Category Archives: 2015 Films

Creed-2015

Creed-2015

Director Ryan Coogler

Starring Sylvester Stallone, Michael B. Jordan

Scott’s Review #495

80058397

Reviewed October 16, 2016

Grade: C+

Creed (2015) will please die-hard fans (and there are legions) of the Rocky (1976) franchise, eager for a trip down memory lane to revisit Sylvester Stallone’s “Rocky Balboa”.

For those yearning for a slice of nostalgia and a harkening back to when the first Rocky was released, Creed will be a crowd-pleaser. For others expecting something new or innovative the story will not be as satisfying.

The film is predictable with all of the expected elements of a sports film.

Instead of Rocky Balboa being the main attraction, he is now a senior citizen and long since retired, now owning a modest Italian restaurant in Philadelphia, the action centers on a young fighter, the bastard child of Apollo Creed, Rocky’s nemesis turned friend from the first few installments.

Adonis Johnson Creed (played by up-and-coming star Michael B. Jordan) is his name and before being rescued from a group home (he has a temper and fights a lot, naturally) by Apollo’s wife (Phylicia Rashad) he does not know fighting is truly in his blood.

Determined to make it big in the boxing world, he moves to Philadelphia and convinces Rocky Balboa to train him.

Along the way, he meets a love interest, Bianca (played by Tessa Thompson), a musician.

The main positives are the nods to history and a few sentimental moments throughout the film. How wonderful to see Rocky Balboa again. It’s like catching up with an old friend we have not seen for years.

We learn that sadly, Paulie and Adrian (Rocky’s brother-in-law and wife) have long since died and a sweet moment shows Rocky visiting their side-by-side graves, pulling up a chair, and reading the newspaper to them.

Rocky’s son has moved far away so Rocky is left a lonely man, and Apollo’s son revives a father figure element within Rocky.

Also nice are some flashback scenes to the earlier Rocky films and we see portions of Rocky’s and Apollo’s fights. The plethora of external Philadelphia scenes does bring authenticity and familiarity to the film and this is a wise decision, instead of too many interior scenes in a studio.

Otherwise, the film is largely a miss.

The formulaic, predictability must have been intentional to make Creed an ode to fans and a film that is easy to watch.  We are served the many “inspirational” training scenes as Adonis trains and trains for the big match, with an arrogant, loud, Londoner, with an equally unlikable coach.

The “good vs. bad” mentality that the film develops is contrived and completely plot-driven. It makes Adonis that much more likable and gives him the rooting factor.

This occurs time and time again in sports films. Why not make both fighters nice guys?

But, of course, the film also gives Adonis a temper to ensure that he appeals to the testosterone-driven fans expecting such.

Phylicia Rashad and Tessa Thompson are stock characters. We get the standard reaction shots from both as they wince along with the blows that Adonis receives, and Rashad gets an unintentionally comic moment. When Adonis lands a flattening blow on his opponent, she proudly professes “That’s what I’m talkin’ about!”.

Interesting to note, however, is the clever decision to make Bianca suffer from progressive hearing loss. Having her handicapped gives her nice humanity, though once the fight scenes begin this is never mentioned again.

A standard boxing film with the expected elements- testosterone, brutal fighting, sentimentality for good measure, and dutiful female characters with little substance, Creed (2015) is a guy’s movie, basic and predictable, with a little edge and lots of machismo.

However, it does capitalize on the Rocky franchise and offers a nice little nod to the past. Otherwise, it is a rather forgettable film with a mediocre story.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Sylvester Stallone

Songs My Brother Taught Me-2015

Songs My Brother Taught Me-2015

Director Chloé Zhao

Starring John Reddy, Jashaun St. John

Scott’s Review #494

80038286

Reviewed October 14, 2016

Grade: B+

Songs My Brother Taught Me (2015) is quite an understated film experience, but despite the slow pace, I found the film of great interest.

The Native American population is largely ignored in cinema (and perhaps other avenues) so what a treat it was to see a film, albeit a small, quiet film, being made to represent this group of people.

Forest Whitaker produces the film.

Undoubtedly the funding was responsible for allowing it to be made at all.

Living on an Indian reservation in remote South Dakota, the story focuses on Lakota Sioux brother and sister Johnny and Jashaun- aged sixteen and eleven, respectively.

When their father dies in a house fire, they are forced to ponder their future within the Indian reservation, and also their desires to escape their lives and move to Los Angeles with Johnny’s girlfriend- also an inhabitant of the land.

The film is largely a slice of life on a reservation and the trials and tribulations of the members who live there. Johnny’s mother is a kindhearted yet boozy young woman with another son in prison.

Jashaun’s mentor, a tattooed man who is creative and attends alcoholics anonymous meetings, only to be caught drunk by Jashaun. A rivalry between Johnny and some rival boys develops.

Finally, Johnny aspires to purchase a truck from an older gentleman. The film is laced with different facets of real-life situations- trivial to some, but an entrance into a culture most know so little about.

I found the film quite interesting and compelling in a very subdued way. A marvel is the frequent long views of the prairie land- sweeping winds and gorgeous scenery for miles. Many shots of Johnny and Jashaun are featured- simply gazing into the crisp air in deep thought.

We see the conflict put upon both youngsters. Johnny, quite handsome and the object of affection by more than one young lady, yearns for a more exciting life. His girlfriend will be attending college in California. Pretty and smart- she is sure to move on to success, but Johnny plans to go with her.

Her brother inquires how Johnny will live with no job and no money- all valid points. Will Johnny age and remain on the reservation for the rest of his life or escape to a different world?

Jashaun, quite young, is filled with quiet energy and curiosity. She is educated and wise beyond her years. What will become of her without a father and surrounded by some unsavory types that her family knows?

Not an offering for those intent on seeing more action than thoughtfulness, but for the patient viewer, it is a fascinating introspective treat.

Songs My Brother Taught Me (2015) taught me a lesson in good storytelling.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best First Feature, Best Cinematography, Acura Someone to Watch Award

45 Years-2015

45 Years-2015

Director Andre Haigh

Starring Charlotte Rampling, Tom Courtenay

Scott’s Review #488

80040147

Reviewed October 1, 2016

Grade: B+

In the case of 45 Years (2015), acting is the clear highlight of the film and the main reason to view it.

Seasoned veterans take center stage and give tremendous performances and lessons in acting.

Tom Courtenay and Charlotte Rampling carry the film.

The subject of 45 Years is an enduring marriage tested by an outside revelation that escalates in importance into conflict and mixed emotions.

The film moves at a slow pace and can be challenging to the most patient of viewers, but the slow pace is warranted as the longevity of the character’s marriage is the key to the film.

Geoff and Kate Mercer, a happy couple living in rural England, are excitedly planning their 45th wedding anniversary (the 40th was canceled due to Geoff’s heart condition). They are a popular couple within their town, both kind and decent people, and the event will be attended by many.

One day Geoff receives a letter from authorities in Switzerland- a young woman (Katya) he was once involved with, and presumed dead in 1962, has been found. Having fallen into an icy glacier, her body is preserved and looks the same as she did then.

Not knowing the extent of their relationship, Kate is riddled with multiple feelings including jealousy, curiosity, and guilt. Geoff and Kate’s marriage is tested.

45 Years is a mature film involving mature characters. Geoff and Kate are still in love decades into their relationship, but the introduction of Katya becomes an unwelcome conflict.

The film plays out gradually, but realistically, as marriage moves along slowly. Many scenes of Geoff and Kate’s day-to-day activities are shown- they walk their dog together, travel into town to shop, relax, and read the newspaper.

Like real people do.

This is an asset to the film. Real life is sometimes mundane and dull, but these little tasks are pleasurable and soothing.

Geoff and Kate’s marriage contrasts with the relationship Geoff and Katya briefly had all those years ago (excitement, risk, youth) and one can understand Kate’s point of view.

As details reveal themselves, Kate feels inferior. She is not young anymore and thinks of Geoff and Katya and the life they may have had together if the accident had not occurred. Despite being dead, Katya becomes an obstacle in Kate’s mind.

The film wisely does not write Kate as a jealous shrew or one-dimensional. She fights her jealousy every step of the way and tries to be strong and realistic.

Charlotte Rampling gives such a good, subtle, understated performance that it is easy to overlook how good she is. She does not have hysterical moments or a scene where she loses control. Rather, Rampling shows a series of complex emotions with her facial expressions.

Let’s not forget to mention Tom Courtenay. Imagine being in the golden years of your life and a long-lost lover (in spirit anyway) returns to the fold. Geoff cannot help but imagine a life with Katya if she remained alive. Kate asks Geoff if he would have married Katya and he cannot deny that he would have.

Several scenes show the couple engaging in “old people” issues- awkward lovemaking for example, which enhances the differences between when Geoff and Katya were in their prime. Geoff cannot help but be whisked back in time with thoughts and what-ifs.

A standout scene is when Kate and Geoff dance at their anniversary party. Having professed his love during a speech they causally dance. Kate is both touched and pained and as the scene goes along unravels. She explodes internally.

Sometimes perhaps a tad too slowly paced, I get the point of pacing 45 Years this way. After all, nearly 50 years of marriage is a long time and similar days will pass with few important moments. Thanks to great acting, I overlooked this and was astounded at the complexities both Rampling and Courtenay bring to the table.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Charlotte Rampling

Joy-2015

Joy-2015

Director David O. Russell

Starring Jennifer Lawrence, Bradley Cooper, Robert DeNiro

Scott’s Review #485

80064513

Reviewed September 24, 2016

Grade: B-

Joy is a safe, mainstream, female-centered 2015 film, a biopic written for current star Jennifer Lawrence. She was nominated for a Best Actress Academy Award for her role and she carries the film.

Still, despite her performance, the film is nothing special and is written in a ho-hum manner.

It is simply not very compelling and the supporting characters are not utilized as they could have been. Despite being based on a true story, the writing is lazy and the plot far-fetched.

I expected more.

The film is another collaboration between director, David O. Russell, and big stars of the time- Lawrence, Bradley Cooper, and Robert DeNiro- all used in previous Russell films.

Lawrence plays Joy, a struggling Long Island mother of two, who is divorced from her husband (who still lives in the basement of her house), with multiple family members living with her, forming a support unit.

The sense is that Joy is the breadwinner of the family.

The story is narrated by Joy’s grandmother, who she calls Mimi (Diane Ladd). Mimi always knew Joy would be a success and we see a few scenes of Joy as a child, surviving her dysfunctional family and her parent’s disputes.

DeNiro plays her womanizing father, divorced from her mother (Virginia Madsen), who lies in bed all day watching soap operas. Cooper plays opportunist, QVC executive, Neil Walker, who takes a liking to Joy and helps her achieve her dream as a successful businesswoman after she patents an idea for a new, high-powered mop.

The authenticity of the time, 1989, and through the 1990s is apparent, as we see Joy working for Eastern Airlines, a company that would fold several years later. Also authentic were the automobiles of the time and the dresses and hairstyles.

These points the film does very well. And how cute was it to see famous daytime television stars such as Susan Lucci, portraying soap opera stars, as Joy’s mother lives her life vicariously through their tangled and bizarre soap lives?

Several scenes occur on the television set as we get glimpses of the soap stories.

The film as a whole, though, feels too neat.

Predictably, Joy faces obstacles on her way to success.  Already struggling financially, she takes out a second mortgage on her house. At first, she cannot give away mops, let alone sell them.

On the brink of giving up, she finishes a meeting with execs who laugh at her product, but Walker is there to give her a break because she has a pretty face.

Predictably, things do not go well and there is a rather dull subplot about a company in Texas trying to steal Joy’s idea. When she goes and threatens them they immediately back down and obediently give in to her every whim.

This is both unrealistic and uninteresting.

I would have liked to have seen a messy back-and-forth or some court scenes, but the Texas company is portrayed as nothing but the villain.

The writing has either plot holes or contains missed opportunities altogether and many questions abound. Despite many scenes of Joy’s past we end up knowing little.

Her entire family lives with her in a suburban Long Island house- why does Joy own the house and not her mother or grandmother? Why does Joy have a rivalry with her half-sister, Peggy? Why does Joy’s father own an auto garage and still need to stay with Joy? Why is Joy’s mother mostly in bed?

Madsen as the mother is rather cartoonish and unnecessary to the plot as is Ladd- a dynamic actress given little of substance.  I did not buy DeNiro as a cad nor in love with his wealthy new girlfriend Trudy (though seeing Isabella Rossellini in the part is a win), conveniently there to be Joy’s financer.

Despite an enormously talented cast, which is fantastic to see, most of the supporting parts could have been played by any actors, as the roles are not all that challenging, and the film itself is certainly a vehicle to showcase Jennifer Lawrence, David O. Russell’s current “it” girl.

This is not a slight towards Jennifer Lawrence since she is the best part.  She successfully portrays Joy as a sympathetic, strong-willed, fair, decent human being, with enormous struggles, and a blue-collar sensibility.

Great performance, but I wish the writing and the other talents involved in the film were given better material.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Jennifer Lawrence

Results-2015

Results-2015

Director Andrew Bujalski

Starring Guy Pearce, Kevin Corrigan

Scott’s Review #471

80038442

Reviewed August 29, 2016

Grade: C-

Other than one fantastic supporting performance by Kevin Corrigan, who should have been the star of this film, Results (2015) is an independent romantic comedy that lacks any real identity.

The film has trouble deciding which couple the audience is meant to root for leaving me to root for none of them, and frankly, a bit bored with the overall script.

Still, Corrigan and to some degree, Guy Pearce make it a tolerable watch.

Corrigan plays Danny, a newly wealthy average Joe type, who joins a gym presumably to achieve a supportive network of friends, as he is new in town- Austin, Texas.

He meets Trevor (Pearce), who owns a local gym and is trained by the moody Kat (Cobie Smulders).

The three individuals’ lives intersect as a triangle of sorts develops.

Kevin Corrigan, who has appeared in numerous independent films over his decades-long career, and blockbusters such as Goodfellas (1990), completely steals the show and is the main reason to tune in.

His acting is effortless as he plays a lonely, rich man looking for human connections. He is troubled but has a comic wit that shines and gives him needed vulnerability. We want him to find happiness despite being unlikable.

Speaking of unlikeable, Smulders as Kat is a frigid iceberg with attitude for miles. Why anyone, let alone two men, would be interested in her is beyond me.

Pearce is appealing as the good-natured, aspiring-to-be successful businessman named Trevor, who is buff beyond belief- to enormous credit since Pearce is no spring chicken. Otherwise, we know little about his character.

He is not in love with Kat, but suddenly seems to be.

Kat warms to Danny but then is in love with Trevor. The entire romantic entanglement is silly and no chemistry exists among them.

The casting of Giovanni Ribisi as a stoner lawyer and Anthony Michael Hall (The Breakfast Club from the 1980s) as a fitness guru are pointless.

The fitness/gym angle is cool if one, as I am, is a fan of physical fitness. It is a nice little lesson as Kat teaches Danny basic core exercises. But after too many scenes of Kat drinking kale shakes and jogging incessantly, or Trevor eating egg white omelets and body strengthening, the message is overkill.

They are fitness buffs- we get it.

The biggest fail is how the film focuses on Danny and Kat as a potential romantic couple, then suddenly shifts gears, making Kat and Trevor the main couple, with Danny on the outside looking in.

It really makes little sense, and by that point, I was rather bored anyway and the film just petered out for me.

Results (2015) has shreds of potential with better-structured story-telling, but misses good potential in many areas- underdeveloped characters and a meandering plot are a couple of major problem points.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Kevin Corrigan

Glass Chin-2015

Glass Chin-2015

Director Noah Buschel

Starring Corey Stoll, Marin Ireland

Scott’s Review #470

70309677

Reviewed August 28, 2016

Grade: B-

Glass Chin, an independent drama film from 2015 contains some positive and negative qualities.

The film has two rather intriguing central characters, a working-class appeal, and some fun moments of Quentin Tarantino-style influence. The villains are unappealing and downright annoying so these elements detract from the main story.

Still, a solid effort.

The premise is straightforward and comfortable. Corey Stoll plays Bud Gordon, a former New York boxer with a level of one-time success.

He now lives in a small apartment in New Jersey with his girlfriend Ellen (Marin Ireland). Yearning to get back into the game, he aligns with crooked businessman, JJ Cook, played by Billy Crudup.

Along for the ride is JJ’s odd henchman, Robert.

Framed for murder so that he is now “owned” by JJ, Bud must struggle to escape the mess he has gotten himself into.

The interesting parts of Glass Chin belong to Stoll and Ireland as they make Bud and Gordon likable and genuine. They are a great team, once successful and now struggling to pay the rent.

They encompass blue-collar appeal.

They are nice people, happy to dine at cheap diners, and clip coupons, but want a comfortable life. When Ellen tries caviar for the first time at a fancy hotel, she dislikes it. She is a happy working-class girl, comfortable in her skin. Bud misses the boxing lifestyle, not for the glamour, but for a purpose.

Having owned a failed restaurant, he is now forced to take a job with a shady character to make ends meet.

I would have preferred to focus only on Bud and Ellen and their life struggles, perhaps with more emphasis on their aspirations, his feelings of failure, and more story involving his training as a young boxer, Kid Sunshine.

But sadly these aspects are secondary to the emergence of villains JJ and Robert.

I am not sure why the filmmakers decided to make both JJ and Robert so weird, and I assume they were going for a Quentin Tarantino influence, but this did not work and led the film to lose some continuity.

Both characters, especially Robert, meander with monologues of nonsense dialogue and downright crazy talk that is rather over the top.

It adds nothing to the story.

They are high-class thugs- the point comes across. The female characters, besides Ellen, are Tarantino-influenced in their left-of-center actions (the wedding dress outfit, the statuesque model who beds Bud), but we know almost nothing about them.

As a side note, I love the constant outdoor locales of New York City and New Jersey, which add authenticity to the film. When Bud drives around in his beat-up 1980s Country Squire station wagon in the snowy New York weather, it adds atmosphere.

More of Bud and Ellen would have been preferred and less of JJ and Robert would have helped Glass Chin be a better film.

Still, there is some appeal, but overall Glass Chin (2015) is quite uneven.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Female-Marin Ireland

Anomalisa-2015

Anomalisa-2015

Director Charlie Kaufman, Duke Johnson

Starring Tom Noonan, Jennifer Jason Leigh

Scott’s Review #469

80080269

Reviewed August 27, 2016

Grade: A-

Anomalisa (2015) is one of the most creative offerings I have seen recently.

Animation is not my forte- typically I find them much too nice, and the old “family-friendly” tags make me cringe, Anomalisa has received heaps of buzz so I decided to check it out.

I am glad I did.

The stop-motion film is quite adult-themed, though not the slightest bit raunchy. Rather it is an intelligent tale about loneliness and human beings connecting through this loneliness.

It is a bit of a melancholy film too, based on a 2005 play.

The central character is Michael Stone, a depressed customer service expert, who travels to Cincinnati to deliver a seminar on his expertise. Michael is riddled with anxiety and his life is rather mundane though he checks into a stylish hotel that is presumably hosting his convention.

He is a bit of a big name within his industry. Oddly, every person he encounters looks and sounds the same- that of a white man- even his wife and son. He is haunted by the memory of an old flame, Bella, who it is revealed he jilted years ago and now lives in Cincinnati.

The story gets interesting when Michael hears a woman’s voice singing, up until now all voices are male, remember, and he is desperate to find the voice.

He meets Lisa (voiced by Jennifer Jason Leigh), an insecure, rather dowdy woman, with whom he becomes infatuated. A customer service representative at the hotel to witness Michael’s seminar, Lisa is instantly smitten, though wary of Michael’s intentions.

They bond and the film tells of their romance and insecurities.

The film is highly creative and unique. It is also mysterious. My first wonder was to figure out why all the characters, regardless of gender, share the same voice.

Michael is lonely and sees everyone else as monotonous or meaningless until he meets Lisa. The film is not clear what Michael sees in Lisa- perhaps her realness in a world of phoniness. She is an ordinary girl, but what is the point? I am still not sure of this.

I did not find the character Michael likable and not one to root for. He is dismissive of some characters and a bit condescending, but despite this, not a hated character either. He and Lisa as a duo are to root for.

Anomalisa has some humor too, albeit dark humor. When Michael mistakes an adult toy store for a traditional toy store and purchases a Japanese sex doll for his son, Michael’s wife hilariously wonders about some foreign substance around the doll’s mouth.

A nervous male passenger on Michael’s flight clutches Michael’s hand, even after landing safely.

The explicit sex scene between Michael and Lisa is as shocking as it is tender. I think showing this graphic edge in animation threw me for a loop since this rarely happens in animated films- perhaps incorrectly- assuming that they are for children only with their parents to endure.

Anomalisa is not true animation- felt puppets are used, giving a great, human-looking feel and making the characters more life-like.

Anomalisa (2015) is not a perfect ten but damn close for its left-of-center approach alone. A journey into the art of creativity and thought. A bit far out there for most, and perhaps the sarcasm may be lost on some, but a unique experience, nonetheless.

Oscar Nominations: Best Animated Feature Film

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Feature, Best Director-Charlie Kaufman and Duke Johnson, Best Supporting Female-Jennifer Jason Leigh, Best Screenplay

Best of Enemies-2015

Best of Enemies-2015

Director Morgan Neville, Robert Gordon

Starring William F. Buckley Jr., Gore Vidal

Scott’s Review #467

80038199

Reviewed August 19, 2016

Grade: B

Best of Enemies is a 2015 documentary that transports the viewer back to the 1960s, specifically to 1968, during the Republican and Democratic presidential primaries.

I found the documentary to be a nice little history lesson for me as 1968 was before my time and the timing of my viewing (2016) was perfect as at the time of this review we are in the midst of an intense presidential race.

This is an adequate slice of political debate and rivalry with differing ideologies among the central figures.

At that time, ABC Primetime News was a floundering network, that needed something to attract viewers and compete with competitors, the much higher-rated CBS and NBC.

This was a time when audiences had merely three networks of news offerings to choose from.

The documentary references this fact as the power of the medium of television in 1968 was quite intense and still new. I looked back fondly on the limited choices of networks then, compared to oodles of offerings now. Still, everyone watched the same programming, which elicited better conversations the next day it could be argued.

ABC concocted a scheme to bring together two bitter rivals, ultra-conservative, William F. Buckley, and ultra-liberal, Gore Vidal. The pair, obviously of differing opinions, reportedly despised each other, and the possibilities were electric.

I found the documentary very genuine. 1968 was before reality television and mock feuds to garner ratings ever existed.

Their heated debates are now legendary and there was an authenticity to them.

The documentary is told in a structured way. Buckley and Vidal faced off during ten primaries, five for the Republican primary in Florida, and five for the Democratic primary in Chicago.

Other than their blowups, the conversations crackled with intelligence, both men passionate, and well-educated in their views.

Best of Enemies also gives an overview of Vidal and Buckley and how they each had come to achieve their respective fame. Interviews with family members, colleagues, and friends are interspersed in the documentary among the constant barbs between the two as the debates ravaged on.

A moment during the final democratic debate that would cement the loathing between Vidal and Buckley for decades to come.

Continuing to debate with a snarky, condescending tone by both, tensions came to a head as Vidal referenced Buckley as a Nazi, and Buckley, in turn, called Vidal a queer and threatened to sock him in the mouth.

The hatred in the eyes of both men is legendary as their rivalry knew no boundaries. The fact that this all took place on live television (before tape delay censors) made it all the more shocking.

Strangely, the documentary uses narrated voices by Kelsey Grammar and John Lithgow for Buckley and Vidal, respectively, for a few segments. I found this rather unnecessary and even distracting. The voices surmised what each felt at the time and did not work.

This is a documentary showing the real birth of political pundits (now a dime a dozen) and the realism that television was at that time- still rather novel.

Today it is filled with outrageous people and those looking for their ten seconds of fame.

Best of Enemies (2015) shows us the authenticity of television in the early days and sadly, reminds us what it has now become.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Documentary Feature

James White-2015

James White-2015

Director Josh Mond

Starring Christopher Abbott, Cynthia Nixon

Scott’s Review #465

80039413

Reviewed August 15, 2016

Grade: A

I am always struck with a warm feeling, and my faith in the film is reaffirmed when I can watch an interesting independent film (or mainstream studio film for that matter) that has the guts to tell a dark character-driven story and tell it very well of sympathetic characters written exceptionally well.

2015’s James White is an appreciative offering about life and death and how the main characters deal with the roadblocks of life and the effects of death.

This film is quite dark, however.

A fantastic young actor, Christopher Abbott, plays the title character of James White.

We meet James in a loud nightclub, wearing headphones, with soft music, mixing interestingly with the pounding beats of the club music.

The audience immediately can tell that James is wound up, aggressive, and troubled. His estranged father has just died and while he is not too upset by his father’s death, he cares deeply for his mother, Gail, and is worried about her.

No sooner than a service, hosted by the father’s new wife, is held, we learn that Gail is suffering from stage four cancer and will not live much longer.

The film is about how James deals with his problems, from his mother’s illness to finding a job, a rocky relationship with a teen girl, and his reflections on his life, all while filled with rage.

The film takes place over three months, culminating in the dead of winter, an obvious irony.

Abbott and Nixon give astounding performances as son and mother, the apple of each other’s eye, and how they each deal with Gail’s inevitable, impending death.

James is bottled up with anger throughout the film and frequently needs to escape before losing it.

In one amazing scene though, he does lose it during a drunken hotel bender with pals Nick and Jayne. The sheer emotion and desperation that Christopher Abbott gives during this scene are inspirational for any aspiring actor to emulate.

One wonders if director Josh Mond allowed his actors to improvise most scenes as the compelling, raw feeling of scenes is evident.

Nixon, since her fame in television’s Sex And The City, has chosen daring and complex roles and this is to her credit.

As Gail, we see her desperate, emotional, filled with rage, and at times delusional, as she wonders what will become of her son after she is gone and how her world has spiraled out of control.

We also see Nixon successfully play motherly as she coaches her son through his anger and pleads with him to take care of her. It is a powerful performance.

Two slight knocks to the film- James’s best friend Nick is gay (and black), but despite their different sexual orientations, they are the closest of friends. While this aspect reaps heaps of praise for being incorporated into the film, we know very little about Nick, his family, or his inner feelings.

James’s new girlfriend Jayne is also a mystery. She is significantly younger, and is dutiful, but what are her motivations?

Yet, given the very short run time of the film (one hour and twenty-seven minutes), I can see why the filmmakers chose to focus on the mother/son relationship.

A slight criticism.

A film such as James White (2015) is purely character-driven and must be enormously rewarding for actors to play these two raw characters.

Painful, for anyone dealing with a loved one suffering from cancer to watch, but a fantastic journey into the world of wonderful acting and dynamic screenwriting.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Male Lead-Christopher Abbott, Best Supporting Female-Cynthia Nixon, Best First Feature

Trainwreck-2015

Trainwreck-2015

Director Judd Apatow

Starring Amy Schumer, Bill Hader

Scott’s Review #463

80036402

Reviewed August 13, 2016

Grade: B

Trainwreck is a raunchy 2015 comedy/romantic comedy that lends its success largely to its star.

Amy Schumer makes this film as good as it can be (after all, she wrote it) and despite the raunchy girl power themes that are currently the popular trend in films of this genre, Trainwreck has some laughs and good times thrown in, thanks to Schumer.

Judd Apatow directs, who has successfully made a gazillion of these types of films in modern times.

The film does teeter off into predictability toward the conclusion. It has its moments of fun and is not boring.

Unapologetic, sexually promiscuous, and boozy, Schumer plays a successful magazine writer (Amy) given an assignment she despises- interview a sports medicine doctor, named  Aaron (played by SNL alum, Bill Hader).

Amy hates sports and knows nothing about them, she also goes from man to man, nothing serious, and is currently dating a sexy bodybuilder named Steven (John Cena), who she thinks may be gay.

Predictably, Amy and Aaron fall in love.

In typical fashion, Trainwreck contains stereotypical characters or characters who are merely there to bounce off the main action.

SNL alum Vanessa Bayer, and Tilda Swinton are the most obvious examples, as the loyal best friend and rigid, type-A boss, respectively.

Brie Larson and Colin Quinn co-star as Amy’s family members. Both give one-note performances that are fine, but unspectacular, and one surmises that Brie Larson agreed to this role before her Oscar-winning turn in Room (2015).

Despite the comedy clichés, I had some good fun with Trainwreck.

Schumer is likable as an ordinary girl, think of her as the new Melissa McCarthy, to whom many people can relate. I am not sure Schumer and Hader had the best chemistry, but the point was that she found love with a “regular” guy, a tad dull, to counter-balance her big, loud personality.

And they do make a charming pair.

Some scenes work. When Amy encourages a naked Steven to “talk dirty to her” in the bedroom and he attributes everything to bodybuilding, the scene is funny.

When Amy and Steven banter with an angry couple at the movie theater, fall flat.

Certainly not high art, for the raunchy comedy genre, Trainwreck is a treat and entertaining to watch, in large part due to the comedic talents of Amy Schumer.

More often than not, when the masses rave about a current comedy as being “great”, I am usually disappointed. While Trainwreck (2015) is not great, it is good, with some laughs.

Otherwise, it is a rather by-the-numbers film.

Theeb-2015

Theeb-2015

Director Naji Abu Nowar

Starring Jacir Eid

Scott’s Review #459

80017216

Reviewed August 4, 2016

Grade: B+

An Arabic-spoken foreign language film that received a 2015 nomination for Best Foreign Language Film, Theeb is an old-world film set in 1916 during the Ottoman Empire.

The event is  World War I as an Englishman battles Arabs and nobody can be trusted.

The film is largely shot in the smoldering Arabian desert (in Jordan) and told from the perspective of a child named Theeb.

Despite the slow pace, the moments of action are even more important. It has a grainy quality to it that makes it somewhat of a bizarre Arabian western.

Theeb lives in a small village run by his father and older brother, Hussein. One night a mysterious Arab man and an Englishman arrive seeking a guide to take them to a Roman well, close to the Ottoman railway.

The mission is feared a dangerous one, as the trail they must take is riddled with bandits, not to mention, the Englishman owns a box containing gold, making him a vulnerable target.

Theeb, left behind because he is so young, follows and joins them, much to the group’s chagrin. Predictably, trouble ensues and Theeb must fend for himself.

What I enjoyed about this film is its unpredictability in what happens after the group faces danger. Sure, when the foursome sets out on a trail led by camels, we know bad stuff will happen.

But, finally left to his own devices, I was intrigued as to how Theeb would face his new challenges, having up until now been protected by his family.

In ways, Theeb reminded me of another adventure film, Life Of Pi (2012), though Theeb is much darker. Both feature a young, non-American male of Indian or Middle Eastern background, forced to survive largely alone.

The John Boorman classic, Deliverance (1972), also came to mind during one dark scene, as Theeb and Hussein cower amongst rocky caves while their devilish pursuers taunt and whistle at them mockingly from below.

The hunter vs. victim component is front and center and it is killed or be killed.

Later, an interesting bond develops between Theeb and one of the raiders (Hassan) as both mistrust each other. Will they forge the bond or will one betray the other?

The answer to this question emerges during the final moments and the buildup is compelling. I became aware of the father and son dynamic mixed in with the friend and enemy.

When Theeb treats Hassan’s wounds there is tenderness on the exterior, but is Theeb fully kind to Hassan?

A slight negative for me existed in that I did not buy that the period was the early Twentieth century, but rather, everyone looked and acted so modern as if they were merely dressed up for their parts….as they were. Perhaps it had to do with the hairstyles or mannerisms.

Shot entirely in Wadi Rum, Jordan, a gorgeous part of the world, the desert and big sky lend much to the ambiance this creates. It was almost like being in the old, wild west and an ode to old Western films, only set in the Arabic world.

The entire cast, save for the Englishman, are non-actors, an amazing achievement, and a measure that creates an obvious level of realism that rehearsed actors cannot always bring to the table.

Originally meant to be a short film only, Theeb emerged as a full-length feature and I am glad it did, as it has enough meat to warrant a longer duration.

The film is a cinematic wonder with a psychological edge.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Sisters-2015

Sisters-2015

Director Jason Moore

Starring Tina Fey, Amy Poehler

Scott’s Review #458

80063604

Reviewed July 31, 2016

Grade: B-

Slapstick comedy is admittedly not my genre of choice, though I will watch some for light entertainment or to see just how bad (or good) current offerings are.

Nonetheless, I have tried to put myself in a mindset of low expectations for these films that are usually fluff and plot-driven.

In the case of Sisters (2015), the film is pretty much as one would expect: vulgar, crass and raunchy. Yet, due to the chemistry between the leads (Amy Poehler and Tina Fey) and a few heartfelt romantic moments, something does work. It is not as mean as one might think.

This is not to say that Sisters is a great film. Hardly. But not as bad as I feared.

Poehler and Fey play Maura and Kate Ellis, respectively, two late thirties sisters, living in other areas of the country, who return home to Orlando, Florida, when their parents (James Brolin and Dianne Wiest) sell their childhood home.

Maura and Kate have been tasked with cleaning their bedrooms in time for the sale.

The sisters have an idea to throw one final bash and invite their high school classmates, who all conveniently still live in the same town. Events go awry and the party gets way out of hand.

Mixed in with the main plot are sub-plots consisting of a romantic interest for Maura, and a rival for Kate, played by Maya Rudolph.

The best part is the chemistry between Poehler and Fey. They “have it” whether it is a Saturday Night Live sketch, hosting the Golden Globe awards, or starring in Sisters. The banter and the jokes work well because the two comics work well together and it shows on-screen.

They are believable as sisters despite looking nothing alike.

Otherwise, Sisters is a traditional vulgar comedy. One irksome recent trend (now more female-driven than in years past) is the leading ladies being classless. This must be an attempt at female empowerment or the assumption that since adult comedies were once a man’s world, female characters should be written like men.

Do we need Kate and Maura swearing like sailors, making poop jokes, and being so raunchy? Behaving like ladies would now be the exception, not the norm (Bridesmaids, 2011, set this precedent).

Not surprisingly, the supporting characters are all caricatures as is typically the case in films of this genre. The parents are a bit clueless and have kinky sex much to the girl’s chagrin.

Brinda, bitchy, judgmental, yet insecure, the Korean (big stereotype) nail technician who cannot properly pronounce English words, the new owners of the house are snobbish, uptight, and clueless, and finally, James, the guy next door, who are Mr. Fix-it and the straight man in the high-jinks. He is sugar-sweet and the male hero.

The romantic scenes between Maura and James are sweet and sentimental, nicely balancing the vulgarity and raunchiness that the rest of the film encompasses. They are a nice couple and have a rich rooting value.

Most of the action takes place at Kate and Maura’s childhood home where posters of such 1980s films as E.T. and Out of Africa, and a poster of heartthrob Tom Cruise, hang on the walls.

This, and many other references that Generation X will delight from in this film are pointed out, so that is a treat and a positive of the film.

As the party gets off to a slow start, the thirty and forty-somethings appear dull and either talk about their kids or their various maladies and suddenly, after being fed drugs, are back to their college party days, are both dumb and cute at the same time.

Sisters (2015) (hopefully) knows what it is. It is a late Saturday night, raunchy comedy affair, meant as fluff and escapist fun. It is not a masterpiece nor does it intend to be one.

Rather, a full-length SNL sketch including many alumni. It is harmless fun.

A War-2015

A War-2015

Director Tobias Lindholm

Starring Pilou Asbæk, Tuva Novotny

Scott’s Review #456

80057926

Reviewed July 29, 2016

Grade: B+

A War, a 2015 film, made in Denmark, is a thought-provoking story that one might think is a standard “war film” on the surface, but as the film moves along, it turns into something much deeper and rather cerebral.

A slow mover, but necessary to the nature of the film’s message,  the viewer questions what he or she might do in a similar predicament as the main character faces a moral dilemma.

The action begins in Afghanistan as we meet a company of Danish soldiers assigned to protect civilians from the evil Taliban. They are young, good-looking, and of varying ethnic groups (a nice touch in the film).

One female soldier seems to be thrown in for good measure, though we never see her in combat.

Their leader is Commander Claus Pedersen, a good, decent man, well-liked by his troop. They have all seen death and destruction, and Pedersen frequents the middle of the action on the front lines.

He is one of the guys.

When one of his men is wounded during an attack, Pedersen makes a controversial decision, resulting in the deaths of civilians, and some children.

Pedersen is then charged with a war crime and sent home to Denmark to be tried. His wife and three small children are happy he is home, but distraught and opinionated on how he should testify.

One interesting aspect of A War is how the film shifts gears around the mid-way point.  The camaraderie between the soldiers in the field and their bond with Afghan civilians are mixed with dangerous threats from the Taliban.

I kept waiting for an attack to occur and in these ways, the film is a standard war film.

Mixed in are snippets of “home life” involving Pedersen’s wife. She appears a typical military wife, struggling to raise her three kids, one of whom has recently developed behavioral problems.

They miss Pedersen.

The latter half of the film is set inside a courtroom. Pedersen is interrogated by a female prosecutor and while she sympathizes with his anguish, she is determined to convict.

After all, children were killed because of his actions.

The filmmakers are on Pedersen’s side, but the conflict makes for great analysis. Should he be held accountable for deaths in a war zone? The viewer will ask him or herself- “would I lie to stay out of jail and with my family who needs me”?

Interesting stuff to ponder.

A War, ironic to the title, is calm and subdued, very impressive to me.  To compare, a film of this nature, targeted as a “blockbuster” would likely have technical enhancers, dramatic music undoubtedly would play to cue action in the war zone.

When Pedersen’s verdict is read aloud in the courtroom, it would normally contain some jarring camera shots or an intense musical score.

A War has none of those and that brings a certain reality- this could be everyday life. A decision is made and life quietly goes on.

Some complaints about A War being a tad boring. I see their point, but it is an atypical war film. It is understated and character-driven, rather than a shoot ’em up, overwrought with testosterone action, or laced with artillery or explosions.

A War (2015) is not a mainstream film- much to its credit. Rather it is methodical and fraught with interesting thinking points.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Trumbo-2015

Trumbo-2015

Director Jay Roach

Starring Bryan Cranston, Diane Lane

Scott’s Review #449

80057100

Reviewed July 11, 2016

Grade: B+

Trumbo, starring Bryan Cranston, who is suddenly in everything these days, is a 2015 biography drama about Dalton Trumbo, a famed, talented Hollywood screenwriter blacklisted in the 1950s.

Cranston is center stage in the film, and very good.

The film has a crisp, glossy look and excited me with its ode to old Hollywood and its mixture of real-life interspersed newsreels.

Great stuff for a classic film buff!

The sets, costumes, and art direction travel back to the 1940s and 1950s, but throughout I had a constant feeling of a modern film dressed to resemble an older one and never felt true authenticity.

Still, good effort and a well above-average Hollywood film.

A treat for cinema lovers or even those folks interested in seeing some classic black-and-white footage- a young Ronald Reagan is seen testifying, presumably against those feared to be communists.

Following World War II there was panic throughout the United States, including liberal Hollywood, to oust anyone with thinking deemed “un-American”.

If this sounds like a dated way of thinking now, the United States was not always as diverse as in 2016.

The infamous “Hollywood 10”, included ten screenwriters who were Communists, or at least had communist beliefs and sympathies. The story in Trumbo focuses on Dalton Trumbo, a quirky screenwriter, always with a classy cigarette, and holder, in hand.

His story is told and the audience sees his passion for fairness in the United States. He sees nothing wrong with being a communist.

The supporting characters are excellent. John Goodman, in the role of Frank King, B movie director, who gives Trumbo a chance to write under a pseudonym, and Helen Mirren and David James Elliott, as villainous Hedda Hopper and John Wayne, respectively.

Diane Lane could have been given more to do as the loyal wife of Trumbo, but sadly, Hollywood is not a woman’s world.

If I were to have any criticism of this film it is that Trumbo is mainstream fare and not high on the edgy factor, which is only a mild complaint.

There is nothing wrong with that, but the film screams Hollywood branded.

For instance, throughout Trumbo’s two-year prison sentence, he faces no real threats, no beatings, no abuse, nothing. He emerges from prison with a few gray hairs and life goes on. When Trumbo’s friend battles, and finally succumbs to lung cancer, there are no long-suffering scenes, making the film on the soft side.

Again, an observation of the type of film Trumbo is more than a complaint.

The scenes of Trumbo with his three children as the film periodically ages the children with older actors are touching, especially scenes with his oldest daughter, Nikola, are sweet. She grows up to be just like her father.

Trumbo earnestly explains to young Nikola, why he is a communist and asks what she would do if someone else was without food- her response is to share- a simplistic and sweet scene.

Ah, through the eyes of a child, the world is so innocent.

Trumbo goes back to the Hollywood of old- clean, glamorous, and extravagant, both in the film and the retro use of old footage.

It is a nonthreatening film that explains the story of Dalton Trumbo in a safe, thorough way.

I enjoyed it tremendously.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actor-Bryan Cranston

Janis: Little Girl Blue-2015

Janis: Little Girl Blue- 2015

Director Amy Berg

Starring Janis Joplin

Scott’s Review #420

80025570

Reviewed- June 19, 2016

Grade: B+

As a fan of Janis Joplin’s classic 1960s and early 1970s brand of classic, bluesy, rock n roll, viewing a documentary of the star’s life and times was a great experience.

The film sheds light on the mysterious rocker, gone way too soon and with undoubtedly much more to say. Janis was one of the most authentic, real performers of her time.

A big voice in a man’s world, impressive still, is that she wrote all her songs herself.

The documentary is well put together as it traverses Janis’s early days as an insecure teenager living in rural Texas. Never a beauty, Janis was insecure like most teenagers are.

She was always a pistol and prided herself on being different and outspoken, frequently ruffling feathers in her conservative town, especially given the period.

Janis preferred hanging out with males and being “one of the guys”.

An aspect I found interesting about this documentary is exploring Janis’s home life, well before she became a successful singer.

Taunted in school for being different because she was a painter and a thinker, she lived in a largely racist town and had a conflict with others who were not as progressive as she.

Janis’s sister and brother are heavily featured throughout the documentary and explains interesting tidbits about Janis’s home life and conflict with her parents.

Sadly, they forged a pleasant relationship, but never really mended fences before Janis’s untimely death.

Her relationships with other rockers of the time are explored and more than one festival performance is shared giving a glimpse of what type of performer she was. She improvised, and put her heart on the line, intense, and brutally honest.

A lost soul with enormous talent and raw capabilities, Janis Joplin is missed, but thankfully we still have her incredible music to carry on with.

Janis: Little Girl Blue (2015) is a great documentary that gives a cherished overview of the life and times of a tremendous artist.

Mustang-2015

Mustang-2015

Director Deniz Gamze Erguven

Starring Güneş Şensoy

Scott’s Review #417

80058482

Reviewed June 18, 2016

Grade: A-

Mustang (2015) is a powerful, relevant, Turkish film released in 2015 and nominated for many awards, including the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar.

I fully support the nomination as I feel it is a top-notch piece.

A coming of age story but with no clichés, and a real, true-to-life feel to it. It tells of various generational beliefs and how these conflict with other viewpoints and ideas.

It also focuses on blossoming life, and sadly, tragic death.

The story tells of five beautiful young sisters living in a remote village in Turkey, a thousand long miles outside of Istanbul. The girls range in age from eight to eighteen and live with their Grandmother and Uncle Erol.

The sister’s parents had died years earlier.

The main protagonist is Lale (Güneş Şensoy), the youngest of the siblings, who is wise well beyond her years as the plot unfolds. We first meet her as she bids an emotional farewell to her teacher when she moves to Istanbul.

The film is told largely from Lale’s point of view, but each of the girls plays an important role.

As the girls play an innocent game in a lake with a group of boys, the game causes a scandal in their “old world” village, and the girls are banished inside the house by their Grandmother and Uncle, who fear their progressive ideas will hurt and shame them.

The main crux of the story is the conflict between different generations and the yearning of the girls to be free and independent, both sexually and intellectually.

Their older relatives, and others in the town, prefer the old ways and are prudish.

The oldest daughters enter into arranged marriages, while the younger ones fear the same will soon happen to them.

The film wisely does not portray these conflicts in a clichéd way or make them over-obvious.

Rather, the film feels real, fresh, and like a slice of small-town Turkish life. Istanbul is mentioned as a paradise of open-minded thinkers and progressive ways, and “the place to be”.

The girls fear life in the doldrums, cooking and cleaning for their men, married off to older men without any love.

It is unclear if the Uncle is molesting any of the girls- the film alludes to it, but the point is not made obvious. What is clear, though, is the girl’s desire for sexual freedom, experimentation, and love.

They are modern thinkers.

The young actress who plays Lale is a marvel. So natural, earnest, and clever, she befriends an older man who teaches her to drive and they embark on a sweet friendship.

The film is shown through Lale’s eyes and her reactions to situations. Knowing nothing of sex, she sneaks a peek at a sex education book and is fascinated by her older sister’s sex discussions.

The ending leaves events open to interpretation, and I believe happiness awaits those featured at the conclusion.

Mustang (2015) is a wonderful film, filled with truth, conflict, great acting, and food for thought. A must-see for foreign language film lovers.

Oscar Nominations: Best Foreign Language Film

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

Ex Machina-2015

Ex Machina-2015

Director Alex Garland

Starring Domhnall Gleeson, Alicia Vikander, Oscar Isaac

Scott’s Review #410

80023689

Reviewed June 17, 2016

Grade: B+

Ex Machina (2015) reminds me of another recent science-fiction film, Her (2013), with more of a female empowerment edge. The latter is more of a romantic drama with undercurrents of love.

In contrast, Ex Machina has a cynical tone and elements of imprisonment and psychosis, even narcissism.

The film features excellent visual effects and a futuristic mystique, making it a successful treatment.

Directed by first-timer Alex Garland, who could very well be a director to watch rise the ranks with subsequent projects.

Young, fresh-faced computer programmer, Caleb Smith (Domhnall Gleeson), wins a week-long trip to remote Alaska, to spend it with his mysterious boss, Nathan Bateman (Oscar Isaac), the CEO of a software company.

Caleb must arrive at the luxurious, sprawling estate via helicopter as it is in a deserted area of the world and exists on mile after mile of the gorgeous landscape.

Nathan, played by Oscar Isaac, is both charismatic and creepy. He lives alone save for a beautiful Asian servant named Kyoko, who speaks no English, and a female robot named Ava (played by rising star Alicia Vikander).

Caleb’s assigned task is to study Ava and determine whether he can relate to her as a human while knowing she is a robot. It is soon revealed that Nathan plans to reprogram Ava, thereby killing her. Caleb schemes to rescue Ava, but is all that it seems?

With a cast of only four principals, it is not difficult to assess each character and their relations with each other. Caleb is the least complex of the four or rather, the one with motivations readily apparent.

The others are shrouded in mystery. Caleb expects a fun getaway but instead finds himself amid experimentation. Is Nathan’s desire to perform psychological tests on Ava, by way of Caleb, genuine?

The audience can sense immediately that there is something off about Nathan. Merely in his thirties, how could he amass such financial success so soon?

Why is he, a servant, and a robot the only inhabitants? Why does the helicopter pilot refuse to venture further than the drop-off point?

Some of these questions are answered, some remain unanswered. It is part of what makes the film mysterious and complex. Could Ava be the one doing her share of experimentation or manipulation?

Alicia Vikander deserves much praise for her role as Ava and some would argue that the talented young actress should have won the Best Supporting Actress trophy for this role instead of for The Danish Girl (2015).

I’m not sure I would leap to the same conclusion, but she does amass a ton of subdued emotion as Ava. She is complex and profound. She longs for exposure to the outside world and would love to cross a crowded street to see all the faces and different types of people.

Like Nathan, there is also something not right about Ava.

Is she calculating or simply soulful? But how can she be, she is a robot.

I compared her to another famous film robot/computer- HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968).

Along with Vikander, Isaac steals the film in a role that mixes creep with genius. He sits around his estate in comfy clothes a blue-collar man might wear drinking beer and studying Ava. He has sexual relations with his servant and she is expressionless.

He does not treat her well so we do not root for his character. At the same time, his character is tough to read. Is he experimenting on Ava or Caleb?

Visually, Ex Machina has a sleek blend of modern, crisp CGI, not at all usurping the story. There is also a scene of bloodletting that chills as much as any good horror film would.

Garland was heavily influenced by 2001: A Space Odyssey and Altered States (1980) and made the film with as little budget as possible and without outside influences that might change his vision.

I commend this and wish more filmmakers would follow suit.

Ex Machina (2015), while perhaps not perfect, could be a blueprint for what is to come from this young director.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Original Screenplay, Best Visual Effects (won)

Legend-2015

Legend-2015

Director Brian Helgeland

Starring Tom Hardy

Scott’s Review #405

80057599

Reviewed May 24, 2016

Grade: B+

Tom Hardy is one of my favorite modern film actors (he should have won the 2015 Oscar for his riveting performance in The Revenant, in my humble opinion) and in Legend (2015) fans are treated to a dual role by the handsome Brit.

Hardy portrays Reggie and Ronald Kray, two of London’s most feared and brutal gangsters.

The film belongs to Hardy in every way, shape, and form, the locales of London are fantastic, and more than one scene is jaw-dropping violent, but the film meanders quite a bit and the vocals of Ron Kray are quite difficult to understand.

Still, impressive effort as a whole.

The time is late 1950s London. Reggie Kray, the more mainstream of the Kray brothers, is a feared member of the organized crime community.  He is coddled by his mother and can do no wrong in her eyes. This makes any relationships difficult as his mum disapproves of his mates.

He falls in love with Frances Shea, a young woman who narrates most of the film, so it is told from an outsider’s perspective. Reggie’s brother Ron has recently been released from a mental hospital and if off of his medications, is certifiably crazy, and very volatile.

He is gay and makes no bones about it.

Ron and Reggie have a love/hate relationship, and this dynamic is the most interesting aspect.

Thanks to Hardy, as the writing is not Legend’s strongest suit, we see two very different characters, even though they look alike. In the myriad of scenes shared between the brothers, it appears that two actors are playing the roles which is to Hardy’s credit.

An important scene emphasizes the relationship between the two. When a rival dares to mention Reggie’s wife’s name disparagingly, he points a gun and fires at the man’s head.

Fortunately, the gun is not loaded, so the audience breathes a sigh of relief. Yet, a worse fate awaits the victim. After the deed is done, Reggie whispers in Ron’s ear that he killed the man “because I can’t kill you”.

This means Reggie would kill Ron if he could- shocking since they are brothers. To add to this, it is implied that he would kill his brother with the same savageness as his victim.

This makes the audience ponder.

Impressive is Ron’s sexuality, especially since he is not written stereotypically. He is brutal, masculine, and hardcore. The fact that Ron Kray was a real figure is important to note. His entourage of boyfriends follows him around in dedication.

Who can blame them as his charisma oozes- think of an unstable James Bond.

The twin’s relationship is the best part of the film, but as a mob film, Legend meanders quite a bit, so much so that it becomes tough to identify what the point is, if not for Hardy.

Save for Frances, none of the supporting characters are written with interest and are all rather forgettable.

The wonderful Chazz Palminteri is wasted in the role of Angelo Bruno, head of a Philadelphia crime family and friend of the Krays. There is little meaning or interest in his role.

A mediocre story, but with leading characters with depth, makes Legend (2015) an interesting film that flies under the radar and receives little notice.

Hopefully, if nothing else, it continues the success that Tom Hardy is currently achieving in modern film.

Bone Tomahawk-2015

Bone Tomahawk-2015

Director S. Craig Zahler

Starring Kurt Russell, Patrick Wilson, Richard Jenkins

Scott’s Review #403

80075001

Reviewed May 10, 2016

Grade: B+

Bone Tomahawk is a film from 2015 that almost nobody saw or heard of, and is a unique independent horror/western hybrid. It has strong influences on Quentin Tarantino and contains an impressive cast for such a low-profile film.

Bone Tomahawk is the proverbial diamond in the rough and is worth seeing for film fans with patience enough to sit through the slow-moving pace to get to the good stuff.

It largely comes in the final thirty minutes of the film.

Notably, the film was recognized by the Independent Film Committee and received two Spirit Awards, for Best Supporting Male (Richard Jenkins), and Best Screenplay.

It won neither.

The film does not have a “star”, but rather a myriad of heavy hitters in a clear ensemble. Kurt Russell plays Franklin Hunt, sheriff of a tiny town named Bright Hope, presumably somewhere in the west (Wyoming?) circa 1890. His deputy sheriff, Chicory,  is played by Jenkins.

When drifters kill some travelers, they accidentally stumble upon a mysterious Native American burial ground and taint its contents, leaving one brutally murdered by the tribe.

The other (played by David Arquette) stumbles into Bright Hope and is immediately deemed suspicious. When he, a female Doctor’s assistant, and a young local man disappear, it is realized that they have been abducted by the owners of the burial ground, who are feared to be cannibalistic savages.

Hunt, Chicory, a foreman named Arthur (the doctor’s assistant’s wife), played by Patrick Wilson, and a local playboy played by Matthew Fox, decide to trek long terrain to find and rescue the missing.

The pace is slow and will undoubtedly turn off some folks seeking slicker, high-tech viewing, or even some CGI, but the payoff for patience is immense.

The group’s trek through the desert in pursuit of the accosted seems endless, and I did have thoughts of what the point was, but the forthcoming turn of events makes this tedium worth it.

In defense of the long plodding journey, this aspect does make the audience get to know and begin to care about the characters- some make it out alive, others are not as lucky. The fun part is finding out who does and doesn’t.

Bone Tomahawk contains one of the most gruesome scenes that I have ever witnessed in my thousands of viewed films. A male character, nude, is brutally scalped and a spear is hammered into his throat in full view of the prisoners.

As if this is not shocking enough, he is then turned upside down, split down the middle, and chopped in half, as his insides spill to the ground. The snapping sounds of his bones and the visual horror of the guts are even tough for the non-squeamish to view.

It is uncanny that Kurt Russell plays a similar character in another 2015 film, the much higher profile, The Hateful Eight. Sure, he is a bounty hunter, but the period, setting, and costumes are almost identical.

One might wonder which was made first.

Bone Tomahawk is a guy’s movie, but not in the traditional sense- there are no explosions, no unnecessary machismo, or apparent clichés.

But at the end of the day, it is a Western and the cast is mainly male. Besides the Doctor’s assistant, the only other females are wives with small roles.

The most glaring is Sean Young- given hardly anything to do in a cameo appearance. Otherwise, the Native American females, blind, deaf, pregnant, and missing appendages are the only other females in sight.

A unique hybrid of film genres, Bone Tomahawk (2015) is a clever, different experience.

I am a champion of independent film and this film is a good example of why I am. Evidently, with a stellar cast of A-list or former A-list stars banding together to make a piece of art, it seems others champion good films too.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Richard Jenkins, Best Screenplay

Spectre-2015

Spectre-2015

Director Sam Mendes

Starring Daniel Craig

Scott’s Review #401

80056799

Reviewed May 5, 2016

Grade: B+

A modern treat for James Bond fans, Spectre (2015) is a slick, costly production sure to please die-hard lovers of the storied franchise.

It contains a rich history and nods to recent installments, wrapping the story arc up, a fantastic villain, and fast-paced, compelling story-telling.

It lacks an interesting lead Bond girl, a quality that detracts from the film, and what is a must for the cherished franchise.

This is the only major flaw in an otherwise fantastic film.  In typical Bond fashion, his adventures take him to London, Rome, Mexico City, Austria, and Morocco.

Speeding along in what is now the twenty-fourth Bond film, and still feeling fresh and relevant, Spectre commences where its predecessor, Skyfall, left off, mainly hot on the heels of M’s (Judi Dench’s) shocking death.

How wonderful to see her again, albeit in a videotaped message crucial to the central plot.

The new M is a male character again and portrayed by Ralph Fiennes. In the film’s sub-plot, a new character, C, comes into play as the head of the Joint Intelligence Service, who deems the 00 section outdated.

The focal point is Bond’s avenging of the former M’s death by taking down Spectre, an organization not seen in a Bond film since 1971’s Diamonds Are Forever, but once again a strong presence.

The opening sequence in Mexico City kicks off the energy of the film.

Fast-paced, and with an awesome helicopter chase/fight sequence, it is a long sequence that thrills. We watch, engaged, as it swirls and tumbles mid-air, while hundreds of spectators in a large outdoor square flee for safety.

The film then forays into the inevitable Bond song, “Writing’s On The Wall”, this time written and performed by Sam Smith.  This particular song has received mixed reviews, but I am fond of it.

This leaves the audience geared up for a wild adventure to come.

The return of the crime organization, Spectre, to the story brings a rich history and is the most interesting part. We have a rooting value since it is familiarity.

Even more pleasing is the return of Bond’s arch-enemy Ernst Stavro Blofeld, known more forcefully as “Number 1”, who has been played by such legendary actors as Donald Pleasance, Telly Savalas, and Max Von Sydow.

In Spectre, Christoph Waltz takes over the role and a major win. Waltz, a tremendous actor, plays Blofeld in a sly, wicked manner,  taunting, yet with some comedic elements.

In a compelling scene (and the first one containing Waltz), James Bond appears, hidden, at a Spectre summit.  He recoils as he recognizes the shadowed Blofeld, realizing the detrimental repercussions this will mean.

I only hope that in subsequent Bond films, Waltz returns.

Let’s discuss the Bond girls in the film.

Ironically, the small role featuring the oldest Bond girl in franchise history (aged fifty and played by the gorgeous Monica Bellucci) is more compelling than the lead Bond girl, Dr. Madeleine Swann, played by Lea Seydoux.

As Lucia Sciarra, widow of the Italian crime lord, Sciarra, there is more chemistry between Daniel Craig and Bellucci than between Craig and Seydoux.

I would have much rather seen Sciarra as the primary focus, but she is shamefully underused, appearing in two scenes only. Seydoux seems to lack energy and I noticed zero chemistry between her and Craig.

I am not sold on the new Moneypenny either, Bond’s labored sidekick and always suggested one-sided love interest, in earlier films it used to be a fun dynamic. She was a secretary, older, and their flirtation was charming, light, and fun. She was almost a mother figure to him.

There are no flirtation or romantic hints as the character has been modernized to fit the twenty-first century.

Despite this character’s misses, the film is exceptionally well-made with loads of action. Sometimes Bond films hold up well, other times they do not.

Time will tell what fate holds for Spectre (2015), but my hunch is that it will age well.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Song-“Writing’s on the Wall” (won)

Bridge of Spies-2015

Bridge of Spies-2015

Director Steven Spielberg

Starring Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance

Scott’s Review #399

80050060

Reviewed April 28, 2016

Grade: B+

Tom Hanks teams with Stephen Spielberg once again in another A-list Hollywood film.

Like Saving Private Ryan (1998), Bridge of Spies (2015) is in the historical vein. This time, the Cold War is featured; the film begins in 1957.

The camera work, the artwork, and the set decorations are second to none as the film looks and feels authentic.

As interesting as the overall result is—it felt like I was watching a well-made film—there was also something missing, which did not make it truly riveting, and that is why it received a B+ rating.

With Spielberg and Hanks on board, one will get a quality film.

Hanks portrays James B. Donovan, a Brooklyn attorney specializing in insurance law, but a wiz at negotiation and experienced with the Nuremberg trials.

He is assigned to defend suspected spy Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance) in what is assumed to be an open-and-shut case, his guilt is considered a given.

Abel has been arrested by the FBI and is thought to be a Russian spy. They are willing to release him on the condition that he reveal Soviet contacts, but he refuses.

Meanwhile, an American pilot, Frances Powers, is captured in Soviet territory and taken hostage. To make matters more complicated, an American graduate student, Pryor, is trapped behind the Berlin Wall in East Germany and not allowed by the Germans to leave.

The pressure is on Donovan to defend Abel in the United States but to make a deal to return the three men to their respective countries.

Hanks, a great actor, is his typical stoic, capable self, and his portrayal reminds me of his role in Captain Phillips (2013), calm, well-mannered- a clear yet quiet leader.

The role is not flashy compared to other legendary Hanks roles (Forrest Gump-1994, Philadelphia-1993). The film centers around Hanks and caters to his acting style. His character is always at the forefront.

Hanks never gives a bad performance and I admire him in almost anything.

Let’s discuss the role and the portrayal by Mark Rylance in his Oscar-winning role.

Giving a very subdued, nuanced performance, he is good and low-key in what could have been an energetic, over-the-top performance if written that way, but I am not sure I would have handed him the golden statuette over a few of the other nominees in the 2015 Supporting Actor category.

This isn’t a criticism, but I am unsure if he warrants an Academy Award.

Bridge of Spies is very detail-oriented and every set piece- from late 1950s cars, clothing, hairstyles, and home furnishings is spot on.

The film was expensive to produce and no expense seems to have been spared.

The film travels from Brooklyn to the Soviet Union, to Germany, and gives off a patriotic, Americana flare, which is true to life in the given time. There was such a sense of country and community.

Nothing makes this more apparent than the distasteful glares coldness and hatred displayed by many characters towards Donovan.

To counteract this, when Donovan is ultimately more the hero, he is revered and celebrated.

As great as the film looks, there is something slightly disconnecting about it. I was left wanting more from a story perspective and feeling slightly disengaged throughout parts of it. I was never riveted or blown away despite realizing I was watching a well-made film.

This can happen if the story is less compelling than the way the film looks as with Bridge of Spies.

After I finished watching I felt that I did not need to see the film again, in contrast to truly great films where one can watch over again.

A slight mention is that Bridge of Spies is a “guy’s film”. Amy Ryan, a great actress, does all she can with the only real female role in the film in that of Donovan’s dutiful, supportive wife, a role written one-dimensionally hundreds of times.

It is a shame her character is not fleshed out. The typical worried scenes or fretting for her husband to return home to his family are purely reactionary and do not further the plot.

In this sense, the film deserves criticism for being too traditional.

Bridge of Spies is a good effort but not a tremendous film. It is the type of film I liked but did not love.

Perhaps, the names Spielberg and Hanks on the marquee had me expecting more.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Mark Rylance (won), Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design

Girlhood-2015

Girlhood-2015

Director Céline Sciamma

Starring Karidja Touré, Assa Sylla

Scott’s Review #398

80013602

Reviewed April 24, 2016

Grade: B

Girlhood (2015) is a coming-of-age foreign language, French drama that tells the story of a sixteen-year-old French girl, living in a poor area (the projects) just outside Paris.

She faces numerous conflicts and tough decisions on how to live her life. School, gangs, and romance are the main issues she tackles, as well as troubled home life.

Wisely, the film uses a female director, Céline Sciamma, which lends some authenticity to the largely female issues discussed. For all its good intentions and some interesting nuances, the film suffers from a lack of grit and has a safe feel making it less compelling than it could have been.

I felt I was watching a glossy film rather than any harsh reality.

Still, worth the effort.

Marieme is a tall, gorgeous teenager living near Paris. She struggles academically and is rejected from attending high school, instead of being sent on a vocational track to be able to find a job.

Her mother works long hours as an office cleaner, and Marieme’s abusive brother is in charge of the household. Marieme also has two younger sisters.

Upset to learn she will not be attending high school, she is approached by a gang of girls, led by Lady, who asks her to go to the city with them.

She agrees to join their gang when she realizes that her brother’s best friend, Ismael, whom she has a crush on, is friendly with the other girls. Marieme and the girls begin to while away the days by stealing, fighting, and terrorizing anyone in their path.

Partying in hotels, they make the rounds. Marieme must ultimately decide if this is the life she wants.

What I found most interesting about the film is its use of an all-black cast. Sciamma (who ironically is white) felt that the female black population in Paris is underrepresented.

This is accurate and scores point with me. I love the camaraderie among the girls. They always have each other’s backs and when Marieme fights a rival girl to defend the recently beaten Lady, there is a sense of sisterhood that is appealing and is at the heart of the film.

Friendship, loyalty, and bonding are explored.

Also worth noting is that most of the cast are either unknown actors or non-actors picked off the streets to appear in the film. To this effect, the acting is surprisingly good for most novice or non-actors.

The romance between Marieme and Ismael is another strong point. They share an undeniable attraction but are forced to spend time in secret. Marieme’s brother appears to run a gang of all boys and forbids anyone from being with his sister.

The scenes shared between Marieme and Ismael are tender, sweet, and believable. They have a rooting factor.

The positives are also the negatives to Girlhood. The film lacks real grit or dirt and the friendship and romantic elements are also played safely.

Everything is glossy and bright.

For example, two fight scenes occur, one with Lady and a rival girl, and one with Marieme and the rival girl. A group of spectators gathers in a circle egging the girls on. They are in a hot, deserted parking lot.

The scenes could have been brutal, bloody, and fierce. Instead, they are short, lack blood or bruising, and feel safe. When Marieme pulls out a knife, it is intended to cut the rival girl’s bra, not to stab her. This seems unrealistic and not how things would play out in an urban gang situation.

And on a nitpicky level, why was the mother absent from the family life? Sure she had a night job, but the film presented her as being all but out of the picture. She tried to help Marieme get a job working with her, so why so much turmoil due to her busy schedule?

Also, the silly scene of the girls playing miniature golf added nothing to the plot and should have been dropped.

Girlhood (2015) is a nice, albeit sweet, coming-of-age, female gang story, that might have been more intense, but the decision was to make a soft film rather than a harsh one.

An effort that mainly focuses on bonding, friendship, and life choices over the realistic brutality it could have dealt with.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best International Film

The Look of Silence-2015

The Look of Silence-2015

Director Joshua Oppenheimer

Scott’s Review #396

80016401

Reviewed April 18, 2016

Grade: B+

An extremely grim and depressing 2015 documentary, The Look of Silence is a companion piece to 2013’s The Act of Killing.

Both focus on the brutal Indonesian genocide of 1965-1966, in which an estimated one million people were exterminated.

The documentary tells of the effects on one of the families who survived, who now must co-exist in the same village as the killers, who remain unpunished because of government corruption.

They are still in power.

The documentary is cleverly put together as the central figure watches what appears to be outtakes of the related The Act of Killing on television, and the story is manipulated so that some of the killers do not realize they are being filmed for the purposes they are.

The main point of view of the film comes from a middle-aged Indonesian man, peacefully living with his wife and daughter, as well as tending to his very elderly parents, the father is a torture victim and quite frail, who appears to suffer from dementia.

The father is rail-thin and the mother cares for him. Their life is tough. For protection,  throughout the documentary, the middle-aged man is unidentified.

Through conversation with his mother, we learn that his brother (their son) was one of the  “communists” or leftists, who were led to the nearby Snake River, tortured, and eventually murdered and thrown into the river.

The mother reveals that by some miracle, the middle-aged man was conceived shortly after his brother was killed, thereby saving the parents from suicide because of their grief.

The middle-aged man, under the guise of fitting patients with eyeglasses, goes from murderer to murderer (all still alive, very old, and living in the town) and politely quizzes them on their involvement in the Indonesian Massacre.

It is unknown whether the middle-aged man is, in fact, a Doctor, or if it is merely a ruse. Interspersed throughout, the interview clips of the murderers on television proudly describing their feats, are shown.

The Look of Silence is a true downer but shockingly realistic, sad, painful, and eye-opening.

Unlike many documentaries, we are not shown repeated clips of the events of the 1960’s- the story stays in the here and now.

The audience uses their imagination to create what they think happened. Powerful stuff. In the videos of the killers, they describe in brutal detail how they killed their victims and it is quite sickening to watch.

Two men proudly reminisce of the chopping off of a woman’s breast, comparing the ruined flesh to an open coconut,  or slicing off a man’s penis. Others tell of drinking the blood of the victims.

Painful to realize is that this is not some horror film, but a real-life event.

Quite dumbfounding to me was that little or no remorse was shown when the middle-aged man questioned the killers in the present time. Some shrugged their involvement off, some got hostile, and some denied their involvement.

Some, now quite feeble, were accompanied by younger family members unaware of their father’s or grandfather’s past doings.

Some appeared quite upset.

The documentary is not filled with spliced-together archives or flashy lights or graphics. It is slow-paced and plodding. Some may find it too slow.

The title, The Look of Silence is rather perplexing and makes little sense to the subject of the documentary so I am not sure why it has the title that it does. But that is merely an aside.

As much as citizens of the United States complain and stress about the political state of affairs or financial matters, we have it quite good, and viewing this painful documentary is a reminder of that.

The Look of Silence (2015) displays the evil of human beings in the recent past. They show no remorse. In a world filled with ISIS, the documentary is a scary reminder that something like this can easily happen again.

This is a sad and morbid reality and this film will stick with you for some time.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: 1 win-Best Documentary Feature (won)

Cartel Land-2015

Cartel Land-2015

Director Matthew Heineman

Scott’s Review #395

80039606

Reviewed April 17, 2016

Grade: B

Cartel Land is a 2015 documentary film about the Mexican drug war, specifically focusing on vigilante groups in both Mexico and the United States.

These groups attempt to combat and thwart drug cartels by using their illegal efforts. Brutal and ugly, the documentary paints a dark picture of the drug trafficking problem and the hopelessness of the situation.

Interestingly, the hot-button issue of illegal immigration is not explored.

The great thing about documentaries, in general, is their truthfulness and ability to open one’s eyes to a situation in which one may not be aware or have limited knowledge.

Most people know there is a drug problem in the United States, but Cartel Land successfully educates the viewer on the complexity of the issue.

Various perspectives are explored throughout the documentary: the Arizona Border Recon, led by militant figure, Tim “Nailer” Foley, and the Autodefansas, led by Dr. Jose Mireles, are the vigilante groups in the U.S. and Mexico, respectively.

A third perspective, in that of one of the cartel members, the particular gentleman featured, cooks and transports the crystal meth across the Mexican border.

Additionally, some individuals feel that the police and government are responsible for solving the issues and should be left in their hands.

The documentary does not endorse one particular opinion but paints a controversial picture of the situation’s reality and presents both sides objectively. However, the majority of the screen time is dedicated to the Autodefansas story.

One of the most thought-provoking parts of the documentary, and what initially engaged me in it, is at the very beginning of the story.

Told from the perspective of one of the cartel members who is interviewed with the backdrop of a nighttime scene, where he cooks the meth he will then deliver, is poignant.

Since he transports drugs, he is perceived as a monster.

He admits he causes people’s deaths, destruction, violence, etc. He then explains that the cartel members come from poverty- what else are they going to do to make this much money? Or make a living at all? It is an opportunity- who would give that up?

This made me think of how complex a problem drug smuggling is and it also laid the groundwork for the viewer to realize that the cartel members may not be the only ones who are bad or crooked.

What is the definition of right and wrong? On whose terms?

The primary members featured are Dr. Mireles and another member of Autodefansas, Papa Smurf. They started Autodefansas to combat the corrupt Mexican police and government that allows the drug cartel to exist, presumably for profit.

Their group of vigilantes brandishes militant guns to “protect their town” and the inhabitants. An assassination attempt occurs when someone tries to crash Mireles’s plane- he goes into hiding.

But we also learn that Mireles is a womanizer, a cheat, and cannot be trusted. Is he making deals for profit on his own? Papa Smurf is in cahoots with the police. Is cash being exchanged?

The Arizona vigilante story is interesting to hear from Foley’s perspective. I observed the group to be uneducated, poor, angry, and filled with racist hatred. This is scary to think that some Americans feel the way they do and it made me sympathize with them the least and the drug cartel a bit more.

One vigilante compared different races to being like two pit bulls in a cage- separated things are fine, but released from those cages the animals will kill each other. He had no concept of two races being able to live happily amongst each other.

Parts of Cartel Land are quite gruesome and descriptive.

In one scene we see a teary mother from the town of Michoacán, who the Autodefansas protect, describe how an entire family of innocent farmworkers, including a newborn, were murdered by being hurled against rocks until they died.

They were the victims of a revenge scheme enacted against their boss. One pities her and we see the funeral for the newborn take place amid screams of despair from surviving family members. We also see decapitated heads and murdered individuals.

It is chilling to think that this goes on in today’s world.

The cinematography is splendid and countless scenes of the Mexican and Arizona landscape are prominently featured. Miles and miles of spacious, mountainous areas are shown, and the use of night vision cameras allows a feeling of being right there with the patrol groups.

The main takeaway from Cartel Land is the subject of corruption.

Throughout each story the lines are blurry. Who is corrupt? Who should we sympathize with? Who are the good guys? Who are the bad guys? The facts are shaded in gray and we know there are no good groups or bad groups.

This documentary teaches the audience that there is a major problem with the drug cartel across Mexico and the United States that has existed for years and will continue to exist for years to come.

A lesson learned.

Oscar Nominations: Best Documentary-Feature

Spy-2015

Spy-2015

Director Paul Feig

Starring Melissa McCarthy, Jason Statham

Scott’s Review #386

80027379

Reviewed March 20, 2016

Grade: C+

Spy is a 2015 comedy spy spoof starring funny lady Melissa McCarthy as a loser desk CIA analyst suddenly thrown into the field and assigned to rescue a missing agent with whom she is also in love.

Carrying the film in every way, McCarthy is funny and adds to an otherwise formulaic, by-numbers, comedy.

As, admittedly, the “action-comedy” genre is not my favorite, I have seen much worse than Spy, and the premise is quite nice, but the second half of the film sinks into the ridiculous and is very loud and overly long.

McCarthy plays Susan Cooper, a frumpy forty-year-old woman with a decent job as a CIA analyst (she tracks the field agents’ cameras and warns them of impending peril), an important job, but is deemed dispensable and a loser by the higher-ups at her job, with more important duties.

She is single, overweight, and lonely, pining after her sophisticated partner Bradley Fine (Jude Law), a field agent and stylish James Bond-type.  After a mishap with Bradley thought dead, Susan goes undercover in France, Rome, and Budapest to solve the case since she will be unnoticed.

Spy is a film with a star that completely carries the film.  Being a big fan of McCarthy’s and enjoying her performance in whatever she appears in (comedy or drama), this film needs her charisma and comic timing.

Spy contains a few laugh-out-loud moments, especially when McCarthy is forced to take on the persona of one loser after another- a divorcee with multiple cats and a wardrobe to cringe over-throw in a 1980s perm and got a great SNL-type moment.

The film itself reminds me of a long SNL skit. When McCarthy delivers her one-liners they connect and amuse.

An apparent homage to spy films and James Bond films, Spy seems closer to an Austin Powers film as it goes for more silliness, but not quite as over the top.

Still, the European locales offered added elements of Bond films pleasantly. McCarthy as an apparent female James Bond is also cute.

A noticeable negative is the unnecessary two-hour running time. With a genre of this nature, a ninety to one-hundred-minute running time is all that is necessary, and any more than that the jokes wane, become redundant, and usually go into the ridiculous.

Another problem with Spy is the supporting characters. A well-known cast including Rose Byrne, Allison Janney, Jason Statham,  and Bobby Cannavale, each of these actors are cast in cartoon-like, one-note roles.

Cannavale and Byrne are the villains (Sergio and Rayna) in the plot and they play their roles in a one-dimensional way,  as evil as possible, but perhaps also over-acting the parts.

This could be the fault of the director or simply what is accepted in the genre that this is. Janney-  as the tough-as-nails CIA director and Statham as the dumb, temperamental, field agent also overplay their roles.

Why are all of these characters loud, unpleasant, insulting, or all of the above? The answer is it might allow better comedy to have caricatures instead of characters, but that is a debate for another time.

On the other hand, Miranda Hart as McCarthy’s sidekick Nancy, a very tall, awkward woman, and Susan’s best friend is great and shares equally in the comic success that McCarthy brings.

Their chemistry is evident and a recommended second pairing would be worth exploring. Unlike the other characters, I felt myself rooting for her and wished her a love interest, though the 50 Cent’s romantic introduction was strange.

The plot is more or less trivial and unimportant in a film like this. Rationally speaking, almost everything that transpires would never happen in real life, but alas, this is the movie, so one must suspend disbelief big time.

Spy is escapist fare to the max.

A hot mess if not for the wit and comic timing that McCarthy brings, Spy (2015) has an interesting premise but doesn’t deliver anything more than the silly formula that has existed for decades in the film comedy world.

I finished the film with mixed emotions.