Rate That Movie Part IV: Movies Never Sleep

[Geezer]

Finally got around to seeing Interstellar today. I liked it quite a bit. Thought the concepts dealt with were vastly interesting and that made the nearly 3 hour run time never feel long to me. I was always wanting more. Plus the action sequences were incredibly well done, filling you with a tension that was palpable. That being said, I can easily see why anyone would hate the film. Hell, I couldn't wrap my head around half of what was going on (which I think a second and third viewing would certainly help.) There's just so much science going on that you can easily get lost in it, especially if its not your thing. So while I don't think it is on the level of some of Nolan's other masterpieces, those are some of my all time favorite films, this was still a great film that I will almost certainly watch again. B+

[JohnErle]

Birdman - 8/10

Birdman is a stylistic tour-de-force for director Alejandro González Iñárritu, full of great performances and a fantastic use of jazz drumming in the original score which beautifully evokes the main characters' chaotic mental state. The film might be a bit too stylish for its own good, keeping the audience at a distance from the characters by forcing them to notice the director's use of technique. It's ironic that Keaton's character in Birdman is trying to mount a play based on the work of Raymond Carver, who was known for a stark realism that is the antithesis of Birdman's over-the-top characters, unlikely plot developments, and stylistic indulgences. A little more Carver might have made the movie better. I also could have done without the heavy-handed rants about the evils of Hollywood vs. the artistic integrity of live theatre and the out-of-place commentary on social media, and a more convincing Birdman costume might have made the story a tad more believeable as something other than allegory. Still, when you approach the film as an exercise in style, it's often a wonder to behold.

[Buscemi]

Interstellar ***.5/****

If this movie taught us anything, it's that we are all fucked. Christopher Nolan, that mad artistic genius, has made a film that combines all of the world's problems (global warming, the reduction of budgets of non-military programs, the rewriting of history books to hide truths) and made it into an easy-to-sell 169 minute film. But despite the high quality of the film, most audiences will more than likely never realize what Nolan was saying with this film. It's not so much a film about space travel but how the human race is forever in a state of delusion, being too pig-headed to realize what's really going on as they are too into themselves to do what really needs to be done. This movie is a wake-up call to the world and I personally feel many only managed to hit the snooze button.

On the technical front, it's a very beautiful film with excellent technicals and a pleasing score by Hans Zimmer (I hear he finally mastered the Morricone style). As for acting, I was most impressed by John Lithgow as the grandfather. For some reason, he stood out the most for me in the cast. I am a bit disappointed I didn't see the IMAX version though (I came a bit late to the theatre so I had to settle for a standard digital showing).

[JohnErle]

Whiplash - 8/10

It's certainly an invigorating cinematic experience with outstanding central performances, but what keeps the film from being great is the fact that none of it could ever happen in the year 2014. Parents and school administrators are so obsessed with trying to weed out bullying, and yet this teacher is allowed to mercilessly abuse his students, both verbally and physically, and it's been going on for years? I didn't buy that for a second. If the movie had been set in the fifties, back when teachers could get away with a lot more, and when jazz was still relevant, it would have been plausible, if still over-the-top. It was never anything less than entertaining, but Guardians Of The Galaxy was more plausible.

[Chienfantome]

The director actually said in interviews that he based the film on his own experience as a high school jazz drummer and how it sort of was like a boot camp, and the guy is 29, so that wasn't in the fifties But I haven't read the interviews for Guardians of the Galaxy, so maybe it is even more based on experience, I don't know. Could be.
Anyway, great film, it's finally opening in France next week, I look forward to seeing it again.

[JohnErle]

Just because he was in a jazz band in high school that doesn't mean the story isn't a complete fabrication. It's not a documentary, after all. I had a few intimidating teachers when I was a kid too, but saying that you went through a program that was like a boot camp is different from portraying behaviour that would be unacceptable in an actual boot camp. My guess is that he exaggerated the behaviour he experienced for dramatic effect, since I'm sure the real story was far more mundane, but I say he took it way too far and completely destroyed the film's credibility. It was fun to watch, but only for the artistry that went into making it.

[Chienfantome]

It's way more than just fun to watch. In my opinion
And I really wouldn't go as far as saying that such behaviours couldn't happen in real life in 2014. Chazelle sure pushes the limits, but not that far off. And this isn't what the film is aiming at. The film explores what burns inside of us, that passion that makes us cross the lines, in terms of relationships, of human behaviour. It is extreme, but I wouldn't say it's unbelievable.

[numbersix]

Haven't seen it yet, but certainly in the film industry there are some insane and dangerous people, even when they're teaching. I'm sure that could extend to the music world too.

[JohnErle]

Yes, the movie does try to explore themes about the passions of artists and asks the question "how far is too far?" but by presenting a scenario that is so far beyond the realm of possibility, it offers no reason to take its themes seriously since the director fails to establish that he understands how the world works.

If this story has been about a famous jazz bandleader recruiting new musicians to join his band, then fine, I would have had no problem with the scenario being presented, since everything would have been happening between consenting adults, but in the context of a school, and a prestigious private school full of rich, spoiled millennials at that, there's no way this behaviour would have been tolerated for as long as it was. You throw one chair at a student and you're gone. The potential for a lawsuit is way too high, and the reputation of the school is worth far more than any one teacher.

And that story about Charlie Parker that the movie keeps falling back on to make its scenario more believeable? That didn't happen in the context of a school either. Also, it may not have even happened.

In Slate, Forrest Wickman accused the film of distorting and misinterpreting the anecdote about Charlie Parker that both Neiman and Fletcher retell and frequently allude to, in order to fit the film's themes. Both state that drummer Jo Jones threw a cymbal at the teenage Parker's head as punishment for Parker's supposedly losing the beat of the composition they were performing in Count Basie's band during a 1930s performance. "Jones," Wickman wrote, "didn't throw the cymbal at Parker's head. He threw it at the floor around his feet, 'gonging' him off. In other words, it was not an episode of physical abuse."

[transformers2]

They're in college, not public school, so the student's are far less likely to get their parents involved and file a lawsuit. The kids know that Fletcher's tactics are morally wrong, but they have too much respect to let anyone outside of the facility know what's going on. I grew up in a primarily wealthy community and had a teacher in middle school who used to throw stools and markers at kids all the time, and no one ever reported him because he was an excellent and well-respected teacher. Christ, he managed to win teacher of the year just 4-5 years ago. And trust me if someone was going to report this guy, it would've happened long ago. I understand that these character's come from wealthy backgrounds and are more likely to report such behavior since they have the money to pay for the legal proceedings, but I don't find it to be even remotely implausible that a teacher could get away with these things in the modern day.

[JohnErle]

It looked like an expensive private school to me, making it even more likely that he would have been fired years ago. And the blind reverence all the students showed him also didn't ring true. Millennials aren't exactly renowned for respecting their elders, authority, or institutions, so the carte blanche we has given to humiliate students and slap them around didn't work for me. The first time we see him outside the school he's playing in some crappy little club in front of 20 people, and his band in the climax is only the opening act in the festival, so he's far from the Bob Dylan of jazz, so why are all the students so desperate for his approval? It was entertaining to watch him heap abuse on his students, like watching Clint Eastwood be a cranky old racist in Gran Torino, and watching Teller get the better of him towards the end was appealing, in the much the same way audiences enjoyed watching the frat boys get the best of Dean Wormer in Animal House, but I don't think the movie works on any deep, meaningful level because the cult of personality build around Simmons' character is too wildly over-the-top.

[BanksIsDaFuture]

I don't find it hard to believe that none of the students would ever report Simmons' actions to higher-ups, especially if they wanted to stay in his band and reap the rewards later after school. Look at that Rutgers basketball coach who eventually got fired last year - he'd been abusing his players for years until someone took it upon themselves to leak a video of it. Also - crazy coaches like Bobby Knight who kept his job because he was so good at it.

After the other kid killed himself, the lady mentions something about they'd had reports of Simmons' behavior as a teacher. I take from that that the school knew about it but turned a blind eye since his band was always winning competitions and was legendary - only when a kid killed himself and another attacked Simmons that they decided they had to step in.

I know how a certain idea or moment can stick out and ruin a movie, but if you wanna talk unrealistic, you only need to bring up Gone Girl.

[JohnErle]

I still don't buy it, and I never will.

As for Gone Girl, I've said before that I don't think it asks audiences to see it as anything other than a wildly over-the-top, neo-noir thriller, with a dollop of social commentary as a bonus, while Whiplash takes itself a lot more seriously and suffers because of it.

[Buscemi]

Top Five ***/****

Though more dramatic and darker than Annie Hall (the film many have compared this one to), Chris Rock's commentary on fame in today's world still gets the job done and manages to be much better than when Judd Apatow tried it five years ago with Funny People. The cast is extremely well assembled (from Rock and Rosario Dawson to J.B. Smoove and Cedric the Entertainer and even cameos from Jerry Seinfeld, Adam Sandler and Whoopi Goldberg as well as a scene-stealing DMX) and Rock has much improved as a director compared to his first two films. Rock also manages to be spot-on in his criticisms throughout the film, analyzing pressure from fans and media, reality television, the modern state of film criticism, roles taking for the money and life itself. It's essentially a Chris Rock routine turned into a feature-length movie (though I feel that Andre isn't an avatar for Chris but rather based on Adam Sandler with elements of Dave Chappelle and himself thrown in).

In short, it's not a classic but you must give Paramount credit for picking it up and going wide. It's a film definitely worth seeing. And you will probably never think of hot sauce the same again.

[Shrykespeare]

Saw two movies today.


Big Hero 6

My GOD, this was awesome. 10/10


Penguins of Madagascar

My GOD, this was awful. 3/10