The Four Faced Liar

So I saw this movie because Netflix recommened it and I'm so weak-willed. Damn you, Netflix! If it has those little film festival olive branches on it's movie poster, odds are I'll watch that movie. This one had four! The premise about four college aged New Yorkers and how their relationships are altered after they meet at a bar, aptly named the Four Faced Liar. There are two couples and their lesbian friend and by the end of the movie there is a new couple out of the five and the other two have dissolved. In the first minutes of the movie, I realized the audience for this movie was very small; namely, urban twenty-something students - of which, I am not.

The movie is about relationships and following your heart versus your head? I'm not quite sure where the accolades for this movie came from. The characters are almost dynamic but end up only having that one unique layer to them and fail to be two-dimensional. The relationships don't make a whole lot of sense nor do the motivations of the characters. A self-proclaimed anti-monogamous character suddenly wants nothing but monogamy? A reserved character with a need for approval suddenly dives head first into controversy? The characters were just too under-developed to make their actions completely genuine. Perhaps there were too many characters. Honestly, one of the couples could've been removed completely and the story would have probably worked better. The dialogue was witty in some parts and was almost very perceptive, almost. It was as if the movie couldn't decided if it wanted to advance the plot or focus on the satirical idioms from the characters. I can see how this would be a better movie if I was able to relate to the characters in some way.

The cinematography and sound mixing does a nice little job considering the budget. The lenses are clear and the camera movements smooth. The post production side of the movie was polished. I will say that the pivotal New Year's Eve bar scene was edited perfectly with great fast/slow time warps on the clips with awesome jump cuts to keep the pace up and then the mirroring of the two situations going on inside and outside of the bathroom with the slow-mo climax was pure brilliance.

The actors did a pretty good job. They were one level up what I would've expected from this low budget of a movie. That being said, they were a little bit stiff and over delivered some of the lines but it wasn't terrible.

In the end, it wasn't terrible but it wasn't relatable either. It doesn't seem like it can really appeal to anyone other than it's target audience."Look at modern literature; all of the greatest female characters were written by women because no man could ever write from a female's perspective. Women have this compassionate chemistry that allows them to listen with an unbiased ear. All women, even you."

The Freebie

So, I'm not sure why I ended up seeing this but something caught my interest. It's this little indie comedy film abobut a seemingly perfect married couple, played by Dax Shepherd and writer/director Katie Aselton, who decided to give each other a night off to sleep with whomever they wish in order to solidify their relationship. It was also filmed on location in Los Angeles. The film turned out to be like a Greta Gerwig movie but with an actual plot-line and extremeley attractive leads.

The movie is basically an ad-lib-athon, some people call this 'mumblecore' I believe. Most of the dialogue was relevant to the movie and helped to build the main characters' relationship. The was an actual story arc and the characters were interesting. I assume that this is like the movie Hall Pass (since I haven't seen it) but realistic. The characters were believable, although too good-looking.

The cinematography and sound editing were obviously minimal as it usually employed in these types of movies where natural sound is favored over fine tuned editing. I'm not a huge fan of this type of editing, but it does make the subject matter feel more real. When there's a lack of sound editing, color correction, smooth edit cuts etc it makes the characters feel more real. If the storyline keeps you interested, I believe this approach can help you connect with the characters. When the story (or lackthereof) doesn't keep you interested, this approach becomes annoying - at least that's my opinion. Case in point, Hannah Takes the Stairs. I'm not a fan. Sorry, but I just don't get it. So to sum up all of this rambling, the minimalistic approach to the cinematography and editing can help in some cases and deter in others. In this case, it helped. Although I should note that the sound editing wasn't as raw as I've seen in other low budget indies similar to this.

The actors did a great job coming off as a natural couple. They had some decent chemistry going on. They moved the plot along somehow with little sprinkles of essential dialogue mixed in with the ad-libbing going on.

In the end, it wasn't the low budge romcom I was expecting. It was a tad bit deeper and more thoughtful. Still a little bit stretched given the premis of the movie. I found it interesting to see the locations in L.A. that they filmed at which held the same level of interest as the story did for me. "I trust us, baby"

All Good Things

So, this is the movie that Kirsten Dunst had reportedly said was her best performance ever and it also stars Ryan Gosling wearing super awesome vintage suits? I'm in. (I'm curious if her aforementioned statement was before or after her Best Actress win at Cannes this year for a Von Trier flick?). The premis of this movie is something I normally wouldn't be interested in but thought I'd give it a shot because of the actors. Oh, and because it has Kristen Wiig in a serious role.

The movie is based on a real-life couple from 1970's New York in which the husband, although extremely suspicious, was never investigated after his wife's ultra strange disappearance in 1982.

The actors, wardrobe, and set design were the best things about this movie.

Some how Ryan Gosling was able to take this horrible character with no redeeming qualities and make you somehow not hate him. Even though his motivations and actions were devious, he was able to show you where he was coming from and what had shaped him into the person he'd become. I still don't know how he was able to pull that off. He was like a mult-dimensional villian. Weird.

Kirsten Dunst did do a nice job in the movie, albeit she was pretty sullen and somber throughout. It was still a nice job.

I love Kristen Wiig in this. I love everything she does and it was ultra awesome to see her do a serious role - although she didn't have much screen time.

The wardrobe was quite retro and captured the feel of the times. Perhaps it seems cooler because vintage is the new black now, but it sill was very beautiful.

The sets and locations were also in keeping with the time and added to the overall look of the movie. The colors were in keeping with the tone and gave this period piece some authenticity.

The plot was obviously a lot of speculation about the characters and not that entertaining. Is this possibly because I'm not into murder mysteries? Most likely. But looking at it objectively, it wasn't anything that hasn't been done before.

The pace was a little choppy and didn't flow throughout the story.

Overall, it was nice to see the actors do a stand up job. It was a forgettable movie and I wasn't interested in the plot. "I've never been closer to anyone, and I don't know you at all".

Visioneers

So, yeah I can't take credit for finding this movie at all. I was out of options at the redbox and picked it on a whim because I (usually) like Zack Galifianakis' roles and sense of humor. This movie is from a first-time (more or less) writer and director team that are also brothers. The movie was almost brilliant.

The movie is about the main character, George Washington Wisterhammerman, who lives in a sort of alternate universe where he works for the most successful business in the history of the world as a 'visioneer'; Where the middle finger is a friendly greeting and everyone around is exploding from built up stress. People start to deal with this worl-wide exploding phenomenon in different ways and eventually the higher powers step in to take control.

At first I was a little bit ancy while I was racking my brain and trying to figure out the big secret behind this parallel universe and completely missing the point. When the movie was over, I literally did a double take (well, almost literally) and was like I totally missed that it was satirical the entire time. It made the movie move to a whole new level. Ironically, my mind was working like the targets of the satire! After realizing my own simple mindedness I realized how much better of a film this actually was. Like I mentioned, it was almost pure brilliance. The story had a lot of potential and capitalized on most of it. It was like The Invention of Lying but with more satire and up a couple of levels. More could've been done but the movie was pretty well-rounded for the most part.

Galifianakis - I'm determined to learn the spelling of his name - did a standup job. Not entirely different from what we saw in Kind of a Funny Story but proves that he can do dry comedy just as easily as slapstick. I find him extremely awesome and enjoyed this movie, once I realized what I was actually watching.

Judy Greer was also very refreshing in the movie. I almost didn't recognize her. She's perfected the bitchy best friend of the female lead but it was extremely nice to see her in a different role. She's proving to be quite the character actress as well.

I had questions about the locations chosen for filming and had a nice laugh when I read that the directors used their parents' house in order to get in under budget. Nice move guys. The filming and scenery felt like it was a higher budget movie that it really was and so they obviously did a nice job in that way.

I'd warn anyone who wants to watch this to go into looking for the symbolism and satire instead of taking it for face value. Self-depreciating humor is also a necessity since we are all undoubtedly the targets of this satire. "There are 1,200 minutes of productivity remaining until the weekend".

Jack Goes Boating

So, the directorial debut of Philip Seymour Hoffman? Yes, please! He’s definitely one of the best character actors out there and throw into the mix that it’s an indie movie about a quirky socially inept couple and I’m all in. I missed this one in the theaters but thanks to Netflix instant I got the chance to finally see it.

The movie also stars Amy Ryan (think Holly from The Office) and she does a fantastic job. Apparently, this was adapted from a play that these same actors were in. The movie is about Jack, a headphones wearing anti-social limo driver, who begins a romance with an equally quirky woman and gets help from a married couple along the way.

The story is subdued. The characters are dynamic and relatable. The plot is quite believable although the synchronization of the two couples is a little dramatized – but hey it is a movie after all. I can’t help but like these stories about sweet quirky couples – so the story was endearing in my opinion. I liked how the budding relationship between the two main characters brought out the real problems with the married couple to the forefront. I also loved the symbolism of the apartment bathroom to literally show how each of these characters built walls in their relationships with others. There was even some dry humor sprinkled in at select moments, but a dramedy this was not.

The cinematography and score were smooth and effortless as I would expect a movie of this sort. The shots focused on the characters and we had a lot of close ups showing us their non-verbal acting as well.

The ending felt a little bit rushed and off when compared to the rest of the movie. The plot also only focused on the beginning of the relationship and I would’ve liked to see a bit more between the two characters – possibly even some background would’ve been nice.

Overall, it was a nice little subtle film. Nothing extraordinary to report/ It felt very personal which is the way a directorial debut should be. I enjoyed it. Is it for everyone? Obviously not. “That’s a long way off. Spacetravel for tourists” – Jack Goes Boating.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

So, yes, I’ll admit it; I totally jumped on the Harry Potter bandwagon. Regrettably, I completely judged the books/movies as youthful nonsense and didn’t think much of the series until I saw The Deathly Hallows Part 1. I became intrigued and then somehow read all 6.5 of the books in three week’s time. I can’t imagine what kind of ride it’s been like for the true fans who’ve waited this series out from the beginning. My theoretical hat is off to you. That being said, I was more than excited for this last movie to come out and felt legitimate pain that I had to wait two whole weeks before I could see it in the theater.

No need to read any further (not like many of you do anyways); it was an epic of epic epicness!

The beginning of the movie had a really killer score which was different from all of the other movies and had this perfect eerie vocal accompaniment which, correct me if I’m wrong, none of the other films had. Eventually, the score turned into the same we've come to expect. The first few minutes of the movie felt as if I was watching an episode of Game of Thrones. I have no idea why I’m referencing that show because I’ve never even seen an episode. But it just had this feeling as though the story was epic, legendary, even and just driping with the gravity of the story. The way all of the movies, or at least these last few, should’ve felt. All this from a new score, blue filter, and long panning shots of the characters looking into the distance amidst timeless backdrops. As the movie continues, it starts to feel like the Harry Potter movies we know, and love. But it does still carry some of gravity of the movie with it in some of the scenes.

There was no expense spared in any of the CGI in the movie. Looking closely, you can tell some of the water scenes were shot in a tank and some of the flying scenes weren’t real – but on the whole, the effects surpassed all of the previous movies.

The script was pretty spot-on with the book. There were several slight changes to make things more dramatic – which I’m all for. There was one scene which irked me and I’ll explain later. I read the last half of the book after I saw the movie and liked pretty much all of the changes. I felt this movie did a good job of explaining everything – which some of the previous ones were notorious for not doing. The movie did have about seven endings, but I actually prefer to have movies like that so I don’t feel short-changed – unless it’s a movie I’m ready to get out of.

Now, I will say that the actors. . .  how do I put this? They had more time to shine in Part 1. This movie was all about the action. There wasn’t very much time spent for feelings, relationships, talking, etc. Who needs it when there’s a battle to win right? I would’ve liked to see a bit more of this in the film. I guess when you look at both of these movies as a whole, we got the character development in the first half. There still is one scene that was begging for some character development, and I’ll explain later. The movie did take the time to incorporate all of the characters that it needed, which was great – no skimming over the smaller characters like in the previous movies. Was it worth losing the character development of the main characters? The movie was pretty fast paced so I could see where it would’ve been hard to throw some dramatic monologues in there.

So, overall this was the way it needed to be done. Better than I imagined it was going to be. No Sopranos ending here. Again, I’m referencing a show I’ve never seen! You’re asking yourself was it that good? Yes ,to the two of you reading this, it was! It holds the record for biggest midnight opener, biggest single day opening, and biggest weekend opening both domestic and foreign – so yeah, it’s good. “Do not pity the dead, Harry. Pity the living”

 Yes, there were a couple of things that could’ve used some reworking . . .

**spoiler alert**

This revelation is really the only thing that irked me in the movie; the scene where Harry is going into the forest and finds Ron and Hermione on the stairs. “I’m going to the forest to meet my death”. “No”. “I have to”. “ok”. “I’ll come with you”. “No”. “Give me a three second hug then”. “Ron, you want a hug, mate?” “No I’m ok. I’ll just look at you with a serious expression on my face and stand here while you leave to face your death”. . . c’mon. There is no way those two would have ever let Harry go do that and there’s especially no way they wouldn’t have followed him there. Go back and watch all the movies or read the books and count the number of times they’ve literally thrown themselves in front of him saying they’ll have to go through them to get to him. It ruined the seriousness of Harry’s decision. It was like, oh, of course it’ll work out, they’re not even that upset about it. Ok, let’s say somehow Harry talks them into letting him go , it wouldn’t have been that easy. It was much better in the book and should’ve stayed that way. So there it is, the one little thing that I did not like in this movie. I just don’t see what the reasoning behind this decision was when they wrote it this way?

The only other thing I might’ve changed; I would’ve spent a little bit more money to make them look older at the end. That’s it. It wasn’t horrible, but it wasn’t very serious either – the scene, that is, not the movie. But I will say that the last shot of those three standing in a row together looking off-screen really tugged at your (dragon) heartstrings. It was very bittersweet. Then they play The Harry Potter theme over it and it’s just dripping with bittersweetness. The last time we’ll see those three characters together – then it fades to black.