The Big Lebowski is one of my all-time favorites because it is just the weirdest, quirkiest movie I have ever seen. On paper, The Big Lebowski is a crime drama featuring the kidnapping of the trophy wife of a wealthy industrialist. However, this movie is really more of a black comedy following the inanities of a hippie out of time.

The Big Lebowski follows the travels and travails of Jeffrey Lebowski (Jeff Bridges) preferably known as “the Dude” (or Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing). The Dude is a lazy Californian hippie who really only loves three things: smoking weed, going bowling with his buddies, and drinking beers with his bros. The Dude’s rather peaceful lifestyle is interrupted one day when thugs break into his home, and begin destroying his property, demanding the ransom for his kidnapped wife Bunny (Tara Reid). The Dude, who is not married, soon realizes that he is in the middle of a huge mix up: the thugs were after the other Jeffrey Lebowski, the titular Big Lebowski, a multimillionaire and self-proclaimed business icon (David Huddleston). Furious over the loss of his rug to the thugs, the Dude marches over to Big Lebowski’s house to demand recompense. The Big Lebowski entrusts the Dude to deliver the ransom, and from there the Dude becomes embroiled in an unfortunate series of events that involves a gang of German nihilists, a pet marmot, and an anarcho-feminist memorably played by Julianne Moore.

What makes The Big Lebowski so hilarious and remarkable is not its plot but rather it’s amazing characters. The plot is actually rather non-cohesive, with the Dude just bumbling from one ridiculous situation to another, with very little direction. The Dude is the archetypical hippie who hates the “square community.” He seems to live an almost ascetic-like lifestyle, living in a very modest home with few belongings, performing tai chi in the mornings, and meditatively listening to whale calls while taking a bath. The Dude is joined by his friends, Walter Sobchak (John Goodman) and Donny Kerabatsos (Steve Buscemi). Walter is a Vietnam War veteran who manages to bring up the Vietnam War in nearly every conversation he participates in. Walter has a hot temper, yet is very book smart, able to extensively quote historical figures such as Lenin and religious texts such as the Talmud, and is a devout Jew, despite the fact that he was raised an Irish Catholic. Donny is the quietest member of the group who often unintentionally provokes Walter’s wrath by interrupting him. These three friends for an eccentric little group that makes its way through the ludicrous events in the movie.

The Big Lebowski is really a collection of vignettes, following a one crazy hippie through one of the strangest series of events ever put on film. The best part of the film is watching colorful characters react to crazy situations, such as a naked women flying on tightropes flinging paint on a canvas. Through it all the Dude is unfazed, keeping his undying sense of optimism for a calmer tomorrow. In an age of franchise, sequels and reboots, The Big Lebowski is a delightfully unique indie gem that should not be forgotten.

Grade: A+

Wow, this movie was an absolute mess. To me, The November Man was an espionage thriller that felt like a shoddy combination of Bourne and Bond, with an old Bond actor at the helm, hoping to get back in the action movie game. The result is a rather confusing movie that utterly lacks direction and drive.

The November Man follows retired CIA agent Peter Devereaux (Pierce Brosnan) as he comes out of retirement at the request of his former CIA partner, John Hanley (Bill Smitrovich), in order to safely escort his former lover and also CIA agent, Natalia Ulanova (Mediha Musliovic) out of Moscow. Ulanova is a critical asset to the agency as she knows critical intel about Russian President Arkady Federov (Lazar Ristovski). The extraction operation goes wrong, and a kill order is put out for Devereaux, who must use his wits and exceptional combat skills to evade both the CIA and the Russians, whilst uncovering a conspiracy between the Russian government and the CIA dating back to the second Chechen War.

Although I tried to explain the plot as clearly as possible, to be honest, I was very confused throughout this entire film. This confusion was not an interesting type of confusion, such as in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, where the viewer has to piece together the mystery as the MI6 agents do. In The November Man, supposedly important characters disappear for no reason, and certain characters almost teleport from one location to another without explanation. A certain degree of confusion and mystery is essential in any good espionage movie, but this movie crosses the line into nonsensical. The only “big twist” that the movie has is very predictable and poorly handled, and will probably leave audience members more confused than ever. Perhaps my biggest issue with this film is its Russia heavy storyline. It has been over three decades since the worst periods of the Cold War, and I feel that modern espionage movies should focus on new countries, such as Japan, China or North Korea. The USA versus Russia espionage movie has long run its course, and this premise should be retired.

Pierce Brosnan does a perfectly mediocre job as Peter Devereaux. Brosnan tries to use his years as James Bond to inform his role as Peter Devereaux. However, Peter Devereaux simply lacks all the characteristics that make Bond appealing as a character. Devereaux is an old bitter man, who seems to love no one, and pretty much hates everything. While Bond has a similar lack of emotion, at least Bond is utterly faithful to England and has lots of charm. Devereaux honestly comes off as more of a jerk than anything else.

What frustrated me the most was that this movie had lots of potential. Throughout the course of the film, Devereaux is pursued by a CIA assassin, Peter Mason (Luke Bracey), who was his former protégé. In the trailers, it is implied that their relationship would be at the forefront of the movie. In my opinion, a movie about a former CIA agent being pursued by his former protégé would be a compelling and interesting movie. Sadly, however, this relationship is completely buried by a bunch of Russian Cold War politics in the movie, thus destroying the one thing that this movie had going for it. Don’t bother watching this movie. Watch Skyfall, or the Bourne Identity.

Grade: C

There Will Be Blood was a movie that both shocked and enthralled me. Initially, I was skeptical about its entertainment value, as a movie about oil drilling in California in the early part of the 20th century did not seem very riveting.  This movie destroyed my doubt by spinning a tale of greed, unchecked capitalism, and the determination to succeed at all costs.

The movie follows the two-decade career of Daniel Plainview, (Daniel Day-Lewis) a self-termed “oil man” determined to succeed in the petroleum business.  Plainview, by all accounts, is a sociopath who only cares about success, and is obsessed with destroying his competition. He abhors large oil companies such as Standard Oil; he begins the movie with a single oil well in the hills of California, using the profits from this well to buy more land to expand his oil empire. He eventually starts his own drilling company with his adopted son HW who, at age 10, serves as his business partner. Plainview’s career takes a monumental upswing when a young man tells him of a small, impoverished town in Southern California that has massive untapped oil fields. Daniel travels to the town and tricks the largest landowner into selling him all of his land for “partridge hunting.”  Once Plainview confirms the existence of massive reserves of oil in the town, he goes to work.

Daniel Day-Lewis was absolutely fantastic in this movie, playing a deeply morally flawed man with rarely seen skill and finesse. Lewis’ body language speaks volumes as he surveys an oil field, with the camera focused on his face, his eyes practically glistening with greed. Day-Lewis’ intense acting style is perfect for Plainview’s obsessive character, as Plainview says in the movie “I have a competition in me. I want no one else to succeed. I hate most people.”

Plainview’s competitive personality is both his greatest ally and greatest enemy during the movie, as his obsessive attitude forces him to greater lengths than his competitors, driving him to lease one of the largest oil fields in Southern California. However, with each successive success, Plainview loses more and more of his humanity, much like Walter White, the high school chemistry teacher turned meth kingpin on the show Breaking Bad.  Plainview becomes less and less sympathetic of a character as the film progress, neglecting his young son, attacking people who speak against him, and generally disregarding the damage he causes to the people around him. By the end of the film Plainview is a wildly wealthy man, but a bitter alcoholic and a monster.  

This movie is perfect for people who people who enjoyed shows such as Breaking Bad, which depicts how men can lose their humanity in the pursuit of success. By the end of the film, Plainview is almost unrecognizable, the shell of the man he was. This film can be a little tedious, due to long landscape shots with no dialogue, but if you are determine and patient, this film will absolutely amaze and shock you.

Grade: A-

Rounders was a reasonably pleasing and entertaining gambling crime drama, yet I felt that there was nothing particularly special about it. In general, I really love gambling movies, such as Rain Man and Casino Royale. It is a great movie to kill a couple of hours, but lacks the substance to be truly great. 

Rounders follows Michael McDermott (Matt Damon), a talented young poker player and first year law student who loses his entire savings in an underground poker game.  After this loss, McDermott tries to go “legit” and gets a real job, only to be drawn back into the gambling world.

Every gambling crime-drama follows the same basic formula: at the beginning of the movie the hero, the main gambler, loses his entire savings to a highly skilled and amoral opponent. After this loss the hero, broke and despondent, tries to move away from gambling. Eventually however, the hero regains his or her confidence, and prevails in a rematch against their previous opponent, winning back their bankroll, with some profit on top. In this sense, Rounders does not deviate at all from this basic plot structure. What elevates Rounders from sheer mediocrity is its vibrant performances.

Matt Damon does an excellent playing the main character. McDermott is a good man, from a humble background, who genuinely wants to live a normal life, but he loves poker far too much to completely devote himself to law school. Damon taps his experiences playing Will Hunting in the movie Good Will Hunting- an impoverished genius from South Boston- when playing McDermott, making him feel grounded and relatable. However, the best performance in this movie was Edward Norton’s. Norton plays Worm, McDermott’s crooked friend from high school, who is a poker hustler who uses sleight of hand to rig poker games. Norton beautifully displays Worm’s imbalanced personality with his body language and speech patterns, always twitching and moving around, while incessantly chattering, confusing his friends and opponents alike. Damon and Norton have great onscreen chemistry, with Norton continuously irritating Damon, while Damon tries to contain his hyperactive partner.

Overall, Rounders is a pleasing film. I personally enjoy crime-dramas, and I particularly love gambling movies since I think that the strategy behind poker is fascinating, despite my pitiful lack of skill. That being said, Rounders offers little in the way of unique or innovative elements and only makes up for this lack of creativity with two great leading men, resulting in a fairly pleasing yet bland movie. All in all, Rounders is like a midnight snack: exactly what you need at midnight, but hardly quality at any other time of the day. 

Grade: B-

Side Effects is a daring movie that deals frankly with tricky and controversial topics such as psychiatric medication and insanity; yet, it exercises great delicacy.  Side Effects makes striking cinematographic choices and is backed up with powerful performances by Jude Law and Catherine Zeta-Jones.

Side Effects centers on Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara), a young woman suffering from depression following the imprisonment of her husband, Martin Taylor (Channing Tatum), for insider trading. After a botched suicide attempt, Elizabeth begins seeing Dr. Johnathon Banks (Jude Law), a young, talented psychiatrist. Banks attempts to treat Elizabeth’s depression with therapy and common antidepressants such as Zoloft. When these drugs fail, at Elizabeth’s urging, Banks puts her on a new, experimental drug, Ablixa. While on Ablixa, Elizabeth begins experience strange bouts of sleepwalking, which eventually leads to a tragedy that no one could have foreseen, throwing Banks and Elizabeth’s lives into turmoil.

Jude Law’s performance was absolutely amazing in this movie. His character’s commitment to helping his patients improve their lives completely changed my views on psychiatry and on mental health in general. Before watching this movie, I had the erroneous belief that psychiatrists only treat the severely mentally ill and that these doctors were cold, harsh people. Jude Law’s character is a warm, kind, man, who genuinely cares about his patients and their well being. One of my favorite moments in the movie is when Dr. Banks says, “Where I come from [England], if anyone goes to see a psychiatrist, or takes medication, the assumption is that they are sick. Here [United States], the assumption is that they are getting better.” Jude Law successfully brings warmth and humanity to the cold field of clinical psychiatry.

I would be remiss if I did not also mention Catherine Zeta-Jones exceptional performance. She plays Dr. Siebert, a rather unethical psychiatrist who represents the worst of the field. At first Dr. Siebert seems like a minor character, but her inner darkness is revealed as she reveals how little she cares about her patients. Her gaze is cold, her mannerisms are manipulative, and I felt my hair rise almost every time she was on screen.

The cinematographic techniques used in Side Effects are fascinating. The film features very little music, and when it does feature music, it is played very softly in the background to increase tension and suspense. Much of the dialogue is soft or whispered, with long periods of silence during conversations. The color palate mostly consists cool blues, grays and shadowed yellows.  In essence, the film feels muted, and drained, as if something is missing at its core, much like how some people feel when they are suffering from depression. This style adds ambience to the film, but also makes it fell tedious and a little boring at times.

Much like Mud, Side Effects is a difficult movie to classify, but it broadly fits into the thriller category. Side Effects is a special kind of thriller, though, because it lacks the typical action sequences, gun fights, and over-hyped villains common in most films of the genre. Despite occasional dull moments, Side Effects is an excellent movie that will change your perception psychiatry and the mind.

Grade: A-

This lyric from the final song in Django Unchained is probably the best description of Django, the main character, and of the movie as a whole. Quentin Tarantino has long loved the spaghetti Western, and Django Unchained is his love letter to the genre.

Django Unchained is a unique twist on the spaghetti western genre, as it takes place both in the Wild West, and the Deep South, featuring gun duels and slavery equally. The movie follows the path of Django Freeman (Jaime Foxx), a slave in Texas, who has been separated from his wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington). Django eventually encounters Dr. King Shultz (Christoph Waltz), a bounty hunter who frees Django, since Django knows the location of three escaped criminals that Shultz needs to kill. Django turns out to be an incredible marksman, and Shultz takes him under his wing as his apprentice bounty hunter. Shultz and Django become fast friends, and Shultz decides to travel to Mississippi to help Django free his beloved Broomhilda from the clutches of psychotic plantation owner Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio). His journey to save her is a long and difficult, filled with death and destruction.

DiCaprio, Waltz and Washington all did wonderful jobs playing their respective characters, but I was most moved by Jamie Foxx’s performance. He plays Django brilliantly, able to show both the profound despair of a husband separated from a beloved wife, and an amazing amount of rage and determination. More importantly however, Foxx is able to make Django, for the lack of a better word, cool. Foxx spits out one-liners without batting an eye, and stares right at explosions without flinching. Django is a great character because he is willing to do anything, and kill anyone in order to reunite with his wife, all with great style, sass and lots and lots of one-liners.

Django Unchained is more of a stylistic look at the Wild West and the Deep South, rather than a gritty historical movie, like 12 Years a Slave. Tarantino however, does not sugar coat the brutality of slavery, featuring a horrifying whipping scene in the first act of the movie. Despite all the horror and violence, Django Unchained is a work of art, with a beautiful soundtrack featuring classic spaghetti western tracks, rap music and neo-soul, combined with perfectly timed close-ups and tense confrontations. At the same time, Django Unchained is hilarious, with ridiculous outfits, bumbling villains, and Samuel L. Jackson playing a house slave who likes saying a particular swearword a lot.

My only complaint about this film is that the plot feels kind of choppy. Django Unchained is an unusual Tarantino film, as the events in the film actually proceed chronologically. The movie’s plot is extremely simple and powerful as it follows a man who is willing to go to any lengths to save his wife. However, the transition from the Wild West to the Deep South feels a little bumpy, and there are occasional extraneous scenes that I feel could have been eliminated to reduce the two hour and 45 minute runtime. Overall, Django Unchained is another tour de force by Tarantino that will both disturb and entertain moviegoers.

Grade: B+

Matthew McConaughey is currently one of my favorite Hollywood actors, thanks to his amazing role as Cooper in Interstellar. Watching Mud, which was created near the beginning of the “McConaissance,” made me appreciate his talents even more. Mud is truly a hidden gem among the many popular and profitable movies featured on Netflix.

McConaughey plays the titular character Mud, a wandering vagabond, who is found hiding out an abandoned boat, on an island in the Arkansas River by two 14 year old boys: Ellis (Tye Sheridan) and Neck (Jacob Lofland). Ellis and Neck are from De Witt, Arkansas, and spend their free time cruising the river in their rickety little riverboat. Mud has only two possessions: a pistol, and a lucky yellow shirt with a wolf’s eye sown on the sleeves. Mud tells the boys that he will give them his pistol if they help him repair the abandoned boat on the island, so he can escape to the Gulf of Mexico. Ellis and Neck are enchanted by Mud’s mysterious nature and immediately agree to help him.

Mud can almost be described as a collection of little vignettes, told by Mud. He and the boys bond as Mud tells them stories of past adventures, past loves and future hopes. McConaughey is at his best in this movie, using his rustic Southern accent to tell the boys stories of his childhood adventures in De Witt. McConaughey is a convincing mentor to the boys, as he tries to guide them through the perils of adolescence. Tye Sheridan does an excellent job playing Ellis, a young boy dealing with his parents’ impending divorce and his growing romantic feelings for a fellow classmate, while his friend Neck is an orphan who lives with his uncle. Mud, an orphan with no remaining family, becomes a surrogate brother to Ellis and Neck as they work together to repair the boat, and they bond over their similar struggles.

Mud is a magical film in that it doesn’t really fit well into a single genre. There are elements of action or adventure movies, a romantic subplot, coated with harsh realism. Mud can best be described as a remake of Stand By Me for the modern era, as both movies follow the adventures of young boys as they learn about life and mature. What makes Mud truly unique is McConaughey’s performance as Mud, an adult who plays an active role in the boys’ lives. This movie is perfect for viewers who want to watch a special coming of age adventure in the Deep South.

Grade: A-

I honestly think that Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is one of the best espionage movies ever made. It is better than Bourne and better than Bond, as it perfectly captures the paranoia of the Cold War, especially during the 1970s.  This movie kept me on the edge of my seat until the climax, and when it was over all I could say was “Wow.”

The movie follows the master spy, George Smiley (Gary Oldman) as he tries to hunt down a mole in the Circus (MI6). Smiley is regarded as one of the finest spies in MI6, but he and Control (John Hurt), the head of MI6, are ousted after a failed intelligence operation leads to the capture of Jim Prideaux (Mark Strong), a high level field agent. However, when rumors of a mole in the highest levels of begin to surface, Smiley is brought out of retirement to find the mole.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy features many talented actors such as Benedict Cumberbatch, John Hurt, and Colin Firth, but the true star of the movie is Gary Oldman, who perfectly captures the character of George Smiley. Of all the famous fictional spies, George Smiley is the most realistic. He lacks the sex appeal of Bond and Bourne’s fighting ability. Smiley is a 60 year old man, whose only asset left to him is his wits. Gary Oldman’s long and illustrious career allows him to perfectly depict a grizzled old spy who has found countless secrets and seen many betrayals.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is unique in the espionage drama for its lack of action sequences. It rather captures the cold paranoia of the Cold War. The movie is filmed in a grayish tone, to emphasize how difficult it was to trust anyone during this uncertain period in time. Perhaps the most masterful part of the movie was the depictions of Cold War era Russian agents. The main “antagonist” in the film is really Karla, the head of the Soviet KGB, but the audience never sees his face. Karla, instead of showing himself, acts through the mole, which is his proxy, emphasizing the ambiguity of espionage. To find the mole, Smiley infiltrates archives, finds old documents, and interviews old employees. The movie emphasizes that espionage is not really about gun fights but rather collecting intelligence. Although this process seems boring, the movie is incredibly suspenseful, building to a crescendo as each new piece of information brings Smiley a little bit closer to finding the identity of the mole.

Thanks to the Bond franchise and many others, the Cold War has been glamourized as a grand ideological fight with the proud Western countries trying to fight back the duplicitous Communist Russians. Spies are exulted as debonair agents with cool guns and agents. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy reveals the dark, dirty nature of the Cold War. Spies are depicted as rather ordinary men, who work in the shadows and deal with unpleasant secrets, all while risking torture and death. As Smiley says “Don't you think it's time to recognize there is as little worth on your side [KGB] as there is on mine [MI6]?” I could probably go on for several more pages about this movie, but suffice to say that it is an excellent, honest and compelling portrayal of the Cold War.

Runtime: 2 hours, 7 minutes

Grade: A

My first thought after I finished watching The Interview: “North Korea bothered to hack Sony over a movie this pathetically terrible?” The Interview, without a doubt, is one of the worst movies I have seen in the last 3 or 4 years.

The plot of The Interview is fairly simple. Dave Skylark (James Franco) is the host of a celebrity gossip show that largely produces ridiculous headlines like “Eminem is Gay.” Aaron Rapaport (Seth Rogen) is Skylark’s producer, who longs to cover more serious stories. The duo eventually learns that Kim Jong-un is a fan of the show, and Skylark asks Kim if he is interested in giving an interview on the show. Surprisingly, Kim accepts and demands that Skylark and Rapaport fly to North Korea for the interview. Soon after, Skylark and Rapaport are approached by a CIA Agent, Lacey (Lizzy Caplan), who tasks them with assassinating the dictator.

My main issue with this movie was James Franco’s character. Dave Skylark is probably one of the stupidest characters in movie history. His entire comedic repertoire consists of pee jokes, poop jokes, fart jokes, and the occasional sex joke. I genuinely believe that James Franco is a brilliant actor, given the right role, but in The Interview, he acts like an overgrown four-year-old. In certain comedies, the right amount of stupidity can be hilarious, but Franco’s character is so stupid that it is simply off-putting and nauseating. 

Seth Rogen does a mediocre job playing Aaron Rapoport, the intelligent producer at a very unintelligent show. I am extremely thankful that the screenwriters decided to make Rogen’s character at least moderately intelligent, otherwise I probably would have thrown my computer through the window at the 30-minute mark. Randall Park’s portrayal of Kim Jong-un as a lunatic with major daddy issues was actually fairly interesting and funny, which managed to offset some of Franco’s buffoonery. 

Now, for all of my harsh criticism, I will admit that I did occasionally laugh while watching this movie. However, for every funny scene, there was at least 10 nonsensical, ridiculous scenes, such as a scene when Seth Rogen has sex with North Korean press secretary in a nuclear bunker. The Interview is a haphazardly made movie filled with sex, violence, and gore, and not much else. North Korea legitimized this trashy movie by hacking Sony, which in my mind, generated this movie more publicity than it ever deserved.

Grade: D

After critical successes like Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, I would’ve thought that Quentin Tarantino’s 1997 heist film, Jackie Brown, would be much better known. The story follows a middle aged flight attendant, the titular Jackie Brown (Pam Grier), who, upon getting caught smuggling money from Cabo for arms dealer Ordell Robbie (Samuel L. Jackson), decides to con Ordell and the feds out of the remaining half a million dollars located in Mexico.

While often remaining in familiar territory for Tarantino—a crime drama filled with sexism, racism and plenty of violence—it’s interesting to see him work primarily with a female lead character. Jackie is smart and confident, often taking matters into her own hands to solve her troubles. While having strong female characters isn’t out of Tarantino’s realm, it’s refreshing seeing not just a woman, but a black woman, be completely in control. Pam Grier puts so much life into this character: she’s got an incredible toughness to her, while still coming off as charming. In one of my favorite scenes of the whole film, she yells at Ordell after he deviated from the plan they set to get the money. Watching her berate a violent man with a temper—who also tried to kill her earlier in the film—is awesome. She completely takes control and reasserts her position as the leader of the plan.

The only other thing to really stand out in the film is the supporting characters. Max Cherry (Robert Forster) is a bail bondsman with a crush on Jackie who decides to try and help her to pull off the scam. He’s a great contrast to Jackie: he’s quiet, willing to help and more than capable. It’s no surprise that he was nominated for an academy award for his role. Over on Ordell’s side is Louis (Robert De Niro), his former friend who just got out of jail and works for Ordell again. He’s also quiet, but it’s more that he seems to have no ambition and just drift through life. Lastly, Federal Agent Ray Nicolette (Michael Keaton) is highly motivated to catch Ordell and prove himself a capable agent. He’s intense, but despite his best efforts, he can’t seem to manipulate or scare Jackie into cooperating.

The acting, writing and filming of Jackie Brown are all exactly up to Tarantino’s high standards. I think the reason that it goes unnoticed is that there’s nothing particularly memorable about the film. While well executed, it feels like it’s just a combination of Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. I don’t think it should be overlooked for that reason, but I understand why the film doesn’t stand out among the rest of his work.

Grade: A-

Length: 154 minutes