Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Foxcatcher - I liked this movie more than I thought I would, but I'm not sure it was strong enough to be an Oscar contender in 2014. There were just far stronger films, in my opinion. I couldn't care less about wrestling, but I was interested in this story. I looked up the true story that it was based on when the movie was released into theaters (I couldn't help it; several people called the ending "shocking", so I was curious). It's really creepy and tragic. Just like he did with Moneyball, Bennett Miller made the movie more of a quiet psychological drama instead of a "sports" movie. I liked that it was sort of a distant look at this man, John du Pont, a man who clearly suffered from a dangerous combination of a mental disorder and too much money. Steve Carrell did a fantastic job, but it's really about the way the movie is written/directed that gives his performance such intensity. For example, his response to Mark Schultz (Channing Tatum) saying "you can't buy Dave" is an icy stare (that will pierce your soul), instead of the expected comeback of "I can buy anyone". It's that sort of subtlety that really holds an impact and makes the movie memorable. On another note, on The Tonight Show, Channing Tatum talked about his "cauliflower ear" injury during the making of this movie and that is ALL I could see when he appeared on screen. It's really gross...*shivers*. And why was Sienna Miller even in this movie? Did she even have any lines aside from the ending? How weird is it that Sienna Miller appeared in 2 of the Oscar nominated movies from last year?

2. Whiplash - Another unexpected actress to appear in an Oscar nominated movie? The annoying girl from Glee (Segue for the win!). Seriously, though, how is this girl a thing now? She is a terrible actress. Other than that, this movie is terrific. It's definitely in my top 10 from last year (not top 5, though) and it's definitely the best movie that was nominated for an Oscar. I didn't really like the beginning because it felt very predictable and overdone. I don't think I really got into it until the scene where he has dinner with his family. The way they treat him, and vice versa, is just so fascinating. ("Isn't it subjective?" "No." - sums it up nicely, I think). The movie then dives deep into "striving for greatness". You really start to question whether this really awful, awful man has actual good intentions. There have been several successful people who credit their "bullies" to their success (Christina Aguilera is a perfect example). For some people, being told you're not good enough is incentive to do better, while it breaks others - but then maybe the ones that it breaks really just aren't good enough or don't want it bad enough. If everyone tells you you're the best; will you strive for better or will you plateau? This is all explored in the world of drumming, something that I never knew was so physically (and apparently psychologically) draining. It blows my mind that people are capable of that much passion for something. It's crazy and beautiful. The ending is so intense that I think I stopped breathing, because I found myself grasping for air at the end credits. Then I sat, unable to move for 10 minutes, then I cried my eyes out. The emotions were totally unexpected, raw and unforgettable.

3. Top Five - I love Chris Rock. As a comedian, he is one of my favorites. His stand-up routine about bullet control is genius ("there'd be no more innocent bystanders"). As a person, I also think he's pretty great. It's not like I know him personally or anything, but he literally lives 10 miles up the street from me - so I see him out and about a lot. He shops at the mall that I used to work at and he was always very friendly to everyone (once there was a woman who went into labor and he tried to calm her down by telling her jokes and the entertainment headlines the next day were "Chris Rock rescues pregnant woman at mall". It still makes me laugh.). Anyway, this movie made me laugh, mostly at the beginning - the cab screeching to a stop...I died laughing, and at the end - the stand-up routine is perfect and then the best cameo I've ever seen *spoiler* DMX singing "Smile (Though Your Heart is Breaking)" is actually perfect. I also loved Rosario Dawson giving several shout-outs to SUNY Purchase (my alma mater). It's weird that this movie title refers to ones "top five rappers" list (as opposed to...you know...comedians?), but here is mine: 1. Biggie 2. Dr. Dre 3. Kanye 4. Eminem 5. Marky Mark (HAHAHA! I'm kidding...or am I??).

4. The Theory of Everything - Sorry, but this movie is booooooriiiiiing. They focused waaay to much on the sappy love garbage. This man is the one of the greatest scientific minds of our time, and more than half of the story is about his relationship. And it's boring. Did I mention that? It also makes him seem like a complete asshole. I do like her story, though. Felicity Jones does an incredible job, but I really like the character (assumingly based on the real person). She's feisty and confident; challenging his ideas with wit and grace. She's the whole "behind every great man is a great woman" idea (she's the Alma Reville of Science). Other than that, I have nothing else to say about this movie. Oh, I guess Eddie Redmayne should be mentioned. He does a great job too, and I like him (he was the best part of Les Miserable). But Best Actor? Should have gone to Bradley Cooper.

5. Horrible Bosses 2 -  The first one had its moments, but a sequel is totally unnecessary. My biggest complaint about the first one: Too much Jason Sudeikis (not funny), not enough Charlie Day (always funny). I just love Charlie Day soooo much. He makes me laugh. There aren't as many standout scenes in the sequel but him shouting "fuck you, I love Sandra Bullock!!" when Speed is insulted (how DARE they!) made me laugh out loud. Also, the scene where they do a slow motion walk to a rap song is fucking genius!! That gag always drives me insane in movies like this and I was about to groan so loud; until I realized they were in on the joke. HAHAHAHA! Chris Pine is in the movie way more than I expected him to be and he does a pretty good job with his comedic timing, but I would still prefer more Charlie Day. Always more Charlie Day. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Fury - With the writer/director, and the caliber of the cast, I felt that I knew exactly what to expect with this movie. A well-paced, brutal war movie, with impeccable action sequences, and compelling characters. It's a familiar story of war; innocent young kid learning the horrors of war among a group of men who have experienced/survived these horrors and are already detached from humanity. It's kill or be killed territory, and this kid (Logan Lerman) has to decide which side he's on. There are standout scenes; in particular, the one where Brad Pitt's character forces said kid to "do his job". However, I did think some of the war sequences were a little tiresome to sit through. It's all been done before, and I don't think Ayer introduced anything new to the canon of war movies. Other thoughts: Brad Pitt at 52? DAMN. Shia LaBeouf is a great actor (I don't care what anyone says). Logan Lerman is growing on me (I have a bitterness towards him because in the very short time that I worked at a production company in LA, I had a bad experience with his mother, who is his manager. Let's just say, she wasn't very nice.). And WHOA...that ending is fucking incredible. It makes the whole movie worth watching.

2. Earth to Echo - I don't know how or why, but for some reason, I was under the impression that this was an animated movie. It's not. It's also not very good, at all. Every review that I've read, refer to it as a combination of other movies "It's E.T. meets The Goonies", etc.  I would go with Short Circuit meets Super 8, but I think the point is clear: It is beyond derivative. In fact, it's almost offensively unoriginal. Yes, one can argue with confidence that Super 8 is derivative, as well, but at least it's clever and offers new ideas to a new generation (Personally, I LOVE it). This movie does none of that. I guess, for a child who may have never seen the movies that it copies, it might be entertaining. That's the only semi-nice thing I have to say about it.

3. Boyhood - Prepare yourself for my venting (it's been a while!). I did not like this movie. I'm really fascinated at the support behind it. I'm a huge fan of Richard Linklater, and I have nothing but respect for what he accomplishes, and the passion and patience, he had for this story. The biggest praise for this movies seems to be that people "connect" with it. Linklater has a knack for that, proven by the Before trilogy. This "connection" alone, is a valid reason to praise a movie. I felt that connection with Short Term 12, and I realized that it was a deep, personal connection. It's a beautiful thing, when that happens but I knew that not everyone would "get it". So, I realize that I'm at the opposite end of the critical spectrum because I find it impossible to "connect" with it. I also realize that it is, in fact, about "boyhood", and that I am not, in fact, the targeted audience for said "connection". I've read several female critics, though, who have "connected" to the single mother aspect, and the growing up aspect. Well, not to simplify it, but DUUUUHH. Everyone can connect to growing up. The reason I don't connect with it, is pretty simple: It's about a narcissistic, privileged, white male, who is unappreciative of the support and life he has been graced with. So, if you "connect" with the story - congratulations! you've lived a pretty fucking great childhood. I can already hear the outcries *Spoiler alert* "But his step-father abused his mother!", "But his parents divorced!", "But he was raised by a single mother!", "But his high school girlfriend dumped him!". To those arguments, I say "So what?!". He has two parents who love him, even if his father disappears and reappears when he pleases. His mother has support (from at least two people, as seen in the movie), which allow her to get an education, put a roof over her children's heads, food on their table. Plus, both of her children go to college. They are certainly not poverty-stricken. I call his character narcissistic and privileged, but it's really the idea of this movie that is narcissistic and privileged - it supports the idea that the world revolves around you, which is the epitome of what is wrong with the world (and more specifically, America). The only ounce of "connection" I can make is for children who are victims of domestic abuse (raises hand, along with thousands (millions?) of other people). The psychological effect of abuse is devastating and a story worth telling, yet, this movie gets it so wrong. First, he seems much more concerned with the fact that his step-father makes him cut his hair, than by the fact that his step-father is abusing his mother (seriously?!). He doesn't really see much of the violence (at least that the audience is aware of), which already makes him luckier than most children in this situation. But the thing that bothers me the most, is that he does absolutely NOTHING about it. You may ask, what can a child do, really? And maybe it's not the best idea to encourage a child to get involved, but if you can honestly sit back and do nothing, then I don't have any sympathy for you. Even at 5 years old, I knew that what was happening to my mother was wrong and I knew that my presence would stop it from happening. Just standing in front of her, saved her life multiple times. . Anyway, enough about me, because I realize that my experience, isn't the same as everyone else (and I also realize that I am so much luckier than most in this situation). Another part, that annoys the shit out of me is that she leaves so easily. She literally takes her kids and leaves, never looking back - it's never mentioned again.  If it were that easy to get out of an abusive relationship, then everyone would do it. I have so much more to say about this movie, but I'll just bring up one more problem. Not only is the movie practically endorsing, narcissism, it's also a step-by-step guide on how to grow a misogynist. It's a very realistic observation about "boyhood", so kudos, yet, it never addresses this as being a problem. From his perspective, the three women who are influential in his life, are his mother, his girlfriend and his sister. His mother is a woman who is implied as the responsible part of the divorce (as in, it was her decision to leave his father, a man who he admires greatly). She then continues to date men who treat her like shit (which isn't implied, but I assume his father probably treated her like shit, as well). His girlfriend cheats on him with *gasp* a jock, we are never given any information about him, but we are to assume that he's an asshole (just because he is a jock), but I'd argue that maybe she cheated on him because he is boring as fuck, and this so-called "jock" is actually passionate about something. His sister is... *bigger gasp*... SMARTER than him. HOLY FUCK....I take it all back, kid, you've lived a miserable life. I can't believe you had to share a childhood with a female who has a brain! End of rant. *deep breaths* Oh wait...one more thing: the kids are terrible actors. Holy shit, it's painful.

4. The Best of Me - I added this movie to my list because I love Michelle Monaghan, but then I sat down to watch it and realized it's a Nicholas Sparks movie and I loudly groaned. Surprisingly, I don't hate his movies (I like The Notebook, to an extent, and I surprisingly thought Safe Haven was ok, aside from the ending. Also, I like A Walk to Remember, which I didn't even know was a Sparks movie until I just looked it up. The only movie that I thought was terrible is The Lucky Ones). Romantic dramas just aren't really a genre that I enjoy, in general. His movies are just really sappy and unrealistic - and they all seem to have the same general outline. The Best of Me is a typical star-crossed lovers from different worlds plot, high school sweethearts torn apart and reunited as adults for a second chance at love. The leads don't have any chemistry, which is obviously necessary in a movie like this (I think is why The Notebook was so successful). Plus, the younger versions don't really match the adult versions. Luke Bracey looks nothing like James Marsden and while he's only 2 inches taller - he looks super tall compared to Marsden. Yes, I looked up their heights because the difference in appearance bothered me that much. Also, because I was bored for a lot of the movie. And, I really like Liana Liberato (excellent in the movie, Trust, and Stuck in Love), but it's odd that she wears a face full of makeup as a teen, and then grows up to have the naturally beautiful features of Michelle Monaghan. Anyway, I connected to the movie a little bit, because it's about regret (his regret) and her living her life, accepting that he has pushed her away. I think the lesson is that if all these good guys keep pushing away the one they love because they don't feel like they are worthy enough, women are just forced to date assholes. However, when he states "I wanted to do something good" as his excuse for pushing her away (stupid, stupid idiot), I realized that a twist was coming and I slowly realized what that twist was going to be and man is it stupid. It really ruins the entire movie, however, I think it's a better movie than the 8% on RT implies. I mean, I've seen a lot worse.

5. The Drop - In the beginning, I was so confused about the setting of this movie. The group in the bar have a clear Boston accent, then Tom Hardy has a weird Boston/English hybrid accent and then there is James Gandolfini, as James Gandolfini (who is clearly not from Boston). Once you realize and get over the fact that they are supposed to be in Brooklyn, the movie is solid. Hardy is superb - it's another quiet performance (something he excels at), but there are subtle hints at a deeper internal struggle. He seems sufficiently confused through the entire plot, and I don't want to give away the ending, but it's pretty fantastic. Plus, he rescues a pit bull puppy!!! The cutest little pit bull puppy ever! Another highlight is Matthias Schoenaerts, the guy from Rust and Bone (a film that has stayed with me much longer than I expected it to). He is excellent (and about to explode in 2015). It's also Gandolfini's last performance, and it's a fitting one. The movie is well-paced, with a sense of dread and the threat of violence lurking around every corner. I highly recommend it.

3 Thoughts on Still Alice

1. Julianne Moore - Does anyone dislike Julianne Moore? I know she's done some terrible movies, but has anyone ever criticized her performance? I don't think she's ever been bad in anything. So saying that this performance is amazing is hardly surprising, but I would go as far as saying it's her best performance to date and it is definitively the best female performance of the year. It's a sincere, nuanced and delicate deconstruction of a woman who is quite literally losing her mind. It's incredible, really.

2. The supporting cast - The part of the movie that will destroy your heart, of course, aside from the obvious, is this woman's relationship with her youngest daughter, played to absolute perfection by Kristen Stewart. I'm hardly a fan, but I will always give credit when it is due. I will also argue that she is perfectly cast in the role, but that's counter-productive. Stewart's performance (and the role, itself), is the one that shattered me. I *knew* from the beginning, that even though she is the one who defies her mother's expectations and lives by her own rules, that she would be the one to come through in the end. Yet, even as it happened, I just broke. Everyone else is perfectly cast in their roles, as well. Alec Baldwin sufficiently fills his role as the man standing next to an Oscar winning performance (2 years in a row!). Kate Bosworth continues her streak as the uptight, sensible one. Break free, Kate, break free!! And Hunter Parish, ahhhhh, Hunter Parrish. I just love him so much, but he is constantly just a pretty cardboard cut-out sitting in the background of family gatherings. When is he going to be given a role worthy of his excellence again? 

3. The subject matter - I read what this movie was about a long time ago, then I sat down in the theater and within the first 5 minutes of the movie, I remembered and said (in my head), "oh fuck, this is going to be depressing as fuck". Early-Onset Alzheimer's Disease. It's just about the worst of the worst. Even the character at one point states "I wish I had Cancer". It's a shocking statement, but I think I would have to agree. Losing my mind is absolutely the thing I fear most about aging. My memories are what make me, me. Good and bad, they are everything. Recently, I've had some problems with short term memory loss and it's really fucked with my head. I try not to tell anyone, and I hope people don't notice because it's such a terrifying experience. It's a lonely feeling; and even though there is no reason for it, I feel ashamed. Like, how dumb am I that I can't remember where my car is parked? The woman in this movie is a top scholar, specialized in linguistics and communication, and this disease is actively trying to destroy everything she has worked so hard to become. This disease that has no cure. What could be worse than that? I love that they addressed the suicide option, because in all honesty, it's the option I would choose. I just don't have the fight that some people have (I blame it on my extremely horrific childhood. I just have no more fight left in me), if I can't live my life as "me", then I would rather die. I'm very open about that, and it sure pisses my mother off (watching The Walking Dead, my mother, "what would you do if that happened", "oh I would have killed myself a long time ago" and then I received an hour long lecture about how everything gets better. LOL.). On another personal note, my mom's husband's mother (my step-grandmother), is suffering from Alzheimer's, which started a few years ago and has accelerated shockingly fast during the past 6 months. I always get super depressed when I see her, because she has no idea who I am. Having a conversation with her is near impossible, yet she loves to talk. This movie made me feel so guilty for getting frustrated with our conversations. If you know someone who is suffering like this, a little patience goes a long way. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. The Interview - First of all, I thought this movie looked extremely dumb from the first moment that I heard of it. Sometimes I like these types of movies, sometimes I don't. This just looked like one that I wouldn't. I always go in with a "clean slate/open mind" attitude, however, I highly doubt I would have seen this in the theater. I have a strong feeling that if it had been released in the theater (without any controversy), it would have bombed. It's a terrible, unfunny movie. I almost fell asleep watching it. I admit, it did start off very funny - the first scene is hilarious (I won't spoil it since it is one of the big cameo appearances), and I almost choked on my own laughter when Franco compared his interview to "Frosty Nixon". Then, it quickly went downhill like an avalanche just building, and building, to a total and complete snoozefest. It felt like a parody of a funny movie, instead of the political satire that it should have been. The jokes were repetitive and silly. Franco over-acted (like usual) through most of it and Lizzy Kaplan is so much better than this role. Also, the song "Firework" will always and forever be associated with Rust and Bone, and will therefore, NEVER be funny.

2. The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby: Them - I'm so in love with this movie. I think it's weird when people criticize me for not liking romantic comedies, as if I am some sort of cold-hearted monster who doesn't believe in love. Well, this movie, my friends, IS love. It's raw, messy, and life altering. I think I'm actually more of a romantic person than most people I know, even though I don't date and I have no interest in getting married. I do believe in finding that one person who you choose to share your life with. This movie is about these two people who have made this choice, and now they are facing the difficulties of that choice (because life doesn't always go as planned). I think I connect more to McAvoy's character, although, I've been criticized by people who are close to me, for shutting down when something bad happens, like Chastain's character. I push people away; keeping them at a safe distance, however, I think that there is that "one person" who I would share myself with. He's clearly in love, and he just wants to communicate, understand, connect with her, and she just "disappears". The whole situation is just heartbreakingly real. It helps having two of my favorite actors, McAvoy and Chastain, as the leads. I just love them both so much and they make a very believable couple. I always feel like McAvoy is in love with his co-stars; he just looks at them like they are his world. Why can't he look at me like that? (why can't anyone look at me like that?). I really, really, really can't wait to watch the "him" and "her" versions because they both have such a unique experience and perception of each other. It will be a fascinating watch, for sure. I think I'm waiting to fully digest the movie until after I've seen the other versions, but this version definitely makes it into my Top 10 of last year. The whole theme is the idea that "if you love someone let them go" - he does let her go, but he doesn't give up. That's love. The only thing that irks me, tremendously, is that McAvoy had an American accent. It's so unnecessary. It takes place in NYC - a melting pot of accents; it would have been perfectly realistic for him to keep his natural (*cough* fucking sexy) accent. Especially, since Isabelle Huppert plays her mother and she gets to keep her French accent. What the fuck?! Totally unfair. Oh and the only other thing I want to add is *spoiler*, I love the way they handled the cheating thing. It happens, it hurts, it's not the reason they have problems. Although when he says the words "I slept with someone else", I actually screamed out loud, "AAAAAH! You're such a fucking idiot; don't tell her that! You goddamn fuck up!" (actual words).

3. Chef - I saw some really great reviews about this movie, and I've always been a fan of Jon Favreau. I didn't really know anything about it (other than it was about a chef...because duh!), so I was a bit surprised by the warmth and heart that it had, and by the amazing cast of actors. I also wasn't expecting the commentary about social media, specifically, Twitter. Ironically, it highlights the exact reason that I don't have Instagram: pictures of food. Pictures of food actually makes my stomach turn. I don't have that eye/stomach connection that most humans seem to have with food. If I see pictures (especially a meal that contains meat), I think too much about the ingredients and I lose my appetite. So, this movie was really hard for me to get through (it was like one big Instagram post after another). I like that the story was about finding joy in your career; not getting stuck and settled into a routine that you aren't passionate about, and feeding a father/son bond that often gets ignored in modern films (passing on a family "trade"). I actually know someone who has the ultimate goal of owning a food truck. I thought it was a pretty strange goal, but food trucks are all the rage right now (and who am I to judge? To each their own.). However, I'm just so picky; the thought of eating something off a food truck makes me sick. Anyway, the movie is cute, well-written, and it movies pretty quickly. Personally, I think it's a bit overpraised, but overall I enjoyed it.

4. Horns - I was in the mood for a cheesy black comedy/horror movie, and this fit that description perfectly. It had the same feel as Jennifer's Body, which I loved. Daniel Radcliffe has impressed me lately, and he gave a satisfying performance here (even with the odd American accent). I like the murder mystery aspect, and I was actually surprised by the revelation of who did it. I also really like the ending (her reason; not the whole showdown/angel wing spouting part). I wasn't expecting that twist; and it is extremely devastating (spoilery tip: pushing away the one you love, in order to protect them from being hurt, is the worst idea ever. Don't do it. The one you love would rather be with you no matter what.). As much fun as I had, I think the movie could have been a lot shorter. There were so many scenes that just felt unnecessary. Also, I don't really get the appeal of Juno Temple. Everyone seems to think she is super hot, but I don't really see it. Like, if I passed her in the street, I wouldn't look twice. She's not even a good actress, so I don't think people are attracted to her talent. She does get naked in EVERY movie that she does, so I guess that's the appeal, then? Maybe? She's just not for me.

5. John Wick - So this movie is basically about a guy who exacts revenge on the people responsible for killing the cutest puppy that ever lived. In other words, it's the most awesome revenge story of all time. You know when there is a movie that you just know is going to be awesome? That's how I felt with this movie. I just knew. And I wasn't disappointed. Plus, I love Keanu Reeves. I know that he's done some pretty shitty movies, but he's also done my favorite action movie OF ALL TIME! That would be Speed. I can recite every line. I think it's my most watched movie of all time, as well. I don't think Keanu ever takes himself very seriously, so his missteps aren't even real missteps...it's just Keanu. He's like in his own little world (sort of like Joaquin Phoenix). I prefer when he does movies like this, though. He's just such a bad-ass, and the movie has the perfect amount of action, style, and cheesy dialogue that he excels at. Overall, it's just a really good time and I look forward to the sequels/franchise.

3 Thoughts on Birdman

1. The writer/director -  I don't know how I fully feel about this movie yet. I've digested it a bit, but I'm still not in love with it. I have a lot of respect for what it accomplishes, and I love more than a few things about it. Yet, there is an air of superiority about it that has me hesitant. First, I would like to point out that Inarritu is among my favorite directors (21 Grams is in my all-time Top 10 and Amores Perros is in my Top 50 - worth noting that these were both written by Guillermo Arriaga), so I am happy with his Oscar nomination and I think he is worthy of the praise for directing such a complicated "gimmick". The problem that I have, I think, is with the writing. It's hard to distinguish, but the story just felt so repetitive. It's as if EVERY scene was saying the same thing over, and over, and over again. The irony of it all is that there is a scene in which this repetitiveness is referenced (and fixed) within the play that this film is revolved around. It's amusing that the creator understands editing within a play, but not within a screenplay. Then the ending is so drawn out and completely simplified, as if Inarritu felt the need to explain his purpose of the previous 90 minutes of story. It's just unnecessary. Don't assume your audience is stupid.

2. The actor - This is going to be hard for me to explain my disdain for the ego of an actor, without sounding like a complete bitch, but here goes: I appreciate acting, but I don't think it's all that complicated. I am the first to recognize a talented actor, but I think the true "art" within the film industry starts with the writer. Actors are given waaaaaay too much credit simply because they are "the face" of the movie. And because of this credit, they are obscenely egotistical. This movie has the intent of showcasing "acting" as Michael Keaton seamlessly transitions himself from scene to scene (yes, he's fantastic. Although, Edward Norton is the standout performance for me), but he's performing someone else's words, completing someone else's vision of a character. The actor isn't really "creating" something of his/her own. I think that this is exemplified by the fact that an actor can be praised for one movie, and then be bashed for the next movie. Did the actor suddenly become a bad actor or was the first movie a fluke? OR did the first writer/director have a clear vision of the character and the next movie didn't? This isn't always true, I think sometimes you can tell if an actor is "phoning in" a performance for money, etc. and sometimes acting is a collaborative process (as seen in the same scene I referenced above with Edward Norton explaining how to cut four lines down to one to create a stronger impact). I often consider the performances as the essential factor of my enjoyment of a movie, but honestly I just don't think that actors are as important as we all seem to give them credit for. Ugh...I do sound like a bitch, but that's really not my intent. I LOVE actors; I'm often attracted to actors and I even dated an actor, once. Actors are usually extremely passionate people and that is incredibly attractive, so I hope I haven't offended anyone (but really....get the fuck over yourself. You're not that important. Hugs and kisses).

3. The critic - Man, this movie is tough on critics. I get it. Most critics piss me off; so much so, that I rarely read "real" critics anymore. However, I don't agree with the whole "critics are just failed artists" idea. Critics, in theory, are people who LOVE a certain art form so much that they want to share their thoughts and ideas about this art form as a profession. Unfortunately, film critics, in particular, have become snarky, hyperbolic and, worst of all, hasty - often criticizing something they haven't even seen. So, I get why this movie shits on critics, but as someone who loves to share opinions on movies, it makes me a little sad that filmmakers feel this way. They should create their art without giving a shit what the audience thinks. If you are making something to please a critic, receive praise and awards, etc., then I'm afraid YOU are the problem, not the critic.

Spring TV Preview: 5 Shows to Watch

1. Better Call Saul - Oddly, I'm not that excited for this show. Like many people, Breaking Bad is my favorite show ever. I like Saul, as a character. He's funny, skeezy, morally grey and interesting, but I don't know....a whole series? I don't see that being that good. Plus, it has such high standards to live up to - it's almost impossible to live up to that. I will watch it, though, just because I'm interested to see where this character started; and who from the Breaking Bad universe he encounters.

2. Allegiance - It looks like a complete copy of The Americans, but I want to watch it anyway. The Americans is a fantastic show; actually, one of the best on television right now. I don't think Allegiance is going to be nearly as good because it seems like it wants to have more mass appeal (being on network television, and all). Plus, apparently it's based on an Israeli show, so I guess I can't accuse it of "copying" The Americans; instead it's just a direct copy of a show because Americans are too lazy to watch non-American shows. Also, I like Hope Davis. I'll give it a shot.

3. The Slap - What a ridiculous title. And so literal. The catalyst for the show is "the slap", but I hope the show is about more than that. I mean, it has to be. I think it's going to dive deep into the way one moment can change your entire life. Otherwise, I can't see it attracting THAT much talent. The cast is ridiculous. Peter Sarsgaard, Thandie Newton, Zachary Quinto, Uma Thurman, and my favorite among the cast, Melissa George (a.k.a Lauren from Alias). The commercials have been so dramatic so far, it's almost funny. I guess we'll wait and see.

4. Secrets & Lies - Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Ryan Phillippe. Oh and Juliette Lewis. FUCK YES! (I've been in love with Ryan Phillippe for 19 years. 19 YEARS!)

5. American Crime - I don't know much about this show - just that it stars Felicity Huffman (and that's enough for me to give it a shot), and that it's about a racially motivated crime, which is relevant to the current state of America. Also, it's been given the coveted Thursday night time slot on ABC, and they have been hitting some home runs with their Thursday night shows. I'm in. I hope it delivers.

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. The Guest - I heard really good things about this movie, plus it is from the same people who are behind You're Next. I really, really liked that movie. It didn't scare me, like I was hoping it would, but I still thought it was really cool. It had a great cast, it was well-written, had great surprises and a killer soundtrack. I feel the same way about this movie. It was not what I was expecting, at all. I figured it would be predictable; a guest turns out to be a serial killer - not exactly new territory. However, the whole military thing, throws the story in a new direction, and then the even bigger Bourne style twist is super cool. I think the only issue that I have, is the ending. It's way over the top and I started to lose interest. Overall, though, I was impressed. Not quite as strong as You're Next, but I appreciate the effort - and look forward to the next project. I didn't really think Dan Stevens was hot on Downton Abbey, and I didn't even really recognize that it was him in this movie. He is HOT, in this movie - like a Ryan Gosling, quiet, mysterious type of hot. He's quite good in this movie. Also, is this what has become of Ethan Embry?!? A two minute cameo in a horror movie? How sad is that?

2. Frank - I guess I just don't "get it". I saw this movie on several "Best of" lists, from people who I usually trust, and.....I just don't get it. I liked the beginning; I even laughed at a few things, but after 40 minutes, I was bored to death. It was just so repetitive, and then it got downright depressing (and not in the good way; in the "why the fuck am I watching this" way). Another thing I don't get: Domhnall Gleeson. I mean, he's cute in an awkward sort of way, but he's also really annoying. Also, Michael Fassbender with an American accent? NO, THANKS. It was so hard to listen to (it sounded like James McAvoy's American accent in Wanted, which was terrible, but at least I got to look at James McAvoy for 2 hours). I just....don't get it.

3. This is Where I Leave You - Probably one of the best assembled casts of 2014, but such an awful, boring, trite movie. I just don't get movies about families like this, that are supposedly "dysfunctional"; it's just silly to think that these people don't understand how lucky they are. They have problems (just like literally every single person on Earth), AND they have a built in support system (unlike many people), so in my head, I just shout "shut the fuck up!". The best part of the movie is Rose Byrne (she is always the best in everything, except, maybe Damages because Glenn Close rules), and she's not in it nearly enough. I didn't like Adam Driver in Girls (from the one and only season I somehow managed to get through), but I thought it was just because his character is annoying as fuck, but no...I don't like him in this either. His timing seems to be off with every line he says (which is a problem in this movie because he was given many of the "funny" lines that land with a big fat thud). I don't see him as the "star" that some are making him out to be. The story was pretty predictable, although there are some surprises that I felt like were thrown in as an afterthought. Overall, it lands on my worst list of 2014, because there is just nothing of any entertainment or artistic value of note.

4. Let's Be Cops - This should be a funny movie, but it really isn't. It's just dumb. It makes me really appreciate 21 (and 22) Jump Street, because it's similar "buddy cop for the new generation" territory, but it's done so poorly. I like both of the leads, and I like their chemistry on New Girl, but it just doesn't translate on film well. It's set up as two nice guys who can't catch a break, but they both seem like assholes from the very beginning, so I don't really root for them. Plus, I don't really understand how girls suddenly think they are hot because they put on a cop uniform (but I've never really understood the cop, thing. You fundamentally HAVE to be an asshole to be a cop. It's just part of the job description. I have respect for most cops and appreciate that they devote their life to keeping people safe, but I would never, ever date a cop. Period.). The best part of the movie is Elena from The Vampire Diaries, only because I love her, and have a super, duper crush on her because she is perfect (and she is also my yoga inspiration). She is a better actress than this movie, though. You can laugh at that if you want, considering she is on a CW show, but she plays two roles incredibly well on that show. She's going to surprise everyone, one day.

5. Brick Mansions - I knew this movie wasn't going to be very good, but it looked like a fun action movie. Overall, it's not good at all, but there are some fun actions scenes - like the scene with the bricks shattering the windshields. It's totally insane and soooo much fun. I wanted more scenes like that, though. I met RZA a long time ago (I did promotion for Wu-Tang Clan's "Gravel Pit" video. I used to be cool, back in the day.). He was super nice, as was the rest of the group. I can't say anything nice about his acting, though. It's just....not good. Paul Walker has never been known as a strong actor, either, but sometimes he can still pull of roles because you can tell he is having fun (like with The Fast and the Furious movies). That's not the case with this movie. He takes it a little too seriously, and it just doesn't work. I do kind of want to watch the original version of this movie, because it does have some commentary on class warfare, but this version ignores the politics in favor of fight scenes. They even set it in Detroit, too, which is genius, considering the devastation that the city has been going through. There is just so much to say and none of it was said.

3 Thoughts on Inherent Vice

1. It's totally bonkers - It's weird, hypnotic, hilarious and only vaguely cohesive, but somehow it made for an amazing cinematic experience. I say that because if I watched this at home, I would have hated it. The plot is extremely hard to follow, and the multiple characters all seem inconsequential if you don't pay attention. Sometimes, when I am at home, I lose focus on the movie that I'm watching in favor of the Internet, chores, playing hide and seek with my cats, etc,. So, I'm glad that I chose to watch this in the cinema and fully grasp all of the details, the humor, and the genius behind it. There's a sense that you're not really meant to grasp all of it on one viewing. There is also a sense that there are actually two different narratives unfolding, but one of them isn't actually happening (outside of Doc's head), which causes the discrepancies in characters and plot. There is just something so odd and cool about it; I walked out of the theater completely satisfied in the experience. And I laughed. A lot.

2. Joaquin Phoenix is perfect - He's just so fucking weird and cool; just like this movie. While I always recognized his talent, there has always been something inherently sad about him and I think it was a valid projection of sadness that people of my generation have towards him. I still, to this day, can't look at Joaquin and not think of River. It's impossible. Lately, though, I think Phoenix has used this sadness to his advantage (Her, The Master - both Oscar-worthy performances), mixed with these absolutely eccentric characters (this movie and I'm Still Here), proving that he's certainly a well-rounded actor. I still laugh when I think about I'm Still Here. It's one of the funniest (and weirdest) movies/performances I've ever seen (and the marketing campaign behind it is so surreal). His performance in Inherent Vice, is perfectly timed with subtle hilarity and downright absurdity.

3. PTA's filmography - While I always found something to contemplate and respect in Paul Thomas Anderson's movies, I was never a fan until There Will Be Blood (which is a rare "perfect movie"). I thought it would be the exception out of his filmography for me, but then The Master came out and I was pretty blown away by it, as well. It made me re-evaluate my thoughts on PTA, because I realized that I was probably too young to "get" Boogie Nights (I enjoyed it, mildly) and Magnolia (I loathed, with a passion). Now that PTA has impressed me three times in a row, I think these two films deserve a second chance. I mean, what if PTA is actually one of my favorite filmmakers and I didn't even realize it??? Also, if I'm being honest, I think I've always had a "fuck you" attitude about him because Fiona Apple is MY GIRL! She is my lyrical soulmate and she has admitted that some of the real, heartbreaking lyrics are about her relationship with him. I will try to push those feelings aside though, and give his earlier work a second look.

Oscar Nominations: The Good, the Bad, and The Snubbed

While I don't feel like I can truly judge the nominations this year, considering I haven't seen most of the "awards favorites", I still have some opinions: 

The Good: 

-BRADLEY COOPER FUCK YES! Definitely my favorite performance of the year.

-Paul Thomas Anderson - Adapted Screenplay for Inherent Vice (I just saw this today, and it might make my Top 10 of 2014).

-Big Hero 6 for Animated Feature

-Interstellar for Production Design, Sound Design & Visual Effects (Hey...at least it's something!)

-Ummmm....Bradley Cooper!

The Bad: 

-The Fucking Grand Budapest Hotel. Seriously, what the fuck?! Am I the only one who didn't like it?

-Rosamund Pike for Gone Girl. Aside from the stupid fucking screenplay, she was the worst part of the movie. I would have been okay with Ben Affleck scoring a nod, or even David Fincher (there are some really striking, beautiful shots), but I just can't with Pike.

-I can't comment on the other nominees because I haven't seen any of the other nominated movies (which makes me really sad) - out of 8 nominees, I've only seen 2 of them (and I hated 1 of those).


The Snubbed:

-Too many to count, really. Never a bad thing when there are too many movies/performances to consider, but this year the critics and I were on different pages. Here are just some of the movies/people I feel deserved recognition:

-Under the Skin - For something, anything! Best Picture, Editing, Screenplay, Sound Design (that one should have been a given), Cinematography....ANYTHING!

-Jake Gyllenhaal. Nightcrawler is a strong film (not in my personal Top 10, but it's still good), but his performance is really great. While I'm happy that Cooper snuck in a nomination, I'm sad that Gyllenhaal is the one he pushed out. Renee Russo gave a fantastic supporting performance, too.

-Essie Davis for The Babadook. Rare for a horror movie to have that much of an impact and most of it can be credited to her.

-Joaquin Phoenix. He's perfect in Inherent Vice (and PTA really should have received a directing nomination, too, but I will settle for the screenplay one).

-Screenplay for The Skeleton Twins (an actor nod for Bill Hader would have been a beautiful thing, too)

-Tom Hardy. Wasn't the biggest fan of Locke (I liked it, but I didn't love it), but his performance was mesmerizing.

-Christopher Nolan for Interstellar. Hoyte van Hoytema for cinematography. Seriously, it's one hell of a film - how on Earth do these two not get recognized by The Academy?

-I have many more, but I'll just write one more. One that is a bit "out there": Shailene Woodley for The Fault in Our Stars. For real.

3 Thoughts on American Sniper

1. Bradley Cooper owns this movie - Honestly, I can't think of any other reason to see it. The movie itself is....average (more on this below), but this is a performance of a lifetime. I have been a Bradley Cooper fan for 14 years (holy shit, I'm old), since his Will Tippin days. Alias is one of my all-time favorite shows, and his character was just the best. However, it wasn't until a few years later with Wedding Crashers, that I really realized that Cooper can act. It seemed like such an odd movie to come to this realization, but the fact is, he played a complete and utter douchebag in Wedding Crashers, and it was NOTHING like Will Tippin. I followed his career ever since - from the starring role in Kitchen Confidential (a show that I actually really enjoyed), to guest starring on Nip/Tuck (an incredible, memorable role), to supporting roles in Yes Man (I even endured He's Just Not That Into You - just for him). I am so happy that he is a full-blown movie star. He deserved the hype, but now he deserves an Oscar. This performance is stunning. Bradley Cooper, himself, is a very charismatic person (watch any interview and try not to smile), and I think that has shown through in every role prior to this. With this role, there is not even an ounce of Bradley Cooper in it. There are parts where his character, Chris Kyle (based on a real person), is charismatic, but it's in a different, Texas military man, sort of way. As a liberal New Yorker (New Jerseyan now...same difference, really), who is anti-guns, anti-violence, anti-war, etc, I think it's incredible that I felt like I understood the choices that someone like Chris Kyle made. Some of this can be credited to the writing, but for the most part I credit Cooper. He balanced the external confidence of these choices, with the internal consequences of these choices. The fact is, while Kyle may have killed 160+ people, he saved an immeasurable number of lives, and truly believed that he was fighting for American freedom.

2. The "true story" - Aside from the main performance, the only other interesting aspect is that it's based on a true, and very sad, story. The thing is, I felt like I've seen it before. There have been many movies about post-9/11 America - from a war aspect, and from a PTSD aspect. It didn't really feel like anything new. The movie is also very long, and a little too cold in my opinion. It's problematic that it is based on his memoirs because it becomes "his truth", which is definitely interesting, but I felt like other perspectives are needed. It's a strong movie, but I don't know, it just felt like something was missing. It would have been stronger, for me, if we had the perspective of the "other" sniper, instead of him just being "the bad guy" who doesn't have a voice at all. Overall, I hardly find this movie to be Oscar worthy (nominated for Best Picture and Adapted Screenplay), but it's still worth it to see such a strong, central performance (Cooper was nominated too! I hope he wins).

3. All of the pretty faces - Obviously, Bradley Cooper is the prettiest of all the faces, but there were some crazy good-looking supporting actors (and one actress) in this movie. Sienna Miller is not a strong presence in this movie, but she is very beautiful. She is almost unrecognizable, though, in this role with her long, dark hair and makeup-less face. I haven't seen her in a while, so I wasn't expecting her to look so much older (and we are the same age, I've just always thought of her as younger than me...and now she looks older. It's weird.). Other noticeable pretty faces: the guy who plays the new Jason on General Hospital, Joel from Parenthood, Jake McDorman, Jonathan Groff and Luke Grimes. Well done, boys.