So I saw Birdman, and I thought it was great-despite the fact that it kind of calls me dumb. Before I get to what's actually in the movie though, I'd like to quickly talk about what the movie is not. Admittedly I don't do a ton of research for movies I watch beyond watching trailers and stuff, but Birdman the movie has completely different themes and concepts from Birdman the trailer. From the trailer I got the sense that the movie was about Michael Keaton as a fading movie actor, far past his earlier success in superhero movies trying to gain legitimacy by doing a stage play, but as a twist action movie stuff happens around him all the time and he just might maybe actually have superpowers!
In fact, the first part of that is true, but most of the proof for the second part comes from one extended obvious dream sequence towards the end of the film. While Keaton does spend the film conversing with a "Birdman" voice in his head, to me at least it was pretty clearly just a voice pretty early in the movie. Anyhow enough about what it isn't and more about what it is.
Because what it is is an interestingly shot movie about fame, acting, and the nature of theater. The whole thing appears to be one long take, the camera following people from one scene to another, mostly throughout this theater on Broadway. I'm always a fan of these kinds of shots, and it gives the movie an incredible sense of momentum, as we follow one character until they have a conversation with another character, then follow that new person to a new conversation an so on. To me this gave the movie a very play-like feeling-like the whole thing was actually being performed by the actors in two hours without extra takes or extended periods of time on set-which was a great asset in a movie about the production of a play. Of course according to all the characters in the movie, I wouldn't know what a play is actually like, because I'm the kind of idiot who enjoys superhero movies.
The constant downing of superhero movies, and Hollywood movies in general, is a major theme in Birdman. Early on while trying to fill the role that Edward Norton will eventually take Keaton lists a number of movie actors only for his agent to say that they're busy making one superhero movie or another. Keaton's character is haunted by the superhero movies he made twenty years ago (though apparently he was Birdman for three movies, instead of the two he did as Batman in reality.) Interestingly, while Edward Norton is basically playing himself-a brilliant actor that can be very difficult to work with-he's a version of Edward Norton that never left Broadway, that didn't star in the Incredible Hulk, and instead stayed "pure" as a stage actor only, both he and a theater critic played by Lindsay Duncan hold this over Keaton's head throughout the movie.
It's with Duncan that Birdman's anti-Hollywood agenda is at it's sharpest. She delivers an extended cutting monologue on the vapidness of movies and movie stars and what they've done to society, and to me Keaton's extremely lackluster response to her speech makes it pretty clear that the movie agrees with what she's said. As someone who really enjoys a superhero movie but is also not against more intellectual pursuits, it was hard not to take it a bit personally.
I don't want to say all that to make this seem like a bad movie, again I really enjoyed it. I found the cinematography really engrossing and there are some very good performances, especially by Michael Keaton, who I've always enjoyed as an actor but seemed to disappear for me after he did that movie where he was a snowman. Basically, I think this movie is worth the time it takes to see it, it's doing a lot of interesting stuff, but I did want to forewarn you about what you're getting here. Recommended.
Hi, I'm C-Rad. I see all kinds of things: Movies, TV shows, Video games, whatever, and tell you what I think about them here. I'm just trying to have a good time and I hope you are too!
Friday, November 14, 2014
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Whiplash
So I saw Whiplash and it was all right. Basically take the first half of Full Metal Jacket (where drill sergeant R. Lee Ermey yells at the young marines at boot camp for like an hour) but instead of about training to kill people it's about being in a high profile jazz orchestra.
Miles Teller plays a gifted young drummer at an elite art school and J.K. Simmons plays the drill sergeant/band conductor. I've been a pretty big fan of Simmons for a long time, since he played an evil skin-head in HBO's Oz. Both on that show and in this movie Simmons' intensity allows him to elevate the lines he reads to be full on menace and threat. He's definitely the best part of the movie for me.
The role Teller plays is a lot more complex than the one Simmons has, because it has to explain why he's willing to take Simmons's abuse. Unlike the cadets in Jacket, the students here are actively choosing their abuse. I could identify with Teller's drive and ambition, and how sometimes our ambitions can take us to dark places. Unfortunately, in a way that I find kind of hard to explain I didn't really like Teller's performance in this role. I think his character was too much of a cipher, I had trouble determining what he really wanted and where his drive came from. This really hurt the movie for me.
If you like really intense performances and some very fun jazz numbers, this movie is worth a look, but I can't endorse it whole-heatedly.
Miles Teller plays a gifted young drummer at an elite art school and J.K. Simmons plays the drill sergeant/band conductor. I've been a pretty big fan of Simmons for a long time, since he played an evil skin-head in HBO's Oz. Both on that show and in this movie Simmons' intensity allows him to elevate the lines he reads to be full on menace and threat. He's definitely the best part of the movie for me.
The role Teller plays is a lot more complex than the one Simmons has, because it has to explain why he's willing to take Simmons's abuse. Unlike the cadets in Jacket, the students here are actively choosing their abuse. I could identify with Teller's drive and ambition, and how sometimes our ambitions can take us to dark places. Unfortunately, in a way that I find kind of hard to explain I didn't really like Teller's performance in this role. I think his character was too much of a cipher, I had trouble determining what he really wanted and where his drive came from. This really hurt the movie for me.
If you like really intense performances and some very fun jazz numbers, this movie is worth a look, but I can't endorse it whole-heatedly.
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
Dear White People
So I saw Dear White People and I thought it was pretty good. It wasn't an uproarious laugh-out-loud comedy, but I don't think it was trying to be. Instead the movie is more like a series of conversations and monologues that characters deliver about race and the roles they see themselves in.
The movie centers around a campus radio show and it's firebrand host played by Tessa Thompson, and throughout the movie there are little asides from her show, usually in the form of statements starting with "Dear White People..." like "Dear White People, the official minimum number of black friends has been raised to two." This show, combined with recent changes to housing policies at the school lead to increased racial tensions which culminate in the campus frat bros holding a black face themed Halloween party. Along the way the movie points out and often has fun with a number of racial stereotypes and attitudes. I think my two favorite examples were Tyler James Williams and Brandon P Bell bonding over being embarrassed for liking Star Trek: The Next Generation because it wasn't seen as "black enough" despite it's cast and pedigree, and the way it seemed like whenever Williams interacted with white people at least one person in the scene feels the need to fondle his Afro.
To me, having the big climax of the movie being a black face costume party seemed very apt, and something that might actually make this an important movie for future college students. I think sometimes we sensationalize the problems people face, and this makes it harder to relate to those problems. You end up with something like Higher Learning, which almost 20 years ago tried to discuss racism on college campuses with white students as Neo-Nazis and black students as Black Panthers with race war school shootings around every corner, this extreme view allows the viewer to distance themselves from what they're seeing "Sure, I don't hang out with anyone who looks different than me, but it's not like my dorm room is full of swastikas!" Dear White People has lower stakes, but it also allows the viewer with less room to hide, it seems designed to spark discussion and to make the view examine how their actions effect people in ways they might not otherwise realize. Frankly if it keeps one college campus from hosting an incredibly racist costume party it's done more than its fair share.
The movie centers around a campus radio show and it's firebrand host played by Tessa Thompson, and throughout the movie there are little asides from her show, usually in the form of statements starting with "Dear White People..." like "Dear White People, the official minimum number of black friends has been raised to two." This show, combined with recent changes to housing policies at the school lead to increased racial tensions which culminate in the campus frat bros holding a black face themed Halloween party. Along the way the movie points out and often has fun with a number of racial stereotypes and attitudes. I think my two favorite examples were Tyler James Williams and Brandon P Bell bonding over being embarrassed for liking Star Trek: The Next Generation because it wasn't seen as "black enough" despite it's cast and pedigree, and the way it seemed like whenever Williams interacted with white people at least one person in the scene feels the need to fondle his Afro.
To me, having the big climax of the movie being a black face costume party seemed very apt, and something that might actually make this an important movie for future college students. I think sometimes we sensationalize the problems people face, and this makes it harder to relate to those problems. You end up with something like Higher Learning, which almost 20 years ago tried to discuss racism on college campuses with white students as Neo-Nazis and black students as Black Panthers with race war school shootings around every corner, this extreme view allows the viewer to distance themselves from what they're seeing "Sure, I don't hang out with anyone who looks different than me, but it's not like my dorm room is full of swastikas!" Dear White People has lower stakes, but it also allows the viewer with less room to hide, it seems designed to spark discussion and to make the view examine how their actions effect people in ways they might not otherwise realize. Frankly if it keeps one college campus from hosting an incredibly racist costume party it's done more than its fair share.
Monday, November 10, 2014
Interstellar
So I saw Interstellar and I really liked it. I might be a little biased though because I really love movies about space and space exploration. After I saw the movie I played Kerbal Space Program for like 10 hours because I was just in a very "TO THE STARS' kind of mood. Anyway, the movie! It stars Matthew McConaughey as Cooper, the pilot of a spaceship on a mission to find a new home for humanity as Earth dies beneath our feet. On their trip, Cooper and his crew (including Anne Hatheway and a few robots among others) face a number of challenges, from fist-fights on frozen worlds to overcoming time itself.
The cinematography for this movie is amazing. The sense of scale you get as our hero's tiny spaceship flies past Saturn or onto the surface of an alien world is both humbling and exhilarating. On the other hand, when the camera isn't pulled all the way back, a lot of the space shots are done seemingly from cameras aboard the ship, so part of the ship's hull always takes up part of the screen. To me this was both reminiscent of the movies I've seen of the actual moon landings and helped to place the viewer within the action of the scene.
I enjoyed a lot of the science-y stuff in the movie. There's a lot in this movie about time, both how long it takes to actually travel through space conventionally and how time can dilate when you get too close to a black hole. This concept-that an hour for you can be days, weeks, or even years to everyone else-has always fascinated me, even since I read Time for the Stars, a Juvenile Sci-Fi novel about that concept as it relates to travel near light speed.
The robots in the movie are amazing. Instead of being the usual movie robot-a guy in a suit or wearing makeup-these robots are completely non-anthropomorphic. They're instead just boxes make up of a few planks, making them walk like a person using crutches, and run by turning into vaguely jack shaped wheel. Combine that innovative design with extremely dry senses of humor and a bit of self awareness about how robots usually end up in these kinds of movies (i.e. destroyed or being the bad guy), and you get a winning combination.
I guess what I didn't like was that towards the end things get a little too cute for my taste. Like the whole movie is very hard science for most of its run-time and then gets mystic towards the end. I've heard some of my friends really appreciate this aspect, but it left me kind of cold. Also, this is a movie directed by Christopher Nolan, so that means that it's almost three hours long and may have some parts that you find confusing, be forewarned!
To sum up: A beautiful and smart sci-fi adventure, I wish there were more movies like this!
The cinematography for this movie is amazing. The sense of scale you get as our hero's tiny spaceship flies past Saturn or onto the surface of an alien world is both humbling and exhilarating. On the other hand, when the camera isn't pulled all the way back, a lot of the space shots are done seemingly from cameras aboard the ship, so part of the ship's hull always takes up part of the screen. To me this was both reminiscent of the movies I've seen of the actual moon landings and helped to place the viewer within the action of the scene.
I enjoyed a lot of the science-y stuff in the movie. There's a lot in this movie about time, both how long it takes to actually travel through space conventionally and how time can dilate when you get too close to a black hole. This concept-that an hour for you can be days, weeks, or even years to everyone else-has always fascinated me, even since I read Time for the Stars, a Juvenile Sci-Fi novel about that concept as it relates to travel near light speed.
The robots in the movie are amazing. Instead of being the usual movie robot-a guy in a suit or wearing makeup-these robots are completely non-anthropomorphic. They're instead just boxes make up of a few planks, making them walk like a person using crutches, and run by turning into vaguely jack shaped wheel. Combine that innovative design with extremely dry senses of humor and a bit of self awareness about how robots usually end up in these kinds of movies (i.e. destroyed or being the bad guy), and you get a winning combination.
I guess what I didn't like was that towards the end things get a little too cute for my taste. Like the whole movie is very hard science for most of its run-time and then gets mystic towards the end. I've heard some of my friends really appreciate this aspect, but it left me kind of cold. Also, this is a movie directed by Christopher Nolan, so that means that it's almost three hours long and may have some parts that you find confusing, be forewarned!
To sum up: A beautiful and smart sci-fi adventure, I wish there were more movies like this!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)






