Review: Beautiful Creatures

That’s it – I decided I will simply ignore any kind of  reviews. No scrap that – of course I will still read reviews but after watching and enjoying way too many movies that most “top critics” condemn. Or hate. Or call it inferior. Granted some of them might not show the greatest acting (unfortunately most Gerrard Butler movies) or a wobbly story (most romantic comedies) or no story at all (most action movies). But a lot of times they are so much more entertaining than the  critically acclaimed movies.

‘Beautiful Creatures’ was another of those examples where a lot of critics didn’t like it very much and I had a blast watching it. It is based on the best-selling novels by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl and tells the story of Lena and Ethan who are star-crossed lovers in a world where witches and wizards live among humans.

While Ethan (Alden Ehrenreich) has never met Lena (Alice Englert) before but when she comes into school having just moved to her uncles (a brilliant Jeremy Irons) reclusive estate, he knows he has seen her before as the girl who has visited his dreams. Before long they form a bond and thanks to the great young actors this whole process seems natural and reminded me how it felt falling in love for the first time. Weird things seem to happen around Lena and she finally confides in Ethan that she and her family is a caster – powerful wizards and witches. While she seems like a lovely girl she is facing a potential change of heart so to speak – on her 16th birthday she will be either pulled to the light or the dark side. While she is told that she doesn’t have any power over the outcome her uncle Macon Ravenwood (Jeremy Irons) believes that she can choose what she wants to become. Cue Emma Thompson in what must be one of her most fun roles to play – the very dark and mean Sarafine. A dark witch who wants to have Lena on her side knowing she is very powerful.

So while this whole story is not only a great popcorn treat with some truly fantastic special effects and even better acting (apologies for going on about the acting but it was just so good) it is also a great coming of age story. Who hasn’t witnessed crazy family gatherings or the fear of what will become of oneself once out of school and into the adult world? It’s a nice change to see that the women have the powers in this world and are the leaders of either good or bad while most men are more or less bystanders. There has been a lot of backlash at ‘Twilight’ for portraying Bella as a girl without any will power and only living her life for her man. I have not read the books and only partially watched the movies (they were indeed quite bad but I liked Kirsten Steward in it. Well Lena is the total opposite and at times it seems little bit like Ethan is the one becoming brainwashed by his love for her.

It doesn’t often happen that movies are better than books but having seen this movie I am really intrigued to read the rest of this book series before I have to wait how the story goes on. So go on, read something, or be entertained – just don’t listen too much at what is supposed to be good or bad and rather make up your own mind!

Review: Lincoln

For some reason one of the earliest memories of watching a movie was with my family in the summer of 1989 – it was a quiet sea town at the Baltic sea and they were showing a couple of different movies. One of them was ‘E.T.’ and until today I can remember that feeling of witnessing something magical. This was my introduction to one of the most celebrated and iconic directors: Steven Spielberg. Later on I saw ‘Indiana Jones’, ‘Jaws’ or ‘Schindler’s List’ all of which have earned their place in film history but lately I am wondering where the magician of those movies is. I was extremely disappointed in ‘TinTin‘ and ‘War Horse‘ and I simply refuse that there is a 4th Indiana Jones. So when his latest movie was announced I was hesitant to buy into the hype. Yes it was a movie about one of the most loved and most important presidents of the USA – President Abe Lincoln – and one of the best actors of our generation would be playing him (Daniel Day-Lewis) but I just couldn’t forget the last movies.

‘Lincoln’ tells the story of the weeks and months leading up to the shooting of President Lincoln and his efforts to pass the 13th amendment – the abolishment of slavery. Meanwhile the Civil War is in its final stages. Lincoln fear that once the war is over his Emancipation Proclamation would not be passed. So he is torn between finishing a cruel and devastating war and passing the 13th amendment.

‘Lincoln’ shows a lot of great actors giving very long speeches. Very little is shown of the people who are actually affected by this amendment. A lot is shown of President Lincoln and his personal struggles with his family but it just doesn’t sink in with me. It feels more like reading a (very boring) history text-book than an interesting movie. Of course Daniel Day-Lewis gives a mesmerizing performance, I don’t think this guy can act badly if he had to. The supporting cast is also very impressive and gives great performances all around – so do the actors wearing those impressive wigs. Tommy Lee Jones, Lee Pace, David Strathairn and Hal Holbrook are the politicians fighting for and also against Lincoln while Sally Field plays the long-suffering wife of the president. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is the older son of President Lincoln who doesn’t want to stay behind but fight in the war which his father is extremely against.

My biggest problem with the movie was the fact that it didn’t show anything special. Yes it portrays history and you couldn’t really add anything to it but at the same time it felt bland. If I compare it to ‘Argo’ which is also a movie based on historical facts and Ben Affleck still managed to keep it interesting and exciting. And this was the same feeling I had in the last couple of Steven Spielberg movies. So I find it a great injustice that Steven Spielberg got an Oscar nomination for best directing while Ben Affleck didn’t but that’s just my personal taste. Most of my friends who saw the movie loved it. Maybe it’s just me then 😉

Review: The Woman in Black

Although I usually only dare to watch horor movies surrounded by bright light and lots of people I still managed to wind up in a dark and empty cinema in Dublin watching “The Woman in Black”. Parts of the reason for doing so – I freely admit it – were in order to see if Harry Potter – sorry I meant Daniel Radcliffe could do anything else than well Harry Potter. And let me tell you: he can! Even with fewer lines, much less line than say the first chapter of “The Philosophers Stone”. In fact the amount of lines, Daniel had to learn for “The Woman in Black” probably fit on one sheet because most of the times he simply runs around an empty house, looking very frightened and searching for what is causing weird noises. Cue a very creepy rocking chair. His only companion was a dog and well – they usually aren’t great for conversation.

“The Woman in Black” is a 1983 horror story by Susan Hill taking place in England around the turn of the century. Daniel Radcliffe plays Arthur Kipps, a widower with a young child and it soon becomes clear that Arthur has some serious issues with dead people, especially his wife. He is sent to the country side in order to work through the final belongings of the recently deceased Alice Drablow. When arriving in the small town of Crythin Gifford people are very secretive and rather see the back of poor Arthur rather sooner than later but he is adamant to follow through on his task since his boss hinted that he’d get the boot if he doesn’t do that job right. It is hinted that the whole village saw some horrible things happening, the opening scene showing a triple suicide by some 10-year-old girls and Mrs. Drablow herself losing her only son in an accident in the marches. The only person that is helpful and forthcoming towards Arthur is a wealthy landowner Sam Daily who luckily owns a car (the only one in the town) which will come in handy! He is also the one who tells some of the horror that has happened to the locals but dismisses it as simple urban legend that it would have anything to do with a ghost or similar such nonsense.

Sam Daily is played by Ciaran Hinds who seems like a grounded antidote to the hyper-nervous Arthur. Daily eases charm and knowledge but keeps a dark secret himself. With the unfriendly villagers Arthur quickly turns to his work, going through the papers of Mrs. Drablow. Unfortunately for him, his workplace is a very old house – cue a creepy looking mansion that reminded me of The Haunted House in Disneyland – out in the marches, where Mrs. Drablow used to live. He can bribe a farmer to drive him out there in a carriage but just like proper public service in the UK the return will only happen once a day so Arthur is stuck to the house until the evening.

The next 20min of the movie I can hardly recall because I didn’t really see what was happening, hiding most of the times behind my hands. It wasn’t because of gruesome images or ghastly disfigured ghosts showing up. No! Laugh at me but it was the music driving the overall suspension. The way the name-giving “Woman in Black” is introduced and her story told wouldn’t be half as scary if it wasn’t for the music of  Oscar nominated composer Marco Beltrami. So when Arthur finally was picked up, I was quite relieved – only to be drawn back to the house for the final conclusion. I don’t really want to give too much away of the story because I fear it would take away the suspense. But I can tell you, it is a really good movie. The acting is superb on all levels – every part is played so extremely well, you feel you really know these people. Also the world, created by director James Watkins feels like you belong into this creepy village. Only to be extremely grateful when everything is over, that you actually don’t belong. Again thanks to the music and also the landscape the atmosphere created really supports the overall theme: an oldfashioned horror story.

But really this isn’t a review as I haven’t seen (properly seen) most of the film which really come to think of it is a testament to its purpose: This is a proper, genuinely frightening Horror Movie. It is also a testament to the legend that is Hammer Films to know how to properly scare people out of there undies! And boy was I scared. Without any cheap tricks or cruel blood splattering, it will still leave you utterly shocked and frightened. I was so glad I watched this during the day, being able to wander around the streets of Dublin at bright daylight. So forget Saw, Hostel and any other nonsense that only shocks due to too much fake blood. Wath “The Woman in Black” if you want to be truly terrified and frightened!

Review: Sherlock Season 2

It’s about time to take a break from all this Oscar and Berlinale blogging and discuss truly GREAT celluloid entertainment which will never ever be eligible for either of those awards but which is by far the best thing shown on any screen in the past 12 months. I am talking of course about the brilliant “Sherlock” the love child of Dr. Who writers Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss.I already wrote about how amazing, awesome and simply extraordinary the first season was. Now after watching the second season a couple of times I am simply counting down the months, weeks and days until we will have a third season! Why? Well you have to see for yourself but let me tell you it is amazing, heartbreaking and probably the best 90 min your TV will have ever shown you!

There are very view Films or indeed TV Shows that leave an imprint on me, so strongly that I want to go back and watch it over and over. Indeed I can’t remember if I ever watched a movie twice in a row just because (and not just to see it with the commentary…). But I did just that this morning, re-watching the last episode of the 2nd season just because it was so amazing and just wanted to find that clue to understand how they did it! And according to Steven Moffat we are all missing something….a vital clue that tells us, how they did it.

But firstly, let’s recap what the second season is all about. While the first season gave us an introduction to the brilliant mind of Sherlock and his unusual friendship with John Watson the second explores this and other relationships more in-depth. Rather than being alienated by Sherlock’s appalling at times even antisocial behaviour (at one point it is discussed if it was Aspergers) John manages to see the good in him and realizes that Sherlock Holmes just has a different way of showing his feelings towards people who are close to him. Through the course of the second season we are witness to how much Sherlock truly cares for Mrs. Hudson (a bad guy dares to hurt her and in return, he falls out of the window…”a couple of times” as Sherlock dryly explains to Lestrade). We can also see how Sherlock calls Watson his only friend and finally in “The Reichenbach Falls” we learn that while he keeps on breaking her heart, Sherlock appreciates Molly and thankfully lets her and us know it.

Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat chose three of the most popular Holmes-Stories as base for the episodes of season two: “A Scandal in Belgravia” is based on “A Scandal in Bohemia”, “The Hounds of Baskerville” obviously derive from “The Hound of the Baskervilles” and “The Reichenbach Falls” is based on “The Final Problem”.

“Scandal” introduces us to The Woman – the only female person that Sherlock ever came close to having feelings for. While I really enjoyed the story and its modernisation, the pace and the eventual conclusion I just didn’t like Lara Pulver as Irene Adler.

A lot of people were disappointed with the eventual dog in “The Hounds of Baskerville” but I had to say that not only was I truly frightened by the story (something Sir Conan Doyle already aimed for) but I also really liked the conclusion. I agree that some of it seems far-fetched but then again it is entertainment.Russel Tovey is great as the frightened Henry Knight and when Lestrade shows up from holidays, the gang is somewhat complete for some banter the Sherlock-way.

In “The Reichenbach Falls” Sherlock and Holmes are facing someone, we have met before: No – not Mycroft but rather Moriarty. It is so much fun, watching Andrew Scott being a totally mental villain. Sherlock tells him in the final minutes of “The Reichenbach Falls” : “You’re insane”  and Moriarty dryly responses: “You’re getting that only now?”. The acting of everybody involved most of all that of Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman but nothing can prepare you for the intensity and climax of the final episode. The scene on the roof and Watson’s monologue are heartbreaking and beautifully acted and whoever will win the Oscars for best actor and best supporting actor just have to live with the fact that they only won because Sherlock didn’t qualify for it!

For some of the deductions of Sherlock I had to stop and repeat the scene even though the filmmakers (most of all the splendid director Paul McGuigan) already do a great job of making understanding easier. But Benedict Cumberbatch just speaks so quickly and gives us so many information even the best visual support can’t help it. Thankfully for us Watson has the same problem so he serves as a kind of translator between Sherlock and the viewers.

Having read some Sherlock Holmes stories by Sir Conan Doyle I was aware that he (unsuccessfully) tried to kill off his hero because he was so bored with him but had to bring him back due to public demand. The “killing” actually happened so even before the final episode was broadcasted the internet was full with questions of “will he die” or even worse “will this be the last episode”? Only one day after the episode Gatiss and Moffat confirmed that indeed there will be a third season but it was enough time between to let the internet run wild with ideas and theories. I don’t have a real theory but just some ideas, how they did it: Molly obviously was a big help and so was Sherlocks homeless network, that bus was there for a purpose so was the bike rider who knocked over Watson. And finally – why did the children scream their heads off when they saw Sherlock??? Or another theory by my sister who over the last year or so I managed to turn into a Sherlock-Fan. She didn’t know what was coming when she watched the final episode and thanks to text messages, there is a transcript of her reaction and theory!
10pm – Will watch Sherlock now!
11.30pm – They can’t do that!!!!!!
11.45pm – Ok, get it, Molly scratched him off the floor, didn’t she?

So if you want to do yourself a favour, watch this unbelievable piece of television. You will not regret it and maybe you find the missing clue to make me understand how the hell they did it!!!

Review: War Horse

When you have a call sheet with names like Steven Spielberg (director), Richard Curtis (Screenplay), Janusz Kaminski (Director of Photography), John Williams (Score),  Emily Watson, David Thewlis, Benedict Cumberbatch, Tom Hiddleston and Eddie Marsan, you’d expect one of the greatest movies of the last year. Then again, I never thought of being disappointed by the super-duo Spielberg & Jackson but Tin Tin was not what it could have been.

While “War Horse” was definitely not as dull as “The Adventures of Tin Tin” I still have the slight suspicion that Steven Spielberg might not make another “E.T” or even “Schindlers List”. While in those movies you didn’t feel the length of the film because you were so compelled by the storytelling, here it felt at times unneccessary long and some scenes just could have been cut short or even dismissed all together: the long visit of the German soldiers at the French Farm or the scenes with the two German brothers. I am also wondering if there is a dialect-language-trainer-strike going on in Hollywood because I simply cannot understand why you would have the German soldiers either speak perfect british english with no accent at all or with very strong German accents or even better – having them speak German with each other. Being German I also spotted the English actors who tried to pretend to be German. You might say what you want about Quentin Tarantino (and believe me I have ;)) but at least he managed to make a totally plausible movie in 4 languages without any of his actors having to succumb to some ridiculous accent (ok maybe Brad Pitt didn’t get that memo) or pretending the whole world speaks English on camera but local languages off camera.

So what about the movie then – the story originally was intended for children and eventually was turned into a very successful stage adaptation for the West End as well as the Broadway. When Spielberg saw the play in February 2010, he decided to make a movie out of it and 8 months later – by October 2010 the main shoot was finished. War Horse tells the story of the horse Joey, growing up in the English Countryside and developing a very close relationship with farmer boy Albert. When it is announced that England will go to War (this being the Great War) horses are sold to the cavalry – including Joey. Luckily for Albert (and for the female viewers of this movie) Joey is bought by the dashing Captain Nicholls (Tom Hiddleston) who goes on impressing his even more dashing (apologies for the lack of variation but it simply is the most fitting word) Major Jamie Stewart (Sherlocks Benedict Cumberbatch) in a very impressive 300 men+horse strong charge. But the reality of war is upon them rather sooner when the cavalry has the task to take over a small camp of German soldiers. Here the movie really shows its strength because what I wasn’t aware of was the clash of generations that this awful war really brought along. While the British were still fighting on horses with bayonets Germans already had machine guns and such things. So when the old-fashioned cavalry charges onto the camp they are not aware of what is hidden in the woods behind the camp. Once the charge is over (here one can see one of the best editing effects ever showing devastation without barely any blood) a German captain yells quite telling at a devastated Captain Jamie Stewart “Look at what you have done! (showing at all the dead horses and men) Did you expect we leave 600 men unsupported? What were you thinking?”

Joeys real ordeal now begins with a short stint at the German casualty department than meeting a lovely French girl before being brought back into the war to pull heavy artillery for the Germans. Meanwhile Albert grew up and is adamant to find his beloved horse so he signs up for the war and we meet him again in the trenches.

Thankfully even though the movie shows the cruel reality of war it doesn’t shy away from some comic relief. Who would have thought that a synchronized throw of 10 steel cutters can be highly entertaining – but it is. Eventually and quite unbelievably the movie draws to a Happy End – this was probably down to the fact that the movie is based on a children’s book. And while the movie overall wasn’t one of Spielberg’s best work, he still manages to make me cry like a little child. What I found myself left with was that I barely had any idea, how bad the Great War really was. You learn so much about the 2nd war (especially if you grew up in Germany) but barely anything about the first one. So for that alone I was grateful I watched the movie. It definitely isn’t my favourite “Best Picture Nominee” but I liked it better than “The Artist” or “The Descendants”. But please don’t go watch it, if you need cheering up!

Review: Hugo

During my quest of trying to watch as many Oscar nominated movies as possible before the big day, I finally managed to watch the most nominated this year: Hugo.

After the disappointment of “The Artist” I am very happy to tell you, that “Hugo” is a beautiful, enchanting and worthy oscar-nominated movie – well in my opinion at least.

Martin Scorsese manages to bring his love for the movies to life in this sweet story
of the orphan Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield), who lives in a train station in Paris in the 1930’s. He keeps all the clocks of the station running on time but he really wants to fix his automaton as he believes it holds a message from his deceased Dad. On his quest of finding missing parts and pieces, he meets Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz) and her Godfather Papa George (Ben Kingsley) who has holds a secret the children are about to uncover. Hugo is also constantly on the run of the station inspector (a hilarious and wonderful Sacha Baron Cohen) and the chases give way to some great comic relief during the sometimes tragic story.

At first I was weary of the fact that the movie would be shown in 3D but unlike many directors before him, Martin Scorcese uses the 3D technique in order to support the storytelling of the movie (take note all you action directors who seem to think  that 3D MAKES a movie). And unlike “Warhorse” (review still to come) this is a proper family friendly movie that pretty much everybody can enjoy for various reasons. During the movie you will see some of the most enchanting movies from the pioneering stage in the early 20th century – excerpts from Charlie Chaplin, “A Trip to the moon” and other movies from George Melies. It did what I must assume was the intention of Martin Scorsese – it makes you want to watch all of those old movies and it also reminds you what movies really intended to be: Dreams coming to life. For that reason alone I truly loved “Hugo”: for me movies are a way of escaping reality and exploring dream worlds for at least 90 min. This movie does just that!

As to be expected from a Scorsese movie, the acting is top-notch and it’s nice to see that (although I love him) he doesn’t have to cast Leonardo DiCaprio in every movie. Especially the kids surprised me with the skills but for me Ben Kingsley was the heart of the movie as the forgotten film pioneer who gets a second chance at fame and happiness.

So if you can’t decide, which Oscar-movie you really want to see, I urge you to choose “Hugo” over “The Artist”!

Review: Berlinale Movies

Having lived most of my life near Berlin it is hard to imagine I never ever managed to visit the world-famous Berlinale Film Festival. So this year I decided it should be different and thankfully I was introduced to an equally fanatic film fan like myself and he managed to get me a couple of tickets as it is quite hard getting the tickets while at work. We ended up seeing three movies together: “For Ellen”, “Una Noche” and “A Royal Affair”.

When I finally went to my first screening I was more excited also because the movie starred one of my favorites – Paul Dano, who I found remarkable in nearly everything he did so far. Here he also serves as a producer and in the Q&A after the movie, director So Yong Kim said his involvement was the driving force behind the movie. “For Ellen” tells the story of Joby a young musician visiting a depressing little town somewhere in upstate New York in order to finalize his divorce which obviously was instigated by his estranged wife Claire. During the course of their somewhat conversation (he is talking, she not so much) it is clear that they also have a daughter – Ellen – who Joby wants to see before leaving again. The reasons for the divorce and subsequent refusal of Claire to even talk to Joby (at one point she just tells her lawyer to do the talking) are never discussed and one can only assume that Joby simply never took care of his young family on his trip to fame. While one cannot ignore the huge talent that Paul Dano is, portraying a clearly troubled person who fights for the love of his little daughter, the movie itself didn’t appeal. While following Joby around on his quest to….well I don’t know what because that was never clear to me. Joby constantly wants to get closer to Ellen but all he does is offending people, smoking like a chimney, getting drunk in bars and picking up random girls. In my opinion a movie that tells the story of an estranged father trying to get closer to his little daughter you should have some positive thoughts towards the dad but all you can feel is pity at his attempts. I also had problems with technicalities -the camera always seemed to linger a couple of frames too long while other scenes simply didn’t fit at all into the flow of the story. I liked how So Yong Kim chose between hand hold cameras and changing to steady cams once Joby was actually with Ellen, supporting the calm she brought over him. Another great performance came from Jon Heder who finally showed international audiences that he is capable of something else than an ever recurring Napoleon Dynamite. He plays Jobys unexperienced lawyer who tries to get some kind of connection with his client only to be ridiculed by him. Why Jena Malone got a credit so high up on the list when she can only be seen in a very short scene wasn’t clear but it can only be assumed that her name should draw more people into watching the movie.

All in all I found the film worthwhile solely for Paul Danos performance but without him, it was just another little indie film that doesn’t quite manages to compel.

Review: The Artist

After so much talk and awards and what-not my expectations for “The Artist” were pretty high. Boy were they met…NOT.

The movie tells the story of George Valentin, a super star in the time of silent movies. His equally famous partner – Uggi, the Dog – never leaves his side and together they are a charme-combo barely anyone can resist. By accident George meets the aspiring actress Peppy Miller and this chance encounter gives her career a boost and him a reminder, of what feelings are for. Since he is a married man though, he will not pursue anything. But things don’t stay the same, the industry is changing – there are the first sound tests for movies. While the producer of Georges movies is delighted by this (a very good John Goodman) George himself doesn’t believe in this new stuff and dismisses it. Unfortunately for George his producer choses the new over the old so George is left on the street. But he wants to prove everybody that he is an artist so he goes ahead, writing, producing and starring in his own movie. Meanwhile Peppy Miller becomes one of the first big stars of the new “talkies” as they were called back then. So while his star is declining she is on the fast track to super stardom.

While I don’t doubt that it will win a lot of the 10 nominations it received, I just couldn’t like it as much as some of the critics have. I liked the idea of a silent black-and-white movie a lot but I found the execution rather tedious and less than exciting. For one – the main character is in my opinion very unlikable and the fact that he simply doesn’t get any of the lessons he is given in terms of vanity and arrogance annoyed the hell out of me. It is a fine display of acting skills by Jean Dujardin who most probably will win the Academy Award for best Actor (though I much rather would like to see Gary Oldman receiving it) – he manages the fine line between physical comedy and drama very well. I just couldn’t like his character. Bérénice Bejo on the other hand was so sweet and innocent you just had to love her. Of course her scheme of making up for her insensitivity was very clear but very charming. James Cromwell gives a beautiful performance as George’s Butler who just tries to help him even if George himself doesn’t want to be helped. The whole cast does a fine job in this quite unusual movie.

I just couldn’t get rid of the feeling that the writer and director Michel Hazanavicius had to make sure that there was a French element in the film – a lesson for society if you will. While it might be a good thing to have, here it just didn’t feel right at all. The movie is about the dream of all dreams – making it big in Hollywood, being a star and while the sometimes beautiful old-fashioned story is wrapped in the gorgeous scenery and costumes of the 1920’s – in the end it just feels like a fraud because it is a quintessential French movie. Maybe that’s why I just couldn’t like it as much as others did. I can agree on the great acting (though other films last year have been better in my opinion) but the whole package just doesn’t feel right.

Review: Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

In the run-up of this years Oscar race I was very surprised to learn that Gary Oldman has never been nominated before – not for Leon, not for “True Romance” and not for “Sid and Nancy”. I could probably go on and on about all the roles that Oldman made his own and made great but somehow got always overlooked by the academy.

Therefore I was even more intrigued by his latest movie “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy” because it finally gave Gary Oldman the recognition he so deserved. But even though it is his movie, the call sheet reads like a who is who of current british film: Ciaran Hindes, Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch, Mark Strong, Tom Hardy, Toby Jones and John Hurt. It is therefore surprising to see that the movie is directed (quite marvelously) by the rather unknown Thomas Alfredson who only recently shot into the spot light with his movie “Let the right one in”.

The story is based on the famous novel by John Le Carre by the same name and tells the search for the mole within the MI6 during the hight of the cold war. Smiley (Oldman) is called back into action, trying to find the mole within his own ranks with 4 people (Hinds, Firth, Jones, Dencik) in the closer range. He is supported by the Guillam (Cumberbatch) in his search. While the plot develops we learn a lot about the different men and by the end of the movie nearly every one of them gets their heart broken.

It is a quiet movie but even though the action is somehow missing you feel drenched in adrenaline and sitting on the edge of the seat by the end of the movie. It is also a movie you want to go back and revisit – I certainly have to because I am sure I didn’t get everything that went on. I also want to go back and cherish the amazing range of acting skills on display. Gary Oldman fully deserves his Oscar nomination but the rest of the cast shouldn’t go unnoticed and everybody up to the smallest role (cue Christian McKay) does an amazing job. The whole cast seems to blend perfectly in with each other creating this great group of people. Interestingly though he seems so much older and wiser than the rest of the cast, Gary Oldman is only 2 years older than Colin Firth and 5 years younger than Ciaran Hinds but he still seems closer to John Hurt than the rest of the group.

As I said before all of those strong men get their hearts broken in the course of this movie and every time it happens, you can feel your own heart breaking with it. You will know what I am talking about, when you see the movie but as a hint: watch out for Guillam making the hardest decision of his life and Prideaux shedding just one tear.

All I can say is go watch this movie, if nothing else this movie portrays some of the finest acting by some of the best actors of our time!

Review: The Descendants

After the rather surprising Oscar Nominations this Tuesday, I will need some time in order to get my head around these. In the meantime I will check out the nominees and see if the Academy was right in nominating them or not (quite possibly NOT in the case of Michael Fassbender but more on that later).

First up is Alexander Paynes latest movies “The Descendants”. As much as I loved his previous works “Sideways”, “About Schmidt” or “Election” I am simply not a big fan of George Clooney therefore I was a bit unsure when watching it. But as usual Alexander Payne doesn’t disappoint and delivers a well-made movie with great acting, a touching story and( just like in “Sideways”) he makes you want to travel.

This time it is Hawaii the story is set in. George Clooney plays Matt King, a real estate lawyer whose wife is in a coma due to a boating accident and not only does he now have to take care of his young daughters but also face the fact, that his wife was cheating on him and about to leave him. The film describes the imaginary road he takes his daughters (and their friend Sid) in order to get to grips with the imminent death of their mother and wife but also to finally get to know each other. The trip becomes real when Matt decides to find the lover of his wife in order to give him a chance to say good-bye to her, before they will have to turn off the machines.

The lover – Brian Speers – is the first big surprise of the  movie as he is played by Matthew Lillard who is most known through his roles in Scream, She’s all that and Scooby-Doo. Here he plays a torn man who comes across as both frightened of losing his family but also shattered by his affairs fate. It shows once again that Alexander Payne really knows how to bring out the best in his actors as the whole cast really shines. Yes even George Clooney does a decent job as the jaded husband though I don’t think I will ever become a fan of his work. I was especially impressed with the two young actresses who played his daughters: Shailene Woodley and Amara Miller who show a broad range of acting skills while going through this tough time.

The overall theme of the movie seems more uplifting even though it is a movie about loss and death but Alexander Payne has a way of telling a seemingly ordinary story with all its  low points and high points, leaving the viewer with some kind of satisfaction having witnessed it or even participated in it. The only problem I have with the movie that apart from its positiveness in a movie-perspective it leaves a kind of “meh” taste behind. It is a well made, lovely movie. The director did an amazing job and the actors are all great but still, I cannot feel the same enthusiasm about it, as I felt after watching “Shame” or “Winters Bone” so why the former did not receive one nomination is beyond me but I guess that’s just how the game goes.