Bridge of Spies

Four Stars (out of four)

So, this is a movie I have been eagerly anticipating.  It's funny how things can work out sometimes.  A movie that is about the Cold War; and with the way current events are shaping up in Syria and Ukraine and with Putin pushing a very nationalistic agenda, we may be seeing a return to those days much earlier than any of us thought.  I grew up during the Cold War, long after these events took place, but not so much so to remember and appreciate the context this movie was steeped in.  And, it is dead on.  To younger audiences that were born in the 80's, it may seem inconceivable how the geopolitical dynamics played out then, but the movie perfectly captures these dynamics perfectly.

The movie is based on real events.  After Soviet spy Rudolph Abel (played very mensch-like by Mark Rylance), is arrested, an insurance lawyer, James Donovan (Tom Hanks), is appointed as his attorney to demonstrate to the USSR that Abel will get a fair trial, thus showing our moral mettle.  After taking the case to the Supreme Court, Abel unsurprisingly gets a very stiff sentence.  Meanwhile, U2 pilot Gary Powers is shot down over the USSR and gets a similar stiff sentence from the Soviets.  People from both sides are screaming for blood and the mood on both sides of the world is tense.  Donovan is sent to East Germany as a private citizen to negotiate a trade.  Since the trade can't be acknowledged by either government, there is a lot of skullduggery going on.  In the meantime, a US graduate student is arrested in East Berlin, further complicating the matter because the German Democratic Republic (the GDR or East Germany) wants to score points with the USSR by getting their man back and by stressing to the US that the GDR is not a doormat for the USSR.  Donovan decides to get both US citizens released and eventually does.

The reason I gave the ending away is that it is all a matter of historical record and isn't what the movie is really about.  It is about the context of the events in question, public sentiment on both sides, and most interestingly, the geopolitical power dynamics at a crucial point in world history.  It was incredible to watch, particularly in regards to the GDR.  The movie takes place just as the Berlin Wall was going up, and for those of us born later in the Cold War, it is easy to forget that Germany was caught in the middle of all this, shortly after losing WWII.  They didn't necessarily like the Soviets, but they had little control over their fate because of the war they started recently ended in defeat.  While they had to accept their lot in a much grander drama that overshadowed them, they would not go quietly.  The GDR makes the negotiations difficult until the movie implied that the Soviets leaned on them.  In this, we see the beginning of the real subjugation of East Germany under the Soviet yoke.  Essentially, we see the Soviets telling the GDR they are no longer a sovereign nation.  As Orwell said after the uprising in his book Animal Farm, "Of course all animals are equal.  Just some are more equal than others.". All of this is played out in microcosm through this spy exchange, and would establish a new world order that arguably still exists today.  It is a brilliant, yet understated presentation on how the Old World order died, a final casualty of WWII and marked the ascension of the US role in world affairs from then on.

But the movie is more than that.  It also brilliantly portrays the US/USSR battle of ideas/moral codes and our mutual distrust.  It is also quick to point out the hatred between us was very real, but both sides understood the consequences of missteps.  It portrays the mutual animosity and the quid pro quo nature that dominates our relationship even today.  And considering Russia's new-found belligerent ambitions to reclaim the prestige they lost in the 1990's, we may be traveling down the road portrayed in this film again for a new generation.

As I said, this is not a particularly dramatic film, but one of subtlety and nuance.  At first, I was underwhelmed, as Spielberg's movies tend to be bombastic.  But as I think more and more about what I saw, the more I see that it is fantastic story, penned by the Coen brothers of Fargo and No Country for Old Men.  The fact the story is true is icing on the cake.   This movie is measured, takes its time to highlight the details.  The details are all-important here, so it is not required for the movie to lambaste us.  This is truly an adult, intelligent film; a species of growing rarity in Hollywood.  It is movies like this that remind me as to why I still love  them.  Vacuous crap like The Lego Movie makes me despair, but movies like this restore my faith in the state of today's storytelling.  Leave the kids at home and see this.  Or bring them to learn something about where we have been and maybe where we are going.

The Martian

3.5 Stars (out of four)

And so the new crop of good movies for Oscar season continues.  Many people have said The Matian is Director Ridley Scott's Apollo 13 or a love letter to NASA and science, and those people are not wrong.  This movie could not have come at a better time for beleaguered NASA, and I am pretty sure the recent discoveries on Mars were timed to coincide with it.  Now, I can't tell you if the science is perfect in this film, but I can tell you it is one hell of a ride.

The Martian begins with our fourth manned mission to Mars.  After a week into a month-long mission, the landing site is hit by a huge storm and the crew is forced to abort.  As they are trying to get back to the ship, astronaut Mark Whatney (Matt Damon) is struck by debris and disappears into the storm.  He shows no life signs so the crew takes off without him.  It turns out, though, Watney did survive and after the storm, makes it back to the habitat.  He is injured, but manages to pull through.  He then has to figure out how to make supplies for six people for 30 days last for five years until a rescue mission can come and get him.  That is, of course, if he can find a way to communicate with Earth since the communicator dish was destroyed...

So, the movie is a bit like Apollo 13 meets Castaway.  But is is so much more than that.  Like Apollo 13, it stresses that none of this is possible without a great amount of teamwork; this time, on a global scale.  Scott shows why he is such a great director here by ratcheting up tension, injecting humor in all the right places, keeping a breakneck pace, showing the enormity and complexity of the problems quickly, and makes you want to go hug your old science teacher all at once. It is immensely entertaining and not to be missed.  There are no good guys and bad guys, no nefarious agendas, just a bunch of very smart people who are working toward common goal.  And it is a massive advertisement for NASA, still the coolest and nerdiest government organization that really knows how to sell itself.

The Martian is one of those great movies that is a testament to the human will to survive.  It is an acting tour de force for Damon, since he is alone throughout most of the film.  He delivers most of his exposition through a series of video logs that allow us to take stock on his personal situation at important points.  It is actually an ingenious bit of storytelling to keep us grounded in Whatney's psyche.  It brings real emotion and a human element to his situation that is critical for us to care what happens to him.  It connects us in a very real way, whether you see him clowning around, updating us on his progress and plans, or venting his frustration.  In the end, it comes down to Damon and his performance in these oddly intimate moments that make this movie work so well.  

The only real complaint I have is actually not with the film, but the source material.  It is a little too convenient what jobs Whatney has. He has precisely the set of skills he would need to do everything.  He is a botanist and engineer, meaning he sits at the perfect intersection of growing things and fixing everything on the ship physically.  He's Superbrain!  But, while the movie does come up with some limitations he has that are overcome later, I ultimately felt it was a little too neat.  I realize that all members in NASA are crossed trained in other missions as well, but Whatney seems to have every conceivable skill he would need to survive his ordeal.  But in the end, this is a very minor criticism to what is an excellent movie.  See it as soon as you can.  You won't be disappointed.

The Intern

3 Stars (out of four)

It is nice to see a comedy come along that don't insult or condescend to its audience or demean its characters.  The Intern is not broad or farsical entertainment, just a very sweet look at a bunch of people with their own set of problems trying to make it in the world.

The Intern starts with Ben (Robert DeNiro), a genuinely nice widower and retiree at a bit of a crossroads in his life.  He has learned what many retirees learn, the boredom of retirement.  He has already traveled the world, picked up hobbies and spends a lot of time with his children and grandchildren, but still cannot find enough to fill the time or hole in his life that was left without his wife and job.  One day, he finds an Internet company that is advertising for an internship program for senior citizens.  He obviously gets ithe job and quickly ingratiates himself on everybody with his laid-back and very friendly attitude.  He ends up working for the company's founder, Jules (Anne Hathaway), a very driven young woman trying to keep the company vibrant and profitable.  She has a reputation of being hard to work for as she is very peculiar how things have be.  While they initially don't mesh very well, Ben begins to break down the walls she has and they eventually become a great team.

This movie is a joy to watch because it is fun, but never really insults any of its characters.  Yes, personal quirks are sometimes the butt of some jokes, but those jokes are more sweet than mean.  Instead of being a sardonic satire like The Office or Office Space, The Intern is more of a lighthearted look at making your way in the world in today's new business environment.  No character is cruel or mean.  Even though Jules is very hard to work for, she is not the Glenn Close she-devil in The Devil Wears Prada (another Hathaway film), but merely a driven, detail-obsessed woman used to getting her way because her way generally works.  She deeply loves her company and vice-versa, but it has grown too fast and she is overwhelmed.  Ben, meanwhile, could come across as the sage old guy, like Yoda in a tie, but it doesn't do that either.  He is instantly likable because he is a hard-working, genuinely good guy who sets an example that everyone sees and is drawn to.  It is after they know him that he touches everyone with advice that comes from experience.

But the winning element for me is that the movie never condescends to anyone.  The people are real people with real problems.  There are no broad caricatures or mean depictions.  There is no one talked down to.  This movie could easily degenerate into simple, easily digestible pigeonholes, but it never does that.  What is particularly nice is the relationship Ben and Jules have.  It starts warily, but not antagonistic.  As they grow to know and understand each other's problems and quirks, a genuine friendship develops.  Nothing is too over the top or unbelievable.  This is just a genuinely fun and warm comedy that is thoroughly enjoyable.

Sicario

3.5 Stars (out of four)

In preparation for this review, I looked back at my review for Prisoners, the first film I had seen from Dennis Villeneuve (who is rapidly becoming one of my favorite directors), and I was struck by how similar I felt about the themes of both movies, reflections on the consequences of morally questionable actions when you are reasonably sure about the reasons for those actions.  If it's possible, Sicario is even darker than its little brother in terms of scope and tone and took me to very unpleasant places.  It is also disturbingly and unflinchingly accurate in its depiction of the drug war raging on our border.

The movie opens up in a small town outside Phoenix, where FBI Special Agent Kate Macer (Emily Blunt) is on a team to investigate a kidnapping.  After a brief shootout and bombing, it is discovered there are 42 bodies wrapped up in the house's walls.  She is then selected to be part of a special task force to go after the drug lords behind it.  She agrees, and thus becomes our eyes and moral center for much of the rest of the film.  Throughout the movie, we are then taken on a brief tour of the enormous scope of the drug war on both sides of the border in an operation that becomes increasingly dark and illegal.

It's interesting they chose a woman to be the center of this film.  She unfortunately doesn't do very much but watch and become increasingly appalled at the lengths and methods the task force is running.  Perhaps they chose a woman to be the antithesis of every man in the film, who, apart from her partner, are all complicitly evil at various levels?  In a way, this is very effective as the film's moral ambiguity needs a moral center.  This movie is being compared a lot to Steven Soderberg's multiple Oscar-winning film Traffic, not the least being their similar themes.  But while Traffic was more of a wake up call based on its timeframe, this movie finds us smack dab in the middle of a war in all but name (i.e. our military fighting the drug lords).  The only thing that kept me from giving this four stars is that it degenerates into a little bit of wish-fulfillment, similar to Clear and Present Danger, where we strike at drug lords, but there is no real retaliation or consequences.  This smacks a little bit of unreality, but otherwise, everything leading to the climax of Sicario is dead on.

This movie took me to some very unpleasant and dark places I don't normally like to think about, which tells me just how effectively presented this material was.  As good as Prisoners was as far as suspense, Sicario makes it look like a garden party.  I have rarely seen such a perfect mix of music, angles and subject matter to keep the viewer totally rapt. This film never lets up the tension, and it is both disarmingly blunt in its depictions of the atrocities of the Mexican Drug War and subtle in its use of beautiful composition mixed with evil intent.  Every scene is claustrophobic and suffocating, filled with low angles, low lighting and tight spaces to make you subconsciously feel trapped.  As I listened to people afterward, that was the recurring element over and over again, the non-stop tension.

I have seen enough of these movies in my life and know the craft enough to know when I am being manipulated, as all movies expressly do to their audiences.  So, it is a mark of excellence, to me, when I find myself really being really affected by the events I see on the screen.  This movie is excellent in every way, other than it ends a little too cleanly for my taste.  However, from what I have seen, there is already a sequel in the works that deals with the outcome of the events set forth in this movie, again to be directed by Villeneuve.  I can only hope it is as good as this one.  Be warned, this is not the normal actioneer or suspense movie.  It hits really close to the bone and will disturb many who see it who are unaccustomed to real violence.  There is nothing glitzy about this film.  It is exciting, yes, but very cruel an unrelenting, just like its subject matter.

Black Mass

3 Stars (out of 4)

Well, Oscar season is now upon us and our first major contender is here with Johnny Depp in Black Mass, and it opens with a bang.

Black Mass is a story about the South Boston gangster James "Whitey" Bulger, played with a steely menace by Depp.  It is actually a pretty straightforward biopic depicting a point in time when he went from a small-time neighborhood boss to one of the biggest gangsters in Boston.  The trick was that a childhood friend, John Connolly (Joel Edgerton) ended up working for the FBI, an organization that at the time, was trying to bring down the Italian mafia.  So, the ambitious Connolly naïvely suggests to his bosses the use Bulger as intelligence asset against his rivals and protects him.  Bulger, like the wily criminal he is, sees this as an opportunity to force out his enemies and take over their businesses, which he does with gusto under the full sponsorship and protection of the FBI.  Connolly then cajoles, obfuscates and even threatens colleagues and criminals alike to help Bulger no matter what, until their mutual downfalls.  Another complicating fact is that Bulger's brother, Billy (amazingly played by Benedict Cumberbatch, no hint of his British accent, ever), is Massachusetts' senator and arguably one of the most powerful men in Boston, if not the entire state. The film is ambiguous about whether or not Billy actively helped his brother at any time, which helps the tension.

While Martin Scorsese's multiple Oscar-winning film The Departed was a remake of the great Chinese potboiler, Infernal Affairs, the setting, and in particular, Jack Nicholson's character, was primarily based on Whitey Bulger.  The interesting thing to me about Black Mass is that gangster films usually depict both sides of the criminal life, the danger and the glamor.  In this case, there is nothing glamorous about Bulger's life, setting. or the man.  Depp plays him as a very cool, but angry menace that could snap into murderous intent instantly.  Depp's makeup, sunglasses, and generally dour expression throughout the whole film make him look like a living skull, which I am sure was deliberate.  At times, it is almost distracting as he goes through the movie more like a coiled snake, ready to strike anybody or anything without a trace of emotion except anger.  The movie makes the point that his son and mother's deaths left him an angry shell, but it is almost as if he is in a red haze for the whole movie.  

Edgerton is also very good as Agent Connolly, in a role that I think will be overlooked because of its extreme unlikeability.  He is so desperate to make a name for himself, so driven to prove that he is not "Southie" gutter trash, that he unleashes this menace on Boston and protects him at all costs.  Now, one of the double-edged issues of using criminal sources is that they are criminals and will continue to do criminal things.  But they are a necessary evil for the bigger picture.  This movie, however, demonstrates a particular problem, how far should you go to protect a source?  The movie suggest Bulger strung the FBI along for some time before he gave them any actionable intelligence.  But when he did, it was a gold mine that allowed Connolly, and by extension, the FBI, to take credit for major arrests that effectively ended the mafia influence in Boston.  But as a result, they got a worse devil in Bulger, who Connolly thought he could control.  The movie doesn't explicitly say whether or not this case is why FBI agents are not allowed to work in areas they grew up, it certainly seems plausible this is why.  In any case, the movie is good and a fine entry into the gangster genre.

No Escape

3 Stars (out of four)

The previews held some promise that this would be  a good thriller, and it was, but it was kind of run-of-the-mill.

So, No Escape has Owen Wilson and Lake Bell playing a mother and father with two girls moving to an unnamed Asian country (but looks a LOT like Thailand) to work for a water company.  On their way there, the country is beginning an extremely violent coup.  By the time Owen and family check into their hotel, events are already in motion.  The next morning, he goes to buy a newspaper and gets stuck literally on the middle of a violent street confrontation with police and protesters.  He manages to get back to the hotel just in time to find a mob pulling out foreigners and killing them on sight.  He quickly manages to get in the hotel, get his family, and what follows is one of the worst two days imaginable as they try to escape the country without being killed.

Now, the reviews have been savaging this film because of its extreme bloody nature, and I think this demonstrates how naïvely sheltered Americans can be.  Rarely have we experienced the kind of upheavals many countries have, and even then, they tend to be very contained.  Maybe it's the unflinching look at what being inside not just a riot, but a real revolution, is what critics don't understand.  Maybe it's because there are two endangered children in the story?  Maybe it's due to Lake Bell's attempted rape.  In any case, it is harrowingly real as to the level of brutality.  It is a little over-the-top as far as how murderous these guys get, especially with their own people, but recent history has given us such orgies of violence from the Khmer Rouge to Syria to El Salvador to Burma to pick your conflict in Africa.  But in this case, these guys appear to be everywhere and an unstoppable force, wiping out everyone wherever they go.  It struck me a tad unrealistic, but then again, I've never been in the middle of a revolution, either.

Maybe people are having such visceral reactions because they don't want to see very realistic depictions of violence in their popular entertainment.  There has always been a sanitization of real violence in American movies, and this movie, for the most part, sticks to those sanitized rules, except when violence is done to other Asians. I once read a movie review (I think for Executice Decision) that said the indications a movie is racist is when the villains are interchangeable with each other, ie Asian, black, whatever with no consideration to their motivations.  I would hold its rather the treatment of the victims is the yardstick.  We are obviously seeing this from the disoriented view of our white family.  On the other hand, the Asian victims in this film are not just meat for the grinder in increasingly horrible ways while the white family is "safe" because we Americans need a happy ending where we don't die.

The circumstances are very conventional cat-and-mouse dodging of bad guys.  There is nothing particularly original about the film other than this is a typical family thrown into a chaotic situation.  In any case, it is very exciting, albeit tough to watch at times.  For the most part, this movie was really good outside of the omnipresent killers, and a really odd plot twist with Pierce Brosnan that is a little deus ex machina.  But all in all, I really liked it.

Train Wreck

1.5 Stars (out of four)

Oh, I so wanted this to be good.  Amy Schumer's comedy can be brutally funny at times.  But, much like suppositories, this movie proved that she is only good in SHORT doses, and the longer it goes on, the more painful and humiliating it gets.  I admit, I like her a lot. Her internet shorts "Inside Amy Schumer" consistently make me laugh until I hurt.  That said, there is some stuff I don't get about her.  Now, I'm no prude, but what is up with her wine-swilling, barely functioning alcoholic persona mean?  Is she lampooning younger women today who drink way too much wine, or is she trying to be hip?  It really isn't clear sometimes.  This weird persona of hers is on full display in her movie, written with Judd Apatow, Train Wreck.

The story starts with two young girls being told by their father that monogamy is unrealistic and you should only live for yourself.  Flash forward an undetermined number of years and she is a writer for a Maxim-type men's magazine and she is essentially screwing her way through New York City.  For an assignment, she interviews a sports doctor who has revolutionized joint replacement, and works for Doctors Without Borders.  After being dumped by her boyfriend for her philandering ways, she begins to fall for this doctor, but she is so screwed in the head with misconceptions about relationships in general and men in particular, she doesn't know what she wants.  Hilarity ensues.

Now, I am not saying this movie isn't funny, because it is very funny in parts.  The stereotypical feminine relationship between her boyfriend and Lebron James is particularly hilarious, especially Lebron.  Normally, the kiss of death is to let athletes act (Brett Favre, Michael Jordan, Shaq and Mike Tyson ring a bell?  They're not funny.  You're not laughing with them, but AT them.  It's sad), but in this movie, Lebron is so earnest, it's impossible not to love his performance.  Amy herself, despite all the stupid stuff in this movie, is absolutely fearless in her eviceration of everything, including herself.  Which makes what I'm going to say next, so tragic.

You know how you broads hate it when we (men) tell blonde jokes and women-are-bad-driver jokes?  Why is that?  Because it shows an absolute idiocy in understanding women and reduces them to negative stereotypes that go for the lowest common denominator.  News flash!  All women are different.  They're not dumb, stupid, forgetful, flighty or crazy.  Now ladies, I know you don't want to hear this, but here goes: all men are not dumb, muscle-bound brutes who are totally clueless.  "But," I hear you shrilly yelling at me, "you men have been doing this for years!  What's good for the goose...etc, etc etc.."  To which I reply: this dumb stereotype has been going on in almost every female-based comedy or rom-com in the past thirty years.  Enough!  It gets old!  Get some new material!  This joke has played out a loooong time ago.  Be more clever than the knuckle-dragged so and prove us wrong.

Another thing I don't get with today's comedy is the very brutal and unimaginative takes on previous taboo subjects.  For instance, there is a scene where Amy wants her muscle-bound boyfriend to talk dirty and it gets more and more pathetic.  It ends with him getting almost gay when he compares her ass to another dude's.  I have said it time and again, anything for its own sake is gratuitous and lazy.  The same goes for crudity.  Just because you show an escalating argument where one guy keeps getting more and more graphic about how he will anally rape another guy (See?  The non-gay guy is saying more and more gay things to another guy. He must be a closeted gay!  Isn't that funny?) doesn't make it funny.  And dwelling on it after the rule of three doesn't make it any funnier.  This modern tendency to focus on the obvious and drag it to uncomfortable lengths (starting with Austin Powers and brought to new heights by the incredibly unfunny TV show, The Office) isn't funny.  Crudity for its own sake is a cheat and it's lazy. It's the same reason I hate Andrew Dice Clay's comedy.  I don't mind the occasional dick and fart joke.  In the right place, they can be quite funny.  In Train Wreck, it was the opposite.

And that's too bad because Amy is a great comic.  But in this movie she comes off as selfish, oafish, stupid, blind, arrogant and ultimately pretty unpleasant.  The cast of Seinfeld were the same way, but they had that magic sauce that Train Wreck lacked: cleverness.  Anyone can make a joke about hanging a towel off a guy's dick (as they do in this film), but that's a lazy cheat.  This movie's premise was great and could have been comedic gold, but came out mostly as sludge with moments of real brilliance in it.  And that is the final tragedy, because Amy deserved better than this.  She is crass, but incredibly witty.  In here, she's just...sad.