Max is one of those movies that doesn’t quite pan out the way you want them to. It is overly cheesy and undermines what could have been an emotionally resonant film for audiences.  Produced by Karen Rosenfelt (Marley & Me), Max tells the story of a trained service dog who suffers from PTSD after the death of his handler, Kyle Wincott, and becomes too traumatized to remain in the military. He’s adopted by the fallen Marine’s family but teenage brother Justin (Josh Wiggins) faces his own obstacles and has no interest in caring for the animal. Max eventually strengthens the fractured bonds within the family and helps them heal from their loss.

It should come as no surprise that the dog is the clear standout of the movie. Max is utterly adorable and the audience’s reactions to the instances of psychological and physical threat to him are proof that animals can elicit so much emotion from us. Max is effectively used to shine a light on the Wincott family’s current state of affairs and ongoing struggles. The strained relationship between Justin and his father (Thomas Haden Church, Sideways and Spider-Man 3) is engaging but these moments are few and far between. The third act drags on for quite a bit before reaching its predictable resolution. However, there is a great fight scene where Max shows off his ferocious side by taking on two dogs. Also, there isn’t really much for the supporting cast to do because of the focus on Max and several of the characters feel thrown in for good measure rather than to serve the narrative. Max deals with some pretty heavy subject matter and had the overall tone of the movie been a shade darker, I feel that it would have left more of an impact on me.

While Max falls short of what I had expected, there is enough here for families to enjoy should they choose to see it. There is no doubt that many people who have at some point been through similar circumstances will relate and find Max poignant. It is ultimately a film about dealing with loss and who certain individuals emerge as in the aftermath of that tragedy.

Grade: C+

Unlike children who can yell about their love for gummy worms and instantly become friends, making acquaintances as a working adult isn’t as easy. Patrick Brice’s sex comedy The Overnight excellently exhibits this grown-up anxiety with Emily (Orange is the New Black’s Taylor Schilling, who plays a more sexually reserved role here than Piper Chapman) and Alex (Parks and Recreation’s Adam Scott, who’s as awkward here as ever). They’ve recently moved from introvert Seattle to extrovert Los Angeles with hopes of finally expanding their horizons post-college. When Kurt (Jason Schwartzman), a local dad dressed in contemporary Amish attire, approaches them and their son with an open invitation to pizza dinner at his place, their excitement for the future friendship ruptures from their otherwise lackadaisical faces. Fast forward to post-dinner where Kurt is showing breast-pumping videos of his wife to the unsuspecting couple and The Overnight has kicked into full gear.

The best part about The Overnight is the combined awkwardness of Scott and Schwartzman, who are just inherently uncomfortable by nature. The movie is mostly about them getting out of their comfort zone enough to sing while swinging prosthetic dicks around, but the rest of the movie doesn’t feel as jaunty. Skinny dipping and smoking pot past 8:00 PM doesn’t faze me as a pompous college student who’s “done it all,” unlike the 50+ year-old ladies behind me who were audibly gasping at Adam Scott using a bong. As a result, the sexually tense night ends in a rather quick 79 minutes with nothing especially slaphappy happening. Still, the blend of secondhand embarassment, casual humor, and a dark yellow-ish hue that feels like a happy drunk is enough for The Overnight to establish itself as a somewhat raunchy but mostly tame watch worth visiting.

Grade: C+

So, here we are again, in the same situation as last week: me reviewing a historical drama. You may recall me saying how I don’t very much care for English literature set in the 17th and 18th centuries. You know, that awkward historical era between the artistic and scientific genius of the Renaissance and the dramatic technological and political changes of the Industrial Revolution. A time which is always full of beautiful and vain aristocrats with seemingly nothing better to do than melodramatically fall in love with each other, have affairs with each other, and so on and so forth. Well, my dislike of that time period does not end with British literature; in fact, it extends to films of that time period as well, about any region of Europe. By this point you may be wondering why I’m reviewing this film at all, and to be honest with you I’ve been asking myself the very same question.

Anyway, enough with my ranting. A Little Chaos is a historical drama set in France in the late 17th and early 18th centuries.  Our main character is named Sabine de Barra (Kate Winslet, Titanic and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), who is a landscape architect. She attends an interview given by the renowned designer André Le Nôtre (Matthias Schoenaerts, Daens and Far From the Madding Crowd). He is looking for help in designing his greatest-ever project: the gardens of the palace of Versailles for King Louis XIV (Alan Rickman). Despite their landscaping styles being completely different, he hires Sabine to build a section of the gardens. Once there, the low-born Sabine must quickly adapt to the foreign world of a royal court, developing relationships, enemies, and more romantic ties.

Now, I know what you’re probably thinking at this point: wouldn’t a movie where the main character is a landscape architect be really boring? As a matter of fact, if you thought this you would be completely correct. As it turns out, the only thing more boring than films about vain and useless European aristocrats is movies about landscape architects who build gardens for vain and useless European aristocrats. As you can imagine, it is very melodramatic.

Another thing you may have noticed about this period piece about France is that none of the main actors in it are French. In fact, there is not a single French actor in the entire movie; they didn’t even hire any French extras. The vast majority of the French nobility speak with Southern English accents, with the occasional Scotsman and American thrown in for good measure. I know there are plenty of reasons why this came about, but it really bugs me that the makers of this film couldn’t be bothered to hire even one French person. Another thing about the movie that bugged me was the fact that the costume department for some reason felt the need to dress Kate Winslet so that the audience can see her cleavage in every single scene. It’s completely unnecessary and a bit grating.

Now I know that I am certainly not the target audience of this film, and that target audience will probably love it; despite its extremely bland plot the movie is not all bad; the period costumes are beautiful and the acting is good, if not great. Plus, Stanley Tucci plays a flamboyantly gay duke who actually ends up being really funny. It also has a romance plot between Winslet’s and Schoenaerts’ characters which will be enjoyable for those who will enjoy this movie in the first place. But as you all clearly know by now, I am not someone who would enjoy this movie in the first place.

Grade: B+ (if you like period dramas about vain and useless European aristocrats)

Grade: C- (otherwise)

True Detective has finally returned. Season 1 was, in my opinion, some of the finest crime drama ever created. Season 2 has a new cast and director, but retains writer Nic Pizzolatto. After a season as critically acclaimed as the first, Pizzolatto has his work cut out for him.

The first episode, entitled “Western Book of the Dead” follows four main characters: highway patrol officer Paul Woodrugh (Taylor Kitsch), Vince City Detective Ray Velcoro (Colin Farrell), State CID officer Ani Bezzerides (Rachel McAdams) and crime boss Frank Semyon (Vince Vaughn). The story takes places in the city of Vince, a fictional Californian city filled with corruption and organized crime. Velcoro is a crooked detective discreetly paid by Semyon to take care of his dirty business.  Officer Woodrugh is a war veteran struggling with what seems to be post-traumatic stress disorder. His job as a motorcycle patrolman seems to help him cope with his trauma. Officer Bezzerides is a highly qualified and skilled officer in the State CID who is completely devoted to her career, while trying to distance herself from her father, who is a preacher in a strange religious organization. Frank Semyon is a crime boss who hopes to become a legitimate businessman by investing gang money into an upcoming project to create a high speed railway system across California. His plans are interrupted by the untimely disappearance of a city manager who was supposed to broker the investment deal with the Russian Mafia.

Honestly this episode was rather frustrating to watch. Each police officer was introduced separately and they do not meet until the last five minutes of the episode. Like I said in my review of season 1 of True Detective, the true magic of the show comes from the interactions between twisted and broken detectives while they delve into the dark corners of humanity. This episode seemed to get bogged down creating compelling and dark backstories for each of the FOUR main characters, which ended up consuming most of the screen time, rather than immediately focusing on the story and delving slowly into background and character motivations.

With that said I do not plan on continuously comparing this season to last season, and I did find some bright spots in this first episode. I found Detective Velcoro’s story rather compelling as the audience learns in the opening minutes of the show that Velcoro’s marriage fell apart after his wife was raped and beaten. His wife has a child approximately 9 months after the rape, and despite the boy’s questionable paternity status, Velcoro treats him like his own flesh and blood. I think this parent-child relationship will be fascinating as the season progress, growing and maturing. Velcoro is by no stretch of the imagination a good parent, but his love and affection for his child is expressed in small and sweet gestures, such as the little digital recorders he bought for himself and his son so that they can exchange audio diary entries and express the emotions they have trouble expressing in person.

My feelings about “Western Book of the Dead” are very mixed. On one hand, I am very excited by the overall mystery, which involves a criminal conspiracy in the construction of the California high speed rail system and it was rather fun to watch veteran character actor Timothy V. Murphy play  a Russian gangster. Pizzolatto proved last season that he can create conspiracies with great finesse and detail. On the other hand the episode felt very tedious and dull as I was forced to sit through basically four separate background pieces until the larger mystery came together at the end. With the lack of character interaction, the episode felt like it lacked a central driving force. Hopefully, now that all four characters have been established this episode, next week’s episode will be more compelling and exciting.

Grade: B-

In the world of animated feature films, there are three studios which tower above all others: Disney, Studio Ghibli, and Pixar (I know Pixar is owned by Disney, but they retain complete creative control). Each of them has their own special niche: Disney reigns supreme in fairytales and traditional fantasy stories, Studio Ghibli has arguably the most beautiful films along with a tradition of strong female protagonists, and Pixar makes films which are frequently less conventional than their competitors (living toys, fish, and the monsters in your closet), but no less heartwarming for it. At their best, Pixar movies are hilarious, fun-loving, and occasionally really heartbreaking. I am pleased to report that Inside Out is all of this and more; it’s the best film that Pixar has made in years and one of my new favorite animated films.

Inside Out is a story about all the little people inside our heads. More specifically, it is about the all little people inside the head of Riley, an eleven-year-old girl from Minnesota. They are Joy (Amy Poehler), Fear (Bill Hader), Anger (Lewis Black), Disgust (Mindy Kaling), and Sadness (Phyllis Smith). They run the control panel inside Riley’s head, and the five of them work together to keep Riley healthy and happy. But things take a turn for the worst when Riley and her family move to San Francisco, and they have their work cut out for them managing Riley’s feelings about leaving her best friend behind, moving into a new house, and going to a new school. When sadness starts creeping into Riley’s once carefree life, Joy and Sadness end up trapped in a remote part of her mind. The two of them have to learn to work together to get home, and to make sure that Riley can be Joyful again.

I know many people may hear that premise and expect the movie to turn out a bit cheesy, but let me assure you that it is anything but. Inside Out is Pixar at its best: its fun-loving, it’s hilarious, and its occasionally really heartbreaking. This should come as no surprise considering its directed by Pete Docter, the same mind behind Monsters, Inc. and Up. Like the best animated films, Inside Out functions on two levels: on the one hand, it’s a fun-filled adventure through Riley’s mind, featuring such destinations as the Imagination Land theme park, the Dream Productions movie studio, and the Train of Thought. But on the other hand, it is also a supremely well-crafted story, this time examining a young girl as she struggles with real sadness and depression for the first time in her life, and coming to accept that it’s okay to be sad sometimes.

There are so many things about this movie I could heap praise upon, but I would like to examine a couple in particular. First off, the casting of every character is simply spot-on. Amy Poehler, showing her experience since her stint in Studio Ghibli’s The Secret World of Arrietty, perfectly portrays the manic energy needed as the personification of happiness. Bill Hader is hilarious as Fear, and Phyllis Smith nails the depressed but never whining voice of perpetual sadness. And Lewis Black as the literal personification of anger? That’s fucking brilliant!

Another thing I’d like to point out is how the film manages to hit a wide variety of different tones while always maintaining a consistent feel. As previously mentioned, the movie maintains an atmosphere of adventure throughout, both in terms of Riley’s outer circumstances and her inner emotional journey. Like all Pixar movies, Inside Out is also extremely funny; I laughed out loud many, many times during my screening. Many of the jokes will go right over the kids’ heads straight for their parents, but there’s plenty of variety to keep audiences of all ages laughing. And also like all Pixar movies, there are one or two moments which are incredibly sad. I teared up a couple of times during the film, and I could hear many people in the audience full-on crying at one point, including fully-grown men.

In summary, Inside Out is a supremely good film. It’s fun, it’s funny, it’s heartwarming, and it’s heartbreaking. It’s a fun adventure and classic coming-of-age story. It’s an example of the magic that Pixar can create when they are at their finest, and honestly I think it’s the best they’re made in years; no doubt it will receive universal acclaim. In fact, out of all the films I’ve reviewed this whole year so far (and there’s been a lot of them), I think Inside Out may be my favorite. So come on, let’s go meet the little people inside our heads.

Grade: A+

So maybe you’ve have already seen the latest “talk of the town“ Jurassic World or are planning to see it soon. But a little-known movie hits the big screens today, and believe me, if there is a movie that deserves your attention, it is Me and Earl and the Dying Girl. And let me tell you why you should watch it.

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl is a fresh take on the coming-of-age story where the lives of three high school kids change in different ways when one of them is diagnosed with cancer. I know this sounds serious, and it is. But the beauty of the movie lies in the flow of it and how it walks you through this palette of emotions the trio goes through. The story itself is pretty simple: Greg (Thomas Mann) and his friend Earl (RJ Cyler) are two friends who grew up together making short films that spoofed famous movies. Greg is an escapist (he tries so hard to stay detached from social relationships that he calls Earl his co-worker), but he’s forced to spend time with his classmate Rachel (Olivia Cooke) who was recently diagnosed with cancer. The trio goes through various experiences that alter them and their perspective of life.

I could keep talking about how every element of the movie is meticulously pieced together for an amazing experience; but that would just be overkill. So let me jump into talking more about the screenplay and music. The movie is an adaption of the novel by the same name, written by Jesse Andrews. Andrews has also written the screenplay for the movie, making it an unadulterated depiction of the writer’s vision but with the appeal of a motion picture. This is something that makes the movie a great experience to watch, and easy to believe Jesse Andrews when he says “the movie turned out to be a  better version of the book." Not to mention that the movie also has moments where there’s something on the screen and no conversations taking place. Moments of bliss for straight 4-5 minutes. And the music is so enthralling that you don’t realise that all that's keeping you glued to the screen is a set of images and a mellow tune. Kudos to Brian Eno.

The young cast of the movie delivers a performance that shall propel them into the world of stardom. Mann and Cooke have very strong roles that they describe as emotionally consuming and something that helped them evolve as actors. RJ Cycler has a great debut and showcases his ability to make you laugh. Along with the lead cast there are lots of familiar names like Nick Offerman, Molly Shannon and Jon Bernthal who give equally incredible performances. And then there is Alfonso Gomez-Rejon (American Horror Story), the director of the movie. The artistic finesse of Alfonso can be easily compared to any director at his creative apex.

This is a movie that must be experienced by everyone. Whether it is about a girl dying from cancer, or a boy who plays along with every group in school but belongs to none, or about making movie parodies, or simply being there for one another. It blends all of them together effortlessly into an experience that will leave you drenched in emotions.

P.S. If you still have doubts about how good the movie is: A Pittsburgh council member just declared June 16 as Jesse Andrews’ Me and Earl and the Dying Girl Day.

Grade: A

Casting homages to Juice and Boyz n the Hood, Dope is a much-needed revamp of the streetwise black cinema. Every frame of it explodes with a youthful energy only found in an Odd Future concert in 2012 and it’s comic one-liners rebel against a genre previously characterized by bleak gangster narratives with cherished wit and glee. Dope starts out as a jubilant coming-of-age tale about a nerdy Inglewood teenager who’s in a punk band with his friends before repeatedly defying expectations despite its John Hughes-made characters and cliché setting. It’s overflowing with pop culture references and socio-political commentary that doesn’t become quite clear until it’s literally spelt out in the very end, so it’s focus can be as ADHD as it’s camerawork, but the entertainment of it all is enough to make up for it at times.

Malcolm (Shameik Moore, a true gem) is stuck. He can’t think of what to write for his Harvard admissions essay, “Why Harvard?”, that isn’t a cheesy, hackneyed autobiography about living in the hood with a single mother and still triumphing at the top of his class. While daydreaming about what could have been had he lived the life of a “cool” kid, Malcolm and his two friends bike into the drama of local drug dealer Dom (A$AP Rocky) and his girlfriend (Zoë Kravitz). Dom later invites them to his birthday party at a local club as a thank-you for helping sort things out, and the trio are overjoyed at the opportunity to finally do something “dope” for once. Shit hits the fan real quick as a shooting erupts in the nightclub and Malcolm runs out before the police can racially profile him, until he realizes the next day that his backpack was now filled with “dope” from the party.

The 21st century Risky Business-like storyline upends any criminal expectations as Malcolm uses his run-in with the drug world as an opportunity to expend his Internet and Bitcoin knowledge. Dope is unique in how modern it is, but it successfully retaliates it’s planned obsolescence with Malcolm’s utter adoration for the flat tops and hip-hop soundtrack of the ‘90s. It maintains it’s humor even when it tackles modern issues like incorporating slap humor with white people using the "n" word and quick cracks at the increasing usage of drugs at music festivals. With a premise so current, it's expected to have female roles that actually contribute something, but Dope slips in this regard. The mom is significantly not as present as she should be, Malcolm's friend Diggy (Kiersey Clemons) acts more like a guy, and the only other female characters are sexual objects of desire for Malcolm. Having the mother more present could have made the emotional pull at the end actually feel touching instead of like a glaring, go-to answer it has to resort to instead.

Dope starts off light and enticing- there’s a joke about TV on the Radio that caught me off guard and had me hooked almost immediately. But as it slides down a slippery slope, the story begins to drag, the vibrancy dwindles, and the jokes start to feel stale. Director Rick Famuyiwa wants to combine the sociopolitical commentary on racial stereotypes with a coming of age story with a comedy with a gangster drama, and the mess of it sacrifices focus on a specific issue and meaningful female roles for a stronger black male lead and it's questionable how much of a statement it is. One scene where one of Malcolm’s potential love interests causes a stir on local news and a poor black man on the side of the incident is interviewed digresses into a trite meme and resultantly reduces poverty and blackness to a punchline, and it’s unfortunate that this is often the course of action for Dope when given the opportunity to make wider statements.

With frenetic editing and a potpourri of hip-hop singles from Public Enemy to A Tribe Called Quest, Dope is a two-hour romp garnished in rewarding references to the 90s and raucous scriptwriting to make it this summer’s freshest film. It manages to keep the plates spinning and occasionally stumbles, but it’s decision to overhaul sorrowful genres with abundant fun is greatly appreciated. The film is a bulky, urban comedy that challenges expectations to at least be precisely “dope,” not particularly memorable but entertaining nonetheless.

Grade: B-

I have said on this blog before, probably several times by now, how much of an anglophile I am. I love BBC News, their system of parliamentary democracy (recent elections non-withstanding), and almost all of my favorite bands are British. However, there is one area of British culture which I am not much a fan of, and that is British literature from the 18th or 19th centuries. I know a lot of people love Pride and Prejudice and Wuthering Heights, but if it was written after Shakespeare and before Dickens odds are it will probably just put me to sleep. Knowing this fact, I decided to take a chance on reviewing Testament of Youth, since it takes place during the First World War.

Testament of Youth is based upon the memoir of the same name of an English women named Vera Brittain. She was born in 1893 in the North of England to a wealthy family. As a young woman she desired to receive an education and to become a writer, but of course even in the early 20th century this was considered improper for an upper-class woman. After much cajoling of her family, she was able to persuade her father to let her take the entrance exams at Somerville College, the women’s school at Oxford. She of course passes, and enrolls to study in English Literature while also beginning a budding romance with a man named Roland Leighton. But all this is happening just as the Great War is beginning, and Roland is sent off to fight, along with Vera’s brother Edward and her good friend Victor Richardson. Even Vera is soon caught up in the conflict, as the raging war soon comes to fundamentally transform British society. Vera Brittain is portrayed in this film adaptation by Swedish actress Alicia Vikander, whom we saw earlier this year as the artificial intelligence Ava in Ex Machina. The male roles of Roland, Victor, and Edward are respectively played by Kit Harrington (Jon Snow in Game of Thrones), Colin Morgan (Merlin in the BBC’s Merlin), and Taron Egerton (‘Eggsy’ in Kingsman: The Secret Service).

Testament of Youth is actually a very interesting story because it deconstructs the idea of the idyllic English country life portrayed in many novels of roughly the same time period. It does this in two ways. The first way is by showing how this carefree and romantic society is actually extremely sexist; this society considers it offensive for a woman to do something as mundane as writing, let alone trying to get an education. And this is not in the time of Austen or the Brontës; this was in the 1910s. The second way it deconstructs this ideal society is by showing how it is absolutely destroyed by the Great War. Vera’s friend, brother, and lover all enlist in the military, believing they will quickly beat the Kaiser and be home in time for Christmas. Vera even helps to persuade her father to let her brother Edward join the army, in the belief that the war will be glorious and a way to test his manhood. Of course, the realities of one of the bloodiest wars in history soon shatter all these illusions, which Vera witnesses firsthand after she volunteers as a nurse close to the front lines.

All of that is really interesting, but the problem is that it takes far too long to get there. In order to deconstruct the seemingly-idyllic English country life it has to first portray that life, and this film portrays it exactly the same way as every single other film set in that same time period, making the first 40 minutes or so of the movie incredibly boring. I suppose its necessary set-up for the rest of the movie, but I wish they had done something even a little different with the clichéd tropes of the genre. The other problem is that I feel the movie did not go far enough in its deconstruction. Testament of Youth is considered one of the earlier feminist works, and Brittain became a vocal and well-known pacifist because of her experience during the war. But rather than examining her activism and looking at how she actually tried to change the society the film spent two hours criticizing, the film abruptly ends after she makes her first political speech. The story feels incomplete, because just as she transforms into the woman who she had been transitioning into since the start of the movie, it fades to black, and we are left with a book with the last few chapters torn out.

So, Testament of Youth is a mixed bag. On the one hand, it’s an interesting take on the end of an idyllic era of British society that was never actually as idyllic as many believe. The Great War is a much overlooked time in world history, and I am especially interested in movies which show history from a female perspective. But on the other hand, the film is incredibly slow to get going, and it ends just when it’s finally hitting its stride. It makes some good points, but it takes too long to make them, and it doesn’t go far enough with them. Hopefully one day we’ll see a version of Testament of Youth which truly does Vera Brittain the justice she deserves.

Grade: B-

Every so often, there are movies which, in a way, are paradoxes. The way I see it, movies have two vital characteristics: how enjoyable they are and how good they are. These two qualities are separate but intertwined, and film reviews (such as this) are based upon both. It is quite common for a movie to be enjoyable but not good, but it is quite uncommon for the inverse to be true. Yet this is the case with the Safdie Brothers Heaven Knows What.

Heaven Knows What is the story of a girl named Harley, played by Arielle Holmes. Harley has two great loves in her life. The first is a boy named Ilya (Caleb Landry Jones), who is manipulative, possessive, and selfish. Her second great love is heroin, which of course comes with its own set of problems. All of this is complicated by the fact that she’s homeless, living on the streets of New York City, surviving of the generosity of friends and complete strangers. Things become even worse when Ilya demands that Harley prove her love for him, specifically by killing herself.

Quite literally acting as a day in the life of a homeless drug addict, Heaven Knows What is actually based upon an autobiographical memoir by Arielle Holmes herself. I’m not usually into the ‘based on a true story’ movies because they tend to only be ‘true’ in the very loosest sense of the word since they alter the story to be more drama- and movie-friendly. But Heaven Knows What is different, first off because, as far as my own research into Arielle Holmes can discern, is almost completely true. When co-director Josh Safdie meet Holmes while doing research for another film in New York City, she actually was a homeless drug addict, and everything portrayed in the movie- including her suicide attempt- did indeed happen to her. Even all her friends in the movie are portrayed by her real-life homeless friends she knew during this time, much like City of God. The only exception is Ilya, who is played by a professional actor, because the real-life Ilya was too unstable. In fact, a couple of months ago, the real Ilya died from a drug overdose.

The other thing that sets this movie apart from the crowd is the plain, matter-of-fact way it is told. The story of Heaven Knows What sounds like the perfect Oscar Bait movie; it’s depressing, drugs and suicide are involved, and the Safdie Brothers could have easily written in a happy ending showing Arielle Holmes’ transformation from street kid into an up and coming indie film actress. But in fact, the film is told in an extremely conventional manner, very plainly without overly dramatizing the things that Harley goes through. Yet it doesn’t minimize them either; it is simply her life, presented without comment and without judgment.

All of this is fascinating, and yet the bottom line is that despite its fascinating story and unique narrative style, Heaven Knows What is not at all an enjoyable film to watch. It’s a bit like what I imagine Trainspotting would be like if you stripped away all of that film’s dark comedy. So if you want to see a unique and unconventional film about street kids featuring drug addiction, abusive relationships, and suicide, this is the film for you. I just hope that appeals more to you than it did to me.

Grade: B-

It’s no secret that I see a lot of movies. Like a whole lot of movies. And yet, even though I see so many movies I have not become bored of the medium, because I just love movies. Because I love movies so much, I always try to go to the theatre with a positive attitude; I always want the movies I see, the movies I review, to be good movies. And once in awhile, there comes a movie that I really want to like but, for whatever reason, I just can’t. Such is the case with Aloft.

Aloft is the story of a mother and son, respectively named Nana and Ivan Kunning (respectively played by Jennifer Connolly and Cillian Murphy). The film takes place in two parts. The first is part takes place when Ivan is a child, as he and Nana and Ivan’s little brother struggle to get by in a hardscrabble town somewhere in Canada. Ivan’s brother is sick, but Nana can’t afford to pay for the medicine to treat him. So instead, she desperately turns to faith healing, while Ivan deals with the situation by learning the art of falconry. The second part of the film takes place 20 years later, long after Ivan was abandoned by his mother, who has since become a sort of cult leader/artist. A French filmmaker (Mélanie Laurent) is intent on making a documentary on her, but doesn’t know where to find her. She tracks down Ivan, hoping he can lead her to Nana’s hideaway in the vastness of the Canadian arctic. The story is slowly revealed as the film flips between the two time periods.

Like I said, this is a film that I really wanted to like. The film has a very strong art house vibe to it which elevates atmosphere and visuals to greater importance than traditional plot and characterization. The film’s director, Claudia Llosa, has a strong independent pedigree; her film La Teta Asustada (The Milk of Sorrow), won the 2009 Golden Bear at the Berlin International Film Festival and earned a nomination for Best Foreign Language Film at the 82nd Academy Awards. The cinematography is beautiful, is barren and desolate, prominently featuring the forests and tundra of northern Canada during winter; it has the same sort of rural neo-noir feel present in Winter’s Bone. The actors all give good, if not stunning, performances; dialogue is often minimal, and downplayed as regards to the visual aspects of the film.

The problem is that the film, when you get right down to it, is kinda boring. The movie is about the relationship between a mother and son, but in order to be effective a film with that type of plot has to make the audience feel for its characters, which Aloft is unable to. The characters do not feel like real people, and you can never accept them as anything accept people on a movie screen. Plus, the plot is really melodramatic in a way; the film uses the art house style to make you think that its trying to say something deep and meaningful about human relationships. But rather than being deep and meaningful, the film just comes off as shallow, with a message that feels painfully obvious.

In the end, Aloft is a bit like a pressed flower in an old book. Sure it’s beautiful, but its also completely sterile and lifeless. Honestly, there are better films to spend your money on at the theatre this weekend. 

Grade: C-