A Movie Review: American Sniper

American Sniper.  This movie is based on the true story of Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle (Bradley Cooper).  He starts out life protecting his younger brother.  He grows up with a won't give an inch personalty.  It fits perfectly with what he does, riding in rodeo events.  Then terrorists attacks start to occur across the globe and he decides to volunteer to serve in the US military.

It quickly becomes apparent that his skill set is precision shooting.  While stationed in America, he also runs into his future wife at a bar, Taya (Sienna Miller).  They marry and then 9/11 occurs.  He is sent to Iraq.  There, he starts to make a name for himself as America's more deadly sniper.  He is so accurate that a $180,000 bounty is put on his head.  An enemy sniper attempts to capture this bounty.  The rumor being that the enemy sniper is a former Syrian Olympian named Mustafa (Sammy Sheik).

Chris does four tours in Iraq.  This causes major disruptions at home.  While home, he suffers from PTSD.  His wife attempts to get him help, but he refuses.  Somehow, he finds refuge in going back to Iraq.  This desire is driven by his early youth when he was his brother's protector.  The tensions continue to grow at home with his wife wanting him to open up about his experience.  She also, of course, wants him to stop doing his tours as it is now his responsibility (she feels) to be there for her and their two young children.

This movie does carry some baggage as it deals with the Iraq war.  Many Americans feel (even those who initially supported the Iraq war) that it was a political blunder to go into Iraq.  It may have even assisted in the rise of ISIS.  On the other hand, this movie is an intense, based on real life, action movie.  Nearly every moment in Iraq is edge of your seat stuff.  Then during Chris' brief stays in back in America, you see the intense psychological damage that war can cause where even the most normal activities such as a car tailgating or the roar of a mechanic's machinery can set a war veteran on edge.

I read some brief lines this criticized this movie because it didn't delve into the Iraqi people themselves; however, one has to understand that this movie is bio-pic not a critical analysis of various aspects of the Iraq war.

A Movie Review: Selma

Selma. Martin Luther King Jr (David Oyelowo) has just been given the Nobel Peace Prize.  His immediate move is to meet with President Lyndon B. Johnson (Tom Wilkinson).  The two don't see eye-to-eye on what should be the main Washington DC political priority.  LBJ wants to focus on poverty.  MLK wants the focus shifted to voting.  To press the issue, MLK decides to head to Selma.  Selma is in Alabama.  The governor is George Wallace (Tim Roth).  The county sheriff is Jim Clark (Stan Houston).  MLK calculates correctly that these two individuals would misplay their hand.  The first reaction is mild; however, when MLK plans a march from Selma to Montgomery things heat up.  The march (MLK isn't leading the march as he is tied up at home dealing with personal issues) gets to the Edmund Pettis Bridge.  Here, the Alabama state troopers attack the marchers with batons and teargas.  It is a horrible scene that turns the tide in the favor of civil rights.

First of all, this movie gives you enormous respect for the various civil rights leaders.  To see Hosea Williams (Wendell Pierce) and John Lewis (Stephen James) marching over the bridge that first time really makes one think.  Would I be willing to continue walking knowing what was awaiting me?  Of course, to be honest, this is also a question one can ask when seeing similar largely non-violent protests pop up in our own day and age such as in Egypt.

The movie also openly admits to the conflicts that arose between the various civil rights organizations, specifically highlighted in this movie is the differences between MLK and his team versus SNCC.  SNCC had worked in Selma for months and didn't appreciate MLK and  his organization taking the lead in that city.  The political, strategic and tactical decision making is interesting to watch unfold on screen.

My one criticism of this movie (and a similar criticism can be tossed at Lincoln) is that it perhaps plays more to the politics/history junkie.

A Movie Review: Into the Woods

Into the Woods. This movie takes a number of fairy tales and mashes it all together.  We have Cinderella (Anna Kendrick), Little Red Riding Hood (Lilla Crawford), Rapunzel (Mackenzie Mauzy) and Jack (Daniel Huttlestone).  They are brought together in one story when the Baker (James Corden) and the Baker's Wife (Emily Blunt) are informed by the Witch (Meryl Streep) that a family curse will be lifted if they recover items that all four previously mentioned characters possess:  shoe, cape, hair, and cow.

There is a joy to this movie driven by some fun loving dialogue and music.  "I was raised to be charming, not sincere," is a classic quote.  The music duet between Cinderella's Prince (Chris Pine) and Rapunzel's Prince (Billy Magnussen) is hysterical.  There comes a "but," however.  The movie takes a turn to the negative in the closing chapter of the movie.  Certain complications arise and the Baker's Wife pays the typical price that nearly always occurs across any movie genre.  It is actually a twist that sort of puts an unnecessary -- dare I call it -- sexist twist to this movie.

 

A Movie Review: The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty. Walter Mitty (Ben Stiller) lives a meticulous and somewhat dated lifestyle. His apartment has gadgets from a decade ago. He carefully balances his checkbook after each expenditure.  It doesn't take long for us to realize that Walter has one other quirk:  he lives in an imaginary world.  He is also employed in an unfortunate field and unfortunate economic sector.  He's a negative asset manager employed at Life Magazine.  I am not an expert in photography careers, but with digital I suspect that there isn't much need for a negative asset manager.  And we know that print magazines are having a difficult time of it.  

It all comes to a head when Life Magazine is bought out.  In comes Ted Hendricks (Adam Scott) to make the necessary changes.  It is announced that Life Magazine is getting out of the print world and going fully digital.  Preparations are made for the final print edition.  Famed Life photographer Sean O'Connell (Sean Penn) who still loves shooting film sends over a roll of film, claiming to have the shot for the final cover.  Ted presses Walter for the photo.  Unfortunately, the negative is missing.  Walter goes on an adventure, attempting to find the elusive Sean O'Connell.  He finds himself going from Greenland to Iceland to Afghanistan (via Yemen).  (For some reason, I recall someone getting in trouble with TSA in real life for traveling through Yemen so I wonder if that was written into the film as a hidden tribute to that individual).

Can a movie go from blah to fantastic based on the last minute or two of a movie?  Doubtful.  Yes, there is some nice quirkiness to this movie.  Yes, the movie does try to get your empathy going in terms of Walter's mother.  But it didn't work until those last two minutes when it hits you with that wow moment.

One thing that came to my mind while watching this movie:  I've been to Iceland.  I know how windy it is in Iceland.  How could Walter actually ride a bike in that country without getting blown off his bike?  I wonder if the filmmakers made some special wind protective screens when they filmed scenes of Walter riding his bike in Iceland.

  

My Favorite "Found" Bands in 2014

As I always mention when making these yearly lists, some of these bands/singer songwriters have been around for awhile.  It just so happens that I just ran into them recently.

DWNTWN.  This is a band I ran into on a Monday night at the Bootleg a couple years back.  It wasn't until their Satellite residency earlier this year that I found out that I love this band.

French Style Furs.  Cold War Kids wrapped up in dare I say a cooler sound?

W.A.R.S. Great Northern re-invented and re-launched.  Need I say more?

Dorothy.  Sunset Strip sound turning heads in the East Side music scene.

So Many Wizards.  Here's a band I know has been around for awhile.  I just recently caught them, however.  This band doesn't look like they'd perform dreamy pop, but they do.

Mount Saint.  Just caught this band this December.  Layer upon layer slowly building into a beautiful sound.

HOTT MT Their sound is mysterious.

yoYa. "Am I seeing what I want, or just some fool’s gold?"  Lingering desires.

ZiBBZ.  European influenced thrill sound.

Cillie Barnes.  A friend told me she used to be in Family of the Year.  

A Movie Review: Big Eyes

Big Eyes. We meet Margaret Keane (Amy Adams) as she is getting ready to flee her home.  She and her daughter, Jane (Delaney Raye), jump into the car and head off to San Francisco.  Margaret is able to find a job painting pictures on the sides of baby cribs.  She makes extra money by painting on the streets of San Francisco during the weekends.  This is where she runs into her future husband, Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz).  Walter tells glamorous stories about how he took art classes in Europe.  He wins Margaret over and they're soon married.  A problem arises in their marriage.  Walter Keane purchases wall space at a jazz club.  He puts up his paintings alongside his wife's.  Everyone is drawn to his wife's paintings that portray young girls with big eyes and no one pays any attention to his own work of the streets of Europe.  Well, he finds a way around this problem.  He starts to claim that he in the painter behind his wife's works.  He convinces his wife to go along with this lie.  It starts to put a strain on the family relationships:  Margaret with her daughter, Margaret with his husband.

This movie is fascinating to watch.  Walter Keane has certain strengths.  He can sell and promote.  The problem is that he wants to be a painter and he isn't a very good one.  He is so consumed by this desire to be a famous painter that he turns into the thief, claiming the works of his wife as his own.  Luckily for him, he happened to come across a woman who was talented and also felt a need to provide a stable environment for her daughter.  This desire to provide her daughter a good life results in Margaret going along with this fraud.  This tacit agreement only works for so long, because Walter gradually becomes abusive.  The mental stress of this massive fraud impacts everyone in the family.  And so during the movie you're just loving your hatred of Walter Keane.

As mentioned, Walter pushes Margaret too far and instead of cracking under the pressure, Margaret makes a decision that she made once before, she grabs her daughter and they leave.  They move to Hawaii.  Walter's reach still goes to Hawaii, but then Margaret decides to to do more than just runaway.  She decides to sue Walter.  During the last part of this movie, the movie turns from watching a cruel Walter into watching what happens when a bully finds out that the timid has decided to take a stand.  The movie becomes a great fun farce that turns hysterical once we reach the court room scene where the judge makes a decision that would make King Solomon proud.

I came into this movie knowing nothing about the true story of Margaret Keane.  All I knew about the movie was from the trailers.  And so I have a great appreciation of how this movie reveals a very key fact about this story.  There are at least two hints that are written into the movie (when Walter is attempting to get his paintings hung at an art gallery and when Walter, Margaret and Jane are out painting together) that tie everything together as the movie heads for the finish line.

I also love how during the movie, Jane runs off for a few moments when Margaret is painting on the sidewalk.  Margaret starts to look to the side, but she isn't looking for her daughter.  She is looking at Walter (this being the first time they meet).  There isn't even panic in her eyes that she can no longer see her daughter anywhere.  And then it hit me:  hey, this movie is showing how life was in the 1960s, not how life is in the 2010s.  
            

A Movie Review: The Internship

The Internship. Billy (Vince Vaughn) and Nick (Owen Wilson) are salesmen. They sell watches. Unfortunately, their boss decides to shut down the business and head into retirement. Nick takes a job selling beds, but is convinced by Billy to go for an internship at Google. Somehow they make it through the interview round and get a spot at Google for the summer. The problem is that Google divides their interns into teams and only gives offers to one team.  Billy and Nick are left with a group of individuals who aren't necessarily seen as the brightest interns -- though this is obviously a relative term considering the folks on the team are indeed very smart.  So it is quickly looking like Billy and Nick have found themselves a nice summer job that won't go beyond the summer.

This is a pleasant enough comedy that provides a few laughs. There is one gag that goes too far; however.  Billy's lack of Internet knowledge is just too much.  Constantly hearing "on the line" instead of "online" and Billy not knowing that there is something out there called Instagram is a real head scratcher after awhile.  At some point, you just start thinking that he really doesn't deserve a job at Google.

Though I don't consider this a great comedy, it is an adequate one.  And it does achieve something that I think is rare in your average comedy:  it actually challenges the viewers to think a little bigger regarding their life goals.  That might sound strange from a Vince Vaughn/Owen Wilson movie, but this movie does make you wonder if you can't achieve something more in life.


  

 

A Movie Review. 300: Rise of an Empire

300: Rise of an Empire.   Before taking a look at this movie, it is always interesting to read up on what liberties were taken in a movie.  This link provides some interesting notes regarding the movie.  Did Themistokles (Sullivan Stapleton) kill King Darius (Igal Naor)?  No.  Did Artemisia (Eva Green) die in battle?  No.  Was Artemisia a commander during the naval battle?  Yes.

300: Rise of an Empire parallels the events of the first movie, 300.  Athenian Themistokles makes a name for himself before the events of the Spartan 300 by defeating the Persians and killing King Darius (as mentioned above, King Darius did not die in this battle).  The movie then jumps forward to the naval battles between the Greeks and Persians that occur during the events of the original movie.  As with the land battle in the original movie, the Greeks are severely outnumbered on the sea.  In fact, during the initial naval confrontations, the Persians are okay with their loses as they know they can take a few losses just as long as the Greeks take their lumps, also.

This movie has its moments though over-all it is a movie that one could have skipped at the theater and watched instead via HBO or Redbox or Netflix or whatever other source.  The moments that this movie does have are grand.  Eva Green as Artemisia is a joy to watch.  She's out there for vengeance and it shows when she goes up against Themistokles.  I also love her utter disdain of her naval officers as they fail to have the strategic skills that can be seen in Themistokles.  And both the steamy sex scene and battle confrontation between Artemisia and Themistokles is just pure eye candy (well, maybe a sword fight isn't considered eye candy, but it does rank up there as an intense struggle).

The problem is that the interaction between Artemisia and Themistokles are so intense that it makes the rest of the movie feel inferior.  Maybe there is just something more interesting about a land battle versus a naval battle (maybe why the original 300 seems like a superior movie); however, I do admit I found it fascinating watching the Greek naval strategies play out.            

A Movie Review: RoboCop

RoboCop. Will humans every lose their humanity via programmed robotic technological?  With tech devices such as Google glasses, maybe that is a question to start asking.  The question is:  is this the movie to deal with that question?

Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman) is a clean cop in the dirty city of Detroit.  How he and his partner Jack Lewis (Michael Kenneth Williams) stayed clean while cops all around them were dirty isn't a story that is told.  All we know is that we have two cops trying to make Detroit just a tad safer.  Both are targeted for their investigation.  Jack suffers a gunshot wound.  While Jack recuperates in the hospital, Alex finds his car malfunctioning in his driveway.  He goes out to investigate.  The car blows up.  He is now severely injured.

His wife is approached by OmniCorp, who offers to do all they can to keep Alex alive -- this means turning him into part-robot (actually around 90% robot).  OmniCorp wants to use drone technology to replace human police officers.  The American people aren't buying it and so neither is Congress.  OmniCorp believes that if they can make drone technology more presentable, they can change public perception.  And so they turn Alex into RoboCop.

This movie does have some interesting commentary that it attempts to address.  Will humanity eventually find itself drained of what makes us human by the technology we are developing?  That is perhaps the big issue, but the movie also questions how we allow the media and current events to shape our thinking versus us having a solid philosophical footing that we can use to develop our thoughts when change arrives.  My problem is that these concepts are wrapped into a movie that seems purposely designed to look like a b-movie action flick.  This b-movie atmosphere is perfectly presented in Samuel L Jackson's over-the-top portrayal of media personality Pat Novak.

I saw this movie on pay television.  Would I have hated myself if I had spent money on it in a theater?  No, but I wouldn't have walked out feeling like I'd seen a great flick either.

      

Ian/Media Jeweler at The Echo

Ian. This bands lists their influence as being Andy Kaufman.  I have to disagree.  I think their music is inspired by various indie rockers from the 1980s.  How about 10,000 Maniacs?  Siouxsie and the Banshees?  They mentioned on stage that they're moving to Los Angeles from Boston.  I think Boston has lost an awesome band.  Those vocals have a purity to them that keeps your attention.

Media Jeweler.  This is a band that doesn't realize it is in a band.  Highlight moment:  as their set is drawing to a close, one member is still jamming while the other is packing things up.  Highlight moment 2:  one member runs off stage, disappears in The Echo's Green Room, and comes back with a handful of mini-chocolate candies to toss into the crowd.  This is a band of individual musicians who somehow are tossed up into the air and by magic end up on the same stage to jam.  What are they doing?  Whatever they're doing, it works.

A Movie Review. The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies. When it comes to sequels related to movie series like Harry Potter and Hunger Games, you feel like you need to see the next one.  As for this third Hobbit movie, you feel like you're being taken to the cleaners -- as in there is financial abuse going on here by the studio.

The movie basically feels like one long battle scene.  The movie starts with Bard (Luke Evans) taking on the dragon.  His city is laid waste by the dragon, but as with many who feel they are invincible, Dragon Smaug doesn't take his opponent as seriously as he should.  Just like David (as in David and Goliath), Bard finds Smaug's weak spot and takes advantage of it.  You're one dead dragon.

Bard leads his people up to the abandoned city of Erebor.  He needs shelter for his people and also wants Dwarve King Thorin (Richard Armitage) to honor his agreement to share the treasures that were under Smaug's control.  A problem arises, Thorin is not in a proper state of mind.  Elves also arrive at the scene, led by Thranduil (Lee Pace).  They demand their treasures back, as well.  At the same time, Orcs are marching towards Erebor.  A dwarve army arrives on the scene to support Thorin (perhaps not realizing that Thorin is being unreasonable).  The sides are about to clash when the orcs arrive for battle.

Now we have three major forces on the same field.  It doesn't take long for the elves and dwarves to realize they better put aside their disagreements.  A major battle breaks out.

In between the battle against Smaug and the orc army, there are some in between scenes of humans trying to find shelter, Gandalf (Ian McKellen) needing assistance from Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) and Elrond (Hugo Weaving), and Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly) going off on an adventure that gets stopped when they run into an orc army that sends them back to Erebor.

As mentioned, this movie has the feel of financial abuse.  It just feels like the only purpose of the movie is to show one long battle scene along with a seriously drawn out farewell.  And then what's up with the battle scene?  The dwarves prepare for battle by going into a Greek style defense, but they don't stay in that position for long.  If this type of battle formation worked well for the Greeks in war, why didn't the dwarves battle it out in that formation instead of just using it for show?  And how is it that a well train elvish army loses like 90% of its soldiers while a highly untrained human army loses maybe 10%?  And it just looked like the orcs were all talk with no bite.  It looked like every elf or dwarve was able to kill 10 orcs with relative ease.  A rather useless allie for the evil eye, I'd say.



    

A Movie Review. Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit. I have to admit I'm a Tom Clancy fan. But as for this movie: I doubt we'll be seeing a sequel any time soon. Jack Ryan (Chris Pine) is a graduate student in the UK when 9/11 hits New York. He immediately volunteers for military service. A helicopter that he is in gets hit by a surface to air missile. He survives, but has a broken back. While doing physical therapy, he meets a therapist named Cathy Muller (Keira Knightley). Though not shown, soon after he finishes his therapy, they begin dating. He also happens to catch the eye of the CIA, particularly Thomas Harper (Kevin Costner). The CIA found some intelligence write-ups he'd done while serving in the military. The CIA is impressed and recruit him. His role in the CIA is to get a job on Wall Street and track dirty money. Some money moves in Russia grab his attention. Off to Russia he goes. 

Spoilers below, but hopefully I'm not giving away too much.

Okay, where to start with my disdain for the movie.  First, we meet Jack's antagonist early in the movie, a Russian named Victor Cherevin (Kenneth Branagh).  He's shooting up drugs.  We are led to believe that he's a wealthy drug addict.  We later learn this is just a weak setup to make Cathy Muller look intelligent.

Second, Jack is trying to save the world.  He's in a fight.  The person he is fighting is seen clinging for survival.  Jack runs to a vehicle.  Cut scene.  Next thing we see, Jack is driving the vehicle (now how he got the vehicle to where he got the vehicle is beyond me) and the guy is in the back of the vehicle.  Now how exactly did this guy get into the back of the vehicle?

Third, major spoiler, but if I recall a major part of this scene was in the trailers.  Jack arrives in Russia and is met by a bodyguard employed by Victor Cherevin.  Now let's remember that yes Victor is Jack's antagonist, but he's also a wealthy individual who does business with Jack's bank.  There is no reason yet for Victor to believe that Jack is a CIA agent though obviously he might not be all that pleased that the bank is sending someone over to investigate his actions.  This bodyguard takes Jack up to the hotel and then attempts to assassinate him.  And why exactly would Victor put a hit man on a bank employee?  Isn't that going a bit far.  Are the Russians that crazy?

To me, this movie has so many problems with logic that it isn't worth seeing even if the awesome Keira Knightley stars in this movie.

The Rebel Light/Mount Saint/The Black and The White at Bootleg HiFi

The Rebel Light.  They make you think about spending a warm summer afternoon at a Southern California beach.  Then they bring out the trumpet and you feel like you're dancing on the beach.

Mount Saint.  Hey, most of the band members are from Glendale.  Glendale isn't the hippest place in Southern California, but I also live in Glendale so I'm sold.  I immediately recognized one member of the band though I couldn't exactly place him.  I did a little digging and saw that Drew Beck is also in (or was in) Chasing Kings.  There is just this layer upon layer style to their music that holds you attention.

The Black and the White.  A light touch of funk.  A full show of energy.  A touch of dance.  A drummer who kicks it off.  A bassist who lets the lights play along with him.  A lead singer who whips to the side in quick motion.  You'll find yourself wanting to press close to the stage.