50/50

Summary:  Adam is a 27 year old guy working for an NPR-like organization when he finds out that his back pain is a result of a tumor on his spine.  It's a large tumor, growing around many of his vertebrae.  He undergoes chemotherapy, meeting some great characters in treatment.  His best friend, Kyle, is also a big presence, trying to be supportive in a roundabout way.  Adam's girlfriend is the classic passive-aggressive girlfriend who makes the situation all about herself.  And Adam's mother is the hovering, worrying mother who Adam hardly ever calls back.  He also starts seeing a therapist, Katherine, who is 24 years old and still working on her doctorate.  He is her third patient. 

OaTs:  Based on the life of screenwriter Will Reiser, I'd have to say that, not having ever had cancer myself, it was a very realistic portrayal of how a young man would cope with the diagnosis.  At first, he seems to be handling it well, but as a chemo friend dies, and he gets further information from the doctor about his condition, he breaks down a little at a time.  And Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who plays Adam, is absolute superb in this role.  I wish it was a more realistic expectation for him to be nominated for an Academy Award come next year.

I really think Seth Rogan was cast well as the best friend.  He had a great mix of humor and support going on.  Sometimes you can't tell if he really is trying to help or if he is trying to use this to get girls.  There's a great moment before Adam goes in for surgery that helps flush out Rogan's character and I really liked what I saw.  I think it's natural for a best friend to want to take your mind off of everything, and for that to both help and hurt the one diagnosed.  It was a really great dynamic.

I also really liked Angelica Huston as Adam's mother.  While taking care of Adam's father who has Alzheimer's, she doesn't have many people to talk to.  You can understand her need to talk to her son so often, but Adam is also completely justified in wanting to ignore her.  They come to an understanding and it's a great moment to see.

Anna Kendrick played Katherine, the therapist.  You can tell that she is trying really hard, but she's not all that great at her job yet.  She is still trying to find the best ways to relate and support her patients, but it doesn't come across as helpful in the beginning.  She would have made a great girlfriend of a cancer patient, which Adam also sees, but as a therapist, I don't think she was quite ready for what she got herself into.

Adam's girlfriend, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, was absolutely horrible.  Not in a villainous kind of way, but in a "let's make this all about me" kind of way.  She wouldn't even go into the hospital to wait for him, insisting on waiting in the car because she doesn't like hospitals.  Adam's chemo buddies get this, but don't push the issue with Adam.

His buddies, by the way, were one of my favorite parts of the film.  The ate pot-macaroons and shared frustrations.  When one passes away, it's a real eye opening moment for Adam, where I think he finally realized that there a chance he may not beat this.  There are a couple more moments in the film where you can really feel Adam's frustration and fear.  I don't want to spoil the moments for you, but up until that moment, I was questioning whether or not this movie would tug at my heartstrings.  And it did.  It really did.  No tears, but some serious choking up. 

Score:  8/10

Moneyball

Summary:  Billy Beane, the General Manager of the Oakland Athletics, tries to rebuild his team like no other GM has done before.  With a limited budget, he employs someone to help him look at stats and base players on their On Base Percentage (OBP) instead of all the intangibles scouts use.  Three of the A's biggest players leave during the off season, so Beane tries to replace them with lower-paid, less-flashy players.  The manager of the team, Art Howe, doesn't appreciate Beane's methods and resists.  After losing too many games, Beane moves some players around so Howe is forced to play the team the way Bean meant it to be played.  They start winning.

OaTs:  Directed by Bennett Miller, Moneyball based on a true story.  This is where I find most of my problems come in.  His theory of only looking at stats doesn't really work.  They have used it to some extent in the MLB since Beane brought it to everyone's attention, but those intangibles really are key to building a quality team.  And since it only made a slight difference in the A's status, it's hard for me to see how it was such an important story to tell.  This may be a little harsh, but I follow baseball too much in real life to let all of that go when I watch a movie.

But if I'm looking at it as just a movie, a fictional story with no attachments to real life, it wasn't half bad.  I will complain a little about the lack of time spent on the field.  There was really only one game they showed in any detail.  It was an important game, so I'm glad they did.  I just wish they'd have done it more.  I love baseball movies.  There aren't enough made anymore.  I'm glad for what I can get, but I was a little let down with the lack of pure baseball action going on.

Brad Pitt, as Billy Beane, was pretty good.  I loved him a couple of years ago in Babel, where we played an average husband and father.  I remember thinking that I'd like for him to play more roles like that - an average guy in different circumstances.  He found a role like that here and he did a really good job.  I bought into how much Beane cared about making the team successful.  I could tell he had a real appreciation for the game, which I love to see.  

I will say that my favorite scenes of his, though, were the ones with his on-screen daughter.  Billy is divorced from the mother and they share custody of their 12 year old girl.  He takes her shopping for a guitar, and when she finds one she likes, she sits down and play a few bars, humming along with the melody.  He asks her to sing and she does.  The look on his face when he's watching her is absolutely wonderful.  You can tell that he is completely in awe of her and her talent.  Loved that moment.  But it did hit me after seeing the movie that it was kind of a random scene.  I'm not sure what the point was of having it in there.  Maybe that storyline should have been its own separate story.

Jonah Hill played Pete Brand, the guy who comes up with the theory Beane puts into practice.  Brand becomes Beane's right hand man.  Their dynamic was really special.  There was a lot of sharp and witty dialogue that kept the movie from becoming boring and monotonous.  I could tell that some of the words came from none other than Aaron Sorkin, a favorite writer of mine.  No one can write dialogue like him.

So that's about it.  It's not going to be a favorite movie of mine, but I did enjoy it.  Partially because I was at the Alamo Drafthouse in Winchester, VA.  It's a theater where you can order a meal while you watch a movie.  I met family there because it's almost halfway between us.  We had a great evening.  That's probably what I'll associate with this film the most, a great evening of family, food, and film.

Score:  7/10

The Ides of March

Summary:  A political thriller centered on the press secretary for the democratic presidential nominee.  Stephen Meyers, the secretary, starts sleeping with an intern on the campaign and finds out that the candidate, Mike Morris, had slept with her before.  She got pregnant by the candidate and needs to take care of it.  Meanwhile, the opposing campaign manager tries to recruit Stephen for their team.  Stephen is supposedly one of the greatest young political minds out there.  The whole situation implodes and Stephen has to decide what he's going to do:  continue working for a candidate you once believe to be different than the rest, or admit that he's just another corrupt politician and work against him?

OaTs:  The press secretary is played by Ryan Gosling and the candidate is played by George Clooney, who also directed.  Philip Seymour Hoffman was the campaign manager and Marissa Tomei was his wife, a reporter for a big newspaper, reporting on the presidential race.  Evan Rachel Wood played the intern on the campaign.  Paul Giamatti was the campaign manager for the opposition.  Given this cast, I figured I was in for a great ensemble piece that I'd be rooting for come Oscar Night.  I was wrong.

The story was much more focused on one person than I thought it would be, which is quite a shame given the ensemble.  There was hardly a scene Gosling wasn't in.  He's played to be an upright and genuine guy at first, and then you start to wonder about him.  The constant reminders of how good of a guy he's supposed to be started to ring false after a while.  I found him to be rather annoying and cocky after I got to know him.  

I was much more interested in Philip Seymour Hoffman's character, Paul, who is Stephen's boss and Morris' right-hand man.  I adore Hoffman and every word he utters sounds like music to my ears.  I love his voice, but that’s not nearly as important as the fact that the audience can totally understand his conviction.  He seemed to be a decent guy, but didn't profess to be.  And actions speak louder than words, especially in film.  I could have watched a film about his character all day.

There's really not much to say without giving away the ending of the movie, but I feel justified in my belief that the movie could have been more engaging and much less predictable. But the biggest reason for my disappointment is that I absolutely loved Good Night, and Good Luck, Clooney's Oscar nominated directorial effort from 2005.  It's one of my favorites of the past decade.  I had high hopes, and they were quite dashed by the end of the film.

I found myself predicting the very last shot.  When the last scene began, it all started to seem very familiar.  The way the camera moved.  The character's actions.  The noise and dialogue in the background.  I could feel what was coming next.  Then it happened.  Exactly what I saw in my mind a minute or two earlier.  And I was disappointed.  I wanted something new.  Something that I hadn't seen before.

The thing is, I actually don't like it when I figure things out.  In that brief moment, after I predict the ending and before it's revealed that I'm right, I think to myself, "Prove me wrong. Surprise me."  And I wish that with all my heart.  When I walk into the theater, I ache to see something different.  I sit down in my seat, preferably in the middle of the row, directly in front of the screen, and beg the screen, "Wow me."  It doesn't happen as often anymore.  I was hoping this film would, but it didn’t.

Maybe The West Wing set the bar a little high for political shows and films.  Maybe I shouldn't have listened to the hype and reviews coming out of Toronto.  I don't know.  I can't call it a bad film, it was just a predictable one.  And those are my least favorite.  I can like a bad film.  I've liked many in the past.  But it's hard for me to like a predictable one.

Score:  6/10

Warrior

My first entry about just one film.  And I couldn't have picked a better film to start off this new form of blog entries than this one:  Warrior, directed by Gavin O'Connor.

[Side note:  I plan on giving a lot more information about films in these entries.  I was so concerned about the length of the other articles that I omitted things I would normally include.  Facts, like who the director was, are very important and I hate that I had to leave it out of other films.]

Summary:  This film follows two estranged brothers and their alcoholic father in the world of Mixed Martial Arts (MMA).  Tommy, played by Tom Hardy, is the younger brother.  Recently home from serving in the Marines overseas.  He shows up on his father Paddy's doorstep one night, after not seeing him for years. Paddy, played by Nick Nolte, used to be an alcoholic and is almost 1000 days sober.  His drinking lead Tommy and his mother to leave when Tommy was a teenager.  Tommy used to be a fighter, and decides to start up again with Paddy's help.

Brendan, the older brother, is played beautifully by Joel Edgarton.  He is married with two young daughters.  Because of the youngest daughter's medical bills, his house is nearing foreclosure.  He is a former MMA fighter, now a high school physics teacher who fights at night to pay the bills.  After being suspended for coming to school with bruises on his face, he decides to fight full time in order to make ends meet.  He hasn't seen Paddy in years and doesn't allow him to visit.  The only contact he allows is via mail or phone.

I don't want to ruin the rest of the film, so I'll keep it simple.  Both Tommy and Brendan enter the same MMA tournament, which is the equivalent of the Super Bowl for that sport.  The family struggles, between brothers and between the father and his sons, are much more important to the film than the MMA fights.  This story could have been told using most any sport, though I don't know how someone would get suspended from teaching for playing basketball at night.

OaTs:  I can honestly say, that as of today, this is my favorite film of 2011 thus far, though I will admit that one film I saw at Sundance back in January comes pretty close.  When I saw the trailer for the film, I knew immediately that I wanted to see it.  Not because of the subject matter, but because of the cast.  I was introduced to Joel Edgerton when I saw the Australian film Animal Kingdom at the 2010 Sundance Film Festival.  It was one of my favorites from the festival and I've kept up with the Aussie actors ever since.  Edgerton was a standout and I believe, based on reports of upcoming films, that he just may have what it takes to make it in Hollywood.

I also liked Tom Hardy once I saw him in Inception last summer.  Now, I don't want to get into a debate about that film, but I will say that Hardy was one of the few things I liked about Inception.  So I kept up with him too.  I didn't know that much about Nick Nolte's work, but I did know that he has had some personal problems.  I hate that the way I knew him was through the media and not through film.  So I was really excited to see him in something as well.

Boy was I in for a bigger treat than I ever could have thought.  All three men really brought it.  Nolte was truly heartbreaking as the alcoholic father.  Through conversations, we come to find out that he was also abusive.  The only thing he was good at was training Tommy as a fighter.  Also an ex-marine, he understood - to an extent - what Tommy was going through after returning home.  There are two quite memorable scenes of Nolte's that I can't quite shake.  One with each son.  I'd love if his work was recognized come Oscar time.  And he just might stand a chance, depending on how the rest of the year goes.

Hardy and Edgerton were equally as great but I'd say that Edgerton is the more subtle of the two and the one I was partial to.  Hardy played Tommy to be almost frightening.  His intensity was incredible.  Brendan was more sympathetic.  More of a "good guy" while Tommy would be the "bad boy."  It's not often that you have a story with two protagonists that antagonize each other.  Sure, you can have multiple protagonist on the same team, but this film was not set up this way.  I found it be quite unique in story structure.

But I have to say that one of the biggest reasons I liked it was that I had no idea how it was going to end.  None.  Which one would win?  Would either of them win?  Other sports movies are rather obvious.  They follow one team or athlete and you get a feel about if they will succeed or not.  But with two men to root for, how would the storyteller decide who should win?  No matter what, people will be disappointed.  I really admired the guts it took to tell a story like this.  It seems that movies are playing it more safe.  This can actually make them more dull.  But the entire time, I kept thinking, "Who's going to win?  Brendan or Tommy?"

The story and the acting were superb, and that, my friends, is why this is my favorite film of 2011.

Score:  10/10

Red Box Trip - Weekend of September 23rd

Jane Eyre:  I love Michael Fassbender, and he was fantastic as Mr. Rochester.  He brought such deep emotion to his face, you understood exactly what the character was feeling.  I find him to be absolutely breathtaking.  Perfectly cast for such a loaded role.  I just wish his leading lady held her own.  I don't think there was anything wrong with Mia Wasikowska, but she wasn't really Jane for me.  In previous versions of this story, Jane has been strong willed and determined.  And she was in this one as well, because of the script, but I didn't feel the power and strength coming from Wasikowska that I wanted to feel.  She was too soft spoken.  And I didn't see much life in her face.  She was delightful in a previous film of hers that I saw, so I had high hopes.  I guess that's what happens when I have expectations.  (7/10)

Prom: I blame my desire to see this on Aimee Teegarden, Julie Taylor from Friday Night Lights.  She plays the main character in this teen ensemble piece about, yes - you guessed it, PROM.  It wasn't horrible.  One storyline I actually liked because I actually thought it sent a good message to teen and preteen girls.  The girl who was expected to be Prom Queen found out that her boyfriend, also expected to be Prom King, was cheating on her.  She broke up with him a couple of days before but when to Prom by herself anyway.  I thought that was fantastic.  They both won and she left him on stage and refused to dance with him.  She was great.  But anyway, Aimee Teegarden's character was the main Prom planner.  A motorcycle driving, leather jacket wearing, slacker is punished for missing class and forced to help her out.  And I'm sure you can guess where this is going.  They fall in love.  Some cliche moments, but the Prom Queen moment really made it worth seeing.  Hopefully young girls saw that and thought to themselves, "I don't need a guy to be validated.  I'm fabulous on my own."  (6/10)

The Conspirator:  A film based on an true, untold story in American History and directed by Robert Redford.  Of course I saw it.  It told the story of Mary Surrat, the mother of a co-conspirator of John Wilkes Booth, the man who shot Abe Lincoln.  She was the only woman on trial for the assassination.  She was stunningly played by Robin Wright.  Her lawyer was played by James McAvoy, who is quickly becoming more and more a favorite of mine.  He's really something else.  And I like it when there is a truly good person in a story to really root for.  Some people may disagree and find the "anti-hero" character more interesting.  Not me.  I mean, I love a good "anti-hero" every now and then, but I'd much rather find someone with truly good intentions.  And that was McAvoy's character.  Determined to defend his client even though his friends told him to give up on it.  I don't want to share the outcome, but since it's part of history, the truth is out there.  But whether or not she was found guilty or not isn't the point.  It's whether or not you think she is guilty.  I have my thoughts.  Come find me after you watch it and I'll share my point of view.  A great movie to spark debate, but also entertaining.  (8/10)