The End of the Page

2012 Oscar Race is On!

It’s that time of year again where everyone develops sore hands and sore wrists from typing all these categories and names we’ve never heard of, but to be a true movie junkie, you must follow protocol and deliver to the masses your thoughts on the annual nominations for our golden friend, Oscar.

[The movies marked with a "*" means I have actually seen it. Do not expect to see that much in the Doc Short Subject area, those are usually a crapshoot]

Best Picture:

The Artist

The Descendants (*)

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (*)

The Help (*)

Hugo (*)

Midnight in Paris

Moneyball (*)

The Tree of Life (*)

War Horse

Still no real clue on how the Academy makes its Best Picture nominations and why there is a fluctuating number, but I have some strong feelings about this years list. First off, Drive should absolutely be there and Tree of Life should absolutely not. Drive was a mastery of silence and tension, while Tree of Life caused groups of movie-goers to walk out wondering if what they saw could even be classified as a film. Sure enough, these are polar opposites in terms of filmmaking and should normally not be compared to each other at all, but in terms of being on this list, that’s where my main beef is. Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close also really shouldn’t rank here with the superb fare of Moneyball, The Descendants and Hugo (which personally I think also just scrapes itself onto the list). The big money is on The Artist to win, but without seeing it, I can’t really agree or disagree on that yet.

Actor in a Leading Role

Demian Bichir – A Better Life

George Clooney – The Descendants (*)

Jean Dujardin – The Artist

Gary Oldman – Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (*)

Brad Pitt – Moneyball (*)

I think this is Clooney’s year. He gave an incredibly subtle performance, showing incredible control over internal struggle and pain versus his usual playful charm. Pitt was great in Moneyball, but his best bud will likely edge him out. Oldman definitely deserves the nomination, but the movie isn’t really great enough to support him taking the win, especially over Clooney. Dujardin took the SAG award and the Globe, but the The Artist was in another category at the Globes and he might get edged out here.

Actor in a Supporting Role

Kenneth Branagh – My Week With Marilyn

Jonah Hill – Moneyball (*)

Nick Nolte – Warrior

Christopher Plummer – Beginners

Max Von Sydow – Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (*)

The word on the street says this is Plummer’s to lose. Between the two performances I have seen, Sydow would get my vote over Hill. I am proud of Hill for moving his comedy career into the dramatic circle and give him amazing credit for wanting to prove himself. It can be an arduous transition and you end up doing double the work just to gain people’s acceptance. Yet, Sydow was the best part of Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (all without actually saying one word), making the film just above bearable.

Actress in a Leading Role

Glenn Close – Albert Nobbs

Viola Davis – The Help (*)

Rooney Mara – The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Meryl Streep – The Iron Lady

Michelle Williams – My Week With Marilyn

Viola Davis has been cleaning up the awards for her turn in The Help, but Streep and Close have also received tons of acclaim. I still put my money on Davis to close out the season, but either of her legendary competitors could pull the upset.

Actress in a Supporting Role

Berenice Bejo – The Artist

Jessica Chastain – The Help (*)

Melissa McCarthy – Bridesmaids (*)

Janet McTeer – Albert Nobbs

Octavia Spencer – The Help (*)

McCarthy did get a Golden Globe for her hilarious role in the raunchy girl comedy, but The Help is dominating across the acting landscape and this could fall that way as well. Look for Spencer over Chastain.

Animated Feature Film

A Cat in Paris

Chico & Rita

Kung Fu Panda 2

Puss in Boots (*)

Rango (*)

Don’t really know too much about the first two in the category, but I think the real fight is between the two I actually got to see. Rango is a step forward in animated filmmaking because it was actually shot and treated as if it was a live-action drama that just happened to star a talking lizard. Puss in Boots on the other hand, proved it was more than just a spin-off from the Shrek franchise and provided a heartwarming and quite funny experience that could just slip into the winner’s circle on the big night.

Art Direction

The Artist

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (*)

Hugo (*)

Midnight in Paris

War Horse

While Hugo got nominated for the most awards this year, this is where I think it will actually begin to take some of them home. The train station set was incredible down to the last detail and look to Hugo to bring home a handful of statues due to the beautiful visuals. As a possible other option, The Artist (the next highest nominated) could also begin to flex its voting muscle here.

Cinematography

The Artist

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo (*)

The Tree of Life (*)

War Horse

Here is the only place The Tree of Life should be mentioned. As a film, I really didn’t find it effective in the least, but in terms of pure visuals and expertise in cinematography, it was impressive. I’m not sure it will be enough to win, especially with Hugo and The Artist taking the spotlight, but here and only here could the tree bloom.

Costume Design

Anonymous

The Artist

Hugo (*)

Jane Eyre

W.E.

People love to lean towards the Shakespearean and Victorian flicks in this category, but it actually could go pretty much anywhere. I would give Hugo and The Artist a nudge based on pure momentum, but this will be one of those categories that determines who really wins your Oscar pool this year.

Directing

Michael Hazanavicius – The Artist

Alexander Payne – The Descendants (*)

Martin Scorsese – Hugo (*)

Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris

Terrence Malick – The Tree of Life (*)

Anyone but Malick! Seriously though, he has no shot in this year with Payne doing quite well with The Descendants and Scorsese already taking home the Golden Globe for Hugo. This also could be the place where we see how The Artist actually matches up when not split off into the Musical/Comedy category. It’s nice to see Allen still creating acclaim for himself, but we will have to wait until another time to hear what would likely be an amazingly odd acceptance speech.

Documentary Feature

Hell and Back Again

If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front

Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory

Pina

Undefeated

I’ve heard a lot of buzz around Pina for some amazing visuals, but no real clue here if it enough to overpower the entire category.

Documentary Short Subject

The Barber of Birmingham: Foot Soldier of the Civil Rights Movement

God is the Bigger Elvis

Incident in New Baghdad

Saving Face

The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom

I want to give it to God is the Bigger Elvis just because it is a great title, but a doc about the tsunami could garner a lot of votes from the heart.

Film Editing

The Artist

The Descendants (*)

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo (*)

Moneyball (*)

I really need to see Tattoo because something in my gut tells me the editing was amazing here, but in terms of the three I have seen, Moneyball gets my support for being able to pace and balance a fairly dull topic and sculpt it into a tension-laced experience.

Foreign Language Film

Bullhead

Footnote

In Darkness

Monsieur Lazhar

A Separation

Lots of good buzz around A Separation, especially after its Golden Globe win for Best Foreign Film. Strong likelihood it will continue along the golden path to Oscar.

Makeup

Albert Nobbs

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (*)

The Iron Lady

What’s more impressive, turning Streep into Margaret Thatcher, removing Ralph Fiennes nose or convincing at least half the public that Glenn Close actually was a man? I’ll go for Albert Nobbs to take this home.

Music – Original Score

The Adventures of Tintin

The Artist

Hugo (*)

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (*)

War Horse

Since The Artist is basically all music, you might think this is a shoe-in, but never count out well-known industry names like John Williams (Tintin & War Horse) and Howard Shore (Hugo).

Music – Original Song

“Man or Muppet” – The Muppets (*)

“Real in Rio” – Rio

Not really sure how this category shrunk to only two songs this year, which in itself is a shame, but the highlight is the nomination of “Man or Muppet”, a pure genius chuckle-worthy song from Flight of the Conchords alum, Bret McKenzie.

Short Film – Animated

Dimanche/Sunday (*)

The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore (*)

La Luna

A Morning Stroll

Wild Life (*)

I have been able to find some of these online for viewing and out of those I would definitely cast my vote for The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore (awesome title, by the way). It’s an amazingly adorable tale of a man and his passion for books, something to which I am very much akin to. There is always stiff competition when Pixar is involved (they made La Luna), but I’m pulling for the flying books to swoop down and take the gold here.

Short Film – Live Action

Pentecost

Raju

The Shore

Time Freak

Tuba Atlantic

Not a clue here. Time Freak sounds neat. That’s all I got.

Sound Editing

Drive (*)

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo (*)

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (*)

War Horse

I actually think this might lean towards Tattoo, but the sound was such a beautiful part of the mix in what made Drive so memorable. I also hold a small candle for the hope someone from that movie will accept the award wearing that amazing dragon jacket.

Sound Mixing

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Hugo (*)

Moneyball (*)

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (*)

War Horse

Again, Tattoo, maybe because even the trailer had intense sound elements. Transformers could also pull this out, but then we have to walk award saying, “the Academy Award winning film, Transformers: Dark of the Moon” which just plain hurts my ears.

Visual Effects

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (*)

Hugo (*)

Real Steel (*)

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (*)

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (*)

This is the first category where I have actually seen everything listed, so yay for me! Glad to see Real Steel got in here, because that was an incredibly under-appreciated film. Yet, while that was a fun ride, I would have to say this is a battle between Apes and Potter. Transformers was visually impressive, as always for that franchise, but Potter could win based on the franchise vote here, while Apes might get votes from all those people who feel Andy Serkis should’ve gotten an acting nod. Either way, I’ll likely be happy with the winner.

Writing – Adapted Screenplay

Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon & Jim Rash – The Descendants (*)

John Logan – Hugo (*)

George Clooney, Grant Heslov & Beau Willimon – The Ides of March (*)

Steven Zallian & Aaron Sorkin – Moneyball (*)

Bridget O’ Connor & Peter Straughan – Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (*)

Another fully filled out category! Here I have much more of an opinion on the outcome. I’m a Sorkin acolyte, so I would love to see him win. Moneyball was tight, crisp and paced perfectly for a story about something so dull, so huge props to that team. The Descendants is my next choice because it was penned with such incredble subtlety and given an amazing ability to breathe. Hugo was great, but really felt like two movies instead of one, so I’m inclined not to see it walk away with this one. The other two were enjoyable, but sadly petered out at the end of the story.

Writing – Original Screenplay

Michael Hazanavicius – The Artist

Annie Mumolo & Kristen Wiig – Bridesmaids (*)

J.C. Chandor – Margin Call

Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris

Asghar Farhadi – A Separation

Rounding out the list, sadly I have only seen one of these. There is a ton of buzz around The Artist and it could be the big winner overall tonight, but this could be where we get the amazingly awkward acceptance speech from Allen. For the comedy industry as a whole it would be amazing to see Bridesmaids pull it out, but I am not sure the Academy voters are ready for that yet. Maybe next time.

———————————————————————-

Like The End of the Page on Facebook, Follow The End of the Page on Twitter, Grab the RSS feed.

Operation Homecoming: Words From The Front Lines

by Luke Goldstein

“How can tomorrow ever come when today never ends.”

Rating: 8 out of 10

There are experiences that can never be truly traded away or passed along, no matter how hard we try. The amazement and beauty of childbirth, the crushing sorrow of losing a parent, or even the serenity of knowing a job is well done. Try as we might, these things exist inside us and everyone else will only feel a sliver of what it is like through how we describe it. One of the most profound and life altering experiences is war and no one is affected by it more than those on the front lines. There is always training, there is always a new method to try to prepare, but no one comes back from war the way they went in. Our country is now in the midst of welcoming home thousands upon thousands of soldiers from the fighting in Middle East and those brave warriors face not only the struggles of reintegrating into society (and finding a job), but figuring out rote answers to that all too common question, “What was it like?” Those can be extremely hard conversations to have, but this film documents a program trying to help those soldier find a path to communication.

Operation Homecoming: Writing the Wartime Experience is an essay/memoir writing program that teaches soldiers how to use creative and journal style writing to get their thoughts and experiences cohesively onto paper. These tales of horror, fright, bravery and solitude pull the curtains away from the glorified image of war and patriotism, humanizing the soldiers.

The film brings together not only some of the authors of the essays, but also fellow writers, professionals in telling stories, who happen to also have personal experiences with wartime and being soldiers themselves. Together they weave a painfully accurate and unflinching tapestry of what wartime is really like, not painted in the bright red, white and blue of the flag, but doused in the blackest of night and dripping with the deep red of dead enemies, comrades and innocents. Some of them show the confusion suffered at the other end of a motor attack, while others detail the adrenaline rush of being ambushed and making the split second decisions on whether the person your sights is a combatant or a bystander, and does it even matter.

One by one, you hear about the deconstruction of the basic human belief to protect life as it rages against the programmed need to defend your country, your fellow soldiers and yourself. The documentary does not play itself out as a case for pacifism by any means, but there lingers a certain belief when the screen finally goes black that philosophers have intoned for years: in war, there is no winner.

Politics and beliefs aside, the real effort and success of this is the program itself and how it helps those soldiers returning from a living hell on earth, find their way back into a society that will never be completely theirs. It allows them to find a method of communication, almost a new way of speaking to the uninitiated about the nightmares they have lived through and continue to struggle with. More and more soldiers are coming back with PTSD and a variety of psychological issues, leading to drinking, drugs and a silently suffering uptick in post-return suicides. This program is certainly not the only weapon needed in the fight for the mental health of our returning warriors, but every effort counts and they’re are worth it.

The End of the Page recommendation: Operation Homecoming is an incredibly clear picture of the true life and times of our soldiers, including the issues they face returning to civilian life.

You can also watch replays of this on the Documentary Channel on 2/25 (8pm & 11pm EST) or go ahead and stream it here.

———————————————————————-

Like The End of the Page on Facebook, Follow The End of the Page on Twitter, Grab the RSS feed.

Haywire: Bourne’s Big Sister Takes The Screen

by Luke Goldstein

The choice she is referring to in the poster is her hair accessories. She might have overreacted a little bit.

Rating: 7 out of 10

Once a mold is created for a certain genre of film, it can be hard to make anything to rattle the cages again. Anything stepping past that invisible line is referred to as “not really a horror movie” (even though it is), “not quite a sci-fi film” (except that it was), or “a film that defies genre” (which likely means it is just a good film firing on all cylinders). The challenge here is how we as an audience react to a film that dares to peek outside our tiny genre box; every so often we need to just stretch our fingers over the lip of the box to feel for something more. In Haywire, we get our newest example of stretching those boundaries to see what happens when you try to film something “more than just an action movie.”

Haywire is the tension-filled tale of Mallory, a soldier for hire under a private contractor. She is sent on an assignment that goes south fast. Dodging enemies and former colleagues from all sides, she has to find out who burned her and why.

The first thing pulling Haywire out of the box is its director, Steven Soderbergh. Well known for his award-winning films, Traffic and Erin Brokovich, he also found huge success with his rat pack team of A-list actors in the Oceans series. With the dollars he made in the big budget world, he also found time to keep his imagination on its toes with experimental films like Bubble and The Girlfriend Experience. In that last film, Soderbergh tried out a formula, which he continued in Haywire, filling your lead role with someone outside the acting world, someone who actually lives much closer to the part in real life. In Girlfriend, he hired porn star Sasha Grey as the emotionally complicated high-priced escort. In Haywire, he filled the role of ex-marine Mallory with MMA fighter Gina Carano. Obviously this tactic does not always work (just look at 99% of the movies WWE Studios puts out), but when you have an eye for quality and depth like Soderbergh’s, your rate of success is bound to be higher.

Carano is straight street toughness all the way from the first moment we see her on screen to the final intense stare in her eyes. Her real life fighting abilities helped Soderbergh craft a much deeper sense of realism in the action movie violence. No double twisting backflip kicks, no catching swinging sword blade between the palms of your hands, just straight up hand-to-hand, gun-toting reality. He even pulled down the sound effects that we are used to with muted gunshots and thick sounding punches. All of those choices brought together helped you look at the action on screen and say, “Yep, she could totally do that (and likely kick my ass to boot).” He also surrounded her with talented help, like Ewan McGregor, Michael Douglas, Antonio Banderas, Bill Paxton and the recently unstoppable Michael Fassbender (seriously, how many movies has this guy had waiting to come out at the same time?). Even Channing Tatum comes in to give her a reasonable love interest for a moment, a guy who might be able to go toe-to-toe with her in a fight.

While the movie succeeds in the action and tension department, it also falls a little flat in an area not uncommon to Soderbergh films: it just stops. The story plays nicely with the subtlety of the situation Carano finds herself in, but takes so much time showing all the intricacies that it fails to feel completely wrapped up when it goes to black. Making it even worse is the movie clocks in around ninety minutes, meaning there really was plenty of time to give this a more well-rounded ending.

The End of the Page recommendation: Haywire is a fun, smart action film starring a hero not for us to believe in, but to believe actually exists.

The Anatomy of Hate: Thoughtful, Painful and Balanced

by Luke Goldstein

Rating: 9 out of 10

Watching the daily news each day, you could easily believe we live in a time increasingly overwhelmed by fear and hatred. We could easily slip into depression over the current direction of our governments, our politics and our people and a downward spiral would only lead us into more fear and more hatred.

For as long as there has been good, there has been bad. One cannot exist without the other, but that doesn’t mean we cannot explore their definitions and what makes them tick. The more we understand about the two sides of the coin, the more we can help to influence which side is facing up when we look down upon our world.

The Anatomy of Hate: A Dialogue to Hope is an impressive and sometimes unforgiving documentary by Mike Ramsdell. He takes a balanced and unbiased look at where hate springs forth and what spurs it onward. Bravely walking into virtual lion’s nests of right-wing fanatics, religious zealots and culture warriors, Ramsdell allows the viewer into the living room of “the enemy” (who might only be labeled as such because they feel the same about everyone else).

What sets this film apart from the array of past hate group documentaries is it makes a gallant attempt to get underneath the heated rhetoric and display some of the reasoning behind it. In some cases, such as the white supremacy groups, the reasoning is as flawed as you might imagine, but The Anatomy of Hate gives us a glimpse on how those cycles of hatred spin out of control in the tightly knit echo chambers of small communities. In the section detailing the infamous Westboro Baptist Church, the same logic applies since the congregation mainly consists of one single family.

The movie truly finds it legs in the section regarding the Israel/Palestine conflict that has been raging for years. In interwoven interviews, Ramsdell talks to a woman who lost her son and husband to Palestinian attacks in a very short period and then to young boys on the other side of the wall who believe the Israelis only goal is to wipe them off the planet. It becomes an unending spiral of “who killed who first” with repetitive and deadly repercussions.

Ramsdell also grounds these stories with interviews with various sociology and psychology professionals, who try to unravel the underpinnings to why these rivalries began and what keeps them fueled. One of the more poignant theories is that each of these groups, and many others, share a common fear of the loss of culture. Once we doomed ourselves by understanding our own mortality, we quickly created social contracts to ensure what we created won’t disappear when we die. These groups live under a persistent panic that their culture will be wiped away into the annals of history if not immediately secured away from everyone else through secession or killing off those who challenge it.

This was a valid fear many years ago, but the world has moved on since then, yet these collected pockets hold themselves back like road bumps to evolution. They see the coming interconnected nature of the world population not as a bonus to understanding, but as a muddying of the waters from which they sprang.

The Anatomy of Hate ends on a positive note, focusing on stories of hope and change. Some of these include the very same culture warriors from earlier on, who once calmly spoke of destroying the enemy and the beauty of martyrdom, who now calmly preach dialogue as the true path forward to peace. These beautiful and necessary moments help end the film on a note of hope, a breath of clean air in polluted world of hate.

The End of the Page recommendation: The Anatomy of Hate – A Dialogue of Hope is a poignant and thoughtful portrait of what lies underneath the heated rhetoric of hate. Sad and painful to watch at moments, the last chapter brings it together and creates huge value from the whole.

This film recently played on the Documentary Channel. Check with your cable provider to see if you are a subscriber.

Here are scheduled future airdates (all times Eastern):

Sat, Jan 28, 2012 6:00 PM
Thu, Feb 16, 2012 4:00 AM
Thu, Mar 1, 2012 9:00 PM

Mission Impossible – Ghost Protocol: Cruise Is Back!

Seriously, how hard is to not make a Scientology joke here.

Rating: 9 out of 10

There are moments when a new franchise trailer premieres in the theater and you can feel the audience sink in their seats, silently ashamed they are even being exposed to it. That is when you know the franchise has pitched into a nosedive, frantically attempting to make major and mostly useless changes to the equation in hopes of restarting it (and its profits). I remember feeling that way when Mission Impossible III rolled out. I went in predicting it would be bad, hoping only for some popcorn entertainment, but was denied even that small request. When Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol peeked around the bend,I had my doubts, but (as always) I gave it a shot. Dear readers, this is why I always take the chance, because it just might be everything it is cracked up to be.

I took a deep breath when I sat down for this one and rechristened my hope for some mindless action and big explosions. What I got was even better.

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol picks up our master spy leader, Ethan Hunt, in a Russian prison for an unknown crime. He is extracted by the IMF to once again lead a team of agents into near certain doom as a crazed Russian patriot is trying to get his hands on nuclear launch codes to bring about Armageddon and the next phase of evolution. The chase leads the team across the globe, from the desert paradise of Dubai to the colorful opulence of India. From one step to the next, the action never ceases as the seconds tick down on the fate of the world.

The top of the bill talent alone is a who’s who list of grand slam Hollywood talent. Directed by Brad Bird, this Pixar native is bringing nothing but gold with The Incredibles and Ratatouille already under his belt. Produced in partnership with J.J. Abrams, who actually directed the unfortunate third chapter of this franchise, has hit a major stride while directing Star Trek and Super 8 and acting as Executive Producer for a slew of hit TV shows dominating the airwaves right now (Fringe, Person of Interest, and the upcoming Alcatraz).

In front of the camera, we witness the resurgence of the living legend, Tom Cruise. After a score of years where his personal life completely overwhelmed his on-screen persona, Cruise erupts back on the screen with the fierce intensity the audience has missed for so long. Coming on the heels of some rather underwhelming performances (Knight and Day, Valkyrie), Cruise slides back into the comfortable spy shoes of Hunt like he had never left at all. From the high-kicking fight sequences to the awe-inspiring stunts, Cruise does it all with such enthusiasm you might come to believe the man is made out of pure adrenaline. For Ghost Protocol, Cruise’s intensity and commitment truly lead this cast in the direction of success.

Riding high on the wake Cruise leaves behind, the rest of the cast keeps the momentum going. Jeremy Renner, continuing a meteoric rise to fame after his Oscar nominated turn in The Hurt Locker, gives the crowd a little taste of what we will see in the new Bourne movie (which he took the reins over from Matt Damon). Renner holds onto a lot of that emotional depth we saw in Hurt Locker, but also kick ass in the fashion we have come to expect in the big budget blockbusters. Simon Pegg brings the hilarity, showing once again his subtle style and dry wit, perfectly fitting into the silent moments between explosions and catchphrases. Pegg also got a little extra training for this when he worked under the guidance of Abrams in the recent Star Trek reboot. Rounding out the super spy team is the one real newcomer, Paula Patton, who simmers in virtually every scene she inhabits. Her performance in incredibly layered, something we are not entirely used to in the normally flat eye-candy action roles for women.

From the opening moments to the final fade, Ghost Protocol brings back the action movie genre to what it once was and reinvigorates a sliding franchise. This chapter has the style and intelligence of the original Mission Impossible, while still giving us something bigger and more exciting. So a final kudos must be given to the writers, Josh Applebaum and Andre Nemec, who created a story that held together even under the pressure of stunt sequences which exceeded the ridiculous.

The End of the Page recommendation: Mission Impossible – Ghost Protocol brings the franchise back to its former glory. An action movie worth the ticket price.

Sherlock Holmes – Game of Shadows: Downey Charms Inside Surprisingly Simple Plot

See that guy behind me? I can get a shot through the hat and part his hair to the left, without looking.

Rating: 6 out of 10

I couldn’t wait for the weekend to begin because I knew I was going to hit up a popcorn, blockbuster double-header in the theater, Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows and Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, a back-to-back pairing almost unmatched this year. Two incredibly big budget franchises with two incredibly charismatic leading men. These are the box office battles I just live for. Since the weekend numbers have already come in, we’ve seen Sherlock Holmes dominate the weekend ($40 million vs. $13 million for Mission Impossible), so the honor of first review goes to them.

Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows picks up fairly close to where the last one left off. Watson is getting married and Holmes is closing in on his arch-enemy, Professor Moriarty. The two masterminds face off against each other in a deadly game of cat-and-mouse which threatens not only the life of our quixotic hero, but his best friend and possibly the entire world beyond.

It’s likely been said before, and as much as I hate repetition I’ll forego it this one time, Robert Downey Jr. was born for this role. Obviously the historical version of Holmes was tweaked and crafted around Downey’s skills and persona, but the magical merge between the real person and the literary classic created something perfect which will be cherished by viewers for generations to come. All future attempts at playing Holmes, which I am sure there will be someday, will be weighed against Downey, a bar now set incredibly high. His charm, wit and energy flow through the scenes effortlessly, keeping the audience in tow no matter what is going on. He also lets his co-stars, like Jude Law (as Dr. Watson) and Jared Harris (as Prof. Moriarty) own the moment equally, not overshadowing their own crisp deliveries and subtle mannerisms. From back-to-front, the performances throughout were playful, charming and more than enough to please any afternoon crowd.

So if everyone was so great in it, why is the rating so low? That is a fantastic question.

The downfall here is the script. If you are going to create a story for the world’s most renowned investigator, you need to plunge the imagination of the audience into a world of multiple storylines, interconnecting webs of deceit and subterfuge, something only Holmes could solve. The first film had this, but Game of Shadows rolls out a plot all too plain for such a complicated enemy like Moriarty. There seemed to be an effort to cover that up by actually showing a room full of interconnecting threads built by Holmes, to demonstrate how complicated this all really was, but that felt a cheap way out for writing a more complex story. Moriarty is the epitome of villains, the mental match for Sherlock Holmes, and in the end he just turns out to be greedy, a motive far below the weight of his character.

Guy Ritchie, the returning director, held up his side of the bargain, but didn’t push anything forward in terms of the style and execution. We got more slam-to-slow-motion shots and a couple good moments of Holmes playing out the oncoming violence in his head in order to predict the exact counter maneuvers. I will give both Ritchie and the screenwriters credit through for the final scene between Holmes and Moriarty, which I won’t go into detail about, but it was a nice twist on a familiar theme in this franchise.

The End of the Page Recommendation: Sherlock Holmes – Game of Shadows brings the familiar fun of the first film, but fails to bring the complexity due such highly intelligent characters.

Hugo: Finding the Magic in Dreams

The key chain holding this thing must be massive.

Rating: 7.5 out of 10

Yes, this 3D trend has gotten a little more than annoying recently, but mainly my rage about it is focused at studios that purposefully add this gimmick only to jack up the ticket price and bring nothing additional to the movie experience when the film wasn’t shot in 3D. I avoid tempting my anger over this issue by mostly seeing everything in 2D when offered (unless I know for a fact it was shot in 3D) and this tip keeps me calm and content during my numerous cinema trips. Yet, when a legend in the industry, like Martin Scorsese, decides to shoot his new film in 3D, that can be enough to tempt me into dropping the few extra dollars. So I went, I watched, and I fell into his fantastical world.

Hugo is the story of a small orphan boy who lives in the train station. His sole obsession is to finish fixing a small robotic person that his father found. Hoping to build himself a new friend, Hugo slowly gains the support of a young girl and together they chase after the breadcrumbs of a mystery that very well may link them together in ways they never dreamed of.

Since I led this review with my feelings on 3D, let me first congratulate Scorcese on achieving a beauty and simplicity for this technology seemingly avoided by most other directors (James Cameron gets a pass on this too, since the 3D in Avatar was insanely well done). Right off the bat, the snow falling in the foreground was amazing and added a rich texture to the scene. That straightforward approach to the use of 3D held on through the rest of the film, not overdoing it with overtly sensationalized moments, but using the technology to enhance the depth and reality of the story on screen. Chalk this up as another point for those directors and studios who choose to use 3D from the outset to enrich the experience instead of after the fact in order to enrich their pockets.

** Spoilers ahead – Hard to avoid when talking about the story on this one. **

Now comes the story, or I should correctly say “stories”, both rich enough to be their own movie. You have the original story of Hugo and his mysterious machine boy, then later comes another adventure about legendary film auteur, George Melies, who was believed to have died in the war, but turns out to be living in an apartment in Paris trying to forget everything about those magical movie-making times. Screenwriter John Logan captured exactly the magic I feel when I sit in that darkened room and am transported away to an unlimited number of worlds. I relished those touching moments where Melies waxed poetically about where dreams came from and how we could all live better lives by helping bring those into reality. I loved both story lines, but found the connection between them a little forced and unfinished.

Another portion of Hugo’s personal story, the one about the machine, which strongly resonated with me was his desire to always fix things. There are few things in this world more pure than a desire just to see everyone and everything working at their utmost intended perfection. We all want to be the best versions of ourselves and most of us would also lend a hand if it meant bringing someone else to their pinnacle as well. It rang a touch similar to Pay It Forward, but not nearly as heavy-handed.

Scorcese and Logan did an amazing job in creating a rich and lavish landscape of characters inside the train station, but I ended up wanting Hugo to interact with them much more. Since he really doesn’t, it makes all those layers feel superfluous and unnecessary.

The End of the Page recommendation: Hugo is a 3D triumph visually and makes up for some less-than-stellar threads of the story.

J. Edgar: The Crown Weighs Heavy On This One

I have to see myself on that boat AGAIN! In 3D this time?!

Rating: 6 out of 10

Every director certainly has a style and while some may try to shake things up every now and again, keep people on their toes, others stay the course and deliver time and time again what you have come to expect from them. That’s not always a bad thing, especially when you have serious accolades and awards already under your belt, but it can also set up a certain type of expectation about the quality and depth of each story you bring to the screen, which sometimes can be a lot to overcome. The truth is there is no end to the sophomore curse. Your last fantastic picture is always quickly overshadowed by your current less than stellar outing. Clint Eastwood is the man under the spotlight right now and what he brings to the table is another tale of power, passion and persecution, all inside one continuously conflicted person.

J. Edgar is one theory of the story behind the story, the man behind the machine that created the F.B.I. and reportedly had the skeletons of scores of American citizens, including the presidents he served under. The film follows his rise to power, his curious relationship with his number two man, and his own seemingly unquenchable need to be feared and revered, leaving a legacy that could never be tarnished.

J. Edgar offers a scenario of what might have went on behind closed doors between Hoover and Tolsen, his number two man, and what motivated Hoover to push himself as hard as he did. Much of it is based on circumstance and conjecture though, so it’d be best to view this film as an imaginative or (at best) a mildly educated guess about the truth behind the most feared man in decades.

Eastwood delivers yet again another deep, layered and complex narrative about a troubled protagonist, someone who you are never really sure whether you want to root for. The film is extremely slow paced and at times drags in its repetition, showing Hoover in one situation after another where his power is called into question. Jumping back and forth between his later life and his early years was a nice touch in the beginning, but by the end, it felt disjointed, like you were being dragged back into the past or thrust into the future just at the moment when things were getting good right where you were. I might have thought about just using the older version of Hoover as bookends to the story and play it out more along a traditional timeline, but who knows, that very well could have dragged as well.

The performances are always the most important part of these types of biopics. You need to be able to lose sight of the actor, usually someone incredibly well known, and truly see the person he is trying to represent. Look at Frank Langella as Nixon in Frost/Nixon, Will Smith as Muhammad Ali in Ali, even our man here, Leonardo DiCaprio as Howard Hughes in The Aviator, these are invested performances that elevate the movie beyond just a mere educational stroll in the cinematic park. Yet, DiCaprio falters this time in capturing his past fervor, not for lack of trying, just due to a lack of foundation underneath the moments. Naomi Watts also struggles to really find footing as the dutiful secretary, Helen Gandy. The true breakout here is Armie Hammer as Tolson, who brings a magical assured quality to his early life and a beautiful gentleness in his senior years. Hammer truly burst onto the scene last year in his dual performance as the Winklevoss twins in The Social Network, but in J. Edgar he shows he can handle much more than just overconfidence. Tolson is really the moral compass of the film and the only avenue for the audience to navigate their way in, but even with such a virtuoso performance from Hammer, it wasn’t enough to pull the whole film together in the end.

Eastwood’s decision to use younger actors in dramatically older roles also may not have worked to the film’s advantage. I understand it allows a connection, both physical and emotional, between the two versions of the character on screen, but sometimes it can also feel jarring. While we have come light years ahead in the technology of makeup, truly transforming these early birds into aged senior citizens, the one thing that remains is the sound and tenor of their voice. There is something so unique and distinct about a voice that has been speaking for seventy or eighty years, something that is nearly impossible for these youthful actors to capture. Once again, Hammer seemed to outshine DiCaprio in this arena as well, but I still feel it might have been more powerful to have actual older actors in those roles.

The End of the Page recommendation: J. Edgar has some punch to it, but fails to reach the heights of Eastwood’s past or the power of Hoover’s legacy.

The Rum Diary: Love Letter From One Icon to Another

Somebody outside this window has an idea what happened last night. Likely, they have my clothes as well.

Rating: 6 out of 10

When you come across someone like Hunter S. Thompson you do either one of two things: allow yourself to be drawn into his hyper-vivid world of words and violent expression or you can run screaming. When Johnny Depp took on the role of Thompson for the epic drug trip Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Depp not only went willingly inside that world, he became its new champion, vowing to carry on the legend after what everyone knew would be the inevitable death of its creator. While Depp hasn’t tried to transform himself into Thompson outside the silver screen (thank god, I don’t think another human being could ever contain that level of energy) he has attempted at length to let people know who the real man was, the forever beating heart behind the literary lion.

The Rum Diary reports the semi-true story of Paul Kemp (Thompson’s pseudonym for this tale), a struggling novelist looking for his true voice, mostly in the bottom of various bottles of alcohol. He finds himself in Puerto Rico working for the local paper, The San Juan Star, where the publication was already sounding the death knells, but he tries to make the best of it by making friends with locals and criminals alike. Finding himself embroiled in a land grab scheme and madly in love with another man’s fiancee, Kemp fights to keep himself on the right side of his own ethical boundaries. The pressure may have crushed some men, but instead it only crystallizes his purpose in life.

There is a message in the film, but before we get to that, let’s take a look at the package the message is wrapped in. Most people will remember Depp from his first foray into the mind of Thompson and likely come to the theater expecting more of the same drug-fueled insanity. That would be a dreadful mistake. With only one mildly hallucinogenic scene in the entire film, this is largely a straight forward story, with only a mild level of drunkenness in comparison to Fear and Loathing. While there is an inordinate amount of rum imbibed by nearly every person on screen, the core is really two love stories, one between Thompson and his femme fatale, the other between Thompson and his writing. Depp smoothly portrays the deeper and more thought-provoking side of Thompson, but I imagine many audience members left feeling disappointed by the absence of sheer lunacy which they have come to recognize as Thompson’s foremost personality trait. Aaron Eckhart is seamless in his white collar criminal role, pillaging the pristine land of South America for the richest of the rich businessmen, but what is missing is a catharsis or closure to his storyline. By the time he turns, back to the camera and walks away, it lacks any real sense of importance. The other main role goes to Amber Heard (recently seen heading the now defunct TV show, The Playboy Club). She steals Thompson’s heart (both on screen and in real life, she went on to become his wife, one of them) but her on-screen counterpart fails to really bring anything to the table except her looks. There was a wild impetuousness which helped frame the character, but it got old as the film ran on.

Now that we have firmly stomped some some of the reasons for this not being a wild success, let’s look into what is really done well here and where the true heart lies. This is less of a traditional story and more about the formation of a moment in time, the moment where Hunter S. Thompson became the raging, unafraid, unabashed lunatic of the literary world. What you witness on screen is a depiction of the moment when he finds his real purpose, his true voice, and for a fellow writer like myself, this is a awe-inspiring and beautiful thing to see. The character ponders halfway through the film about where he is in his life as a writer, lamenting that he has not learned to write like himself yet. For aspiring writers there are few things more painful and frustrating than that. It is the key to our literary lives and once Thompson found his, he didn’t just walk through the door, proud of his accomplishment, nay, he kicked the door off the hinges with a size thirteen and told everyone else in the room (past, present and future) to get the hell out of his way. There were few like him before and I imagine there will be even fewer after.

The End of the Page recommendation: The Rum Diaries is really there for the true fans of Thompson. Those unaffiliated with the ranks of the Gonzo overlord, please feel free to step out of the way.

Moneyball: Pitt Swings for the Fences

by Luke Goldstein

Yeah, I came five days early to the game. So what? I like front row seats. 

Rating: 9 out of 10

As we start heading into the commonly known “Oscar season”, I just get more and more excited each weekend. There is always some movie sparking my interest just around the corner, a new film I’ve been reading about for months and trying with all my powers to not let the bar of hope get raised too high. There are always going to be disappointments, even when they are good films, because I was waiting for great, but what keeps me going are those films who look up at the bar and say, “Oh yeah, not a problem.”  Welcome to one of those films…

Moneyball is based on the true story of Billy Beane, a one-time possible superstar in the MLB who turned general manager of the Oakland A’s. After missing once again on his chance for the World Series crown, Beane went rogue, adopted a new system and went after players using a statistical model instead of banking on superstars. It threatened everything the game was built on, it threatened the way things were done in sports, and worst of all…it worked.

Aaron Sorkin‘s name on the poster was the first thing to catch my eye. I sat there as the lights went down and wondered if he could keep his winning streak going (his last two, Charlie Wilson’s War and The Social Network being two of my favorite all time movies). So without wanting to, my bar was already set high into the stratosphere, but as the credits rolled, I felt the film had touched the clouds. Maybe it didn’t hit open space, but still miles above most of what we see on a week-to-week basis. You could feel his power in the dialogue; some classic Sorkin work. I could almost feel particular scenes the way they would have been played on stage. The film wasn’t loaded up with as many quick witted tit-for-tat moments as his last two films, instead it flowed with much more subtlety, using a more even keel in order to lead the audience through an entire season of baseball. I don’t want to give all the credit to Sorkin, since the writing credit is split between himself and Steven Zallian (an Oscar winner himself), but I really don’t know how the work balanced out between them. That split might also be some of the reason why Moneyball doesn’t have that normal Sorkin whip-crack pacing.

Yet, no matter how well the words are written, they still have to be delivered by someone with the skill and sincerity to make them land and Brad Pitt did not disappoint. Without knowing too much of the original story beforehand I was a little concerned with seeing Pitt in this role, which I previously only thought of as a general manager of a baseball team. What really saves him and grounds it in believability is the history of Billy Beane being a failed baseball superstar. Pitt brought the subtle sorrow, the underlying regret he always had nipping at his heels, which helps fuel his desire not only to win, but also to see the game fundamentally changed. What I found most impressive was somewhere along the way, I forgot I was watching Brad Pitt. He disappeared into a dip-spitting, hand-nosed gambler just trying his damnedest to pull off the greatest underdog victory in history. Those are rare performances and they should be recognized as such.

Jonah Hill came along for the ride, playing Peter Brand, the young economics genius who helped develop the formula Beane uses to build his new championship-hopeful team. It definitely is the most dramatic role Hill has tackled so far and put him toe-to-toe with a modern-day film legend in Pitt. Hill held his own and refused to settle for sitting in Pitt’s shadow. In terms of the performances, my only disappointment was with one of my favorite living actors, Philip Seymour Hoffman. It has nothing to do with his take on Art Howe, the coach of the team under Beane. It was more to do with him barely being a part of the story. He got a precious few scenes early on in the film and then disappeared completely almost halfway through the movie. I just wish we could have gotten more of him and Pitt dueling, as he did so brilliantly with Tom Hanks in Charlie Wilson’s War.

In the end, Moneyball did reach my bar of hope and expectation, but it didn’t blow if off the chart as his past two films have.

The End of the Page recommendation: Moneyball is a solid crack to right field. For some it will clear the back wall and make some fan in the bleachers very, very happy. For others, I think it will come in as a good film, but not quite the game winner they were hoping for.