The Post (2017) - 6 stars out of 10

The Post (2017) - 6 stars out of 10

“The Post” is surprisingly lackluster.  I expected a lot more from a production bearing the names Spielberg, Streep, and Hanks.  The film is beautifully shot and has a unique supporting cast of character actors (David Cross, Bradley Whitford, Zach Woods), but the script has the excitement level of a news room.  I mean, if you are going to take a lot of liberties with history, you’d might as well add some more drama to give your cast better acting opportunities.  The main issue is that the script tells a singular story without many subplots and the characters don’t have a chance to transform.  Beyond that, I didn’t understand some of Steven Spielberg’s decisions.  “Let’s start with a war sequence solely to establish that one character feels that the war is hopeless but portray the rest of the story in a city without any reference to the opening.  Plus, we need to get in another jab at Nixon so let’s throw a 20-second Watergate scene in at the end, even though the events of the film take place over 5 days and Watergate happens more than a year later.”  Some aspects of the film just seemed very forced and not portrayed with the highest quality.  Honestly, the best actor in the film was Bob Odenkirk, not because he had a great character to work with but because he’s entertaining in and of himself.  Meryl Streep is the greatest actress of our generation but her performance lacked that “wow” moment that we expect in an Oscar-nominated role.  The same goes for Tom Hanks following his noteworthy performances in “Sully” and “Bridge of Spies” over the past two years.  You can see a bit of Steven Spielberg’s flair in the movement of the camera through the newsroom but the overall picture didn’t come together for me.  There were movies more deserving of a Best Picture nomination but the film’s relevance to the current presidency’s battle with the press secured it a spot.  “The Post” tells an interesting story but, considering the bodies of work of its major players, I don’t think that it will be remembered very far beyond this year’s award season.

[Pictured: "The Post" was disappointingly average and well below the caliber of its big names]

Matchstick Men - 9 stars out of 10

Matchstick Men - 9 stars out of 10

“Matchstick Men” is an unexpectedly riveting crime caper from sci-fi aficionado Ridley Scott.  I first saw this film during my formative movie-watching days and it (along with “Ocean’s 11”) was a driving force behind my love for heist films.  Some might immediately shy away from the film because of Nicolas Cage but fear not, this film was produced in the golden age of his career (1995-2004).  If your impressions of Cage are based on his output over the last decade, this film will change your opinion.  His portrayal of a con man with Tourette’s syndrome and OCD is very refined and methodical, with his tics growing more intense as his stress increases and becoming subdued as he calms down.  He can get a bit irritating at times, but that’s the point.  Moreover, he manages to develop chemistry with the characters around him amidst his panic attacks, irritability, and other characteristics.  Even with Cage’s masterclass occurring, Alison Lohman manages to steal the screen.  It is often painfully obvious when twenty-somethings are cast in the role of a teenager (“Mean Girls” immediately comes to mind) but Lohman’s youthful look and acting make for a convincing 14-year-old.  Another underrated actor that shines is Sam Rockwell.  I have always loved his performances, especially when he is cast as a sleazeball.  He is finally receiving some well-deserved critical attention for his performance in “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri,” but films like “Matchstick Men” and “Moon” show that it is long overdue.  The acting is great, the story is compelling, but the most important part is the twist.  It is one of those jaw-dropping twists that will always stick with you and is followed by a satisfying resolution.  There really isn’t anything bad to say about “Matchstick Men.”  It is a highly underrated film and you won’t regret giving it a shot.

[Pictured: Lohman and Cage develop a slightly-awkward-but-well-executed father-daughter relationship]

Coco (2017) - 10 stars out of 10

Coco (2017) - 10 stars out of 10

“Coco” is the best Disney film since “Frozen”!  It seems like this film has flown under everybody’s radar but its quality is beyond words.  I wasn’t sure what to think at first.  It seemed overly familiar with its “Corpse Bride”-esque land of the dead gags, the token dumb animal sidekick, and the I-don’t-appreciate-my-family plot from many Disney films, but the screenwriters had a lot of tricks up their sleeves.  It maintains an amazing sense of originality considering its similarities to other films, and the surprisingly educational Día De Los Muertos story continually gets better as the film progresses.  Once you finally comprehend the reason that the film is titled “Coco” (not the reason that you expect initially), the family theme grows even stronger.  The format of the story is interesting in that it is a series of layers that are pulled back one by one.  Each layer reveals more information about the family so that, instead of a giant twist at the end, the family dynamic is enhanced and understood on progressively deeper levels throughout the film.  It is incredible.  This is Pixar’s first musical and I found that the music is much more subtle than other animated musicals.  We never have that moment of “Oh, it’s time for another song.”  Instead, the music is fluidly interwoven throughout the story and seems more like a plot point than a musical number.  But that doesn’t make these catchy songs by Robert Lopez and Kristen Anderson-Lopez any less alluring.  “Remember Me” is geniusly used in three completely different ways throughout the film and will have you in tears at the end.  It almost acts as its own evolving theme, changing based on what we learn about the characters.  Similar to “Moana,” the film has an all Latino cast and the authenticity enhances the characters.  I love the visual design of the characters, especially Miguel when he is in his skeleton disguise.  They did an amazing job of making him look like a human and a skeleton at the same time.  Usually, we would be fixated on the creation of a beautiful Land of the Dead and colorful spirit animals but I almost forgot how beautiful the film was because the story is so incredible.  The writers managed to create laugh out loud moments within a story focused around death and they perfectly captured the Mexican culture.  Maybe the story resonated so strong with me as a musician who often gets called away from his family, but I feel like the themes in this story should resonate strongly with every parent out there.  It definitely makes me want to write a secret song like “Remember Me” for my children someday.  “Coco” is a slam-dunk to win the Best Animated Feature Oscar.  It’s creativity and deep, emotional content put it in a league of its own.  There is no other film like “Coco” and likely never will be again.

[Pictured: The contrast between the human and skeleton characters as well as the stunning Land of the Dead makes "Coco" a visual masterpiece]

Strong Island - 2 stars out of 10

Strong Island - 2 stars out of 10

“Strong Island” received an Oscar nomination for its relevance to topical issues in our  society (racism, corruption) but not for its actual quality as a film.  First, the film does not do a good job of explaining the most important piece of the puzzle: the murder of William Ford.  Director Yance Ford is obviously trying to build drama by telling the story in pieces as the film progresses but I’m still not clear on the details of William’s murder.  Much of the film’s accolades came from its emotionally charged interviews and emotions were inevitable since the director created this documentary about her murdered brother.  But then I think about the fact that she was the one recording her emotional reactions to various phone calls with people involved in the investigation.  Suddenly, all of those scenes seem staged and even a bit self-righteous.  But the hardest pill to swallow is the fact that the film simply doesn’t make a convincing case.  In the end, all that I’m left with is the story of a man who intimidated and provoked another man, only to be shot in self-defense.  It is hardly an argument that the Grand Jury ruling was incorrect.  Persuasive documentaries should take time to present the other side’s arguments and refute them so that we can make our decision for ourselves, but the film is so one-sided that I keep wondering what compelling arguments the other side would make.  “Strong Island” is undeniably emotional and topical.  I love the artistry of using physical photographs to tell the story and other aspects of how it was filmed.  I just can’t get behind a film that fails to make a compelling argument for its case.

[Pictured: The film has its artistic moments and points out the history of racism in the United States, but it falls short of making a compelling argument that racism was involved in the grand jury's decision]

Jerry Before Seinfeld - 9 stars out of 10

Jerry Before Seinfeld - 9 stars out of 10

"Jerry Before Seinfeld" is a look back on Jerry Seinfeld’s rise to international acclaim.  This hour-long special is filmed on the stage where Seinfeld launched his career in the 70’s, “The Comic Strip.”  He seamlessly mixes stories from his childhood with classic comedy sketches to take us on a journey full of laughs.  A few highlights include men’s obsession with tools, the intelligence of dogs, and the sock trying to escape from the dryer.  Fans of Seinfeld’s comedic style will love this while people who don’t understand his stating-the-obvious humor still won’t understand.  He is in classic form for every joke from start to finish.  “Jerry Before Seinfeld” is mostly family appropriate and a great homage to Seinfeld's tv show and routines that helped to put stand-up on the map.

[Pictured: The most interesting part of this special arrives when Seinfeld unloads his folder with every joke that he used from 1975 to "this morning"]

Darkest Hour (2017) - 9 stars out of 10

Darkest Hour (2017) - 9 stars out of 10

“Darkest Hour” was not one of my more anticipated films for this awards season but it completely blew me away.  Although I have never been a history buff, this film helped to bring the complex political climate of WWII to life.  It makes an amazing companion piece to Christopher Nolan's "Dunkirk" and the timing of their releases work in a perfectly complimentary way.  While Nolan’s film portrays the battlefield action of the Dunkirk situation, “Darkest Hour” captures the behind-the-scenes political actions that determined the fate of the soldiers.  The script makes these dry textbook events riveting through a long series of passionate speeches by Winston Churchill.  The film was clearly written for Gary Oldman to receive an Oscar nomination and I have no doubt that it will work.  In fact, he will win with this breathtaking performance.  Each jaw-dropping speech is better than the last until the film reaches Churchill's history-changing speech to Parliament.  With each speech also comes Oldman’s perfection of his character’s vocal tone, mannerisms, and occasional mumbling.  The realism is further enhanced by a talented crew that spent over 200 hours applying makeup to literally transform him into Churchill.  This film is 90% Gary Oldman but he receives strong support from Lily James.  She provides the eyes through which we experience the story and uses this role to prove that her acting chops extend beyond Disney fairytales.  Her performance in "Cinderella" was thoughtful and vivid but it was important for her to show her diversity as an actress with a role that takes on a completely different tone.  Some of my characters came out of the fictional scene on the London Underground where Churchill gets to hear the opinions of his people.  This scene is pure magic.  The wonderful performances are tied together by a simple, beautiful soundtrack by Dario Marianelli that sets the mood for each scene with serenity and impending doom.  Even though we see Churchill succeed, the film successfully maintains an overarching tone of the world events at play.  “Darkest Hour” may seem dry at first glance but you will quickly latch on to the film’s hero through the unforgettable, impassioned monologues by Gary Oldman.

[Pictured: This film is all about Gary Oldman, his impassioned monologues, and his literal transformation into Winston Churchill]

Lucky Number Slevin - 8 stars out of 10

Lucky Number Slevin - 8 stars out of 10

“Lucky Number Slevin” is an underrated crime drama with a mind-blowing twist that makes this a must-see!  In this story, Josh Hartnett is a victim of mistaken identity who is forced to repay debts to two rival crime lords when he can’t produce identification to defend himself.  The plot may sound a bit thin but it will all make sense in the end.  The crime lords are played by Morgan Freeman and Ben Kingsley, which is another great reason to watch this film.  Hartnett and Lucy Lui are okay in their love story but I’m more drawn to Bruce Willis’ mysterious character and Stanley Tucci’s performance as a hard-nosed detective.  The film has all of the grit that you’d expect from an R-rated crime movie so be prepared for a lot of blood and profanity.  The violence doesn’t go beyond what is appropriate for the genre, especially because the film’s oft-lighthearted tone keeps us from dwelling on what we’ve just seen.  Unlike the violence, the excessive f-words and sexual content are not always necessary to the story and make it too edgy for my taste.  “Lucky Number Slevin” is a unique film with one of the best twists that you will ever see, as long as you can stomach its extreme content.

P.S. Don’t worry if you feel like you don’t understand why the main character is named “Slevin,” it’ll make sense in the end!

[Pictured: “Lucky Number Slevin” has so much star power that its level of entertainment is inevitable]