

Reviewed August 1, 2015

Grade: B

Unbroken (2014) tells the true story of Olympic athlete Louis Zamperini, a runner during the World War II period, who was also serving in the military during this tumultuous time in history.

His story is one of bravery, courage, and endurance, as he survives a hellish experience in a Japanese prisoner of war camp after having crashed in the Pacific Ocean, stranded for forty-seven days as if that were not enough to break a man.

Mainstream Hollywood fare to the hilt, this film is surprisingly directed by Angelina Jolie (a woman) and written by the Coen brothers, the latter usually emitting less traditional and more quirky fare than this film.

Jolie directs what is arguably a “guys movie” that contains very few women in the cast, and the ones who do appear are either loving mothers or giggling schoolgirl types, so the big names associated with Unbroken surprise me.

I would have taken this work as a Clint Eastwood film.

Unbroken, expected to receive several Oscar nominations, was shut out of the major categories.

Visually, Unbroken is slick, glossy, and shot very well- it looks perfect. The cinematography, sound effects, and costumes look great.

The cast of good-looking young men looks handsome even while battered and bruised and half-starved. While in a way this is a compliment, it is also not one. Unbroken lacks any grittiness and plays it quite safe. Even the scenes of abuse and beatings lack an edge to them.

This is not to say that the film is not good. It is good.

I found myself inspired by the lead character of Louis, played by Jack O’Connell, for his resilience during his ordeals. O’Connell gives a very good performance as his motto, “If I can take it, I can make it” is repeated throughout, and who will not cheer at his accomplishments?

Zamperini, who has traditional Italian parents having relocated to the United States, is strict but fair. Louis’s older brother, Peter, is his best friend and is the person who has the most faith in him. At first, Louis is on the verge of becoming a punk, in trouble with the law, if not for the interference of his brother, who gets him interested in the sport of running.

As the years go by and war erupts, Louis embarks on a tour of duty in the military and his plane crashes in the water providing yet another test of courage and stamina. Louis is strong and always the leader of the group he is intertwined with.

The scenes of the three survivors stranded on the raft for days become slightly tedious, but perhaps this is the intention, as they eat raw fish and raw birds to survive. Much of the remaining action is set in two Japanese war camps as Louis (and others) struggle to survive until the massive war has ended- they do not know if they will live or die.

The central antagonist- a vicious Japanese sergeant named “Bird”, perplexed me. Blatantly targeting Louis and administering cruel beatings and heaping tests of strength upon Louis, presumably out of jealousy because Louis was an Olympic athlete, why did Bird not simply kill him?

His motivations were also odd- In one scene, Bird tearfully tells Louis that he knew they would be friends from the beginning and seems to admire him. Bird’s father, going by a photo, seems a hard, mean man. Is this why Bird is so vicious? Bird’s character is not well thought out.

Also, every single Japanese character is portrayed in a very negative light, which sadly is common in war movies. Surely, despite being a war, there had to have been a few Japanese people who were not cruel.

Character development and depth are not a strong suit of this film.

Unbroken is a good, solid, war drama with an inspiring message of triumph, faith, and determination.

Indeed, it is a positive message to viewers of all ages.

The abuse/torture scenes are tough to watch, but the result is a feel-good story.

The snippets of the real Louis Zamperini are wonderful to watch.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography

Maleficent-2014

Maleficent-2014

Director Robert Stromberg

Starring Angelina Jolie

Scott’s Review #251

Maleficent_poster

Reviewed June 27, 2015

Grade: C+

Maleficent (2014) is an updated re-telling of the classic fairy tale “Sleeping Beauty” told from the perspective of Maleficent, the evil godmother, who in this version, it is revealed, was not always.

She is rather sympathetic towards the beginning of the film.

Later in life, becoming the antagonist, she begins life in a world of goodness, wonder, and hope until she is duped by a young man she loves and turns wicked with hatred and revenge.

The casting of Angelina Jolie as Maleficent is excellent and the main reason to watch the film.

Also worth noting is the wonderful, creative art direction and costumes that look gothic and interesting.

Otherwise, the film meanders a bit, is slightly watered down, and contains a sappy Disney-style love story. The story itself is the weakest part of Maleficent.

Maleficent, protector of the fairies in the magical land of the Moors, as a young girl is betrayed and is NOT a villain. Her male suitor (Stefan) is someone she trusts, loves, and respects, is then duped and has her wings stolen by him.

He becomes the King of the neighboring land of humans, vastly different from the peaceful world that Maleficent lives in.

These events lead her to devastation followed by revenge as she places a vicious sleeping curse on Stefan’s firstborn, Aurora.

Jolie is wickedly delicious in this role- the sultry, pouty looks, and those eyes! She plays scorned, revenge-driven to the hilt without being too over the top as lesser actresses would have.

As the actress ages, she is beginning to take on more character, villainous parts rather than sexy bad girls or heroines and I am all for that. It gives the actress something meaty to sink her teeth into. Her dark costumes perfectly give the character an edge.

The art direction is magical and the difference between the two lands is distinctive. The beauty of the Moors with gushing streams, mountains, and flowers contrasts with the stark nature of the human world.

The fairies symbolize peace and freedom with a life filled with treasures, whereas the human kingdom symbolizes ambition, greed, and coldness. The tiny fairies flittering around add zest and life to the film.

The silly love story, though is not believable nor compelling to me, especially the latter film romance between Stefan’s daughter- Aurora, and her wealthy suitor Phillip. They seem manufactured to be together without having a chance to get to know each other.

This seems contrived and produced to add something young to the story.

On a storytelling note, Maleficent’s sleeping curse is set to transpire on Aurora’s sixteenth birthday when she pricks her finger on a spindle and falls into a deep sleep that can only be remedied by love’s true kiss.

Why does he send Aurora away to live in hiding when she is a newborn? Doesn’t he have sixteen years to enjoy her?

The film then dwindles to the inevitable battle finale with lots of movement and fire and a stand-off between Maleficent and Stefan that is dull and predictable.

Overall, the first half of Maleficent (2014) is the better part and the performance of Angelina Jolie is wonderful.

Oscar Nominations: Best Costume Design