Written & Directed By: Adam Bhala Lough Cinematography: Manuel Alberto Claro Editor: Jay Rabinowitz
Cast: Nick Cannon, Paul Dano, Mark Webber, Riley Smith, John Campo, Regine Nahu, Brandon Mychel Smith. Arliss Howard, Aris Mendoza, Amy Ferguson, Serena Reeder, Jade Yorker
Weapons present a series of brutal, seemingly random youth-related killings over the course of a weekend in a typical small town in America, and tragically reveals how they are all interrelated.
The film’s structure is Tight and how it begins with a shocking and graphic scene. Then the rest of the film explores how we got to that event by following different characters’ experiences or their own points of view. Leading up to one event where it is handed off to a character who was more in the background of the last character P.O.V.
I don’t like the film but I can’t Lie. It has you as an audience member thinking about it a lot for a few days after. But I can’t say if I didn’t like it because it’s a gruesome story that I felt didn’t need to be told and had no real desire to ever see again or did one just not like the film.
In its own way. The film tries to have a message of what is going down on the streets with teenagers at the time. it makes no real decisions. It doesn’t condemn nor does it celebrate these kid’s behavior, but tries to show it in simple terms. No gloss, no glory but it still feels wrong.
It’s like wanna-be kids but with more violence and a lot less sex. It just ends up being very disturbing.
It bothers you the way the characters really don’t care about anything or have no fear of the future. Where their actions might lead. The only time we get a glimpse is when Nick Cannon’s character has second thoughts about a decision he has been dead set to do. Then another person takes the decision out of his hands and does it for him.
You truly feel sorry for most of the characters. Except two by the end. The kids seem so narcissistic. They are impervious to dangerous and shocking things that lie before them.
Plus the director attempts a gritty realism. Which he gets but some scenes could be easily cut down. I’m all for realism but they go on long. Where the characters do absolutely nothing and don’t add to the film overall or characters unless they are supposed to be as bored as the audience.
One question that was left with where are all the parents The whole time? That bothers you and no answers are offered.
What worked against the film was seeing established actors mixed in with the novices. You could tell the difference. It seems real but when you see nick cannon or someone else familiar. It instantly takes you out and reminds you that it’s a movie. No matter how good and believable he is, which is shocking.
This is definitely not a movie teenagers should see, but maybe parents should at least scare them To pay more attention to their kids.
So this worst-case scenario doesn’t happen to them. As this film keeps leaning towards the artistic
This film feels like it goes overboard to be shocking and provocative. It ends up coming out more exploitive. that’s educating the audience and trying to confirm the worst fears of the viewers
Directed by: Brett Simon Written By: Kevin Jakubowski & Tim Calpin Cinematography: M. David Mullen Editor: William Anderson & Thomas J. Nordberg
Cast: Mischa Barton, Reece Daniel Thompson, Bruce Willis, Michael Rapaport, Kathryn Morris, Melonie Diaz, Zoe Kravitz, Josh Pais, Luke Grimes, Joe Perrino, Aaron Himelstein, John Magaro, Robin Lord Taylor, Vincent Piazza, Adam Pally, Emily Meade, Quinn Shephard
At a Catholic high school, a sophomore newspaper reporter investigates a case of stolen SAT exams. He thinks he’s nailed the suspect and managed to get the popular girl when he realizes a larger conspiracy is afoot.
While the film has its own quirky charm. It also tries too hard to be stylish and set itself apart. Calling attention to itself but by doing that it also allows us to notice its flaws
As the film tries to be a cross of a political conspiracy thriller mixed with a film noir film all set in high school. Which is cynical and surprisingly dark. It tries so hard to be an accessible version of brick yet keeping it high school-related that it dilutes itself and comes off seeming like it is trying too hard rather than just existing.
From the beginning, we know Mischa Barton’s character is the femme fatale but she gives an ice queenish Performance that while enticing you never know what drives all these guys so crazy over her. As she plays the role so stiff. Her face barely moves even when she is taking or trying to emote or seduce. Though the film does try to more exploit her looks and body to be an irresistible bombshell
Bruce Willis adds star power to the film. Even though his role is a major one. He is barely in it and the writing of his character isn’t that great or strong that you would understand why he would choose to take a small supporting role in this film.
Feels like it tries too hard to be a tawdry BRICK rip-off. Only with a bigger name cast.
Making a kind of teen film-noir conspiracy thriller movie. That stays more within its own Confines but still has the danger and sex all around. Though none of the hard-boiled language
Directed by: Jack Smight Written by: Garris Bateson Cinematography: Philip Lathrop Editor: Neil Travis
Cast: Stacy Keach, Bud Cort, Marianna Hill, Graham Jarvis, James J. Sloyan, M Emmet Walsh, Ford Rainey, James Greene
Jonas Candide, an ex-carny who in 1918 travels around the bayou with a portable electric chair. At $100 a head, he rendered his services with loving care. But then he falls for a female “client”.
This movie is like a Coen brothers movie before their time, only less stylish. That kind of gets you into the mindset and expectations of the film.
A curiosity of 1970’s cinema as half of what makes the film Memorable are the characters who mostly come off as humorous or some more ridiculous but all feel lived in. They all also have loose morals. None more than the central character played with charm by Stacy Keach.
He is an actor who is considered a character actor but once you look at his resume. Not only has he appeared in some forgotten gems but also starred in many underseen movies. Usually in which he is a revelation in the lead.
The film is freewheeling yet structured. It gets a bit macabre more in attitude but keeps your interests and moving right along with it.
The irony of this film is then it begins and he is more of a freelance shady yet fun character. Everything runs smoothly but as soon as he tries to do the right thing in his own way his luck runs out and each act leads to things burying him deeper. Throughout his desperation, he stays strangely upbeat.
The villain of the film is one of the characters who is supposed to be the most moralistic. The lead guard at the prison. Who is one of the few characters who isn’t impressed or taken by his charm.
During all of this, there is a love story thrown in, that makes him have this change of heart.
Luckily the film is more cynical than anything else. It has a dark sense of humor, that is only highlighted by its downbeat yet happy ending. Which shows the film never loses its sense of humor. No matter how dramatic it might get.
This is a film that creeps up on you as you watch. But towards the end, we are surprised by how much we care.
Directed By: Andrea Di Stefano Written By: Andrea Di Stefano & Francesca Marciano Cinematography By: Luis David Sansans Editor: David Brenner & Maryline Monthieux
Cast: Josh Hutcherson, Brady Corbet, Benicio Del Toro, Claudia Traisac, Ana Girardot, Carlos Bardem
Nicko and his brother take off from Canada in search of an easier life on the beaches of Colombia. Nicko meets a girl in the local village and they quickly fall in love, only for Nicko to later find out that Maria’s uncle is the drug trafficker, Pablo Escobar. His life takes a dramatic turn after meeting El Patron, and Nick is forced into impossible situations to try and keep his family safe, but does Pablo have other ideas?
The film is really shocking in its brutality and cruelty. The film shows, considering when the film first begins you believe it will probably stay on the fringes. Though slowly the film brings you in deeper as the character does. Until we are all in the middle.
Benicio Del Toro is top-notch though he is in throughout the film. Kind of haunting the scenes have isn’t in. He appears only in probably less than half of the film. You want to see more of him. Though him being a phantom character worked well. Like a horror film villain, you can’t wait to appear. Just as mean-spirited. Luckily the film doesn’t turn into a biography of his crimes.
What is not too hard to believe is that the main character doesn’t hide disillusionment well so I would suspect or not totally trust him one hundred percent either.
Hard to believe he didn’t see how dangerous and deadly he is though fictional was still riveting. as at first thought, it was based on a true story then realized it was impossible. For that reason thought the film would be filled with more hope
The last act is thrilling and filled with tension. Not so much action. The beginning of the film is kind of confusing as it seems to have quick flashes of aftermath edited together, but you can tell happened in different time periods.
I believe the film works just as it does for people discovering Pablo Escobar. At first, he seems like a genial nice guy. The boy realizes how ruthless, violent and brutal he can be. Just as the violence in the film comes more in the second half of the film.
Josh Hutcherson does what is required doesn’t really become effective until the last act when everything is on the line and vital as he is trying to escape. Though you wonder why his family didn’t leave earlier?
Too bad he doesn’t match the performance he is playing off of, but then again one is an acclaimed seasoned actor playing a charismatic larger-than-life role. At least he gets to try to match him. He stands his own, but not as memorable.
Would have been interested to learn more about the history of Pablo Escobar through enough films, television, Nolan, and information. This has a nice general overview.
It’s not an undercover tale, more a should have known better and what if kind of movies. Related it for more an American audience by putting a character we can relate to in this international situation and sensation.
Part of Making film more than just a potboiler is slowly presenting the thriller and dangerous moments and making the film about Pablo Escobar. Even if he is more in the background. even though the Canadian story could have been any random Colombians story who happened to cross paths close to Pablo Escobar.
Wish the film set its roots a little more rather than seeming like it speeds up to match its thriller premise when at first seems more like a drama.
Also not believable when he has tons of family, children, siblings that he moves his niece and her boyfriend into his living quarters. Even if he is Canadian. One would think he could use him more as an asset instead of all of a sudden seeing him as a burden.
One could see if it was more a result of him testing him and failing instead of guessing he needed a job done and all who could know except for him. The vital details eliminated, whereas henchman only knows the beginning and end. They don’t know the middle
Directed By: Fernando Leon De Aranoa Written By: Fernando Leon De Aranoa & Diego Farais Based on the Novel “Dejarse Llover” By: Paula Farais Cinematography By: Alex Catalan Editor: Nacho Ruiz Capillas
Cast: Benicio Del Toro, Tim Robbins, Melanie Thierry, Olga Kurylenko, Sergei Lopez, Fedja Stukan
A group of aid workers work to resolve a crisis in an armed conflict zone.
The film has an international cast of actors from different nationalities and origins. As the film follows two days in the life of foreign aid relief workers.
While the characters aren’t perfect there is a humanity to them as in their hearts they want to help and do the right thing. Even if Benicio Del Toro’s character reminds he audience of the type of character who is only a few days away from retirement.
This is the most I have seen Benicio Del Toro play a normal average type person. It is kind of a relief as here there is no showing off or character tics to his performance and he is wonderful in it.
The film is a small film, but defiantly a crowd pleaser. With horrors that are more everyday or average for the people they are trying to help.
The film is mostly centered around the removal of a dead body from a well that is poisoning a towns water. Along the way there are roadblocks and bureaucratic rules that keeps getting in the way.
Throw in there an efficiency expert, who is an ex affair of one of the main characters and a child wondering around who they take with them. That the film ends up almost a political caper. Though with it’s breezy tone throughout never shoes away from reminding you of the dangers the characters face. Which seem to be just around the corner, but the film manages to stay bright and keep the town somewhat light throughout.
The film stays entertaining. As it keeps moving along. With various plot threads and personal stories of the characters that help define them and their time while away from home.
Wish I could say that the film was more noteworthy or that it sticks around after you watch it.
The film never rises above a certain level. Never showcasing or providing the stakes it wants about throughout.
They keeps the film closer to the day to day real life of the workers, but also leaves some disappointment amongst the very few things they seem to achieve and help they are able to provide.
The cast is game and work together as a unit. As their energy is infectious to the audience.
The film allows for flirting and some sexual intrigue between the characters that comes up time to time, but stays verbal more than anything.
Though if looking for something hard hitting despite the description this isn’t the film for you necessarily.
The bureaucratic rules and loopholes they must jump through is what gives the story life. Plus the circumstances of host trying to complete this simple task lead them from one high wire situation to the next in the spacious bleak landscape they also informs us of the citizens and culture. As the film offers no real indulgences. Though seems to be very liberal.
Written By: Robin Canpillo & Philippe Mangeot Cinematography: Jeanne Lapoirie
Editor: Robin Campillo, Stephanie Lager & Anita Roth
Cast: Nahuel Perez Biscayart, Arnaud Valois, Felix Maritaud, Adele Haenel, Ariel Borebstein, Antoine Reinartz, Aloise Sauvage
The early 1990s. With AIDS having already claimed countless lives for nearly ten years, Act up-Paris activists multiply actions to fight general indifference. Nathan, a newcomer to the group, has his world shaken up by Sean, a radical militant, who throws his last bits of strength into the struggle.
This film presents a Strong subject and story based on historical facts. As we learn about the early efforts of ACT-UP and what they were facing off against. At least the french chapter. That was similar to the US chapters efforts
This film feels like a miniseries done in two hours. It is a very trying and powerful movie. That is as much a drama, as a history lesson in itself told more from the radicals Point of view. Rather than a white-washed film where they make the owners that be the heroes.
The film shows that if not for the efforts of the LGBTQ community at the time. The progress for national attention and treatment would have been slower if ever even developed.
This is more than just a movie about the subject or a disease Movie. The narrative here is more of an ensemble but it is also strong.
The film is designed more as a docudrama without so much handheld camera work, but still, you feel like a Participant and witness. As we see the movement from the inside out. As well as slowly get to know abs see the personal lives of the characters. Which allows the film to be more intimate.
The film focuses on a relationship more or less and its development. That is connected to the modern era of the group in various ways. While also showing us the evolution of the group. That helps us in the audience connect to the characters. Through this process, the film reveals events and situations dramatically and still manages to be shocking at times with its revelations.
So much material and information to cover here that it feels like a dramatized documentary that gets more personal. As some of the characters, we get to know each other deeper and stand out. Even as each character is important in their own way as part of the coalition.
This is just one of those films you can lose yourself in and by the end or realize how much time has passed but definitely feel like you have been through a journey. As this is a film mroe of experience where you feel like a fly in the wall. As the film takes over.
You just watch as it tells it’s take abd unfolds a large story like a book.
As all around the filmmmaking and cast are great not a weak link . No one drops the ball. As the film and tale are emotionally penetrating and the characters are portrayed as callable and not saints.
It’s one of these perfect movies into a culture and history one was not formed upon. Like the French film THE CLASS by Laurent Cantet only that was like this film a look into a social issue and the characters involved that offers no answers. Only this tale is based more on fact and events that actually happens
This is a film that has to be seen. As it dreams you in and offers you education and an experience.
Cast: James Duval, Roko Belil, Susan Behshid, Jenee Gill, Gilbert Luna, Lance May, Alan Boyce, Craig Gilmore, Johanna West
Life really sucks for a group of gay and lesbian teenagers living in Los Angeles. Their parents kicked them out, they’re broke and bored, their lovers cheat on them, they’re harassed by gay-bashers. If things are going to be this way, maybe suicide isn’t a bad idea; at least not in the mind of Andy, our major protagonist, who gives the film its title by describing himself as “totally fucked up.
This film plays out more experimental than his last film. This film more examines days in the life of a group of friends. We get to see their videotaped confessions and each seeks to show their own little stories that overlap. So they end up all having their adventures.
That watching the film feels ahead of its time as it comes off a little like the reality show, THE REAL WORLD but also what social media would become eventually.
As from the first frame of a new clipping about teenage suicide in the gay community. We know what the film will be tackling not that it will eventually be prophetic
If the audience does as we watch we try to figure out who will either try or allow themselves to do that.
The film at the time was one of the most penetrating looks at LGBTQ youth that includes sex reckless and romantic and facing consequences for being themselves such as parents throwing them out, infidelity, random violence, looking for love in all the wrong places and people.
It sets a blueprint for later teenage dramas that were diverse and more hard-hitting in the new Millenium
This film was actually not as bleak as his previous film. At least not until the ending where we get a dark ending but also feelings. Which the film Seems to lack. As like the teen’s characters. They play up a certain persona but each is vulnerable that they hide from each other.
The film stays upbeat and energetic throughout and then comes a heaven ending. Whereas THE LIVING END seems so hell-bent on nihilism until the end where it offers actually hope.
This film still has an avant-garde presentation and punk rock attitude and Sensibility. As well as the soundtrack, but surpassingly by the end it also feels like a hardcore after-school special.
The more artistic expression throughout the film. Can be hard to take, even as it breaks up and focuses on characters. Some in the audience might want more story or action throughout. If that is what you seek you came to the wrong movie.
Watching this now through a modern lens. This film is ahead of its time but could have only been made when it was. As it is penetrating and a nice time capsule of the times. Style and politics and just day-to-day life.
This would also be the first of many collaborations between director Greg Araki and actor/star James Duval
Cast: Craig Gilmore, Mike Dytri, Darcy Marta, Johanna Went, Mary Woronov, Paul Bartel
Luke is a gay hustler. Jon is a movie critic. Both are HIV positive. They go on a hedonistic, dangerous journey, their motto “Fuck the world”.
Even though this is writer/director Greg Araki’s first film. This is one of the latest of his films I have actually watched. I have seen all of his work from the film THE DOOM GENERATION (His first self-proclaimed openly heterosexual film. His third actual film and the second in his teenage apocalypse trilogy) on.
I didn’t like that film. The film did fascinate me with its style, anger, and punk sensibility. This is why no matter what I always give Araki’s film a try.
This is his debut film. Where he pretty much made the film on his own. but also this was the start of the New Queer Cinema movement.
Here the film doesn’t pull any punches. It is punk all the way. Angry, in your face, violent, no rules, and funny. The film has it’s messages and stylish selections throughout.
This wasn’t a film where its main characters were gay and sexless. Nor supporting characters in some straight love story. Or comic relief. They were the protagonists and very sexual which we see and good looking. Though also both are dying.
The film offers commentary on the world through side characters and their matter-of-fact dialogue. That works on a commentary of the social scene at the time.
It also offers a violent story with two lovers on the run. That actually seems like it is headed for tragedy and violence. It shockingly becomes something that is personal, emotional, and actually about the characters makeing a connection In all the chaos that is supposedly normal life.
The characters and film both have a nihilistic outlook but end with finding connections and hope on the edge. Leaving a message of living life to the fullest While young. As the characters are the ultimate attractive outsiders who manage to find one another amongst the chaos.
The film wears its influences in it’s background with various new wave and Avant-garde film posters pampering the walls. Not to mention a cameo from cult actress Mary Woronov.
The film has a certain energy and excitement that it never keeps up with at first and that you think will keep up, but it slowly starts to pump its breaks and go slower and takes its turns with the characters. Losing its urgency but allowing for more depth. Still driven by music or the soundtrack. That comes off as inner monologues at times.
Though there are straight supporting characters the film stays mainly with the main couple.
The film is less violent and more talkative than one would expect.
As the film goes along they are lovers on the run whose relationship starts off more sexy and exciting. Though as the film goes along they get to know each other and form a bond and relationship. Driven by sex and end up finding love in their own nihilistic lives.
Random strangers in the background carrying messages that end up being the film’s sly commentary. As well as comic relief.
I can’t say I love this film, but it kept my interests mostly throughout and was refreshing to see a love story that was sexual and not fluffy necessarily that just happened to be a homosexual love story. It’s down and dirty and penetrating In many ways
Directed By: Howard Zieff Written By: Janet Kovalcik Based On Characters created by: Laurice Ehlewany Cinematography By: Paul Elliott Editor: Wendy Greene Bricmont
Cast: Anna Chlumsky, Austin O’Brein, Richard Mausr, Christine Ebsrsole, Dan Ayckroyd, Jamie Lee Curtis, Gerrit Graham, Ben Stein, Keone Young, Devon Gummersall
Vada Sultenfuss has a holiday coming up, and an assignment: to do an essay on someone she admires and has never met. She decides she wants to do an assignment on her mother, but quickly realizes she knows very little about her. She manages to get her father to agree to let her go to LA to stay with her Uncle Phil and do some research on her mother. Once in LA, she finds herself under the protection of Nick, the son of Phil’s girlfriend, who at first is very annoyed at losing his holidays to escort a hick *girl* around town. However, he soon becomes more involved in the difficult search.
This film is just as warm and charming as the first film. Though weaker overall in feel and subject matter
This is the last film that Howard Zieff directed, because he became increasingly debilitated by Parkinson’s disease. Carrie Fisher was also an uncredited script doctor on this film
It’s character from the first film we feel a connection with and want to see what is happening in their lives, but the movie offers less of a reason. So that it feels more like we are dropping by while something is developing . Which might have. Even the movies aim, it just never feels as compelling and things seem to happen more in a leisurely pace.
Which makes it seem like a film that adults might appreciate more then kids. Unless they are just connected to the characters from seeing the first film.
It goes more into the hippie lifestyle that she is around as well as delving more into a friendship than romance
The thing that is missing is that in the first film it was a coming of age story and we were introduced to her making her way through the world and seeing how her family worked while this outsider came in. As well as including a tragedy that you knew was coming
Though this film feels less needed than that film As it feels more like an unnecessary continuation of a story and characters where we leave half of the character from the original who appear more in a cameo. Which also loses some of the charm. As it’s nice to see them but we don’t get to see as much of them as we would Like.
And now she is dealing more with her uncle form the first film who here has a bigger part and we get to see him more humanized in his relationship with her and a romantic one. So we are dealing with the original character in a whole new landscape which seems smart, but isn’t as precious as the character is older and a lot more knowledgeable. It stays clean but she isn’t as naive.
Here the character is doing research more into her deceased mother which is what take up most of the films actions and time. She is also in a strange location for her. So she is exploring new territory. While being around the counter culture she still manages to stay innocent.
Strangely though older she is less boy crazy and fascinated by relationships. Which seems to be why by the end she finds herself in a minor one. Though still not really having any female friends. Which the film starts with her having but losing them to jealousy.
Anna Chlumsky has always been an earnest actress her performances have always felt truthful and soulful full of confidence. She is charming and is energetic in her performance. That feels adventurous and guides each performance she has. Though at least throughout she stay confident. Which leaves a good message and role model for little girls watching it and seeing themselves In the character. Luckily over the years she has come back as a major actress in adulthood and been Emmy nominated quite a few times on the award winning television show VEEP
Maybe it is that I grew up watching and dealing with the first film emotionally so that when the sequel was finally announced. –I looked forward to it and built it up on my head so that when i finally saw it I couldn’t help but find it disappointing. More as me and other might have grown out of it. As it came too little too late.
Now this is not a bad movie at all. If anything it feels heartwarming
Though it works as a continuation of a character like in the films MY AMERICAN COUSIN to AMERICAN BOYFRIENDS, also THE YEAR MY VOICE BROKE to FLIRTING, only skewing younger. Though offers motivation and moving into more adult themes for the characters here it maintains an innocence for everyone
The supporting characters are fun if not too memorable. The investigation is not that interesting or encompassing they seem only there to keep the story moving and the characters moving allowing for some developments.
Not too much of a side story by introducing another suitor for the uncle’s girlfriend.
This was a sequel that I was looking Forward to even though I was old enough to be skeptical and think how were they going to be able to equal the power (at least for me) of the original. As one Wanted to see the further adventures of Vada.
Which is exactly what this film does. She is a little older abd the film transports her out of her hometown into sprawling San Francisco. Bigger city for bigger adventures. As this film comes off more as episodic.
The seed are planeted early in the film. When her friend who we last saw her playing. With st the end of the original. Is jealous and ditches her for a boy who seems to constantly be flirting by with vada and vada In turn has no interest in nor picks up on it.
So as she searches for stories about her mother. The movie revolves around relationships. Her uncle and his girlfriends. Her and the girlfriends son who accompanies her everywhere In her fact finding mission and even her relationship with her mother and accepting her stepmother and her soon to be born Sibling.
That is what most films are about relationships. This one offers a bit of romance between her and the girlfriends son but other then a kids that is as deep as it gets.
One of the charms of the original so is that it came out of nowhere and had a more natural sense of character as well as generally good innocent humor for the most part. So that it felt like a gem out of nowhere that was also felt classical in A small town novel way. It felt comfortable.
Where as this film feels like most of the film it is stretching and feels way too planned out. It feels more designed then coming off natural and it kind of spoils it.
The film Still has some off the wall charm but not enough to make this film feel like it is worth the effort.
Though then Again I might be wrong as I was younger when the first film Came out and more cynical when the sequel came out and might have believed I was above it all. Kids might actually like it. So might those who took the first film to heart. Even though I did and still found myself disliking the sequels
Directed By: Bennett Miller Written By: E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman Cinematography By: Greg Fraser Editor: Jay Cassidy, Stuart Levy and Conor O’Neill
Cast: Steve Carell, Channing Tatum, Mark Ruffalo, Sienna Miller, Vanessa Redgrave, Anthony Michael Hall, Guy Boyd, Brett Rice
The greatest Olympic Wrestling Champion brother team joins Team Foxcatcher led by multimillionaire sponsor John E. du Pont as they train for the 1988 games in Seoul – a union that leads to unlikely circumstances.
The film sets a brooding tone from the beginning, Which feels like the air has been let out of the room throughout the film.
Seeing the humiliation and what life is like in his brothers’ shadow. it seems is already its own tragedy of sorts. The story is told stilted yet matter-of-factly. While it seems each gesture even in behavior is presented almost under a microscope as its own action, As far as detail. Proving that in this film everything means something no matter how minor or even if dealt with in an off-handed way. So that the film feels more like a clinical behavioral study with precision angles.
I give the director Bennett Miller accolades for sticking with his singular vision for the film. His style helps not only define the film but showcases his style as well. Which seems to be more clinical and observational.
In this film, it is the deepest we have seen Channing Tatum ever and not quite surprisingly as good as 21 JUMP STREET. Where he proved he could be intentionally funny in a star-making turn. Here he plays the type of character you would expect, but rather than a general type of character here the film gives him nuances and a certain depth. Not letting him fall and not letting him avoid and go into his bag of tricks as an actor. You feel him really being open and raw in this performance. Having to truly work more than ever before in this role.
At first, Steve Carell seems like a stunt casting in his role. He seems to be trying to break out of strictly comedic roles here. Unfortunately, he seems to become more of a slave to the prosthetics used on him. It could also be that they were so distracting it’s hard to pay particular attention to the complexities of his performance. Though as with many comedic actors he plays well in the confines of drama as serious, disturbed, and strange. Almost feels like a Real-Life Version of the strange comedic character Dan Ackroyd played in NOTHING BUT TROUBLE only not as loud.
Just as in DAN IN REAL LIFE and SEEKING A FRIEND AT THE END OF THE WORLD playing a vulnerable character suits him and he attacks the role with more relish. He tries harder. Taking it as a challenge and running with it. More than he does with comedy, which is his natural talent, and more in his training. Not seeking to be one thing or play one note. Showing his range.
Mark Ruffalo is good though his character is already set up as a saint and martyr and he might be playing the person as he actually was. Good-hearted and that is what makes what happens so heartbreaking. Here he gives the character shades and is obviously important to the story. He seems to be the only character who has sense and is a sobering presence to the lunacy of the other main characters dementia of sorts.
Before filming a particularly dark scene, Bennett Miller made Steve Carell write on a piece of paper the thing that he hates the most about himself and then put it in his pocket. Miller told Carell, “Just have it right there, and know that it’s in a place where, if I was a dick, I could just grab it.” According to Miller, the result is the favorite thing that he has put on film.
Because the project took so many years to get off the ground, many actors were considered for the lead roles. Heath Ledger, Ryan Gosling, and Bill Nighy were strongly considered for the lead roles in the early stages of production.
More is said in silence and behavior throughout the film. It’s like a tragic buddy film. As soon as the main character’s relationship is close but ambiguous and never quite fully explained but suggestions are made silently as to the lengths of it.
The film never seems to drop its air of impending doom and tragedy. Setting a chilly mood and tone that never lets up and leaves things implied rather than explained.
Both characters are in a struggle to define themselves and impress family and others by standing on their own and defining themselves separate from how others might see them. Most of all they seem desperate to prove to themselves that they are more than the roles they have been offered in life. Then living up to it. Though one brings it about himself and the person, he is trying to prove himself to is more himself than his brother who is already proud of him. The other seems lost in his own mind to define himself not by actual talent but by what he finds interest in. As he has been given mostly what he has ever wanted and seems not to be that successful at it. But he has a passion it seems to showcase actual work and/or talent.
Eventually, the film leads to strained relations that seem to revolve between the characters at different intervals that keep seeming to mount more and more that you can feel that it is going to surface and bubble over at some point.
When it does it does rather simply and more out of the blue rather than. A showcase or a spectacular scene. I guess it’s like the facts just random and ordinary.
According to Bennett Miller’s comments at screening, a rough cut of the film was more than four hours long.
Steve Carell claimed that according to director Bennett Miller’s wishes there was no joking between takes, and he did not socialize with the co-stars after work.
According to Steve Carell, the real John DuPont was known for even more outlandish behavior than what is shown in the film, but he and director Bennett Miller wanted his madness to be gradually revealed to the audience.
The third act of deep resentment festering until a final act that you know is coming. Though still feels surprising when it happens and is just as senseless in the act as in the reasons.
The film feels downtrodden. It is based on a true story and real events. Though it keeps the story singular. It also makes the film feel barren and an island in of itself.
Too much of the people who love the good life. Go to extremes to feel something new and different. That registers and that they grant in control of to feel accomplishment in themselves. Here no one gets what they set out for, and their grand plan seems to doom them all to places that might have been inevitable but none planned to end up that way.
It’s a tragedy that feels like a boom as it sets the mood. It seems to be more about what is written between the lines though tells you the story fully as it happens. Nothing feels hidden.
The film ultimately comes off as a bit disappointing as we wallow but are given hints yet no definitive answers. The film immerses us in the drama and relationships yet still keeps them in the shadows a bit.
Cut To The Chase 