​The Arab-Israeli Wars are barely taught in secondary schools; it’s actually more likely that they’re not mentioned at all. The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is one of the world’s major sources of instability, and most Americans are unaware that the U.S. is providing Israel with at least $10.2 million per day in military aid during the fiscal year 2016. Focused on the time around the First Arab-Israeli War (1948) against the backdrop of the last days of the Mandatory Palestine in Jerusalem, Natalie Portman’s directorial debut A Tale of Love and Darkness has a whole lot of Portman’s heart dedicated to the material, but too much of a self-conscious somberness hangs over the film, holding it back from the real emotional poignancy it so needs.

Based on the acclaimed memoir of the same name by Amos Oz, A Tale of Love and Darkness follows narrator Amos (Amir Tessler) recounting stories about growing up post World War II in an attempt to dissect his mother’s unsolvable, mystery malaise. Portman focuses less on the setting and time period, and instead on the setting and time period’s effect on Fania (Natalie Portman), Amos’s mother who would certainly be classified with clinical depression today (it’s timely accurate that the word “depression” is never mentioned throughout the movie, since that was a disorder not properly classified or taken seriously at the time). Fania is often found staring broodily out the window in muted grey dresses, sitting in the rain like it’s her natural habitat, and doesn’t say much to her child or husband regarding her condition. She is constantly haunted by her memories of living carefree with her sisters in Ukraine, a land that is not so caught up in conflict and confusion as Jerusalem.

Scenes with her bring the movie and audience down, as they should given the mental disorder being shown on screen. Fania’s dreams of moving to Israel involved marrying a handsome farmer or soldier, but she instead feels suffocated by the normalcy and nerdiness of Amos’s father, a Lithuanian literary critic. The stability and happiness of Amos’s father and Amos is a dream itself, but a dream come true is inevitably a disappointment, which is a common Zionist idea. In his book, Oz often speaks on how Israel as a place for Jewish people was more of a hopeful dream than a reality, and would just eventually lead to disappointment as dreams too-good-to-be-true eventually end up. Portman attempts to play out this idea with Fania and the supporting characters, but there’s not enough material there for the message to be properly conveyed, and instead Fania’s depression is shown in melodramatic visual cliches.

With the pulling source material and important setting/time period, it’s a slight disappointment that Portman couldn’t do more with what she was given. A Tale of Love and Darkness does have hints of promise in Portman’s work, and I’m eager to see where she goes next. Her decision to adapt Oz’s memoir because of her Israeli pride is one of genuine compassion, and I’m interested to see what other films of this ilk she can produce in the future. The Israeli-Palestine conflict is topic not often covered in classrooms, films, and mass-media news, but films like A Tale of Love and Darkness are necessary reminders of the harsh realities and absolute dreariness that reside there every day.

GRADE: C-

​In the late 1970s, boxing transitioned from a sport to an athletic spectacle as it began to be televised nationwide. One of the most famous matches in the sport’s history was broadcast in November of 1980: a fight between American hero Sugar Ray Leonard and Panamanian boxer Roberto Duran. Relative newcomer Duran beat Leonard in June of the same year, resulting in Leonard’s demand for a rematch. The fight that ensued would quickly go down in history as the No Mas Fight, which captured the attention of thousands in the stadium and millions watching at home. Hands of Stone recounts the true story of Roberto Duran’s journey that led him to this fateful fight, as well as the fallout from its outcome. 

Raging Bull star Robert DeNiro returns to the world of boxing films as renowned trainer Ray Arcel, who puts his retirement on hold to train up-and-coming boxer Duran (Edgar Ramirez, Joy). The chemistry between Hollywood legend and rising star was Hands of Stone’s greatest strength, providing a platform for new actors to strut their stuff and for vets to act as mentors to the newcomers. Duran’s wife Felicidad was played by Ana de Armas (most recently in War Dogs), a young Cuban actress who shows great promise. The actors in this film all complemented each other remarkably well, with DeNiro giving his best performance in a long time, and Ramirez and de Armas showing their acting chops that are sure to get them even bigger and better roles in the future. The strangest choice made by the casting director was giving the role of Sugar Ray Leonard to Usher, who I don’t think has acted a day in his life. That being said, he gave a surprisingly decent performance for someone with such little experience. Usher was able to embody Leonard’s lively spirit and competitive attitude in the ring. 

For a film about such a brutal sport, Hands of Stone was, for lack of a better description, tastefully violent. Enough was shown on screen to portray the fight in a realistic way, but truly none of it was gratuitous. The camera work was creative, allowing the actors’ emotionally intense performances to be more pivotal than seeing punches actually land. This parallels nicely with Arcel’s emphasis that the emotional and psychological aspects of boxing tend to be more important than the physical. He trained Duran to prioritize strategy over technique, brains over brawn, which ultimately contributed to his success.

With the Olympics recently closed, the political ties to sports shown in Hands of Stone were timely. The Torrijos-Carter Treaties were signed in 1977, guaranteeing that Panama would take control of the Canal Zone over twenty years later in 1999. Because of the meaningless appeasement it seemed to be at the time, Duran took it upon himself to bring a symbolic victory over the United States to Panama, which mean a victory over Sugar Ray Leonard. Duran’s victory was humiliating to Leonard, and by association (symbolically, anyway) the United States. Something as relatively meaningless as a boxing match doesn’t seem like it could be so politicized, but director Jonathan Jakubowicz was successful in portraying it as Panama’s sort of Miracle on Ice. 

Hands of Stone is a compelling film, even for those who don’t care much for boxing. Each performance was strong, with DeNiro and Ramirez leading the ensemble and portraying the tough but charismatic characters they were tasked with. The film was mostly character-driven, but featured intense boxing sequences that kept the pace steady and engaging. Though it is a bit early, I think Hands of Stone could easily be considered an awards season contender.  

Grade: A- 

​So, a few days back I received an invitation to a press screening and I read the subject: Don’t Breathe. Before I can open the email and look into the details about the movie, my mind is already imagining… a movie where no one breathes for the complete runtime (Yeah right!) Or maybe a story about an apocalyptic gas leak (really!) Or maybe it’s just something you tell Darth Vader when playing hide and seek.

I know you secretly laughed on that last one. But jokes apart, I open the mail and find out that I was way off track with my guesses. Don’t Breathe is the story of a trio of thieves who plan to rob a blind old rich guy, thinking this robbery will be their ticket to escape from their current lives; only to discover the blind guy is a veteran with heightened senses, who kicks ass!

​Don’t Breathe is an amazing concept that blends the ‘blind guy situation’ into a ‘trapped in the house’ horror scenario. It is a refreshingly fun thriller, that brings something new to the table. It manages to label itself as horror without using gimmicky scare tactics; and yes- there are no ghosts. It is surprising how the creators of the movie turn a disabled guy into something that can bring chills to your spine.

Some of you are already wondering what’s with the frivolous start of this article, but I’m only trying to reflect upon my experience. Although the movie proves to be fun and captivating, there is a common mistake that one can make (like I did), to reason. A hundred questions pop in my head as I try to reason the events taking place. And slowly my mind becomes a pendulum swinging from ‘whoa! Awesome!’ to ‘no way that just happened!’ and back. The movie easily slips from being scary to unexpectedly stupid. For the sake of comparison, The Blind Man, played by Stephen Lang (Avatar), is almost as skilled as Marvel’s Daredevil (Slight Exaggeration).

But hold on! This is not the verdict. The movie surprisingly has more in store. Don’t Breathe holds a twist that is guaranteed to throw you off your seat. To avoid spoilers, I won’t talk much about it, but all I can say is that it changes the course of the movie and is something that you are truly not expecting. It is also a point where the movie’s tone changes to weird and gross.

Yes, I agree, that I all I have done is to create mystery around the movie. And I stand with the decision to do so. Please avoid watching the trailers (if you haven’t already) and watch this movie knowing that you are going to experience something different and new. And if you are able to resist the urge to question everything you see, you will walk out of the movie feeling content.

Grade: B

​January 2017 is rapidly approaching, the month in which we will bid farewell to the Obamas as America’s First Family. It is only fitting, then, that we take a look back at the First Family’s fundamental beginning: Barack and Michelle’s first date. Southside With You chronicles that fateful summer day in 1989 Chicago, from the primping to the kiss goodnight. Young law associate Barack Obama (Parker Sawyers) spends a day wandering around Chicago with his reluctant advisor Michelle Robinson (Tika Sumpter), who sees their spending time together as unprofessional. The film allows the viewer to be a fly-on-the-wall as Barack and Michelle first get to know each other on a personal level. Southside With You is a charming love letter to the Obamas (who I adore, by the way) as they embark on their final months in the White House. 

From the get-go, I knew that the film’s casting would be one of its strengths. The use of relatively unknown actors was essential in allowing them to fully embody Barack and Michelle as the normal people they were then, as opposed to painting them as the larger-than-life political power couple that they clearly are now. Sawyers’s performance was the most impressive out of the two. Notwithstanding his slight resemblance to the real-life Barack Obama, Sawyers transformed into the young, smooth-talking, chain-smoking version of Barack that I loved to get to know. He nailed Obama’s mannerisms without coming across as an impersonator, and truly showed the intense admiration Barack has had for Michelle from the very start. Sumpter’s portrayal of Michelle, though not as chameleon-like, was compelling. Just like the Michelle Obama we have come to know and love, Sumpter’s Michelle Robinson was a strong, independent, take-no-prisoners type of woman, showing that Michelle has always been a role model for women everywhere. 

Although Sawyers’s performance stood out as being stronger, Barack’s character was not necessarily the focal point of the film. The film is about Barack and Michelle in their early days as a couple, but it seems to focus a bit more on Michelle, which I appreciated greatly. It would have been too easy for the to be a film about a man having a woman fall in love with him and eventually becoming president. The fascinating nature of their relationship, however, lay in their give and take and their treatment of each other as equals. Barack’s respect for Michelle, and writer/director Richard Tanne’s respect for Barack and Michelle’s relationship dynamic, was evident throughout the film. 

Though Southside With You was obviously written about the Obamas and cannot be separated from that, I was left wondering if the film would be as interesting had it been about a purely fictional couple. In short, I don’t think so. It was a joy to watch the romance between our then-future President and his then-future First Lady unfold on the screen before me. But without knowing who they are today, without knowing that they have accomplished the things they spoke of hoping to achieve in the future, the film would lack charm.

My like for Southside With You seems to be less about the film itself and more about the admiration I have for Barack and Michelle. The film will appeal to others fans of the Obamas and fans of romance in general, as it presents an a la Before Sunrise look into the beginnings of a legendary American couple.


Grade: B

Many of the best movies out there are not about what they seem to be at first glance. By that, I mean that many great films have underlying themes and ideas that aren’t always discernable by just reading the movie’s description or catching a passing glance at a certain scene. One of the genres that this idea seems to be the most prominent in is the sports genre, especially movies that focus on boxing. Boxing movies are never really about the boxing itself, but use boxing as a means to study the main character. The medium of boxing presents an immediate challenge that the protagonist must face, usually an opponent of great strength or the yearning to become the best, giving the film time to build the character and push them to their limits. So, with the release of the newest film related to boxing Hands of Stone coming this week, I thought I’d look at some other movies about boxers to see how the genre has fared.

​One of Martin Scorsese’s best works, Raging Bull is the perfect example of boxing being used as a medium to explore a character, as we watch the life of a 1940’s boxer fall apart on-screen. The movie follows the life of boxer Jake La Motta (Robert De Niro), an ill-tempered New Yorker working his way to the top of the middleweight division in the 1940’s and 1950’s. As the years go by, La Motta’s relationships with those who he is closest to, his brother Joey (Joe Pesci) and wife Vicky (Cathy Moriarty), become more and more strained, with tensions running high from Jake’s ever-growing anger. And though his tough and angry demeanor helped him thrive in the ring, it’s what eventually tore the rest of his life apart.

It’s difficult to quickly summarize everything that Scorsese did right with the movie, as I don’t think a single element of this film is any less than brilliant and worth talking about for pages on end. But, the most captivating elements that make this film so amazing (in my opinion) boil down to two key factors: cinematography and dialogue. Starting with the cinematography, Scorsese’s choice to make the film black and white adds a layer of depth to the film that color may have taken away. The lighting choices that Scorsese is allowed to make because of the film’s lack of color is spectacular, and this movie is one of the best example of storytelling without having to say a word, in certain scenes. The boxing matches are also some of the most realistic, tonally, that I’ve ever seen on film, with the camera angles adding layer upon layer of depth.

Though many of the scenes succeed in telling the story with little or no dialogue at all, the scenes that do have dialogue manage to be some of the most genuine feeling scenes in any movie. Jake’s interactions with both his brother and his wife are genuine and heartbreaking, as we in the audience know what Jake doesn’t seem to realize: that he is tearing his life apart, as he constantly harasses those he is close to. As the years go by, Jake’s relationships become more and more tense, thanks in part to the performances by De Niro, Pesci and Moriarty, but also to the stellar writing by Paul Schrader and Mardik Martin. One scene toward the beginning of the film, where Jake tries to get his brother to punch him in the face, is mesmerizing, though it seems to contain a lot of repetitive dialogue. Though the dialogue in this scene does seem to repeat itself, it is the realistic and genuine nature of the dialogue that makes the scene so perfect. The dialogue does truly represent how I think the film is in general: real. There is no aspect of this movie that feels hokey or fake, no moment that feels like it couldn’t have happened exactly as it does on screen. It’s one of the best movies I’ve ever seen, and proves more than anything that Scorsese is one of the greatest filmmakers still alive today.
​
Grade: A+

'Rocky Balboa, the sixth film in the Rocky series, is the true sequel to the original film, maintaining the heart and hopeful tone that the original movie so masterfully created. Thirty years after the events of the original Rocky, Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone) finds himself stuck in a life that has somewhat lost its meaning. With his wife Adrian dead, his best friend Paulie (Burt Young) constantly drinking and beligerant and his son Rob (Milo Ventimiglia) wanting nothing to do with the Balboa name, Rocky turns back to the one thing he knows how to do: boxing. Though Rocky is now in his late fifties, he lands an exhibition fight with the heavyweight champion of the world, once again proving that he can go the distance. 
​
Now, upon writing a quick synopsis for this movie, I have been struck with how ridiculous and stupid the premise for this movie sounds. A late-fifties Stallone getting in the ring with the real heavyweight champion? How could this movie possibly feel realistic if that glaring issue is the premise of the film? Well, like many other movies about boxing, this film is not really about the fight between Balboa and heavyweight champion Mason ‘The Line’ Dixon (Antonio Tarver), but about Rocky’s relationship with the people around him and his fears about whether or not his life still has meaning. All he has ever known is boxing and his family, and the loss of both of those things has caused his life to feel meaningless. Like how this movie has little to do with the actual boxing match, Rocky’s decision to box has little to do with wanting to punch people. He yearns to feel what he once felt, to go back to a better time, and the only way he knows how to do that is to get back in the ring.

The focus on Rocky as a character is really what keeps this movie grounded, and Stallone does an excellent job at portraying the older and wiser version of the original character. Balboa is no longer as bumbling and buffoonish as he once was, as age has certainly allowed him to become a bit more well-spoken and contemplative. He's certainly no genius, but he has a much better way with words than he did in the original film. This is most apparent in a scene where he argues with his son, who constantly shies away from his family name in order to make a life for himself. Rocky argues that his son, in his attempts to run from Rocky’s legacy, has lost who he was and what he wants, forgetting how to pick himself back up from a fall and learn to move on. Not only is the writing here a great parallel to what Rocky is going through in the film, but it also serves to prove that the character has matured and changed since the first film. Stallone, who wrote, directed and starred in the film, proves that he has a full understanding of the character. Thus, this movie proves to be a more perfect sequel to the original film than any of the others. This film proves that the character Rocky Balboa is one that can change and grow in a way that Stallone probably never envisioned when he wrote the original. Is it as good as the first one? No, sequels usually never are. But, it is one of the best continuations of a character you could possibly hope for, and a great chance to see Balboa in the ring one last time.

Grade: A-

​In addition to being a film geek in general, I am also a connoisseur of animated films in particular. And the last few years have been phenomenal for animated films. Disney is in the midst of its Fourth Golden Age, with such excellent features as The Princess and the Frog, Wreck-It Ralph, and Zootopia. Pixar, despite some missteps such as The Good Dinosaur, continue to produce amazing films, most notably last year’s Inside Out. And while the future of Studio Ghibli is uncertain, their recent features The Tale of the Princess Kaguya and The Wind Rises are some of the best they’ve ever made. And finally, we have Laika. Despite its youth (it was only founded in 2005), they have become experts in the delicate art of stop-motion animation, producing such gems as Coraline and Paranorman. And now, equaling their previous accomplishments, Kubo and the Two Strings. 

In ancient Japan, there lives a young boy named Kubo (Art Parkinson). He lives in a cave by the seashore where he cares for his sick mother, and earns a living as a storyteller. He ‘illustrates’ his tales by using magic to make moving figures out of paper, which he controls through playing songs on his shamisen. But his mother has taught him that he can never stay in the village past sundown, for if he does his evil grandfather, the Moon King (Ralph Fiennes), will find him. One night he ignores his mother’s warnings, and his wicked aunts (Rooney Mara) destroy his village and force him to flee into the Far Lands. There he meets two protectors, a Monkey (Charlize Theron) and a cursed samurai (Matthew McConaughey) who join him on his quest to defeat his evil family. 

The first thing you’ll notice about Kubo and the Two Strings is its absolutely gorgeous animation. Stop-motion is a tedious and difficult way to make movies, but its benefits are great. Using real, physical models provides a realism impossible with other forms of animation, and allows for a full range of facial expressions which convey emotion in the same manner as a human actor. Laika, already a master in this field, propels the art form to new heights with Kubo; among other things, they created the largest puppet ever used in a stop-motion film for one of the film’s most climatic battle scenes. It’s over 25 feet tall, and can actually be seen being constructed during the credits sequence. But my favorite pieces of animation is Kubo using his magic to animate paper, creating (among other things) samurai, a flock of birds, a fire-breathing chicken, and a full-sized ship.

And speaking of action, Kubo has plenty of it, probably more than all of Laika’s previous films combined. Unlike their previous outings, Kubo is a ‘traditional’ fairytale, complete with magic and ancient weapons and horrendous monsters and a heroic quest. Interestingly though, the film retains Laika’s slightly darker tone compared to Disney and Pixar which they pioneered in Coraline. Although it is still kid-friendly, there is darkness and even death in this movie. This gives the film a gravity that, I think, lighter fare from Disney and Pixar sometimes lack, giving added purpose and meaning to Kubo’s quest. 
​
Overall, Kubo and Two Strings is a fantastic piece of modern animated cinema. The stop-motion visuals are gorgeous and enchanting to see come to life. The voice actors all do an excellent job, and Kubo's music is both wonderful to listen to and refreshingly different than what you would expect in an animated fantasy movie. There’s action and adventure and a little bit of tragedy. If you’re a fan of animation or of fantasy, you can’t go wrong with Kubo and the Two Strings. 
​
Grade: A

​War Dogs is probably one of the most surprisingly amazing movies of the summer. After being disappointed by both Suicide Squad and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, I was rather sick of franchise films and ready for something new and fresh. War Dogs is certainly both.

War Dogs follows the story of David Packouz (Miles Teller) and Efraim Diveroli (Jonah Hill), middle school best friends who end up creating a multimillion dollar arms company, eventually landing a $300 million contract with the Pentagon. The story is told episodically, and largely from the perspective of Packouz, following his journey from Miami massage therapist, to international arms dealer, to the target of an FBI and State Department Investigation. Packouz is portrayed in a somewhat more sympathetic light, as he is shown to be a struggling young man looking for good money to provide for his pregnant girlfriend. He is quickly seduced by the easy money and sociopathic charms of Diveroli, whose only principle is maximizing profit, morals and international law be damned.

Jonah Hill is masterful as Diveroli, who is all snake oil and devilish charm, able to act like an orthodox Jew in one moment, and frat boy in another. The film portrays Diveroli as a borderline sociopath who is able to put on different acts depending on who he is talking to, swinging from sweet to vicious in an instant, and cares only about himself. Hill clearly drew some inspirations for the cocaine snorting, wild child Diveroli from his run as Donnie Azoff in The Wolf of Wall Street. The entire movie feels like a bit of a riff off that film, but with less nudity, less swearing and way more guns.

What really took me by surprise was the top notch comedy in this film. In hindsight, I shouldn’t have been surprised since Jonah Hill is probably one of the best comedic actors of this decade. I found myself laughing at almost every other scene. The film deftly dances between dark and comedic, capturing the gravity of the post 9/11 arms trade and the ridiculous antics of Diveroli. Miles Teller plays a great straight man, and perfectly capturing Packouz’s realization that his partner is quite unstable. War Dogs is exceptional because it simply clicks. It isn’t a condescending story about the dangers of war profiteering: it takes you on the wild ride Packouz and Diveroli went on, nearly touching the sun before falling flaming into the sea. It is a rare film that can create a political movie about the excesses of the Bush era Pentagon with rousing humor and drama.

Grade: A+

(Basically go to the nearest theater playing this movie and throw some cash at the ticket guy)

​As I mentioned earlier this summer, there are a ton of animated movies coming to theatres this year. All of the biggest players in the animation world have a movie coming out this year, with some studios releasing multiple films, and it got me hoping early on in the year that we would get a new movie from one of my favorite studios. Luckily, I got my wish. This Friday, the newest film by Laika Entertainment, Kubo and the Two Strings, is being released. The studio, who solely make stop-motion animation movies, creates some of the most unique and visually enticing animated films I’ve ever seen. So, let’s take a look at some of their previous works to see just how wonderful and interesting Laika Entertainment can be.

Based on the book by Neil Gaiman, Laika’s first solo feature Coraline is beautiful and enchanting, creating a tone and atmosphere unrivaled by any other animated film. The movie follows a young girl named Coraline (Dakota Fanning), who has just moved in to a small apartment in the middle of nowhere. Her parents, forced to move out there to complete a writing project, consistently ignore and neglect her, and the somewhat wacky inhabitants of the other apartments aren’t much more attentive. Eventually, Coraline finds a secret door in the house, which leads to an alternate world with “other” parents, whose eyes are buttons and attentions are completely focused on Coraline’s every whim. And while at first Coraline loves the alternate home, she slowly begins to realize its more sinister natures and understand that she has to choose between one world or the other.

Coraline is one of the most visually stunning animated films I have ever seen, capturing the whimsical tone with wonderful visuals. The film masterfully uses its stop-motion style to capture the emotions of the main character on-screen, without anyone having to say anything. Unlike many other children’s animated films, which likely fear that young kids will lose interest unless there is always a character talking, Coraline knows when to keep quiet and let the visuals speak for themselves. The visual differences between the real world and Coraline’s ideal world are striking, showing the audience exactly what Coraline thinks her world lacks without her having to explain that to us. 

The excellent visuals and general lack of dialogue creates a tone unlike many other animated films. The movie really isn’t a comedy, as it doesn’t have nearly as many jokes as other children’s films, and acts more like a drama than anything else. The movie is directed by Henry Selick, director of the classic stop-motion feature The Nightmare Before Christmas, and the tone of Coraline is quite similar to the tone of that film. The slightly macabre but mostly inquisitive feel of the movie makes it easily distinguishable from any other animation on the market, leaving its audience feeling more fulfilled than if they had seen an average animated movie. 

Grade: A-

Taking a more comedic and satirical route than Coraline, Paranorman is an excellent parody of horror films, adding comedy and fun to the visual appeal that Laika is known for. The movie follows a young boy living in the town of Blithe Hollow, Norman (Kodi Smit-McPhee), who has the ability to see and talk to ghosts that no one else in the town believes in. His parents and sister don’t seem to understand him, he has no living friends and is constantly berated by his classmates for his strange mannerisms. Norman quickly realizes, however, that he has his powers for a reason, and has to use them to stop a witch’s curse from destroying the town.

Where Coraline’s tone is far darker and more macabre in moments, Paranorman almost constantly uses its horror atmosphere to parody classic scary movies, throwing jokes at a mile a minute. All of the most famous and ridiculous comedy tropes are addressed and parodied in this movie, starting from minute one where Norman is watching a horror movie with the ghost of his grandma. In that first few minutes, Paranorman manages to be a satire of so many elements of classic horror that it seems almost outstanding. And, from that moment, the movie never relents in its parody. However, the movie is smart enough to not fall into the pit of cliché itself, with a twist toward the end of the movie that makes the film seem more than just parody, but a fresh take on the horror and animation genres.

Like in Coraline, Paranorman uses its great visual style to forward its parody and tone. The movie skillfully makes itself look like a classic horror film, using the stop-motion and visual talent that Coraline proved they had mastered to generate the feeling and tone. The movie is beautiful, and the excellence of the animation and visual style helps feed into the comedy. Norman’s occasional passages into the paranormal world are stunningly beautiful, as is the evil witch character once she reveals herself. Thus, not only is Paranorman one of the best parodies of horror movies in animated form, but it is another example of Laika proving that it is one of the best animated studios in the business.

Grade: A  

​It’s no secret that there has been a drought of good movies this summer. I was hoping for a great one to slip through the cracks and it finally happened. Hell or High Water is easily one of the best releases this year and deserves to be seen by more people. Ex-convict, Tanner (Ben Foster) reconnects with his brother Toby (Chris Pine) who is struggling to provide for his son. The duo plan a series of robberies to save their West Texas family ranch from impending foreclosure. All that stands in their way is Marcus (Jeff Bridges), a lawman who’s a few weeks away from retirement. The string of successful heists culminates in a showdown with the Texas Ranger who is prepared to bring these criminals down before riding off into the sunset. 

The film’s story is deceivingly simple but delivers an emotional punch. Taylor Sheridan -who penned last year’s Sicario- does not disappoint with this follow-up. His characters are deeply layered and act out unexpectedly. The narrative is a memorable one that is compelling all the way to the end and then some. It’s powerful finale will stick with you long after the credits. Much of the movie’s success can be attributed to the writing and several standout performances. The sharp dialogue is riveting and the three leads are nothing short of extraordinary. The frayed relationship between Toby and Tanner is the film’s driving force while Marcus is our moral compass. It is a testament to the pacing that transitions flow smoothly and never kill the momentum. The particular choice of music adds to the rising tension. The movie’s score is fitting as it underscores the brutality that transpires.

My only gripe with the movie is that some of the interchange is on the nose. It’s this lack of subtlety that instantly foretold the fate of certain characters in my eyes. It’s a minor complaint but one that lessens the poignancy of the film’s more salient moments. Despite this, there are still plenty of twists and turns that take the story to interesting places. I was also pleasantly surprised by the amount of genuine humor in this formidable tale. These comedic moments act as a nice reprieve and give the story some room to breathe in the midst of the violence.

Hell or High Water is definitely worth your time so catch it while it’s still in theaters. I like to think of it as a story of economic misfortune masquerading as a heist film. The actors commit themselves to these characters who are desperately clinging on to their way of life. With a runtime under two hours, the movie never seems to fly by as it builds to its explosive but moving resolution.  

Grade: A-

​For a while, I thought 2016 was going to be a poor year for cinema. Many of the movies I had been excited to see this year did not live up to my expectations, and this summer will go down as one of the lowest grossing in recent memory. However, while many of the movies I had been looking forward to turned out to be disappointments, I’ve also seen many movies which had flown under my radar but which turned out to be awesome. It turns out that 2016 has been a great year for movies- I had just to look a little more than I anticipated. An excellent illustration of this is the film I’m talking about today. While I had seen the infamous trailer some time ago, I was absolutely not prepared for the sheer insanity that is Sausage Party.

Somewhere in America there is a little town, and somewhere in that little town is a supermarket called Shop Well’s. In this supermarket is food of all sorts, but what you might not know is that the food is alive. Although the shoppers cannot perceive it, each day they are greeted by the food with reverence and devotion. The food wants nothing more than to be chosen by the “Gods” and taken out of the supermarket and into “the Great Beyond”. One day, a shopper chooses a package of hot dogs which includes Frank (Seth Rogen), along with his friends Carl (Jonah Hill) and Barry (Michael Cera). Also chosen is a package of hot dogs buns containing Frank’s girlfriend Brenda (Kristen Wiig). But before they can be taken into the Great Beyond and live happily ever after, tragedy strikes and Frank and Brenda are separated from their friends. It's not long before both groups learn the terrible truth about the Gods they worship- that they are not going to a land of joy and plenty, but instead to the kitchen.

As is apparent by that description, Sausage Party is essentially Toy Story except with food. It even starts with a Disney-esque musical number! But of course, being made by Seth Rogen, that doesn’t last long, and it quickly becomes a sort of horror movie, at least from the food’s perspective. All of that I knew about already. What I wasn’t prepared for is how absolutely batshit insane this film is. It’s subversive, offensive, crass, graphically violent, and absurd, with gags being shot at the audience like machine gun bullets. In short, it’s absolutely, hysterically funny. And this is coming from someone who’s not really a fan of Rogen’s previous work. But this movie is just bonkers. 

Sausage Party is essentially a giant middle finger to everyone who thinks “cartoons are only for kids” or that there are some lines that just shouldn’t be crossed. The food’s worship of humans and their belief in the “Great Beyond” is a huge rant against religion which the writers try to make as obvious and offensive as possible. The movie is filled with crude body and toilet humor, along with more sexual innuendos and double entendres than you can shake a stick at (I mean, the two main characters are a sausage and bun for fraks sake). There’s incredibly offensive ethnic stereotyping (a Jewish bagel, a Native American whiskey named Fire Water), incredibly graphic violence (and not solely against food), and enough silly food puns (riding horse-radish) to make Mel Brooks blush. And not to forget a heaping dose of general absurdism on top. This movie has a little bit of everything, and to be honest I’m a little surprised it only got an R rating considering some of the content in the movie.

And just when you think you have it figured out and have settled down to watch the weirdness unfold, the plot takes a major turn in the third act and the film goes totally off the rails. The last time I was this surprised by a film was when the last Spongebob movie turned out to be a surreal stoner comedy with space-traveling dolphins and epic rap battles. I don’t want to spoil anything, but suffice to say that this movie gets fucking weird. I think it gives Swiss Army Man and The Neon Demon a run for their money for title of Most Bizarre Film of 2016.

But most importantly, I could not stop laughing while watching this movie. Best of all, since it has a little bit of every type of comedy, it should appeal to people with broadly different tastes. But it will especially appeal to you if you just want utter insanity. No matter what your taste in comedy, if you want to laugh this weekend, go see Sausage Party. You absolutely will not be disappointed.
​
Grade: A