These Hobbit Feet Were Made For Walking

"The Hobbit:  An Unexpected Journey"

It's been nearly ten years since director Peter Jackson completed his monumental, epically spectacular, nine plus hour saga of The Lord of the Rings.  After the final installment of the trilogy, Return of the King was released, I was hoping his next project would be to bring author J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit to the big screen.  Sadly, due to issues concerning the copyright of the novel and further problems with the studio, Tolkien's prequel would leave fans in a state of limbo.  Finally, the week before the supposed Mayan apocalypse approached, Jackson released The Hobbit.  Well I should say, he released part one of The Hobbit titled An Unexpected Journey. 

An Unexpected Journey is the first installment in yet another trilogy concerning the realm of Middle Earth.  The novel itself is slightly over three hundred pages in length.  When Jackson made the choice to break the tale into three parts, it left fans scratching their heads.  I can maybe see two parts at best, but three?!  It was also announced that the film was to be shot in 3D and at 48 frames a second (twice the normal frame rate at films which films are shot and projected.)  These three decisions by the Academy Award winning director were making me not as excited to return to land of Middle Earth.  Another nine plus hour adventure that's going to have the video look of a soap opera and I also have to wear an additional pair of glasses over the ones I already own; this may not be the cinematic experience I was originally hoping for.  

Sixty years before the events in The Fellowship of the Ring a considerably younger Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) reluctantly steps outside the comfort zone of his cozy little hobbit hole and embarks on a quest. Mr. Baggins is accompanied by the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and thirteen dwarves led by exiled dwarf king Thorin Oakensheild (Richard Armitage.)  The dwarves' goal is simple; reclaim their massive treasure that was stolen from them years ago by the corrupt and villainous dragon known as Smaug who resides in the Lonely Mountain.  Considering the fact that Middle Earth does not have any motorized modes of transportation this party of fifteen has no choice but to trek across a beautiful and dangerous landscape to their final destination.  Along the way they encounter trolls, elves, wargs, orcs, and goblins.  This is also the first time a Baggins comes in contact with the sinister creature Gollum (Andy Serkis,) where Bilbo obtains the One Ring once forged by the dark lord Sauron.  

I went into The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey wanting it to be good but not expecting it to be Lord of the Rings good.  I'd say that Jackson definitely met my level of anticipation.  The film is well paced giving us another chance slip on our furry hobbit feet and admire the lovely handsomeness of New Zealand that Jackson once again uses as his backdrop for the film.  Certain themes and motifs we’ve once heard before echo throughout the land as composer Howard Shore's score moves us along from one plot point to another.  We know what the film’s intentions are going to be as we set out for another incredible adventure.  

I found Bilbo and Gandalf to be more compelling characters than the dwarves.  Bilbo has the most room to change and grow.  Freeman does a fine job of taking on the same vocal inflections and physical mannerisms that the older Bilbo (played by Ian Holm) exhibits.  And of course McKellen remains solid as always reprising his role of Gandalf.  I think in the novel the dwarves work better as a whole but when you see them on screen it just isn't the same.  The make-up design for each dwarf distinguishes them from one another but their personalities are too similar.  There clearly is this great bond of brotherhood that the actors have established amongst each other, but the ensemble cast that Jackson assembled for The Fellowship of the Ring which consisted of several different races of beings is just more interesting and distinct.  Perhaps I'm being unfair here though, considering that this is only part one.  I'll be curious to see how these characters differentiate themselves from one another in the second and third installments. 

The story is on a much smaller and contained scale than Rings.  There's no denying that Smaug is bad creature.  I wouldn't categorize him as a creature of evil though.  Sauron on the other hand is the ultimate embodiment of evil.  The stakes are nowhere near as high as they were in Rings because the fate of Middle Earth does not hinge on the destruction of the One Ring.  That's fine with me though because when it comes to sequels the ante most certainly has to be upped and Rings never fails to deliver on that promise.  An Unexpected Journey shows us something new but retains the same look and feel that Jackson gave us previously.  It's clear that this guy has a clear and uncompromising understanding of how to bring Tolkien's material to the big screen.  And even though I don't agree with him breaking this story into three parts I do agree with where he ends part one while still giving me enough to wet my appetite for The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.  

My knee-jerk reaction was to not have my initial viewing of An Unexpected Journey be in 3D or at the high frame rate.  I was completely against it.  I was however persuaded by a friend of mine and in the end he convinced me it wasn't about what I wanted but more importantly what Jackson wanted.  However, seeing the film how the director intended is certainly a mixed bag.  Certain action sequences and set pieces benefited from the 48 frames a second giving the film a whole new realistic quality to it.  There were however other times where movement from the actors or the camera seemed unnatural and irksome.  Also, some of the visual effects looked fantastic, but then there were times where they had a tendency to look more like a videogame.  I would like to the see the film again in 2D and at 24 frames a second so as to compare and contrast the two viewing experiences.  Despite the quarrels I may have with Jackson's vision the 3D and high frame rate were not big enough deterrents to have kept me from enjoying the film.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is certainly another ambitious undertaking from a director who has already proven that he is worthy of handling such material.  This film recaptures some of that magic that surged through the Rings films.  Overall I was completely satisfied with this first installment but not necessarily blown away.  Even though Jackson won't ever be able to fully achieve the awesome power that surged through the Rings trilogy I still applaud him for bringing this novel to the silver screen. This new trilogy will again be a cinematic journey worth taking over the next couple of years.  I think it would be majorly disappointing if all we still had go on was that crummy, campy animated adaption from the 70's.  Who wants to sit through that again?                          

Drenched and Dripping

"Throne of Blood"

In 1985 director Akira Kurosawa released a film called Ran.  Ran was a project of his that was based on playwright William Shakespeare's King Lear.  I've been a fan of Kurosawa's since my days as a freshman in high school.  I know that Seven Samurai is regarded as his magnum opus, but I thoroughly enjoy Ran much more than any of the other films I've seen from him.  One aspect that I found most impressive about the picture his way he adapted such a classic play to fit into the samurai warrior culture.  That takes talent.  Throne of Blood which was released about thirty years before Ran is Kurosawa's take on another Shakespeare play, Macbeth.  Kurosawa once again takes another classic tale and transports it into his realm of cinema making Throne of Blood out to be just as swift and powerful as a katana blade.

Generals Miki (Akira Kubo) and Washizu (Toshiro Mifume) are making their way back to Spider's Web Castle.  While journeying through the eerie and confusing forest on which the castle boarders they come across an evil spirit that predicts the two men's futures.  Much to their disbelief, the spirit's predictions start to come true after Miki and Washizu are both promoted.  Washizu's wife, Lady Asaji (Isuzu Yamada) wants much more for husband.  She wants him to be become the new great lord of Spider's Web Castle.  This means murdering the current great lord, which of course Washizu does at the request of his wife.  With the blood unable to be washed from both of their hands Washizu and Asaji are haunted by the treacherous deeds they have committed.  Soon Washizu begins to go mad. 

Kurosawa does a fine job of creating a macabre mood for his picture.  His characters commit an unforgivable act of violence and he makes them pay for it.  The mental torture that Washizu and Asaji go through is fantastic to watch unfold.  Watching Mifume's performance as anguish consumes Washizu is the work of a great actor.  There is no path to redemption for these characters and that's fine with me.  I want them to suffer for their actions.  There's a scene where the evil spirit appears at dinner, but is only visible to Washizu.  To watch Mifume tremble in fear and then proceed to hack and slash his way through the air and stumble around in anger and terror is great.  

There are scenes that definitely come off as being very theatrical where Kurosawa has framed the shot in such a meaningful way but not so that we aren't paying attention to his actors.  Despite dealing with such unpleasant subject matter, the film actually incorporates a tremendous amount of beauty that bleeds it way through the picture.  When it wants to be, Throne of Blood can incredibly cinematic as well.  Kurosawa knows when to let his actors do the talking and when his frames should.  

Exquisitely framed and acted with such pain and agony, Throne of Blood is a must see for fans of Shakespeare or Kurosawa.  Although the film isn't quite the masterpiece that Ran comes off as being, Kurosawa has such a firm grasp on the material and knows how to stay faithful to the plot and characters of Macbeth. .  Also, he creates such an unsettling atmosphere that we almost get smothered by the mood; and I mean that in a good way.   There are many more features from the Japanese auteur occupying my Netflix queue and I will get to them eventually.  When watching a master such as Kurosawa whip out his brush and paint such fine lines of character and story that is something to truly admire for any cinephile.              

Happy 50th Birthday Mr. Bond

"Skyfall"

I have to admit there was a part of me that was quite excited, but also rather wary when Columbia Pictures announced that Academy Award winning director Sam Mendes was to be at the helm for the next installment in the 007 James Bond franchise; a franchise that has been around now for fifty years.  On the one hand, I have enjoyed all of Mendes's films prior to his most undertaking.  American Beauty, Road to Perdition, Jarhead, and Revolutionary Road all featured strong performances from a wide range of actors.  Mendes's films also have always featured gorgeous cinematography from legendary director of photography Conrad L. Hall (R.I.P.) and now maestro Roger Deakins.  Highlights of above average performances and jaw dropping photography was what I was expecting from the 23rd Bond film, curiously titled Skyfall.  I was concerned though to see how Mendes would handle the overall material and understanding of such an iconic figure in cinema.  I was also hoping that he had hired a good second unit director to handle the bulk of the action sequences.  Much to my relief Mendes delivered on all my expectations.

Bond (Daniel Craig) is back from the dead after a failed mission to recover data containing highly classified information about the true identities and whereabouts of MI6 agents.  The blonde hair, blue eyed, martini drinking, class F operating license holding, British secret service agent finds himself on the front page of the obituaries after accidentally being be shot off a moving train while going over a bridge by his partner Eve (Naomie Harris)  and plunging him in to the waters below.  Wow, what an opening.  Well, we all know that our hero isn't really dead.  What brings him back to London from the rest, relaxation, and retirement he was enjoying in Turkey is an attack on MI6 headquarters, killing six agents.  M (Judi Dench,) head of MI6, wasn't in the building at the time of the explosion.  Someone is playing games with M and wants her to pay for her sins.  That certain someone is former agent Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem) who has long since been M.I.A.  He is out for revenge against M and anyone who stands by her side.

Skyfall is unlike any Bond film I have ever seen before, and yes I have seen all twenty-two previous installments.  One characteristic that makes this one unique is the characters themselves.  The relationship that Bond and M have is explored and expanded upon.  M always knew that Bond was extremely good at his job but at same time he remained like this sort of thorn in the side of MI6.  With this film we actually get to see M and her top agent conversing outside an office setting.  It's clear that their relationship goes beyond merely employer and employee.  They do care about what happens to one another and Bond will remain forever loyal to her and the cause she is fighting for day after day.  Craig and Dench are good together and we get to see a side to each of their characters that doesn't come off as being out of place or disloyal to the fans.

If there's one thing we learned from No Country for Old Men, it's that Bardem can play one hell of a villain.  Silva is quite different from Anton Chigurh, but Bardem plays him with such utter creepiness to the point where he comes off as a complete psychopath.  Silva's motivation is simple; revenge.  That's a motive I can buy.  This Bond bad guy isn't about world domination/accumulating gobs of money like we've seen from so many of the other cartoonish super villains.  No, Silva's character is grounded a little more in reality.  Everything that Bardem is bringing to the character including his physicality, mannerisms, and vocal inflection is great and at the same time altogether disturbing.

I have to briefly mention the photography from Deakins.  Skyfall truly is the best looking Bond film ever made.  Deakins’s work never ceases to amaze me.  The ever changing color palette Bond's world is immersed in is stunning.  Deakins wonderfully utilizes the full spectrum of color to not just represent mood but more importantly to give this latest 007 entry some uncommon allure.  That's one of the nice things about having Mendes direct a Bond film; he brings his crew of regulars which also includes production designer Dennis Gassner and composer Thomas Newman along with him.

Heavily peppered with big, loud, fun action sequences but also remaining faithful its characters and fan base, Skyfall delivers what it promises.  Mendes, his cast, and his crew continue with a tradition that has been going on for decades now.  Skyfall is leaps and bounds better than Quauntum of  Solace because the screenwriters threw out everything that film was trying to go for which resulted in a frustrating straight up sequel to Craig's first Bond venture, Casino Royale.  Even though this film is not a sequel, the ante certainly has been upped.  Sean Connery is still my favorite Bond and some of his films will forever remain the best in the series.  However, Skyfall certainly has a place in 007 history and is undeniably more memorable than some of his other outings.  James Bond just turned fifty and he shows no signs of slowing down.  Bond had to suffer through the birthday party that Quantum of Solace threw for him when he turned forty-six, but for Skyfall he gets to have his cake and eat it too.        

   

Touchdown

"Silver Linings Playbook"

Director David O. Russell certainly knows how to get the best performances out of people I would otherwise consider celebrities, not actors.  Celebrities for example like Mark Wahlberg.  Russell is definitely an actor's director and he proved that a couple of years with The Fighter.  Wahlberg proved to us that he can bust out his acting chops when necessary and his supporting co-stars Christian Bale and Melissa Leo each walked away Oscar statues.  Silver Linings Playbook which uncharacteristically does not feature Wahlberg but instead has Bradley Cooper playing the main character is another solid entry in director's growing resume.

Pat (Cooper) is recently signed out of a mental institution by his mother Dolores (Jackie Weaver) and put under the supervision of her and his father (Robert De Niro.)  Eight months ago Pat had a mental breakdown after he caught his wife Nikki (Brea Bree) cheating on him in the shower with one of his former teaching colleagues.  Pat did what every normal, rational husband would do in that situation and proceeded to beat the crap out of the guy.  After being institutionalized per the court's request Pat was diagnosed as being bipolar.  Even though he refuses to take his medication his mother wants to take care of him which will hopefully further pave the road to his recovery and bring Pat closer to his father.  Bound and determined is Pat to get back his wife but along the way he meets Tiffany (Jennifer Lawrence) through a mutual friend the two share.  Tiffany is also damaged goods, like Pat.  She too has had a breakdown of sorts since her husband recently passed away.  Together the two of them form a relationship as they try find the silver linings within each other.

On the surface Silver Linings Playbook appears to be nothing special.  There's nothing unusual about the way the story is told.  No fancy MTV style editing tricks or in your face visual effects to be found here.  Man, this sounds like a really boring film.  Wrong!  I came out of this film feeling the same way I did after watching The Fighter.  There's nothing here but good storytelling and sound acting.  

I have never and probably won't ever again see Cooper give such a dedicated and proficient performance.  He shows such a natural range of emotions from one end of the spectrum to the other to which I was thoroughly impressed.  Same could be said about Lawrence as well.  She is very hot right now in Hollywood ever since her Oscar nod for her work in Winter's Bone.  I wouldn't be surprised if both of them receive nominations for their performances in this film.  Both actors have such great on screen chemistry together which comes off as genuine and believable.  Pat and Tiffany do go through their individual ups and downs but there was just something about watching the two of them that didn't make the film seem overly sentimental or vapidly clichéd.

In order to capture these organic performances Russell uses of a ton of handheld camerawork.  Normally I'm pretty against handheld, herky jerky, occasionally nauseating, camera movement that so many directors nowadays seem to shoot their movies in.  Most of time that choice comes off as being lazy, sloppy, and uninspired, serving little to purpose but to infuriate the audience.  Russell uses this camera technique to his advantage and for a reason.  The fact we are propelled right in to the middle of these scenes as we get right up next to Cooper, De Niro, or Lawrence lets us see the raw emotions these actors are conveying.  I want to be a part of these conversations.  I want to be a part of the family too.  Russell gives his audience that chance just as he did in The Fighter to be included in the scene.  

Silver Linings Playbook has the perfect blend of drama and humor to keep us entertained.  There's a certain classic quality to this film as there was with The Fighter.  It's true that the acting styles have changed as well as the camera techniques but there still remains a solid screenplay with tried and true themes that we can all get behind on one level or another.  Silver Linings Playbook probably won't be remembered for decades to come but at least in regards to the here and now of cinema it certainly is one of the year's best.  This playbook has plays we've seen before but the coach still knows how to make his players score when the game is on the line.    

Come Fly With Me

"Flight"

It's been a long time, too long in my opinion since we've seen a live action film from director Robert Zemeckis.  We all remember the works of Zemeckis right?  Some of his films include Back to the Future, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and Forrest Gump.  The last time we were treated to one of Zemeckis's live action outings was in the year 2000 with Cast Away.  Then for about the next ten years we had to endure The Polar Express, Beowulf, and A Christmas Carol.  These three films employed the use of motion capture technology.  Even though during the principle photography phase of production where Zemeckis was directing actors on a set, the end result was this weird, creepy looking animation that just didn't sit well with me.  Also the films themselves I thought were fairly insignificant in regards to his career.  Year after year passed with no live action from the once pioneering film director and I was beginning to wonder if Zemeckis was ever going to do another film where we'd get to see real actors on physical sets.  Finally my prayers were answered with Flight.  Welcome back Mr. Zemeckis, I missed you, but more importantly, cinema missed you too.

Airline captain Whip Whittaker (Denzel Washington) is a cocaine snorting, heavy drinking, cigarette smoking, ladies’ man.  He also happens to be one hell of a pilot.  Whip becomes quite the hero after he saves the lives of 96 (out of 102) passengers and crew aboard a flight bound for Atlanta.  A flight that was essentially doomed from the beginning or so we're led to believe.  You see despite Captain Whittaker heroic efforts he is also being sued.  After his toxicology report came back from the crash, he tested positive for alcohol and cocaine which he had ingested the morning of the flight.  Now we all know what he did was downright courageous but the families of the dead, the airline, and the big wigs who run the flight union think otherwise.  The fact of the matter is Whip is an alcoholic and he needs to get help before he drinks himself to death.  Does he have the strength and courage to admit that he needs help or is his alcoholism going to be merely swept under the rug?

Flight marks Zemeckis's glorious return to live action filmmaking.  This is the type of film that plays to all of his strengths as a director.  The performances he gets from all his actors are strong particularly from Washington and Kelly Reilly.  Reilly plays Nicole, a young woman who is a drug addict, but wants to get her life back on track.  The relationship that Whip and Nicole have interesting in that she knows she has a problem and wants to get help.  The way her life intersects with Whip's make her a fine contrast to Captain Whittaker.  Whip is in denial that he is an alcoholic and refuses to seek treatment for his addiction.  The scenes between the two actors are good because both of them have an understanding of how to push and pull at each other.  I haven't seen much of Reilly in other films but she holds her own quite well against Washington.  

The sequence leading up the plane crash is spectacular.  I can't think of any other director better suited to bring such a terrifying and harrowing experience to the big screen.  I was rather impressed with the plane sequence in Cast Away and I think in a lot of ways Zemeckis tops that sequence.  I was on the edge of my seat the whole time.  The sheer intensity of Washington's performance, camera movement, sound design, and editing all come together to create dynamic filmmaking.  Everything on the plane showcases why Zemeckis so good at his job.

The situation that our main character deals with is a very problem that millions of people face every day.  Flight deals with alcohol addiction in a realistic manner without being overly cliché in its presentation.  Characters come and go throughout the course of the two and half hour film, but each of them serve a purpose.  There's plenty of time for the characters to live and breathe giving the audience a clear portrait of who Whip was, is now, and what he has to become.  Even though a lot of ground is covered, nothing feels hurried or rushed.

Flight is an excellent character piece that marks a long overdue return by a director that cinema has been missing for over ten years.  Zemeckis puts aside the technology for a change to get back to what he does best, being a storyteller.  Visual effects should only aide but never completely tell a story to us and I think he lost sight of that for a period of time there.  A solid performance from Washington is accompanied by a fantastic character motif and mood setting soundtrack.  The film flies high and allows its director to spread his wings.  No need to reach for your barf bag because you won't find any turbulence here knowing that Flight is in good hands.