Director: Dexter Fletcher
Writers: Sean Macaulay (screenplay), Simon Kelton (screenplay)
Stars: Taron Egerton, Hugh Jackman, Tom Costello Jr.

Synopsis: The story of Eddie Edwards, the notoriously tenacious British underdog ski jumper who charmed the world at the 1988 Winter Olympics.

[/info]

In my review of Race, I started off by saying that the story of Jesse Owens is rich and full of such potential, that it was begging to be on the big screen, especially due to it’s cultural relevancy at the moment. The story of Eddie Edwards I’d put in that same camp. It may not have the cultural “importance” that Race depicted but Eddie the Eagle is perfect for those who need an uplifting and inspiring story about an underdog who represents exactly what the Olympics are all about.

The film opens with Eddie (Taron Egerton) as a little kid who has big aspirations of being an olympic athlete one day. However, he’s hindered by physical ailments with knee problems and needs support just to get around. That doesn’t stop Eddie though who begins to “train” himself until he’s old enough to take up skiing, a sport he chooses after the epiphany that he’ll have a bigger chance of realizing his Olympic dreams through the Winter Olympics. After a small fallout in downslope skiing, Eddie turns his eye toward ski jumping and moves to Germany to train. There he meets former USA Olympian, Bronson Peary (Hugh Jackman), who isn’t interested in Eddie at first until Peary notices that Eddie will continue to jump, even if it kills him. From there, the two go on an endearing journey of bonding, training and proving some people wrong.

As a film, Eddie the Eagle is pretty messy. The pacing is disjointed, it’s rather tacky in spots and the film stifles most thematic depth with fickle jokes or unnecessary gags that halt any momentum it builds. That said, I’m not convinced the film was really going for anything but inspiring fun. Dexter Fletcher is more concerned with being goofy and giving his characters flair that make them so damn lovable. Sure, the screenplay throws in some drama between Eddie and Bronson where you’d expect but for the most part, the story is straight forward and everything you’ve seen before. It has all the coaching cliche’s, stirring speeches and athletic courage you would want to see in a film like this. But it’s how Fletcher plays with the material that engages you.

Fletcher does a great job of letting Egerton and Jackman play with their characters, especially during the bigger scenes and it’s entertaining throughout. In one moment, Jackman’s Peary describes a metaphor that ski jumping is like making love to your favorite actress (or actor) and he certainly depicts what that would be like for him. It’s an awkward scene but it has a hilarious payoff during the film’s, ahem, climax. In another scene, Egerton’s Eddie is seduced by a bar owner who isn’t afraid to let him know that she wouldn’t mind hanging out with him in the closet, if you catch my drift. Both of these scenes can be seen as coarse and perhaps a bit uncouth but it all plays into the directors hands at attempting to have fun with the material, while still treating it seriously enough. Fletcher isn’t mocking Edwards’ story or Edwards himself but rather honoring him with a playful approach. The balance was just right.

I can’t leave you without mentioning the score by Matthew Margeson, which is utterly perfect. The melodies are upbeat and have a slight 80’s vibe that helps engulf you in the aesthetics of the film. It’s quite beautiful and help enhance the sense of fun this film was going for. And overall, while the film is an easy target to pick apart critically due to it’s problems, it’s still a very good piece of entertainment. It’s inspiring and wonderfully shows how Eddie Edwards is the quintessential underdog. He was in it for the love of sport. It was what he had to overcome that gave him conviction. Simply, Eddie soars here with heart and fun humor.

Overall Grade: B

[divider]

Director: John Hillcoat
Writers: Matt Cook
Stars: Casey Affleck, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Anthony Mackie, Aaron Paul, Norman Reedus, Kate Winslet, Gal Gadot

Synopsis: A gang of criminals and corrupt cops plan the murder of a police officer in order to pull off their biggest heist yet across town.

[/info]

Triple 9 is a bit of an anomaly. The film features arguably the best assembled cast for a film in the past few years, topping it off with a director whom, with only a few films to his name, is already a near reckoning force in the art of gritty filmmaking. Triple 9 is a movie that is so well acted and directed, and as a result shouldn’t disappoint, nor should it lack depth, interesting characters, logic, or drama. Yet somehow it manages to do all those things it shouldn’t. This is not by any fault of the film’s miraculous cast or challenging director, but in its script, a script that is unfortunately overloaded, and yet not loaded enough.

To explain the plot of Triple 9 is rather pointless, but here’s the start. It is modern day Atlanta, the Russian mob runs the criminal biz and recruits dirty cops with real tactical training to carry out their criminal needs. These cops need to break into a national security facility (for what reasons are still unknown) and need to create a distraction to buy themselves time to pull off the heist, hence where the title of the film comes into play; a “triple 9” is police code for officer down. What happens next is far beyond logical or cohesive, not in the sense of plot confusion, but moral confusion. By the midway point you are left wondering not necessarily what is going on, but why it is going on, and why the film just didn’t keep it simple.

Matt Cook’s script packs ten pounds of story into a five pound bag. He seems focused on convoluted plot threads that continually pile upon each other, rather than attempt to establish the world of this film or its inhabitants, resulting in the film’s lack of depth for its drama, characters, and setting. It’s a script that feels overly excited to keep moving forward, instead of progressing forward, which is incredibly ironic for a film where so much happens narratively yet feels like nothing is truly happening at all. Story is important for sure, but it’s not the only important ingredient for a good film; that’s the mistake Cook makes as a first time writer, and his inexperience shows.

But the film does have its rescue team, here to cover up for Cook’s mistakes (well, some of them). Leading the charge is John Hillcoat, a director of astounding grit and intensity. Hillcoat at least attempts to bring a thematic resonance to this film, by presenting a world we may not have known existed, and painting it with a moral ambiguity. His visceral action, heist scenes, and shootouts mirror the greatness of a film like Michael Mann’s Heat, and it is truly riveting to see. And he even gets effective performances out of his entire cast, in particular Casey Affleck, Anthony Mackie, and Chiwetel Ejiofor, who are all at the heart of this film’s emotional core (for how much of it there is). And despite the plot’s convoluted nature, Hillcoat is still able to balance his cast fairly well amidst the chaos on screen.

Unfortunately, this all leads to a final act where the script rears its ugly head again, one that makes so little sense and throws all logic and drama out the window. It’s as if Cook knew what he wanted the ending of the film to be, yet had no idea how to arrive at that point. After movies like The Proposition, The Road, and Lawless, perhaps John Hillcoat should get back together with Nick Cave again; their past teamwork has made for some very consistent films, a consistency that this film sorely needed. Triple 9 could have been something spectacular, it has all the pieces of a great cast and director to make a modern crime classic, and their skills are seen in full force. That’s what makes Triple 9 more disappointing than anything else; it’s not a bad movie, but “not bad” shouldn’t be good enough here. Word of advice to any upcoming directors: do not work with Matt Cook.

Overall Grade: B-

[divider]

Director: Stephen Hopkins
Writers: Joe Shrapnel, Anna Waterhouse
Stars: Stephan James, Jason Sudeikis, Eli Goree

Synopsis: Jesse Owens’ quest to become the greatest track and field athlete in history thrusts him onto the world stage of the 1936 Olympics, where he faces off against Adolf Hitler’s vision of Aryan supremacy.

[/info]

The story of Jesse Owens is one of heartbreak but also incredible inspiration. Rising above all expectations, Owens not only went to Nazi Germany in 1936 despite obstacles getting there, but he took advantage of every opportunity he had to represent something that is 100% uniquely to him. That is to say, this story is ripe with rich material just begging to be on the big screen.

Race opens with Owens (Stephan James) getting ready to head off to The Ohio State University, the first in his family to go to college. Soon after arriving on campus, he meets legendary coach Larry Snyder (Jason Sudeikis) who starts to prep Owens for the Olympic games. Along the way, Owens makes some mistakes, is forced to amend some relationships and runs into some hurdles (see what I did there) that may keep him from his dreams. Eventually the NCAAP tells Owens to stay away from the Games to boycott Adolf Hitler and his Aryan supremacy. This creates internal conflict in Owens, who understands this is a once in a lifetime opportunity as an athlete.

On paper, this should’ve been great. However, screenwriters Joe Shrapnel and Anna Waterhouse force so much into this narrative and contrive the utter loving —- out of it, that every character comes off thin and shallow. Even the Owens character himself never really feels human. The script bounces from Owens to USA Olympic politics to German politics and back so often that it undercuts any momentum it builds. The forceful writing of building Nazi Germany makes no sense within the context of this story. Instead of letting the audience bring in their already known knowledge of Nazi Germany, the screenplay feels like they have to show you that the Nazi’s are bad guys. As a side effect, time is taken away from Owens that would have otherwise built upon and developed him into a richer character. We never really get a sense of how Nazi Germany effected Owens, other than the superficial response we’d all expect. This feeling is a direct response of a messy narrative with the wrong focus.

When Owens is in the United States before the Games, there’s time spend on his journey leading up to the Games that is just as messy, just as contrived and just as frustrating. Even the athletic action sequences feel uninspired and add little excitement. Stephen Hopkins’ direction is fine and Race is more of a victim of it’s script but there’s not much in his direction that helps much. I’ll admit though, the shot of Owens as he walks into the Olympic stadium is awe-inducing and magnetic, a feeling that was rarely felt here, unfortunately.

That said, James and Sudeikis are pretty good and certainly have a chemistry that works here. While many of their scenes may not work narratively, their performances do bring a visceral quality that is appreciated. However, if you ask me, Andrew Moodie stole the show when he was on screen, playing Henry Owens, the father of Jesse. Moodie has only one line of dialouge but he says so much in this film with his expressions and how he acts with his eyes. He displays this love and pride toward Jesse that is moving and so effective on screen.

All in all, while the real-life story of Jesse Owens is spectacular and absolutely film worthy, Race doesn’t quite have enough working in it’s favor to finish on a strong note. It starts off the starting line fast, stumbles early on and isn’t ever able to recover.

Overall Grade: C-

[divider]

Director: Nicholas Hytner
Writers: Alan Bennett
Stars: Maggie Smith, Alex Jennings, Jim Broadbent

Synopsis: A man forms an unexpected bond with a transient woman living in her car that’s parked in his driveway.

[/info]

If you’re not familiar with The Lady in the Van, it’s a film based on the Alan Bennett play of the same name. And in a weird way, if you’re a fan of Deadpool and charming indie films, then this film is right up your alley. Like Deadpool, but to a lesser and cleaner way, The Lady in the Van is very meta and the Alan Bennett character is very aware he’s in a film. Bennett works as the narrator here but his narration comes in the form of a personified duplicate of himself, to whom he talks to throughout the entire film. There are also moments where the film pauses, and to say vaguely as to not spoil it, that become more obvious in it’s meta storytelling, as to honor the subject of the film, Miss Shepard.

Miss Shepard (Maggie Smith) is older and homeless but has the comforts of a van that she lives in, as for her it’s all she needs. She parks and makes home outside the house of playwright Alan Bennett in Camden, London. While awkward at first, Bennett sort of, well shepherd’s her and gives her assistance as needed. What was supposed to be a few weeks until Miss Shepard found a permanent place to live became something neither of them ever imagined. The two form a relationship that is zany, quirky and full of hilarity.

It’s not all fun and games though, Miss Shepard is a bit distant and indignant at times. She’s cold and bitter, even when people are being nice to her. However, there’s a reason for all her abrasiveness. As the film peels back the layers of who Miss Shepard was, there’s deep levels of regret and unforgiveness that have eaten her all these years. A lot of it wasn’t her fault but she shouldered these emotions to significant levels and it’s taken it’s toll on her.

Overall, The Lady in the Van isn’t necessarily going for profundity or trying to be revealing of anything deep but it’s ideas around regret and treating people with respect do come across genuinely. The film is wanting to have fun and depict Miss Shepard in a way that is honoring to her crazy but lovable story. But they don’t stifle her problems either. She was someone who struggled throughout her later years in life and that does come across on screen well. Maggie Smith is terrific in a role that she just eats up in the most endearing way possible. The balance of irascible biting depicted throughout but also the necessary sympathy you feel is magnetic in Smith’s performance. Alex Jennings is also wonderful playing Bennett (both versions) and the chemistry between Jennings and Smith is visceral in every glorious way.

The Lady in the Van succeeds at exactly what it’s trying to attempt. It’s a feel-good story about a captivating individual who just shows up on your doorstep one day. How do you cope with that? Bennett had a deteriorating mother at the time. Did he need this in his life? Could he have just told her to leave? Probably. But what does it say about the actions he chose? Yeah, this film is a fun exploration between two juxtaposing characters but there are some great questions that arise that seem simple on the surface, but would you react the same if you’re being honest? If you ask me, the film earns those honest questions.

Overall Grade: B+

[divider]

Director: Robert Eggers
Writers: Robert Eggers
Stars: Anya Taylor-Joy, Ralph Ineson, Kate Dickie, Harvey Scrimshaw

Synopsis: A family in 1630s New England is torn apart by the forces of witchcraft, black magic and possession.

[/info]

There is an evil lurking behind the shadows in The Witch; here’s a hint, it’s not a witch. Unless Robert Eggers, with his sinister quality behind the camera, can now be considered one. The Witch is a modern horror movie that is less concerned with physical witchcraft, regardless of what the film’s title suggests. This makes for an overall satisfying addition to the modern resurgence of horror filmmaking.

The Witch takes place in 1630s New England, focusing on the “banishment” of a Puritan family from their plantation due to a disagreement in beliefs. The family finds a spot to reside and farm in the wooded outskirts, where an entity beyond comprehension may be lurking in the trees. The horror ensues after the disappearance of the family’s infant son, and what instantly happens next will simply make your stomach turn and skin curl. As the horror continues, this good-natured family becomes engulfed in sin, paranoia, and religious fanaticism. And it’s fantastic.

As already alluded to above, the real star of the film is Robert Eggers. As a first time writer and director, it is astounding to see such craft in producing a film that is both a glorious exercise in fresh horror techniques, and an authentic period piece. Eggers builds tension not necessarily slowly, but calmly and cautiously; he waits and lets the film’s ideas gradually carry the story and its characters, only to then raise the hairs on your neck when you least expect it, and in a big way. Eggers’ research of the time period and the language is also uncanny; his writing as a representation of 17th Century New England is perfection in its authenticity, whereas the stark cinematography and art direction continues to complement that authenticity even further. If there’s one thing a great horror film needs to succeed, that’s authenticity.

This beautifully translates to the film’s dense and diverse collection of themes. The Witch uses history to paint a portrait of the paranoia of early witchcraft, in a time prior to the Salem Witch Trials, and how that paranoia leads to a family’s destruction. It focuses on the developing evil of this time, and the repercussions of hiding from that danger instead of recognizing its existence. Eggers drives this even further using religious faith and fanaticism, God vs. Satan, and most importantly the repercussions of sin, specifically pride, lies, and even impure sexuality. This ultimately breaks a good-hearted family down, leading them down a path of accusations and madness.

The Witch has been aesthetically compared to that of The Shining and The Crucible, and it is easy to see why. But that fails to give enough credit where credit is due; Eggers has a unique direction style, and it translates here. And the film has this drama that is sorely missing in most modern horror, even further emulated by the film’s incredible performances, most notably Anya Taylor-Joy and young Harvey Scrimshaw. The Witch may initially lack a real emotional resonance at first, and it may introduce these characters a bit suddenly, but this allows the film’s setting and time period to take charge, and it takes a really talented director to use those aesthetics to enhance a film’s drama, but that’s exactly what Eggers does. He also makes a goat scary, a reason alone to see this movie. The Witch may be too abstract for some, but in its execution it has the chance of standing the test of time, a true characteristic of a horror classic.

Overall Grade: A-

[divider]