Movie Review: 'Zero Dark Thirty' Is Masterful, Best Film of 2012.

Navy Seals prepare to storm bin Laden's compound in 'Zero Dark Thirty.' Image courtesy of Jonathan Olley

I remember I was sitting in the library at school studying for my last finals before graduation when I heard the news. The librarian came over the loudspeaker and said Osama bin Laden was dead. I sat comfortably in my chair wishing for my Monday final to be canceled in lieu of the good news, but no. As fellow classmates were excited about the news I sat and pondered, "How? I didn't even know we were close to him."

Thanks to the Oscar-winning directing/writing duo of "The Hurt Locker", I, along with all of America, get to see what (allegedly) went down. 



Following the attacks on 9/11, CIA agent Maya (Jessica Chastain) is thrust into the Middle East to get information from Ammar, who is held captive and tortured by Dan (Jason Clarke). As years pass and people die and information starts running thin, Maya finds out where bin Laden is and gets the go-ahead from Secretary of Defense Leon Panettta to raid the compound. The rest is history.

What could have doubled as an entire miniseries on TV, or even as a season on the similarly themed show "Homeland," "Zero Dark Thirty" takes years of investigation and tightly packages it into a 2hr. 37min. film. Not one frame of film is wasted here, and it breezes along with such ease. The first two hours show some the investigation, with the last half hour of the film dedicated to the raid. Commercials for the film show nothing but raid snippets, but that's not how the film is at all.

This is a masterpiece of a film, there is no getting around it. While director Kathryn Bigelow shattered the 'glass ceiling' with "The Hurt Locker," she obliterates an entire glass building with "Zero Dark Thirty." While war movies have been a staple of powerhouse male directors like John Wayne, Clint Eastwood and Steven Spielberg for eons, Bigelow belongs right next to them or above them.

Working with her "Locker" writer Mark Boal, Bigelow crafts a war movie/thriller/journalism tale with an extremely deft hand. She carefully details Maya's hunt for a man that she knows can't escape while displaying a first-person POV throughout the process. The handheld camerawork shows the gritty, cutthroat world of CIA investigations and a lot of the danger that goes into finding the most dangerous man in the world.

It's hard to imagine anyone directing this film but Bigelow. Here is a woman who takes such bold risks with her films and they always pay off. The film has gotten political backlash for being portrayed as pro-torture. Bigelow doesn't show torture as a good thing, but as a demoralizing and disgusting exercise. Because she decided to show the torture of a suspect makes this a pro-torture film? That's rubbish. If Americans really think that the government doesn't torture people then they must be blind and deaf.

Bigelow's crowning achievement in this film is the shooting of the raid sequence. Shot almost entirely through night vision lenses, we follow the Navy Seals as they run through the compound looking for bin Laden. This way makes the film seem like a first-person shooter for the audience, making us believe that we were the one to kill bin Laden. It's almost like a fantasy that we have our chance to be one-on-one with the man who has terrorized the world for decades.

In the most delicate stylistic touch she put on the film, Bigelow never gets a close up of the dead man who portrays bin Laden. We see that iconic beard but nothing more. Because this is a fictionalized account of what happened (though an opening title card indicates this is based on first person accounts) it's safer to play the shooting as a general attack on one man who has terrorized the world, making it a film of international appeal for any person who has felt attacked by a killer.

"Zero Dark Thirty" is unlike any film to come before it in style and execution. 

For me, Bigelow is symbolized and immortalized in Chastain's performance. While Chastain grinds gears and works tirelessly through the ups and downs with her investigation team, I can only imagine that's how Bigelow was making this and "The Hurt Locker." There are two strong women doing the right thing in a male-dominated world. Chastain goes above and beyond, playing Maya as coy and tough as nails in the most perfect balance. Even with seven films released in 2011 alone, this performance runs circles around all of those. Give her the Oscar.

Some people I've talked to think that just a year-and-a-half after bin Laden's death the film may have been released too soon. Considering this is a film that has achieved unanimous acclaim, a time release doesn't matter. Films that have undertaken 9/11 stories have been either critically acclaimed, like "United 93," or have been met with lukewarm reaction, like "World Trade Center," and those judgments are based on how well the film was made.  

A white-knuckle thriller where we all know the ending, the buildup to that ending is flawless storytelling. "Zero Dark Thirty" is the best film of 2012 if not the decade.

Rating: A+

Movie Reviews: "This is 40" And "Cirque du Soleil" Interesting Holiday Fare

With family in toe, "This is 40" is not your typical holiday family film. Photo courtesy of Universal

This is 40

Judd Apatow's self-proclaimed 'sort of sequel' to "Knocked Up," "This is 40" is a mature and relate-able comedy. Studying the relationship of a 40-year-old couple (Leslie Mann and Paul Rudd), "This is 40" encompasses all of the harsh realities of being parents and lovers in this ever-changing world; sex, money, in-laws, teenagers, school parents, etc. Laugh out loud funny and endearing, this is a film a lot of couples can relate to during the holiday season. But in typical Apatow fashion, the film runs a little long.

Rating: B-

Magical tents dot a new world in Cirque du Soleil: Worlds Away. Photo courtesy of Paramount

Cirque du Soleil: World's Away 3D

Written and directed by Adam Adamson, the Oscar-winning helmer of "Shrek," "Cirque" is a magical feast for the eyes and soul in a barrage of violent and unhappy films flooding the cinema. Young Mia follows an aerialist into a fantastic and jaw dropping world of acrobatics, whimsy and decadence, traversing different tents to find him once more and to fall in love. No doubt this is a gorgeous film, but the transitions to each new set (taken from different Cirque acts including "O," "Love" and "Viva Elvis") are not cohesive and are assembled messily. But when you're seeing a gorgeous film like this, do we even care?

Rating: C

Movie Review: 'Django' Chained to Excessive Violence, Lack of QT Style

Quentin Tarantino's "Django Unchained" is the bloody follow up to his critically and commercially acclaimed Nazi-hunting "Inglourious Basterds," and man, what a let down of a follow-up this film is.
With his past three, when you include 2007's "Death Proof," efforts inspired by earlier, low-budget films, "Django" shows that Tarantino is losing his flare for completely original content.



Set free from the chains that bound him, Django (Oscar-winner Jamie Foxx) works with dentist-turned-bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz ('Inglourious' Oscar-winner Christoph Waltz), to hunt down the Brittle brothers, men only Django has seen before. In return, King offers Django his freedom from slavery and the opportunity to rescue his wife Broomhilda, who is enslaved in a place called Candyland, run by infamous plantation owner Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio).

At first it seems like finding the Brittle brothers will be the whole of the movie, but it only takes up about an hour of the 2hr. 45min. running time. The rest of the time is spent sweet-talking Calvin and trying to get Broomhilda away from his grip, followed by an overly long epilogue.

His longest feature to date, Tarantino fills the time with his trademark banter that borrows Waltz's devilish charm from "Inglourious" with unforgivable use of 19th century Southern speak. Sitting with an audience that was predominately white, almost every comical use of the 'nigger' caused laughter which makes me believe the masses are uncomfortable with the term and laugh to make it more palatable.

There were a few times I didn't understand what the script was doing. At one scene I'm laughing at the incompetence of the first unofficial KKK gathering, then I'm dozing off after watching nothing but people talking for 30 minutes straight. At least with his groundbreaking "Pulp Fiction" and "Death Proof" there was interesting conversation that never got boring and kept the flow of the story going. Tarantino has an ear for great dialogue, but I think he is starting to lose his touch for interesting dialogue.

Where Tarantino falls in script, he makes up for in violence... and a lot of it. Back in the day most, if not all, of the violence in his movies were off screen, but after the bloodbath in "Kill Bill Vol. 1" he isn't afraid to make it the highlight of his films, and why? An overly stylized shootout with blood splashing everywhere and people being blown apart is not the Tarantino I know. The aftermath of a violent act is what used drove the plot of his movies forward, but now he shows it all as if he's trying to direct the latest torture porn flick. He shows it to show it, but it doesn't have any meaning in this film. Maybe with each bullet that Django and King fire represents the over 200 years of guilt/anger the country has sat in regarding slavery. Needless to say, these two really stick it to the man.

Waltz and Foxx are good in this film, but the showstoppers are DiCaprio and Samuel L. Jackson, who plays the slaved assistant to DiCaprio. For the first time ever I was truly amazed by DiCarpio. I've always seen him as the wannabe actor trying to play with the big boys, but this time he has truly proved to be one of the Hollywood big boys. In a role that is charismatic and downright brutal, DiCaprio turns his bitch switch on and off in a millisecond and will shake you to the core. This is his darkest and most award-worthy performance yet.

But Jackson also gives a great performance, perhaps even better than DiCaprio's. Loyal to his master and at times even controlling his master, Jackson's performance as Stephen shows how the biggest black badass in the movie is a slave and not a free man like Django. Stephen is the smartest man in any room he enters, knowing how to size people up and find faults in their logic. From the moment he walks on screen we're already laughing at anything he says, but by the end we are terrified of his ruthless attitude and his dark eyes that will pierce your soul.

Taking a page from the last installment from the LOTR trilogy, when you think the film should/will end, it doesn't. It keeps going, and going, and going. I didn't think it was necessary for the story to be slowly pulled out that way, but I'm guessing Tarantino was wondering how he could write himself into a really weird cameo. In the end (the real end), it all served as satisfying revenge to Django's story.

"Django" is definitely not Tarantino's best. There have been rumors going around that he will quit film making, and I think now is the time to stop. He has lost his original flare by picking up has been B-movies and writing new dialogue for it. Gone are the days where he looked to genres for inspiration and then blowing us out of that water. Now he's just dipping an old sponge in water and ringing out the moldy remains.

Rating: C-

Movie Review: 'Les Misérables' Is A Landmark Musical, But...

Russell Crowe and Hugh Jackman face off as Javert and Valjean in "Les Misérables." Courtesy of Universal Pictures.

It's finally here. The inevitable stage-to-film adaptation of one of the most loved musicals of all time has come. The Tony Award-winning epic "Les Misérables" has made its way to the big screen, complete with an amazing cast, lush production values and, keeping true to its theater roots, live singing. The first musical to ever have live singing throughout, "Les Miz" will be remembered as a landmark musical that changed the way movie musicals are made.




Making a comfortable transition to the big screen at the hands of Academy Award-winner Tom Hooper ("The King's Speech"), "Les Miz's" memorable story of hero Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) on the run from persistent police inspector Javert (Russell Crowe) will be embraced by die hard fans. Anne Hathaway as Fantine, Amanda Seyfried as Cosette, and Eddie Redmayne as Marius complete the roster of principal characters, and not one of them were miscast.

Produced in part by the show's original producer Cameron Mackintosh, "Les Miz" sticks true to the show's story, keeping the film as an operetta much like recent stage-to-film adaptations "The Phantom of The Opera," and "Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street." Like in the aforementioned films, the emotional wallop the audience gets from a live production gets diminished. Now it's not to say that there weren't goosebump-inducing moments (Like Hathaway's "I Dreamed A Dream") but the raw emotion from the stage withers away as the sets open up beyond the atrium. Yes, even good adaptations such as this can still lose the punch.

However, the fact that the cast had to sing every song live in every take did help. There's no way the emotion could be faked by lip-syncing to playback. Even though Crowe reminded me of the Pierce Brosnan train wreck of a performance in "Mamma Mia!" it was a groundbreaking technique that surpasses all musicals before it, no matter how great they are.

As the singing elevates this musical, the style brought it down. Collaborating with frequent cinematographer Danny Cohen, Hooper's handheld camera style, while liberating as we follow characters, was so bumpy at times. During the "What Have I Done?" prologue I noticed the cameraman stumble at least twice while following Jackman. There weren't slight bumps, but trips so noticeable the framing gets cock-eyed. If it's not blunders it's such long takes on one person singing that the ability to be free is trapped in one spot in one frame. The need to sing perfectly every time resulted in long takes that lowers the film's epicness in order to get ultimate singing quality.

The trouble with an operetta like "Les Miz" is the constant music, which can allow for flawless scene changes on stage but causes awkward transitions on film. At the end of an epic ballad or chorus number the screen falls silent and we wait to go somewhere else, i.e.- "I Dreamed A Dream" and "One More Day." 

Despite its flaws "Les Miz" boasts great acting, singing and wonderful sets and costumes. Who knows when we will see a new movie musical do what this film has done, but you can only hope that they all incorporate live singing (if they actually have the cast to do it). Early talk has thrust "Les Miz" as an Oscar frontrunner, but I don't think it's necessary. Sure, it's the grand epic the Academy loves, but it's not THAT great of a film to award. Award Tom Hooper for a job well done in his groundbreaking approach, but not the film as a whole.

Rating: B-

Movie Review: 'Rust and Bone' is gripping, loving.

Mattais Schoenaerts and Marion Cotillard portray damaged lovers in 'Rust and Bone'

"Rust and Bone" is a love story that is wrapped in so much pain and anger that it's unnerving. This isn't an abusive relationship in a sense, but one where the two lovers are both physically rundown and tired. Not tired of each other, just tired.


Marion Cotillard and Matthias Schoenaerts play Stéphanie and Ali, two quiet people with emotional baggage and an emotional anchor tied to them (Stéphanie with her abusive boyfriend, and Ali with his son, Sam). After moving in with his sister, Ali is trying to get his life together to make a living for he and his son. He meets Stéphanie after a fight leaves her bloody and roughed up, but nothing too serious.

The next time they talk they're both changed people. Stéphanie loses her legs after a killer whale she trains attacks her, and Ali is starting a new job, with boxing looming ever closer as a career choice. As a comforting gesture he takes her for a dip in the water, in what was probably the first time she was in the water since her accident. It's a pretty quiet scene, but the emotional ties they develop for each other are being to form.

Eventually, Ali starts to get more involved with back alley boxing, making thousands of dollars while getting beat around and losing teeth. He might be getting the money he so desperately needs, but he begins to become an even worse father to his son, and inconsiderate of the love Stéphanie has for him.

Ali just isn't the type of man to love, he doesn't seem to know how. Neglectful to his sister, son and Stéphanie, the only thing we know that Ali is good at is sex and violence. He doesn't like to be bothered by much, but if the chance to have sex with a girl at a gym or beat someone senseless comes around, he'll do it. By the end he realizes that it just takes one accident to know how great you have it until it's gone.

Given the right person he does seem sort of caring. From carrying Stéphanie to the sea, to their first sexual encounter, Ali has a miniscule soft spot that comes out unexpectedly. He doesn't relish in it,  barely noticing when he is caring, but it's the soft, serene hand that Stéphanie really wants. She doesn't seem to want a lover, but someone who is willing to have a strong emotional connection with her. Presuming her boyfriend left after her accident, Ali was the only one to be comforting to her since then. He's the only man she seems to know.

I liked this movie. I didn't love it, but I liked it enough. There's something about European movies that they can focus on two lovers and not make it boring or irrational. For two hours we witness this "couple" grow a great love for each. Cumbersome at the start and emotionally charged at the end, we observe the stages of love and the emotional, and sometimes physical, impact it haves on all of us.

I obviously can not reveal the ending to you, but it's a sucker punch to the gut that makes you wish some people were more understanding of the things around them. Don't take a true love for granted.

Rating: B

Movie Review: 'Anna Karenina' an intersting book-to-film/stage adaptation

Image courtesy of Focus Features

Disclaimer: I've never read 'Anna Karenina,' seen a previous film adaptation or had previous knowledge about the story before seeing the film.

Tolstoy's "Anna Karenina" is known for being one of, if not the best, novels of all time. Its story of the titular socialite with Count Vronsky is known the world over, and has been adapted into as many films as Austen's "Pride & Prejudice." But never has a production been put together in the way Joe Wright has tackled the story.



Teaming with his "Pride & Prejudice" and "Atonement" leading lady Keira Knightley for yet another literary adaptation, "Anna" incorporates a theater setting for some of the scenes in his film. Opening up with a curtain rising on Prince Stephan (Knightley's "P&P" co-star, Matthew Macfayden) getting ready for his day on stage, the sets are re-arranged and quickly manipulated to play host to an angelic heaven, a train station, and even a rundown alley up in the rafters.

A very interesting approach for an epic love story like this, it was a bold and memorable take nonetheless. As Vronsky's (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) eyes pierce Anna's from across the stage, it's like watching two dancers at opposite ends of the stage slowly come together for a duet. As their attraction draws them closer together she realizes that she is not in love with her husband, Alexei Karenin (Jude Law), and leaves him for Vronsky.

Because this was my first encounter with the story, I can't say what parts of the story should have been included, or let go. At just over two hours in running time, the movie keeps a solid focus on Anna and Vronsky while dipping into the side relationships of Stephan and Dollie, and Levin and Kitty. The film was as good at telling a condensed version of a literary love staple just as Wright's "P&P" was.

The ultimate question with this film's production must have been, "Do we focus on the story or the look of the film?" If I had to guess, story and substance was substituted to get that classic 1874 Russian look for the film. The costumes and production design are top quality, extremely lush and beautiful, with certain Oscar nominations to come for it. The "stage/theater" scenes, though beautiful, were smothering at times, making me wish it could be even more lavish with more robust sets. David Lean's 1965 adaptation of "Doctor Zhivago" and the 1968 adaptation of Tolstoy's "War and Peace" were both big epics that didn't skip on the scenery. Wright should have seen those movies before embarking on this project.

Knightley as Anna won't go down in history as one of the best interpretations of the character, but it's a competent enough performance. She's youthful and glowing in the beginning, then an unraveling mess of emotions by the end. An Oscar nominee for "P&P," there's no saying which literary adaptive performance is better, they're both so different. I must say that I'm tired of her "I'm happy in this scene but I've still got a sourpuss face" shtick she does so often.

The best performance, for me, is Jude Law as Alexei. Quiet and subdued, he is the perfect contrast to Knightley's glowing Anna. Even when she admits to betraying him, Law has so much restrained power as Alexei that it's surprising how he didn't blow up. He had his suspicions, but choices to act rationally and level-headed. Johnson's Vronsky was competent and not memorable or interesting.

Overall production of the film makes for wonderful eye candy over this truly inventive yet bland re-telling. Die hard fans may not like "Anna Karenina," but it's something to experience.

Rating: C