Month: January 2019

Numerous World War Two-era films have thrived in years past, both among audiences and at the box office. However, recent World War II art mysteries, most notably The Monuments Men, a 2014 film starring and directed by George Clooney, garnered dismal critical reception.

As both a critic and moviegoer, I truly enjoyed The Monuments Men. Save for Cate Blanchett’s slightly forced French accent and a somewhat tonally-inconsistent screenplay, Clooney’s film was both entertaining and aesthetically accurate.

In April 2015, Woman In Gold, starring Helen Mirren, Ryan Reynolds, Daniel Brühl and Katie Holmes, was released to a 57 percent on Rotten Tomatoes. However, one might notice the 22 percent disparity between the film’s critics score and its 79 percent audience rating.

This difference exists primarily due to one reason: Woman In Gold, at least according to this critic, is by all means a great film.

Unabashedly emotional and at times even gut-wrenching, the film centers on themes of family strength and survival in spite of dire circumstances. Mirren delivers a spectacular performance as Maria Altmann, a reminiscent Austrian elder and Los Angles resident who escaped the Nazis during the war. Throughout the film, Altmann valiantly pursues what is rightfully hers, a Gustav Klimt portrait of her beautiful aunt, Adele Bloch-Bauer – played by Antje Traue, whom some eagle-eyed viewers may recognize as the villainous Faora from the 2013 Superman flick, Man of Steel – who died at a young age. The painting hung in the Austrian Belvedere Gallery before (spoiler alert!) Altmann won her case and sold it to the Neue Galerie in New York City.

In addition to Mirren, Reynolds also displays his charisma and acting chops in the primary supporting role of Los Angeles attorney E. Randal Schoenberg. Schoenberg took Altmann’s case to the Supreme Court in 2004, and Reynolds’ young and naïve – albeit quite intelligent – portrayal of him strays from the traditional legal drama. Indeed, the attorney’s inexperience partly mirrors the audience’s unfamiliarity with legal procedures, rendering the film all the more grounded and engaging.

Ultimately, the film thrives in its strong minor roles. These include Allan Corduner as Maria’s palpably loving father, Gustav Bloch-Bauer, and Max Irons as Maria’s husband, Fritz. The film’s costume and makeup design is also superb, as Tatiana Maslany’s Young Maria Altmann resembles Mirren’s older counterpart almost exactly.

While Rotten Tomatoes may disagree with my positive assessment of the film, I wholeheartedly endorse it and encourage my readers to watch it. Bring some tissues along for the ride as the film’s ending transcends time periods – literally – through its unique lighting, set design, and character mashup.

This scene, as well as the film as a whole, are stylistic and cinematic…

Gold.

Image Credit

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2404425/

Art Movies: Woman in Gold

At The Continental, the shadowy New York hotel that serves as the headquarters for John Wick’s international league of assassins, there are no rules of conduct except that no “business” – i.e., assassinations – may be conducted on hotel grounds. Similarly, for this “Tricolored Reviews” blog, there are no set rules for the films that I can critique save for the notion that they must possess a story arc that is at least remotely identifiable. Their ratings, whether G, PG, PG-13, or R (I don’t really venture past that, thank you) are essentially irrelevant for reviewing purposes.

As a moviegoer, I often stray from R-rated movies. I simply have trouble watching egregious violence or gore for entertainment. In addition, there is no volume switch in a theater; whatever strafing or loud action sequences may take place in a film, there is no method of tuning it down.

That being said, as a movie critic, R-rated films are a must. Just consider Saving Private Ryan: sometimes, for better or worse the cinematic content that has the most lasting effect on its audience is that which is the least filtered.

If there were one word to describe John Wick – released in October 2014 and co-directed by Chad Stahelski and David Leitch -“unfiltered” would indeed be the most appropriate. However, while streaming the film and its 2017 sequel, John Wick: Chapter 2, on my laptop recently, I did not feel particularly compelled to lower the sound as the story was quite engaging.

The best part of the John Wick franchise is its sophistication. Its original concoction of Bond-esque film noir visuals – except with all PG-13 and traditional plot or saga studio limits vehemently stripped away – coupled with stylish costumes is sensational.

Who needs a fancy tuxedo? The film’s minimalist yet classy costume design is fitting for hitman’s clandestine world.

Keanu Reeves is a stellar actor and the perfect choice for Wick. His blend of unabashed stoicism and internalized emotion is incredibly convincing. As violent and gratuitous and John Wick’s world may seem, Reeves helps ground it and make it feel real.

Swedish actor Michael Nyqvist, fresh off his successful appearance as the villain in Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol (2011), portrays Viggo Tarasov, the main antagonist to Reeves’ Wick. Nyqvist is head of the Russian mob in New York, for whom Wick used to work. One of the film’s most surprising yet altogether commendable traits is its use of foreign languages. Upon frequent occasion, Reeves and various Russian henchmen interact in Russian, oftentimes with sarcasm.

Ultimately, John Wick is simply well shot, and it is a cinematic gem. This is what renders its over-the-top, uber-violent action sequences worth the price of admission. Not only are these sequences well set and lit, they are also part of a broader story. When Wick loses his wife and subsequently his dog to Russian gangsters, Reeves’ emotion is raw and his thirst for revenge is palpable. The film may be an ill fit for younger viewers, but its script and its acting are superb, which is a shame for young, aspiring filmmakers.

Elegant lighting, elegant wardrobes, and a little action in between.

For what John Wick lacks in secondary character exposition – most notably in regards to Willem Dafoe’s loyal ally, Marcus – it makes up in subtlety, story engagement, and overall aesthetic. A success both critically (87 percent on Rotten Tomatoes) and at the box office – albeit a bloody one, at that.

Image Credit:

https://www.allposters.com/-sp/John-Wick-Posters_i13085789_.htm

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/453034043756213431

Hold on to your seatbelts, dear readers! What follows is my harshest review to date:

Julie Andrews is irreplaceable. Emily Blunt is a fine actress. What distinguishes a good movie from a great one is everything in between, from the script to the set design to the directing and the supporting cast.

This, ultimately, is what Mary Poppins Returns (130 minutes, directed by Rob Marshall) lacks. Released on December 19, 2018, the film is evidently a holiday by default, for its well-timed release date essentially obliges audiences to go see it. Walt Disney Pictures certainly has a knack for maximizing its box 0ffice revenue. However, this time around, it fails to do what Andrews did for the original Poppins in 1964: make it memorable.

Don’t get me wrong – Emily Blunt is absolutely fine as the titular character. Her adoption of Andrews’ distinctly old-fashioned, ladylike voice is brilliant, and the affection she feels for the (new) Banks children (played by Joel Dawson, Nathanael Saleh, and Pixie Davies) shines through with utmost sincerity. The sequel’s themes are the same as its predecessor’s: the need to remain forever a child and believe in one’s imagination, rather than succumbing to the corrupt realm of adulthood.

These themes make for a heartwarming, universally-applicable tale, but the issue with them is that they are blatantly unoriginal. Save for a few memorable songs such as “A Cover Is Not the Book” and the ever-inspiring “The Places Where Lost Things Go,” the film is generally repetitive of the original and surprisingly disorganized. Notably, an animated sequence with an evil wolf (voiced by Colin Firth, who also plays William “Weatherall” Wilkins, the evil bank president, in live-action) is quite disjoint. Suffice it to say it is shocking that this sequence survived editing.

The film’s primary virtues lie in its two principal stars, Emily Blunt as Poppins and Hamilton‘s Lin-Manuel Miranda as lamplighter, Jack. Blunt and Miranda’s chemistry is discernible right from the film’s onset, and Miranda adopts a Cockney accent in stride as though he were Michael Caine – alright, maybe not that accurate, but close. The film’s visual effects are quite creative(see the scene with an ocean inside a bathtub) and believable, and the general aesthetic – as observable in the film’s trailer – is more than fitting. The costumes, as well, are both colorful and delightful. The film, for all intents and purposes, looks good.

A good aesthetic…

I am sorry to say this, but my greatest disappointment with Mary Poppins Returns was the film’s portrayal of the grown-up Banks children from the original. Ben Whishaw, one of my favorite actors, plays Michael Banks and Emily Mortimer plays his sister, Jane. Mortimer is completely respectable in her role – pleasant, if you will. While I believe Whishaw was indeed the perfect choice for Michael, his performance is unexpectedly and inherently flawed. In my earlier review of Skyfall in which I praised Whishaw’s performance as James Bond’s Quartermaster, Q, I addressed his use of youthful wit and intelligence to lend relatability and personability to his character – quite a feat in front of Daniel Craig’s oft-stern Bond! Whishaw’s Michael is excessively introverted and narrow-minded. If he were able to sympathize with Mary Poppins’ ideals of creativity and imagination, the story would be solved! Sure, Michael lost his wife, but the only reason Mary Poppins must return, as the title states, is because Michael is turning into his father in forgetting the ways of his childhood – and, most importantly, losing joy and optimism.

Back home in Maryland, I read The Washington Post nearly every day. I will admit, I was fairly shocked upon reading Michael O’Sullivan’s initial review of the film for The Post prior to the holiday season. He gave the sequel 1.5 out of 4 stars, to my great bewilderment and dismay. After seeing the film, however, I now understand why it was poorly received – well, maybe not on Rotten Tomatoes.

I believe that a movie must be worth making for a reason other than merely financial gain. In Mary Poppins Returns, Blunt beautifully reincarnates the iconic character of Poppins. Indeed, Poppins reappears.

However, she left her spirit back in 1964.

Image Credit:

See the all-new #MaryPoppinsReturns character posters. pic.twitter.com/xnZbVSYaET

— Walt Disney Studios (@DisneyStudios) November 15, 2018

https://movies.disney.com/mary-poppins-returns

Two star image: https://stream.org/review-13-hours-isnt-benghazi-movie-waited/

Hi everyone! Welcome back to Tricolored Reviews. This semester, I will be making one major change to my blog: I will be intertwining reviews of TV shows from both Netflix – as in this particular post with Daredevil -and live television with my traditional movie reviews from the Fall 2018 semester.

Seldom does a show surpass itself and improve upon its first season. The introduction of new characters, and their need to naturally complement the show’s existing central figures, can pose a great challenge to effective story development and audience engagement.

If the majority of shows fail to maintain consistent performance over time, Daredevil is the exception.

Following its brilliant and riveting first season in which a blind lawyer, Matthew Murdock/Daredevil (played by Charlie Cox), uses his superhuman senses to defeat the villainous Wilson Fisk/Kingpin (played by the bald and beautifully sinister Vincent D’Onofrio), Daredevil increases the stakes in its third chapter.

While Daredevil‘s second season was superb in its action and innate level of pure entertainment, it often lacked the gravitas of the first season. This was largely due to its emphasis on renowned comic book storylines – e.g., the introduction of Daredevil allies, Elektra (Elodie Yung) and The Punisher (Jon Bernthal), both excellently-portrayed characters – and its lack of a true, singular villain in the imprisoned Fisk’s absence. Season Two also sought to set up The Defenders, an Avengers-like miniseries of which Daredevil is an integral part. Thus, the show lacked its own true identity in its second season.

Following his (spoiler alert!) apparent demise at the end of The Defenders, Matt Murdock is resurrected at the opening of Season Three. The darkness and brutal realism with which he returns to life and regains his identity as Daredevil, “the man without fear,” is truly humbling and quite unique. At one point, Matt even completely loses faith in God, and he immerses himself in darkness. He also symbolically relinquishes his identity as Matt Murdock and trades in his flashy red suit for his original black outfit. Ultimately, the show’s willingness to return to the character’s roots – largely based in the Catholic church and the paradox between holiness and the devil –  is its greatest virtue.

Further, Matt’s relationship with Sister Maggie, who helps heal him, is one of the most emotionally heartfelt and well-acted character interactions I have ever seen put to screen. Around the middle of the season, the revelation that Maggie is in fact (spoiler alert!) Matt’s mother propels the show to new heights and dramatically raises the personal stakes. In addition, the visible toll that this secret and its revelation take on both Matt and especially Maggie lead viewers to more closely relate with the characters’ plight. This association renders the show all the more captivating.

Joanne Whalley as Sister Maggie and Charlie Cox as Matt Murdock.

In addition to character intimacy and weakness – i.e., no one in Daredevil is a perfect, all-powerful “Mary Sue” – the villains of Season Three are stellar. Kingpin returns, and he gains a news ally in FBI agent, Benjamin Poindexter/Bullseye (Wilson Bethel), a prominent villain from the comics with impeccable aim.

Loosely based on Frank Miller’s 1986 “Born Again” Daredevil comics storyline, this season sees Kingpin learn of Daredevil’s alter-ego. With Matt exposed and the FBI corrupt to the brim, the hero’s circumstances are dire. Elden Henson and Deborah Ann Woll also deliver solid performances as Matt’s allies, Foggy Nelson and Karen Page, respectively, in supporting the main struggle between truth and corruption.

The show’s realism is undeniable, and its willingness to blur the line between right and wrong to put its main characters in peril is among its greatest strengths.

Though Daredevil was recently cancelled by Netflix, along with several of its Defenders counterparts, Marvel will almost certainly renew it on the upcoming Disney streaming service, Disney+. In the end, the show’s third season was received with almost universal critical acclaim (a 96 percent, certified fresh rating on aggregate review site, Rotten Tomatoes).

I, for one, tend to agree.

Final rating:

No need to turn around fearfully, Matt; your third season has earned a perfect four out of four stars from this Penn State critic.

Image Credit:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3322312/episodes

http://collider.com/daredevil-season-3-interview-joanne-whalley/

https://docublogger.typepad.com/barn_movie/2017/01/film-critic-linda-cook-gives-4-out-of-4-stars-to-the-barn-raisers.html

https://www.denofgeek.com/us/tv/daredevil/277236/daredevil-season-3-episode-7-review-aftermath