winston9109 Reviews

Arrival (II) (2016)

Thought-provoking like many in its genre don't even try to be.

[8/10 · 21 November 2016]

Arrival is an alien movie that has very little to do with aliens. Its chiefly about a depressive linguist named Louise who is chosen to attempt a translation between the aliens and the U.S. military. However, I think many audience members will digest this movie with very little remembrance paid to the extra terrestrials. The important events take place in the psyche of Louise, which reveal themselves to us only in the final moments of the film. (Going forward there will be spoilers).

First the bad: There are some irredeemably corny lines (mostly from Jeremy Renner's character) that are significant, they lessen the dramatic tone at critical plot points. There are also some scenes where characters are transparently stilted or behave irrationally. Forrest Whitaker's character, for one, is either understated or entirely dispensable. The acting on the whole is forgettable, but never awful. Adams performs well, though her emotional volume is pretty uniform all the way through - which is not necessarily inappropriate. The story is not exactly about her growth as it is about her accepting her own peculiar mind.

Yet Arrival succeeds in ways that are more important. When the twist comes at the end it suggests several things about Louise and about people in general. For one, our reliance on a linear narrative, or on a narrative-period to give our lives stability, meaning. We ignore obvious clues that the film's prologue is actually its epilogue, mimicking the denial that Louise likely lives with throughout the life of her child who is destine to die.

It speaks to the greed or craving for optimum human experience. Louise, for whom its implied lives a rather muted life (which is ironic) before the alien landing, gets an unprecedented opportunity to talk with the aliens. Then they reveal to Louise her gift, to see into the future. In that future, she see's she'll have a child - and that child will die in her twenties. Yet she has the child anyway (without telling the father of her premonition). She has the love affair, the celebrity status, the family by the lake, and indeed all this ultimately disintegrates as she knew it would.

Alternatively, or maybe in conjunction with this, her behavior can be explained as follows: Louise realized she had no free will and surrenders her attempt at controlling reality, and thus finds some measure of happiness. Similarly, Louise maybe recognizes that life is hopelessly fragile, futile even, but decides the moments of both breakdown and beauty are still worth experiencing in full.

To summarize: Arrival is thought-provoking in ways many big-budget Sci-Fi's don't even try to be. There are many other strengths in cinematography and sound that make Arrival solid. Enjoy.

Prisoners (2013)

Very strong in some areas, weak in others

[6/10 · 5 October 2013]

The strongest aspect of the film was the acting. Hugh Jackman knocked it out of the park. It was a shame the other actors weren't given bigger roles, fine as they are. It was atmospheric with a decent, subtle score as well. The atmosphere kept building so you felt like it was going to amount to something major, which it did and didn't.

There's something inherently dissatisfying at the heart of it. The detectives better accomplishments were completely by chance, when he was depicted to be a smart man. There were very simple things they could have done to have made him have to incorporate skill into using his chance realizations. For instance, if he hand't found the picture with the necklace on Holly's late husband, he could have just walked into the next room and discovered the truth, albeit too late. A simple reworking of this scene would have made it more satisfying, as the entire revelation about the dead husband/dead guy in priests basement, was semi-obvious to begin with.

Keller also failed when it counted most, and this is majorly disappointing after he went through such lengths to find his daughter. He also could have handled it much differently when he heard "he was there...we had tape on our mouths." If he fled because he thought he would become a suspect, this could have been better emphasized. Once captured, the whistle aspect could have again been used when Loki enters the house, sees the picture, and realizes Holly's identity.

Basically the entire last twenty minutes could have been reworked, I think, and the film would have been an 8 instead of a 6. I think its possible the movie had a very pro-christain initiative. We are meant to feel like Keller, not becoming a "devil" has Holly called him, and praying, lead to the finding of his daughter, and not losing his faith. The initiative to show this I think really diluted what could have been a very powerful noir film. I suggest Gone Baby Gone over this movie, if you want something similar but more satisfying in several ways. It has twists, moral studies, and great acting all the same, though Hugh Jackman really did nail it in this.

Stoker (2013)

Sensational !

[10/10 · 24 March 2013]

Stoker ..

You have here a visionary tale that tended masterfully to every facet of film. Spellbinding source music soaked into a high - saturation canvas, framed so you can feel the psychosis of the characters, often released in the intentional chaos of expertly executed angles.

A "hands on" type of film, but not without the depth to let your own imagination explore the subject matter's malleable pathos. Movies succeed when they silence the critical voice in your own head, when they reel you in completely, enslaving you. When a movie is your master it can do anything to you, as this one does. The twist is both the diabolical and disturbing type you will not soon extricate, as it will likely permeate and fester in your consciousness and conversation. Not for the faint of heart or easily nauseated.

The movie, however, is beautiful, and India is a heroine in every sense of the world. It bares supernatural undertones without unraveling in that particular industry. In the film's center focus are bold and traditional concepts of sexual repression, nature vs. nurture, and the inextricable bonds of beauty, blood and earth.

Ultimately both mind-blowing and bending with a wholly original deliverance, films like Stoker only pass through the cinemas once or twice a year, if that. Don't miss it. The acting is seamless. The ending is absolutely killer.

Killing Them Softly (2012)

Every review I've read has been wrong

[10/10 · 14 December 2012]

If you want to watch Scarface - go watch Scarface. This movie isn't. KTS is a 180 from the majority of crime classics and their many copycats.

The factor that clumps most crime genre flicks together is the top-down perspective. For instance, in the Departed it was the rats joining up with the heads of their respective sides of the law - Costello and Queenin. The same with Pauli in Goodfellas, the Don in Godfather.

KTS splits apart because it is a film about crime from the perspective of the prey. The opening shot is a junkie in a cold, wet New Orleans wind, lost in a whirlwind of trash against harsh white sky. This is the view of hopelessness - its also the familiarity of many post-disaster neighborhoods. These characters absorbed into the criminal underworld, not because they are evil, but because they haven't many other options and they're too dumb to know the danger they are in. This is the what KTS communicates to us with the background broadcast of the '08 elections and financial meltdown.

When bullets fly in this film - you feel it, because you feel for the characters, which is why having Cogan as its opaque center is so blisteringly effective. He is pragmatic, unapologetic and a completely objective lens to see through. He is the balance between the corrupt political overcast and slime at the bottom of the barrel.

"America isn't a country. It's a business."

Cogan is the the cleanup for the corporation. He snips the buds, ties up the loose ends. He is the inevitability of the business world.

"They are all nice guys."

The humanization of the characters drains you as one by one they slip into darkness. Cogan's jaws open and you understand that the characters are rats in a labyrinth, they are all gears that will eventually be discarded. The soundtrack rhetoric quite fluidly illuminates the movies' greater statement. With all the economic jargon in a ping-pong propaganda game there are people sleeping out on the streets - and a hungry dog has to eat. And all the way up the food chain, through a shady poker game in the back of some shut-down strip mall, to the podium and our new elected president, everyone is a hungry dog here.

This is a methodical film that takes its time with each individual scene. It plays with time and space, slowing down, drifting in and out and then exploding. Cogan walks through the sparks and smoke, he is our escort in understanding the nature and design of things, and he does with an unforgettable composure.

The elements of the film - acting, cinematography, etc, adapt to its scope and drive, the purpose that the makers sat down and did it. Each end does its job, and considering where you end up there's not much room for improvement in any area. Is it the Godfather? No. But its something completely different, and for what KTS was intending to accomplish, it was excellent.

Don't be deterred by the negative reviews, but don't go in expecting the recycling of Scorsese and Copella. This a picture of its own kind, of its own vision. Let it move you.

The House I Live In (2012)

The Slow-Motion Holocaust

[10/10 · 11 November 2012]

If you've been a student of most public schools you've learned about slavery.

There's a lyric I remember that says "I hate it when they tell us how far we came to be - as if our peoples' history started with slavery." Well, the history of subjugating minorities has not ENDED with slavery either, and retrospective condemnation of racism serves the purpose to perpetuate the racism embedded and invested in our country today.

The most important mistake is to confuse failure with success in regards to the apparent shortcomings of our establishment. I again use the example of public schools because the recent documentary "Waiting for Superman" did a fantastic job in addressing the "failures" of schools to educate children. It takes a book like James Lowen's Lies My Teacher Told Me to recognize the grand success of our school's indoctrination process: to teach obedience, not intelligence. It takes a documentary like The House I Live In to vocalize the airtight success of our administration in conducting the 41 years' drug war.

Logic should compute. If more money has been spent (a trillion dollars since the '70s,) the prison population has skyrocketed (2.4 million people incarcerated) and no progress has been made in keeping drugs off the streets, (similarly with our schools, with reform after reform we continue to perform beneath the feet of most industrialized countries,) you have to start looking at things a little differently. It is hard to see the exit of the maze when walking within its walls. This documentary helps to see things from the outside.

This film brings to light a lot of revealing facts that have been swept under the rug, like how opium wasn't an issue until Chinese started climbing the success latter in San Francisco, or how the police in border states can directly siphon the money from drug busts to reward their outfit. Mostly, it encourages a comparison between the way minorities have been apprehended with drug abuse and the apprehension of whites (who hold equal if not higher drug abuse statistics but make up a minority of the prison population.) And it encourages comparison between past, mass scale subjugation (often with eventual extermination) and, to quote the film, the slow-motion holocaust happening in our own country.

It recognizes the drug epidemic as an economic issue and a medical issue, not a racial issue. It recognizes the drug WAR as the glaring rash of vibrant racism, and the brutal front of a class war in a society where profits come first, human beings second. More to this point, it eludes to the country's prime motivation, net gain and increased GDP, and the plethora of companies from Sprint Mobile to GM to privatized prisons such as CCA, all of whom depend on the drug war to maintain stock value.

To quote ousted investigative journalist and ex-LAPD narcotics officer Michael Ruppert, "A snake eating its own tail is not nutritious."

Though it is outside the periphery of the film's focus and beyond the pale even for a documentary of this substance, the issue of international drug trafficking, and facilitation it has received, at times, from both the financial sector and intelligence agency of our country, was never brought to light in this film. Despite whether this topic is to be written off as conspiracy theory or submitted for further analysis, a film that introduces our economy's dependence on drug dependence and the targeting of minorities in an everlasting drug war, has a duty to at least address the controversy. I suggest raising the question on discussion boards and at Q&As, as my screening was lucky enough to have.

We live in a country that is infested with racism, now as much as any other time. Our economy depends on it, and the drug war has fertilized it. It is time to end it.

We Bought a Zoo (2011)

Despite Some Obvious Problems - The Movie Was Good

[7/10 · 1 November 2012]

There were many times during "We Bought a Zoo" I felt like I was seeing an unfinished movie. Nevertheless, it was a movie worth watching all the way through. (Its not entirely just about the little girl being cute.)

The Bad:

Transition shots. They were too long, for instance a car driving by would be on the screen for several seconds. These things add up especially if its a family movie with restless kids.

The Profanity. Not because it was a family movie - even the most sheltered children surely have been exposed to the words in this film, and even as a family film, it still holds a duty to be realistic. However a lot of the swears I felt were simply unnecessary for there scenes, and thus took precedence.

The OK:

Acting: Matt Damon is a good actor. A good actor - sometimes great (most notably his earliest in Good Will Hunting.) He doesn't exactly carry this film, but he at least shines above his female opposite. Scarlett Johansson, in my opinion, shouldn't act. Lord knows why she was chosen in Nolan's The Prestige, the one weak spot in that film.

The Ending: If you view the ending as an epilogue, it works. A little nostalgia, a little reflection on the road they've traveled. Otherwise its just a little weird. A large keystone for the film was Damon getting over the pain. Maybe - doing what he did - symbolized this, but could it have been done better by just stopping with the Zoo? I think so.

The Good:

Cinematography: The use of the sun in the film, especially those drifting shots where the daughter is playing with the birds and the sun shines above her, were remarkable. I've been to that part of California and the lighting, framing and film stock was effective enough that I felt like I was back. The Icelandic Soundtrack (mostly Sigur Ros) also complimented these shots very well.

Story line: The one area of recycling Hollywood doesn't fail at is recycling story lines. This story is something fresh and original - much needed, and calls upon important family issues such as sacrifice, letting go, and opening up.

Overall:

Had they gone over this project a few more times (with me in the cutting room, of course ;) it could have been upwards of a 9. It had a strong foundation. But it felt like too rough of a cut. Sometimes the camera angles were choppy, sometimes they were languid and beautiful. Sometimes the script was sentimental and smooth, sometimes it was just awkward. It was nonetheless a family film worth watching and enjoying. If it wasn't, I wouldn't have taken the time to write this review!

Zeitgeist: Moving Forward (2011)

A Positive Cinematic Evolvement of its Prequels

[10/10 · 28 January 2011]

Zeitgeist: Moving Forward has matured in many ways from its two prequels. The film series is not to be confused with The Zeitgeist Movement, but they are, in fact, collections of data displayed in the form of entertainment we know as film, to influence the direction the movement advocates.

For instance, many arguments against the transition out of the monetary paradigm is "human nature," which has been debated long before the film series came about, pretty much whenever someone brought up the idea of global change. Moving Forward opens with a segment dedicated towards explaining that people's behaviors are shaped out of their genetics' engagements with environment, into attributes misconstrued as "human nature," and how dangerous the argument of "it's genetic" really is in referral to the implausibility of change.

In maturation from the other two films, these understandings are translated through interviews with experts who have spent their lives studying, experimenting, researching, and experiencing these ideas to be true. There are very few quotes or miscellaneous video clips in this film; it is largely interview based, as you will notice it is listed as a documentary and not a documentary video, on this website. The information that is articulated through narration is also, unlike the other films, given little vulnerability to skepticism as it is prominently sourced with charts, graphs and articles that are explained in detail instead of sudden flashes across the screen. The narration in this film is less of a rant, dictation, or brainstorming activity, but more a gravity that pulls together the information presented in the interviews and the variety of existing evidence supporting the ideas of the film.

Like the other films, Zeitgeist: Moving forward demonstrates what several have agreed to be some of the best editing to be witnessed on film, coupled with what is a more subtle but still an appropriate and enjoyable score. The film is also more cinematically entertaining than the other two, frequented with laughable moments and more "pressure breaks," titled in that they allow for a breath of the film's running time and its subject matter.

For those who are afraid of this film, that it will interfere with the way things are and what is known to be reality, it should be noted that this is a very positive movie experience. I attended the Los Angeles premier with over 800 other people. There was a standing ovation at the end, lots of smiles and cheers and hugs, suffice to say a profusely moving collective exclamation of happiness, and hope, something is seldom seen today and when is seen, is often shallow and dead ended.

Moving Forward offers a realistic and accessible approach to the society we live within today and the behaviors exhibited in this society. It offers what is not only a necessary, but a very much possible transition into an alternatively sustainable societal outline, and goes into detail explaining what this way of living entails.

Zeitgeist III explains, ultimately, it is found within ourselves and the choices we make every day, to either perpetuate destructive, or at the very most - not entirely satisfactory lives, or, to finally recognize ourselves and each other, and our interrelation to the planet we all share, so to progress together towards a better way of living for everyone. It is not depressing, aggressive, ambiguously conspiracy driven, or the worst, in my opinion, left with loose ends. It is an extremely intelligent and highly enjoyable movie bringing about awareness and inspiration through an awakening to how things are, and what beauty waits for us in the future.

Animal Kingdom (2010)

razor sharp, reaches so far beyond the spectrum of "crime films"

[10/10 · 16 September 2010]

...it's like a body, infected with a plague, tossed in a river, the poison, just seeping out, infecting everything around it.

you come in at the downfall of a crime family (a mother, her four sons) and watch as the inevitable disintegration both reels in the unsuspecting and casts out it's sharpest edges, creating an incredibly dramatic cataclysm that is both quiet and treacherous.

the premise is a boy, 17, who has just lost his mother, and apathetically, "allows" himself to be taken in by his extended and unabashed underworld family.

The thing about this movie is it never lets up. There is not a moment the viewer feels likely to look away, though nothing here is easy to watch. There are several scenes during which I squirmed, my palms sweat, and actually I gasped. It is also deeply symbolic, and is not titled "animal kingdom" arbitrarily. You watch, mainly from the perspective of the boy, J, as he and those closest to him, (close not necessarily implying blood relationships, as he finds these may be the most dangerous)are increasingly immersed in this boiling, tragic descent. Unlike many films, AK expertly succeeds in displaying the disastrous consequences from several aspects in beautifully unfolded collection of circumstances, bringing J (and the audience) to an ultimate crossroads in finding place in "the kingdom." there are several memorable quotes and sequences, none of which will be spoiled in this review. The performances, to say the least, are incredibly real and convincing, and "animal kingdom" delivers us two of the most richly disorientated, disturbed and provocative "villains" to be recalled in recent film history. there is ultimately no real "hero" only an array of characters who offer incredible insights to the multi surfaced sides of human nature, and what lies beneath.

on a final note, AK was one of the most well directed films I've seen in a while, and absolutely shatters the realm of crime drama, into something totally new and introspective, mainly due to it's cunning, realistic, and deeply complex characters to merge, collide, evolve and devolve in front of our eyes that have forgotten to blink.

The Road (I) (2009)

A Miserable Journey Displayed Beautifully

[9/10 · 15 November 2009]

With a surplus of post-apocalyptic/disaster flicks present in today's film circle, the Road does what very few films in any genre seem capable of doing. Here is a picture that in it's own discreteness captures the realism of a holocaust horror, combining the absolute worst possible future with the most profoundly beautiful human characteristics that keep the main characters persevering. Not only does the story accurately exhibit the polar opposite aspects of a post apocalyptic existence, but the cinematography used during the flashbacks of a life full of color and hope many take for granted, is excellently positioned with the dark, dismal, and often terrifying reality that is the Road. The score was also fantastic and perfectly appropriate for the film.

The only two, minor issues I had were the sound editing, (MINOR!) and the ending which was NOT at all a disappointment, but I felt it was quite open, without giving anything away. This is, again, a minor issue, for the story in itself was a journey, and we see only a small portion of the great, tragic, and ultimately fulfilling struggle.

And, though I'm sure no more attention is necessary, the acting as a whole was phenomenal. Each film since LOTR Viggo has greatly improved and I'd like to think of this as the beginning of his finest hour. Very few performances touch me emotionally, and his was certainly one of them, in three scenes in particular which were, being discrete, (the parting flashback, the dinner, and the climax.) Well done, the Road, thank you Mr. Mortenson.