Mid90s (2018) (****1/2)

Jonah Hill's directorial debut has a spark of magic that reminded me of some of my all-time favorite movies. "Mid90s" is what it is: a small 4:3 aspect ratio movie about a bunch of skateboarding kids doing not a whole lot and saying even less. Still, I was engrossed with the experience. "Mid90s" was released earlier last year but only recently made its way into my queue. Call it laziness or stress on my part. Nevertheless, I still count myself lucky to finally give it a shot.

The film follows Stevie, played by Sunny Suljic (a young actor I only remember from "Killing of a Sacred Deer"), a young boy who lives with his punk brother and their single mother. Where their house is in disarray, Stevie finds solace in joining ranks with a handful of skaters who hang out downtown and base out of a small board shop. They have nicknames like "Fuckshit" and "Fourth Grade" and quickly dub Stevie "Sunburn." Who knows if Stevie loves the concept of skating, but we do see how clearly he wants to be included in something... Anything. He practices on a used board in his backyard, sneaks over fences to ride on school playgrounds, and live out a carefree summer the way you might expect kids to do.

Stevie's older brother, Ian, is played by an unrecognizable Lucas Hedges (who dyes his hair brown and has packed on some muscles to become more intimidating). From the first scene we see they do not get along. Later in the film we might come to see Ian with new light. Where at first Ian is a punk who we see as a nuisance, by the end he is transformed into a person with real insight and real protection for his brother. From "Boy Erased" to the less-than-stellar "Ben Is Back," Hedges has really carved himself into 2018, and maybe this small performance is nonetheless his highpoint.

I loved this movie in the way it shows Stevie utterly washed over in this new world the way a movie like "Almost Famous" dropped William Miller into a world of sex, drugs, and rock and roll. We see Suljic smile and smile, and with each new scene I couldn't help but smile along with him. Is there much plot? No, but I love the way Jonah Hill'c camera remains so still and these boys move in and out of frame. I love how one moment filled me with nostalgia and the next had me brimming with anxiety, especially considering I was neither a skateboarder or much of a "rebel" as a kid. Even the film mimics the style of some grunge film made on a budget, with a tight "square" format and film complete with imperfections and scratches. This isn't a groundbreaking directing/writing debut, but Hill shows he's more than worthy of branching out in the world of film. First as an actor and now as a storyteller, I am continually amazed at the skill of Jonah Hill.

The film concludes on such a miserable note that I felt compelled to deduct from its final score. For a movie so free-flowing, there's a climax that hits like a brick and then kind of ends. We as an audience (at least myself personally) feel so cheated that Stevie and his mother don't have one more scene, or that Ian is left mostly unexplained as a fully-realized character. This movie shows us the serious consequences of hanging with the wrong crowd at an early age, but in the end I wonder if Jonah Hill only wanted to end with "well that's all, folks." The story concludes with a page out of the movie "Rent" which I shudder even saying out loud, with a group of friends, a tv, and some home videos. What happens next? I understand that sometimes questions are left up to the viewer, but with so much at stake it almost makes the film feel incomplete. I just wanted more. Well, maybe that's a sign that it did something right...

State of the Oscar race & nominations predictions...

It's a curious race so far. With the Golden Globes just mixing the pot even more this past weekend, the frontrunners are surprisingly weak and the possibilities for upsets are growing by the day. Oscar nominations will be announced January 22nd... We just heard from BAFTA, we know PGA (Producer's Guild) nominations, DGA (director's guild)... A lot is coming into focus. Let's break down the top races right now.


BEST PICTURE

The mighty "Star Is Born" is making for a weak showing, picking up only one Golden Globe (Song) when it was expected to sweep with 4 or 5. "Green Book" picked up Comedy in an unsurprising win, and "Bohemian Rhapsody" continues to raise eyebrows with the razor sharp divide between critical distain and it's gushing fans. Think larger picture: the last time a Best Picture missed out on a DGA nomination was 1989 when "Driving Miss Daisy" was omitted from that year's lineup... This doesn't bode well for "The Favourite." When looking at all the tea leaves, though, it still seems like "Star Is Born" is ahead for now. With 10 potential nominees, the line-up is looking solidified as:

1. A Star Is Born
2. Roma
3. Green Book
4. Vice
5. BlacKkKlansman
6. The Favourite
7. Black Panther
8. Bohemian Rhapsody
9. If Beale Street Could Talk
10. A Quiet Place (look, this is probably unlikely, but the PGA nomination certainly helped... Plus, there hasn't been a year in which 10 films were nominated since 2010 before nominating rules changed... We might have as few as 5 nominees this year, for all we know...)


BEST DIRECTOR

You need to look no further than the DGA lineup to make these predictions. With the Golden Globe (and virtually every critic's prize) going to Cuaron, "Roma" seems to have this locked up. In recent years, Picture & Director have split... It seems certain to do it again this year, unless the Academy will honestly evaluate this race and reward a foreign, black & white, subtitled, Netflix movie the top honor... I suppose it could happen.

1. Alfonso Cuaron, "Roma"
2. Bradley Cooper, "A Star Is Born"
3. Spike Lee, "BlacKkKlansman"
4. Yorgos Lanthimos, "The Favourite" (snubbed by DGA, but this film is bound to be one of the most nominated)
5. Peter Farrelly, "Green Book" (this would omit Adam McKay for "Vice," a movie that is growing more and more polarizing each day... "Green Book" is not without its controversies, but the transition from comedy to drama for Farrelly doesn't hurt his chances)


BEST ACTOR

While I would argue that both Viggo Mortensen & Bradley Cooper give the year's best male performances by a mile, it's really obvious to almost guarantee the winner this early in the race. I was right to bet on Rami Malek at my Golden Globe party. No matter how much people dislike "Bohemian," virtually everyone will champion Malek's performance. It's a real life person, its a transformation, he's gay... I can feel the stars aligning here. Mark my words.

1. Rami Malek, "Bohemian Rhapsody"
2. Bradley Cooper, "A Star Is Born"
3. Viggo Mortensen, "Green Book"
4. Christian Bale, "Vice"
5. Ethan Hawke, "First Reformed" (he's shown up in very few races so far, and a more logical choice is John David Washington in "Klansman" despite an incredibly forgettable performance (Washington got both Globes & SAG mentions. Hawke is the outsider Indie pick. Plus it's a showier role. Look out for this fifth slot!)


BEST ACTRESS

The toughest race of the year without question. A 3-way race with each woman a front-runner in her own way. Glenn Close, winning the Globe in a stunning upset, gave an impassioned speech that will make voters ask why she has never won an Oscar (and on nomination #7). Gaga is the breakthrough of the year. Olivia Colman (also won the Globe) gives the flashiest performance and in a year minus Glenn Close would win in a cakewalk. So this is the question: will voters go for the deserving veteran or the performance with the best acting? Either way, I think Gaga is going to be happy to finish a second-runner up.

1. Olivia Colman, "The Favourite" (yes I'm partial, but sometimes big Oscar losers (Peter O'Toole, Richard Burton) are no less great for never having won. When an Academy voter sits down and watches "the Wife" and "The Favourite," it seems virtually impossible for this caliber of role to be ignored)
2. Glenn Close, "The Wife" (on second thought, can't we have another tie??)
3. Lady Gaga, "A Star Is Born"
4. Emily Blunt, "Mary Poppins Returns"
5. Yalitza Aparicio, "Roma" (again, a long shot, but Melissa McCarthy's year was also flanked with some awful films, and the Academy isn't one to shy away from punishing actors for poor decisions.... If "Roma" is going to strike big, this is the place it will happen)


BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Poor Timothee Chalamet is going to go another year as a bridesmaid... There's growing support for Mahershala Ali, especially after his Globe win. I think it's clear the front-runner is another veteran actor who is scene-stealing in every way. Oscar voters tend to reward older actors in only this category. It's close, but I think Richard E Grant is in a very good place.

1. Richard E Grant, "Can You Ever Forgive Me"
2. Mahershala Ali, "Green Book"
3. Timothee Chalamet, "Beautiful Boy"
4. Sam Elliott, "A Star Is Born"
5. Adam Driver, "BlacKkKlansman" (a performance that I truly didn't even remember after seeing the film, making his consistency this season all the more puzzling... If I could pick, why not Steve Carell for "Vice," Michael B Jordan for "Black Panther," or even Russell Crowe for "Boy Erased?" There's always hope for an upset)


BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Regina King was the presumed front-runner early on who was predicted to sweep through the season unmatched... Then she was snubbed by SAG (a feat only Marsha Gay Harden & Christoph Waltz have managed to overcome to win Oscar since SAG began) and BAFTA... Her Golden Globe speech was powerful, but we need to start weighing other options. The last time a front-runner missed SAG & BAFTA nominations was Sylvester Stallone for "Creed." He was still the favorite to win up until Mark Rylance heard his name announced from the envelope... When peer groups snub an actor, it's a telling sign.

1. Amy Adams, "Vice"
2. Rachel Weisz, "The Favourite"
3. Regina King, "If Beale Street Could Talk"
4. Emma Stone, "The Favourite"
5. Margot Robbie, "Mary Queen of Scots" (this is a long-shot, though she did get in at SAG & BAFTA... Other possibilities include Claire Foy for "First Man," Nicole Kidman for "Boy Erased," or even Maria de Tavira for "Roma." Heck, can we even wish for a Tilda Swinton upset for "Suspiria?")


More to come! (Critics Choice Awards are this Sunday, January 13th... Another ceremony that has occasionally shed light on front-runners at the Oscars)

Mary Poppins Returns (****)

It's been really difficult to approach this review. On one hand, the original 1964 film remains a Disney classic, full of some of the catchiest songs in on-screen musical history. We also have Julie Andrews in her debut role, a performance that upon repeat viewings shows an immense presence and comic timing. Rob Marshall had a lot in his way, but surprisingly MARY POPPINS RETURNS hits nearly dead on: a great family movie with some great numbers.

Emily Blunt steps into the heels of the iconic character, and I really can't imagine another actress today who would even be considered. This new Mary Poppins is a bit more rough around the edges, has a more distinct pitch to her voice, and definitely wouldn't be a lot of children's choice as babysitter if pitted against Julie Andrews. Still, she is admirable in the way the role has evolved. It's 20 or 30 years after the Banks family went to fly a kite, and justly Mary returns just in time to save the day again.

Mr Banks (Michael, Ben Whishaw) has now grown up, raised 3 kids, and lost his wife... Oh and he is about to go broke and lose his house. His sister, Jane (Emily Mortimer) is a labor union protester (though no catchy song a-la "Sister Suffragette") who helps around the house and this and that. The children are largely independent, off on their own adventures in the park in an attempt to stay out of their father's hair. Did I mention he works at Fidelity Fiduciary Bank?

In swoops Mary Poppins, sharp as a tack and with a mission to "help the Banks family, children included." What follows is a plot that quite literally recreates the original beat for beat. It might be considered a reboot were they not the same characters from before. Everything from a tidying up song (this time in a bathtub) to a scene in which Mary and the kids go to visit a recluse who dances on the ceiling. I was a bit astounded to see the script so liberally lift from the original. Heck, they even included a chimney sweep song complete with elaborate choreography, though this time they're lamplighters.

I'm telling you that the stars of the movie are Marc Shaiman, who does the film's score, Scott Whitman as the lyricist. What they achieve has got to be one of the great modern musical film scores. The entracte opens the film with nostalgia for classic Broadway around the time of the original's debut, and the songs are individually catchy and certainly "hummable." More so than La La Land, I think this might be the new standard in terms of original musicals that Hollywood has put out in recent years. The actors, all doing their own singing (I believe) flesh out the scenes and deliver one great number after the next. Even Blunt's alto range suits the story and rarely makes its audience long for the clarity of Miss Andrews original voice.

I can't praise the film more due to it's incessant cling on the original. Like so many reboots recently, this film falls victim to an over saturation of nostalgia as opposed to real creativity. Instead of showing us something new, the filmmakers say "remember this? remember that??" We get it. For a large studio to take a gamble on a remake, it seems like nowadays the story needs to show us the familiar. It's too bad that so much of the story suffers as a result.

Vice (***1/2)

I've been thinking over the last several years of movies, and with the end of the decade just ahead, can you blame me for beginning to ponder over what my favorites of the last 10 years are? Surely one that keeps coming to mind is Adam McKay's The Big Short, that wildly zany comedy about the Housing Market Crash that almost revolutionized the way narrative features can be told. How excited I was for McKay's return to nonfiction. How underwhelmed I ultimately felt...

The movie is about Dick Cheney (duh), the 46th President of the United States... I mean Vice President. There's a lot of intrigue surrounding the man, his public persona, and the rumors that maybe secretly he was running the country for his 8 years in office. What kind of film is this? Well, in many regards this is a by-the-numbers biopic that charts Cheney's early years and rise to power. We've seen the structure a million times before. One moment he's in a drunken barfight in Wyoming, and the next he has a small office next to Nixon's in the White House. The film intercuts between the man as Vice President and the chronological timeline of his rise to power over the years. Christian Bale is utterly transformed. In the early scenes we can recognize the actor (albeit with a significant amount of extra pounds). By the end, I was all but convinced this was the man in the flesh.

Of course this is Adam McKay, and as dramatic as the film can be, there are moments of pure comic gold. If you've seen "The Big Short" then you remember the cutaways to Margot Robbie in a bathtub explaining what a subprime mortgage is, or Ryan Gosling breaking the fourth wall to speak directly to the camera. VICE follows a similar idea, though McKay is clearly treading further into uncharted waters. There are scenes that serve as vignettes only, such as a scene in which Cheney and his wife transform into Shakespearean characters complete with rhyme, or one of the funniest fake-out endings I've ever seen. I nearly fell out of my chair as fake credits began to roll in the middle of the movie. Wait for it. The levity comes as a stark contrast to the actual actions of the Bush White House, complete with torture, bombings, and false imprisonment of various suspected terrorists over the years.

What's there not to like, then? As the film trudges along, I felt as though the story falls into a rutt, simply showing highlights of Cheney's time in office instead of continuing the plot and following these characters. The film has a beautiful introduction (pre-credits) that set up the stakes at hand. It shows Cheney and his wife (the astounding Amy Adams) and the bargain they make to rise up through the system. In many ways the film is about Lynne Cheney, who many could argue is the ultimate protagonist of the film and the one pulling all the strings. It's a great performance by Adams, worthy of Oscar love. I only wish the back half of the film remained as interested in her character as we do at the start.

By the climax, the intro of the film is all but forgotten, and you can quite literally feel the director (and editor) running out of steam. The film doesn't end, it runs off the tracks. I don't even understand Cheney's motivations once reaching the White House. The film hypothesizes that this man is only attempting to do right by his wife, but by the end he is a ruthless near-dictator that holds absolute power. Sure there are moments of humanity (especially with his daughter), but we lose focus of what Dick Cheney ultimately becomes.

Still, I enjoyed it for what it was. At it's best, Vice can be pure cinematic magic. At worst, it feels like a pandering attempt to recapture the vivid energy of McKay's earlier works. Bale is wonderful as the titular character, yet I feel like such a subtle performance might go over the heads of Academy voters who love fat suits but also love yelling and screaming and kicking and crying. Bale is the epitome of an opening quote: "beware of the man who says little." I think this is as good of a biopic as could be made about the man, but so much feels off. Sam Rockwell's awkward bit as George W Bush feels more like a skit than a living man, and many in the supporting cast feel squished into the movie if only to say "look it's that politician I remember!" Maybe the story could have worked if it focused on only the White House years, or the War in Irwaq, or something... What we are left with is a zany movie with almost too much to say. It's relentless, and not always in the best ways.

Green Book (***1/2)

GREEN BOOK made a splash at the Toronto Film Festival where it won the coveted "People's Choice" Award, a prize previously awarded to Best Picture giants like "12 Years a Slave," "Slumdog Millionaire," and "La La Land" (Oh, wait...). It makes sense. "Green Book" is a crowd-pleaser in all the typical ways. Directed by Peter Farrelly, the film is another addition to the idea of race relations as viewed through a white protagonist. It's one of those movies that caters to your emotions and lets you leave the theater by thinking 'wow it's so good things have changed.' Have they really?

The movie is a true story about accomplished pianist Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali) who embarks on a tour with his 3-piece jazz band through the deep south. Shirley has rubbed elbows with the likes of Jack Kennedy and New York high society. As we learn, this journey is an attempt to connect with his roots. Logically he needs a driver, and fearing the worst he hires Tony "Lip," an Italian bouncer/driver/wannabe food critic (Viggo Mortensen). Come on, we've seen this movie before. You can imagine the dynamic: an uptight musician meets street-smart blue collar worker who also happens to be a casual racist. Through the course of their journeys, it becomes apparent that the two men have more in common than they do not.

We've seen the story before, especially that of race relations as told through a white protagonist. As far back as "In The Heat of the Night" and more recently with flicks like "The Help." I think what is more successful here is that both of our heroes go through a transformation, and it's as much about Shirley learning about his culture as it is Tony introducing him to it. As they drive, they listen to artists like Little Richard and Aretha Franklin, artists Shirley knows but has never listened to. Oh, and he's never tried fried chicken. Later in the film, Tony explains it to him in blunt terms: "It's like I'm more black than you are!" I can already head the dissenting articles come Oscar season.

As cliched as the film feels, it really finds success in the lead performances. Ali (recently an Oscar-winner for the drastically-different Moonlight) shines as an artist with much more to his being hidden under the surface. Rarely does it come to a boil, but we see his vices (drinking, isolation, etc) and we begin to understand the man. There's the briefest of scenes that indicates he is also a homosexual, but never again is this touched on or even pondered over. It's another scene in the long list of cliches that is needed to help flesh out this story. Sure, it's probably true, but the film cares less about the actual facts than hitting all the appropriate beats and in order.

Again, as much criticism as Mortensen might receive for playing a "white hero" in this film focused on black culture, I can't help but declare it to be the best male performance of the year. After gaining 50 pounds and adopting one of the most convincing Brooklyn/Italian accents I can remember, the actor who once played Aragorn is transformed in a stunning technical and comic performance. Not once did I even see the actor playing a part. Not often is such a character so vivid, but this film surely proves Viggo Mortensen as a technical master and also one of the sharpest ears for dialect. Watching him act is electric. Any scene without Mortensen simply doesn't feel like a scene.

Can you guess the ending? I was surprised to see it become a near-exact copy of "Planes, Trains, and Automobiles" by the end, complete with a race to the Christmas dinner table. On the way, the two men race north to New York through a torrent snowstorm, racing away from a south that denied Shirley the chance to dine among white patrons in a restaurant and use the indoor bathroom at a party where he is the guest of honor. You can practically hear the sighs as they pass a "Now leaving West Virginia" road sign. This is a fine movie that will hit a lot of people's buttons and will likely garner much support come Oscar season. Is this one of the top 10 movies of the year? I sincerely doubt it. When is Hollywood going to start looking past these tropes? We don't need more stories about 1960's segregation seen through rose-tinted glass. Look at a newspaper. Why ignore what's right in front of us?