Into the Woods

On a Scale of 1 to 10, with 10 Being the Best

3

Plot: This movie is a fusion of four classic fairy tales which include Little Red Riding Hood, Cinderella, Jack and the Beanstalk, and Rapunzel and the tale that links them all together is about a baker and his wife that want a child. I found this to be a pleasant idea, until all those fairy tales met a sad end, then I found it abnormally long and frankly...boring. None of the music moves the plot forward and all the fairy tales coming together just lead to this really long prolonged end. I love Disney but this is unoriginal and the only reason it was probably made was to make a buck.

Characters/Actors of Note:

Meryl Streep playing the Witch: All of the acting was quite good in this, and Ms. Streep is no exception. She was able to go from her ugly persona to her beautiful persona well. I also was impressed by how well she played such a strange character. Her singing was not bad either. In fact, I kept thinking it was Bette Midler singing! Thumbs up.

Anna Kendrick playing Cinderella: I will always see Ms. Kendrick as the girl from Twilight, but By George, she always does a great job. Excellent singing, as many know from her other movie Pitch Perfect, and her acting was not too shabby. I found her story-line especially repetitive though; the only way I didn't find her annoying was her acting and singing.

Daniel Huttlestone playing Jack: I remember watching this movie and thinking "I know that kid from somewhere..." When my aunt leaned over and stated it was the kid from Les Miserables! I found Mr. Huttlestone's performance was significantly better than his Les Mis performance, namely because his accent wasn't crazy thick. Jack is a character that is a fool, but a lovable fool. Mr. Huttlestone's performance also was impressive with his singing. I found that he could blend well and sing softly, which is again different from Les Mis, as he wasn't blaring in your ear. I found that he is much improved. 

James Corden playing Baker: I am sorry, but I was not that ecstatic about this character. He was pushy but also a push-over. I found him inconsistent about his "wish" and the way he felt about his wife. I was not that happy that he was the narrator either, as his voice made me want to fall asleep, although at the end it makes sense. His singing wasn't that fantastic either. His best skill is that he can blend with others. Casting was great, with the exception of this Mr. Corden.

Music: I think the best way to describe the music can be summed up with a sentence I heard as I left the theater, "If they say 'wish' one more time, I'm going to lose it." Stephan Sondheim wrote this musical; you may know him for his works such as West Side Story and Sweeney Todd. I guess I either love him or hate him because I was pretty sick of the music. It was repetitive, it didn't move the story forward, and it prolonged the movie. I would say that the music needs cutting and rewriting.

Camera Work/Cinematography: Visually, this movie was wonderful. It used colors and angles well. I found also that the make-up and costume department did a spectacular job. I was very impressed with how well this movie looked. Two thumbs up in this aspect.

RECAP:

Overall, the acting, camera work, make-up, and costumes were spot-on. The writing of the script and the music are so off the mark though. When I watched this in theaters, people left early and became antsy in their seats. The movie could have ended in the middle and I would have given it an 8, but since it dragged on for another hour it gets a three. Bad writing only deserves thus. 

Courtesy of Pinterest

Want me to critique a movie? Comment below!

Unbroken

On a Scale of 1 to 10, with 10 Being the Best

9.5

As a special note-My family went to see this on Christmas Day and it was sold out in two theatres for three showings. This movie is going to be a blockbuster hit. 

Plot: This movie is based off of a true story of Louie Zamperini. He ran in the Olympics and was going to compete in the next one in Japan, only that the world was thrown into World War II. While on a search party over the ocean, the plane went down. Louie and his friend Phil survived 56 days at sea and were saved...by the Japanese forces. The story reveals how Louie and other Ally members were treated in the Japanese POW camps, along with his story about how he went from a troubled kid, to Olympic champion. 

*Upon research I found that the movie did not derive from the book. It was been questioned if Louis Zamperini exaggerated his own facts in the book though.*

Characters/Actors of Note:

Jack O'Connel playing Louis Zamperini: I was surprised on the different aspects I got from Mr. O'Connel. He didn't come off as just one singular trait. He seemed to be pretty well-rounded. I finally got to watch someone that actually acted in a way that made sense. Most actors are either under or overwhelming in these high drama movies. I felt that Mr. O'Connel was just right. The fear, the excitement, and the sadness were great. For some reason though, I never cried during this movie. Perhaps it was for the reason that I kept thinking that this guy could have it much worse. I am not saying that this guy wasn't under extreme harshness, a lot of people died in his type of situation; I am saying that this could have been worse. I thought that this character was well-rounded and I appreciated the portrayal greatly. 

Takamasa "Miyavi" Ishihara playing Mutsushiro "The Bird" Watanabe: Again, I was surprised by this character. The reason being that most villains are portrayed as big, ugly, and overly cruel. The Bird though was about the size as the other men, even shorter. He also wasn't bad looking and he didn't go overboard with his evil attitude. I could really picture some like The Bird being in my reality. Mr. Ishihara's portrayal reminded me of someone that is more abusive than a cruel overlord and that is what made him believable. The way that this character's life intertwined with Louie's was strange and ironic. His unpredictable behavior made sense as well. I almost wanted more information on this character in the film.
Domhnall Gleeson playing Russell Allen "Phil" Phillips: I had originally not done a review on this character but I find that I keep talking about Phil. Mr. Gleeson's character is more religious than Louis. He prays more often and believes in an afterlife where he will be re-payed. Phil is a person that is closely attached to Louis, as they only have each other when they are rescued. I felt a lot of love for this character as he was such a sweet heart. He was a quiet, respectful, and faithful. He also gave some more optimism to the situation. Mr. Gleeson's care for this portrayal was lovely.

Music: I thought this music was well put together. It was strong and supporting of the film. I also loved that none of the dialogue was drowned out by the music. (Sorry for the foul language in the link.) Quite good.

Camera Work/Cinematography: This movie looked like it was in SUPER HIGH-DEFINITION. It so was impeccably sharp that it was almost distracting. There was also a lot of colors. There was yellow, black, gray, blue, green, and white. I do have to say that the make-up was just stunning in this film though. The burns, cuts, and coal that were applied were just on-spot. Overall, great make-up and the high-definition was okay but over-the-top.

RECAP:

This movie is wonderfully scripted, shot, and acted. I wish the music was more catchy and the super high-def was distracting. It's great to watch with your family and I don't doubt that this movie will be up for the Oscar. 

Courtesy of Bing

Want me to critique a movie? Comment below!

Shadow on the Wall (1950)

On a Scale of 1 to 10, with 10 Being the Best

8

Plot: A father gets remarried and finds out that his new wife has been cheating on him. He has a gun in his hand and charges at her, only to be knocked-out cold. The wife's sister comes to confront her about the cheating, grabs the gun off the floor, and kills her. She let's her brother-in-law take the blame but finds out his little girl saw the entire thing but has blocked it from her memory. A child psychiatrist tries to find out the truth, meanwhile the murderer tries to rid of the young witness.

Characters/Actors of Note:

Gigi Perreau playing Susan Starrling: Ms. Perreau is the little girl in the film and does a mark-up job. I find that young actors have issues with defining their characters, often just playing themselves, but this person was great. Susie starts off bubbly, happy, and excited then turns into a somber and non-energetic little girl. Her catchphrase when she is happy is "I love you twice as much!" While her somber catchphrase is, "If you want me to..." The way she is able to define her happy and sad self are evident and great to watch. Either this girl takes direction well or is spot-on awesome. 

Ann Sothern as Dell Faring: Apparently Ms. Sothern is a predominately comedic actress, which I would have never guessed. Dell is a complex character as the murderer. She is caring towards the family but also does not want to go to jail...or worse the electric chair.  It was unnerving to see how close she could get with the daughter and to know what she wanted to do. I appreciated how Ms. Sothern decided not to be overly hysterical, which often happens in these 1950s movies, but showed us that fear is what motivated her to take the actions that she did. I felt that this character was well-thought out by Ms. Sothern and carefully assessed. Nicely done.

Nancy (Davis) Reagan playing Dr. Caroline Canford: Ms. Reagan (Yes, as in First Lady Reagan) plays the psychiatrist of the film. Her demeanor reminds me of the psychiatrist in Sybil, as she was calm, calculating, and determined. She was also very caring, which is shown with how well she took to being called "Aunt Caroline" by Susie. Doctor Caroline was wonderfully kind and I think the watchers of this film will be cheering her on. 

PS I appreciated how well they portrayed the way they treated mental illnesses during this time, I felt it was quite accurate. 

Zachary Scott playing David I. Starrling: I loved this character, which means a lot coming from a character that did not speak much in the movie. I was surprised to learn that Mr. Scott usually plays villains! He was such a loving father in this movie that I would not have thought of it. He portrays his caring-self well but his hopeless-self...not so much. I felt that he could have been more depressed, as he was on death row and losing his daughter. I also have issue with one another thing. He was very angry at his wife, had a gun in his hand, and was coming at her...I wonder if he would have killed her. I suppose we will never know. Watch the film yourself and get back to me on this!

Music: The sound of the film has the typical 50s celluloid sound. Lots of violins and flutes that sound similar to bells when they were happy, and the brass section was used for the more frightening parts. It was not overused though but I won't be downloading the music anytime soon.

Camera Work/Cinematography: The movie is in black and white. The use of lights and shadows have to be used. I found that in the movie, they highlighted their faces, while the rest of their bodies were dark. Of course the movie is called Shadow on the Wall so perhaps that was appropriate. I do feel more textures and levels of gray could have been used. In the film they spoke of wearing brown and yellow, but come on...we can't see it so who knows if they actually did wear those colors. Camera work was usually the same focus. Not many close-ups or zoom shots were used. The excellent filming they did was when Susie tries to remember the crime and how they associated dolls with the real people. The representation was wonderful but overall, cinematography was sub-par.

RECAP:

The music was used well but not all that catchy. The film could have been filmed more dramatically or at least have better use of textures, shades, and camera work. Representations were excellently shown though. The acting was superb and the movie was fun to watch. The plot and subplots all melting together makes a great script, and I recommend it to those that love mystery movies. 

Courtesy of Pinterest

Want me to critique a movie? Comment below!

One Hour Photo

On a Scale of 1 to 10, with 10 Being the Best

5

Plot: A very lonely man works in a store developing photographs. There is a family (the Yorkins) that have come in for over nine years to that store and he wishes he was part of that family. The man's loneliness comes to a point where he imagines that he is part of the family. This movie is a thriller but this movie just made me feel so sad. Not only because the main character Sy has a sad life but because the late Robin Williams stars in the film. You may need a hug after this movie.

Characters/Actors of Note: 

Robin Williams playing Sy Parrish: I just felt so sad for the main character, Sy, and I spent most of the movie going, "Oh, poor thing. Okay, now stop acting crazy." It was interesting to see Mr. Williams play such a depressed and strict character. I have seen him in some of his other serious roles (Good Will Hunting and Dead Poet's Society) and found that this character is yet again different and special. I expected Mr. Williams to crack a joke at some point, as comedians often do in their somber roles because they get uncomfortable (such as Jim Carrey in The Truman Show) but not a single joke or humorous moment occurred. Sy Parrish was truly a sad, lonely, and creepy character. The strange part was that when a person watches Sy, they just keep pitying him. It gave a new outlook to the lay-person to understand those who suffer from mental illnesses. This acting was just wonderful and what could be expected from such a wonderful actor. 

*Please Note* That the other actors were minimal characters, hardly having any dialogue so I didn't critique them. 

Music: There were many quiet moments in this movie. The movie comes off meticulous, clean, and orderly and I think music would disrupt that idea. The times were it was used was for dramatic effect and it was used well. I think the sound came off tailored and always proper.

Camera Work/Cinematography: The main color of this film was white; white walls, white floors, and white clothes for Sy. The watcher feels that they are in the mind of Sy Parrish in this movie, except they know that the actions taken in the movie are not appropriate. The reason that the color white and the use of cleanliness were important to the film, is that when developing a photograph, a person has to be careful with chemicals and clean, in order to get the pictures to not be damaged. When we entered the Yorkin's home there is a feel of warmth which is such a contrast to Sy's life. As with the music, this was tailored so well. I loved the use of camera angles, close-ups, colors, and lights and also when there were nude scenes, it wasn't totally grotesque. Everything was in order and I do not believe anything was too overboard. The filming was done quite nicely.

RECAP:

It was interesting having the main character be the "villain" and gave a great insight into the mind's of those who are mentally ill. The music and cinematography were well-done as well. The reason it isn't higher on the scale is that the writing was pretty predictable. This movie also isn't that great of a thriller. There wasn't much thinking to do when you watched the movie. The watcher is waiting for the end to see why Sy is in a holding cell and that is basically all. Overall, it is great for understanding those who are alone but not great for thought-provoking ideas. 

Courtesy of Pinterest

Want me to critique a movie? Comment below!

The Long, Long Trailer

On a Scale of 1 to 10, with 10 Being the Best

6

Plot: A couple get married and decide if they should buy a trailer or a house. The architect, who travels often, wants to buy a home, but his wife wants to buy a trailer so she can have a home for her husband to come to, compared to a hotel. She persuades him and off they go on their honeymoon which is full of crazy antics and embarrassing situations. I enjoyed this movie, it was funny and the antics were realistic. The issue I had with this movie is that I expected more from the two stars, Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz.

Characters/Actors of Note:

Lucille Ball playing Tacy Collini: Most people know the infamous Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz from their iconic television show. This movie though is a little different. She's much more composed and her facial expressions are limited. Basically, the reasons that I loved the show were missing from this movie. This character, Tacy, just wasn't easily likable as she was a hoarder, straightforward, and a bit naggy. Ms. Ball is a good actress, don't get me wrong, but don't go watching this movie thinking it will be like another I Love Lucy episode. The trait I thought was great in this movie is that the antics were realistic, as in everyone might do this. It wasn't like in comedies today, where there might be a bear chase and someone loses their underwear. Instead, the events included getting stuck in the mud or cooking in a moving trailer. It was easy to see yourself getting into a similar mess. You empathized with this character as much as you laughed at her. 

Desi Arnaz playing Nicky Collini: The character Nicky was much like his character in I Love Lucy (Ricky) as he was loud, got frustrated, and a prideful character. The difference between Ricky and Nicky, was that Nicky was a push-over and a pretty nervous character. Whenever he drove the trailer, he heard a voice in his head telling him to "Don't forget the trailer brake!" When his wife drove, he became an overbearing backseat driver. In a way, his character made you like Tacy more, as you empathized with her struggles. This character was slightly lovable though. He wanted to please his wife (but almost to the point of making them broke) and he worried, because he wanted to make sure the trip would run smoothly. One could empathize with Nicky, as he was trying his best, but nothing was working to his advantage, much like our own lives.

Music: I was slightly confused on what they were trying to do with the music. Ms. Ball and Mr. Arnaz had a singing number together midway through the film, and Mr. Arnaz sang a few times after that. It felt like they wanted to make this into a musical but could only fit in a few songs. It wasn't so out-of-place that it was annoying but it did strike me as odd. The rest of the time was filled with orchestral music. The orchestral music wasn't too great but it keeps the attention of the audience.

Camera Work/Cinematography: I enjoyed the look of this movie. The most used effect were camera angles. They titled the camera when they were on the mountain or in the mud, the camera slowly followed Mr. Arnaz from one end of the trailer to the other, or a swinging effect was used when Ms. Ball was cooking in the moving trailer. Most of the movie did not take place in the stuffy trailer, which I greatly appreciated. They chose to have a convertible car take the trailer around, which created a more open look and a chance to have more shots of their natural surroundings.

RECAP:

This movie has some-what lovable characters that we can empathize with. The music was a little off, but not terrible, and the camera shots were great. If you are anything like me, than you might be sighing to yourself and mumbling advice to the couple. This movie isn't like the iconic TV show, but a chuckle or two is guaranteed. 

Courtesy of Pinterest

Want me to critique a movie? Comment below!

Babette's Feast

On a Scale of 1 to 10 with 10 Being the Best

3

Plot: Two pious sisters, who live in a remote village in the 19th Century, have a French cook named Babette. These two sisters care for the poor villagers and do much better with Babette helping them. The sister's father was the town reverend and the villagers all loved him; in order to celebrate his would-have-been 100th birthday, they decide to have a party. Babette begs the sisters to let her cook, not a Danish meal, but a French one. This film has to do with religion, food, art, and I guess...awkwardness? This movie is alright but I just felt it was so time consuming. I failed to see the connections at times between characters and they spent forever trying to "explain" them. 

*PLEASE NOTE* That this movie is not in English but in Swedish, French, and Danish. You will want subtitles on when watching this. 

Characters/Actors of Note:

Stephane Audran playing Babette Hersant: In the film, Babette has to flee from France because of the French Revolution. Due to an obscure connection, she is able to live with the sisters, Filippa and Martine. This lady comes off as thrifty, smart, and straight forward. If she wants it done, it will get done whether others like it or not. I did like Ms. Audran cast as this character as she indeed looked the part. This woman had to be a little torn-up and tough and that is how she appeared. I also appreciated her coolness and professionalism. Good casting.

Jarl Kulle playing General Lorens Lowenhielm: This character confused me. Lorens is a soldier who is sent to his aunt's for misbehaving. His aunt's house is in the dumpy little village where Filippa and Martine live. It is love at first sight and he wiggles his way into the congregation. The issue is...well I didn't understand frankly. He was having supper with them and got up and left. When he talked to his friends about his "love affair" he states that the world is cruel and impossible. Many years later, the sister invite him to the 100th Anniversary, and he states after the meal that life is good and possible. I think I just missed on a culture cue during both the suppers to get where he was coming from.

Bodil Kjer playing Filippa and Birgitte Federspiel playing Martine: To be honest, I kept forgetting which sister was which in this movie. They hardly spoke and others hardly spoke to them. I was confused on how they kept breaking people's hearts when THEY NEVER LEFT THE HOUSE, except to go to church of course. I was also confused on what religion they were. The movie mentioned Catholics, but their father was married and had them, which would suggest otherwise. They had a crucifix but often sang instead of praying. Their religion also forbid eating anything delicious or drinking alcohol. To sum-up, I was more concerned with who they were because I didn't have a clue.

Music: The few times there were music were predominately from the sisters and their congregation singing. I was annoyed with how little background music there was. I felt music would have been helpful for the humorous parts of the film, at the very least, but none was to be heard. Quite disappointed with this aspect of the movie.

Camera Work/Cinematography: As with all 80s movies, this film was foggy. The entire movie though wasn't that pleasant to look at. There was no use of shadows, lights, or creative use of color. The director, Gabriel Axel, has been filming movies since the 1950s. This may sound harsh but, I wonder if he was given bad equipment or just wasn't that good of a director. Something more creative should have been done with this film.

RECAP:

I did like the concept of this movie. People coming together with food, forgiving each other, and actually enjoying themselves (although they wouldn't admit it). I found fault in how strung out this movie was. I failed to find real human connections or religious ones. I also wasn't a fan of the cinematography and lack of music, either. An older relative might enjoy this film, but I find it is a bit of a snore. 

Courtesy of Pinterest

Want me to critique a movie? Comment below!