The Imitation Game

Expectations:
As I sit here and write about The Imitation Game, I just realized that I haven't actually reviewed a film since December 1, which is quite insane. Sure, I can blame some of that on my busy schedule, but much of this drought can be blamed on the fact that I had no interest in writing about the films that I actually did watch in late-November and December. Mediocrity was abounding in my film-watching world, as a few of this year's Oscar-hopefuls have been a bit disappointing to me. Nevertheless, I needed something to watch, this week, and The Imitation Game was the winner of my attention. Honestly, I knew very little about the film or Alan Turing's role in the events of World War II, but the critical praise of the film drew me right on in. Considering the historic nature of the film, one can assume that The Imitation Game is all but a lock for a best picture nomination, which gave me a chance to get caught up on Oscar's favorite films (even before the actual list of nominees is released).

Plot:
While the film was certainly intriguing and emotional, the amazing story would have allowed for anyone to create a successful film. In fact, when the film strayed from simply telling the story, I lost interest completely. That said, I believe that this story should be taught in every single history class in every single country that is happy that Germany failed to win WWII. This film may have been a bit distracted by the obvious social progression that is quite recognizable when comparing 2015 to any previous year, but, regardless, at the heart (for me at least), the achievements of this man and his counterparts are more than worthy of our recognition. While Alan Turing was certainly a victim of the social constructs of his time, the film should not have been so caught up in displaying this disconnect, unless the film was going to be 100% about said disconnect. In my opinion, a guy who wins World War II and basically creates the original design for modern computers is much more than just an example of failed society, as this film attempted to display Alan Turing.

Characters:
At this point, I will attempt to move beyond my rant about the focus of The Imitation Game. Of course, stopping myself from ranting is quite difficult. So, we will see how that goes!

Negatives:
Rory Kinnear's Detective Nock was one of those pointless characters that filmmakers create, in order to tell the story in the way that they see fit. Whether or not Detective Nock actually existed, I do not care, because his presence in this film was pointlessly necessary. In keeping with my lack of caring about Turing's sexuality and personal issues, I was not a huge fan of the flashbacks to Turing's childhood, which featured young Turing (played by Alex Lawther) and young Turing's love interest (played by Jack Bannon). Because the WWII portion of the story was so fascinating, everything else just distracted from the awesomeness, in my opinion.

Positives:
Benedict Cumberbatch was certainly intriguing in his portrayal of Alan Turing. While I have no previous perception or knowledge of Turing, Cumberbatch did a great job of being the Alan Turing that The Imitation Game was attempting to create, and that success is quite praise-worthy! Additionally, I really enjoyed Mark Strong's performance in his role of Stewart Menzies. This film really utilized the preconceptions that come with Strong's presence in a film, minimizing additional explanation of his role in the film, which I thought quite clever.

Conclusion:
The story that was encompassed within The Imitation Game was likely the most interesting thing that I have seen in the past twelve months. Unfortunately, the filmmakers failed miserably in their utilization of that great story, taking something potentially great and turning it into something quite mediocre. Never in my life have I directed anything, but I feel as if I could one-up Morten Tyldum, for sure! This film should be an Oscar frontrunner, considering the AMAZING storyline, but oh well! Although I have been fairly critical of The Imitation Game, I would encourage you to watch the film, if only to realize the significance of Alan Turing's role in shaping the 20th and 21st centuries. Also, next time I google something (like, 2 minutes from now), I will know that my actions are partly made possible by Alan Turing, which is quite neat. I give The Imitation Game 2.76 out of 5 stars.

12 Years a Slave

 

 

Expectations:

If you've read any sort of pre-Oscar news, over the past few months, you would have certainly been exposed to the praise of 12 Years a Slave. Truthfully, that's the only exposure that I really had to the film. I can't even remember watching a trailer, though I probably did at some point. Regardless, my expectations were surely lacking, aside from my assumption that this would be an "Oscar favorite" type film. The problem with those Oscar favorites is the fact that they are extremely hit or miss with my viewing pleasures. For instance, in 2011 (we will leave the amazingness of 2012 out of this), there were Oscar-nominated films that I loved, like The Help, Moneyball, Midnight in Paris, and Extremely Loud and incredibly Close, but there were also some that I didn't love, like Hugo and The Descendants. Plus, there were two that I could not stand or understand (cough... The Artist, cough cough... The Tree of Life). With that being said, I was afraid that 12 Years a Slave might be one of those historic films that drives The Academy crazy, offers up a few good performances, and leaves me less than satisfied. However, I couldn't miss out on the opportunity to catch a film like this, coming to Hattiesburg, Mississippi.

 

Plot:

The only big negative in the storyline of 12 Years a Slave is the fact that this story is unfortunately one of truth. There are multiple dramatically honest moments that truly make you feel for the individuals who were forced to endure such horrific circumstances. Here in the South, the faults of slavery continue to bring out emotions on both sides of the spectrum. As for me, it's an issue that I believe is best left in the past, but I won't argue with a great tale, such as 12 Years a Slave, being brought out, in an effort to make a new generation of moviegoers and, most importantly, Americans aware of what evil once engulfed our nation. Kudos to the late Solomon Northup for publicizing his story and giving folks like me the opportunity to realize the severity of slavery in the South. There is a moment in the film where Northup, played beautifully by Chiwetel Ejiofor, is hung from a tree, remaining low enough to hold himself up by the tips of his toes. Never, in all of my movie watching, have I ever felt more engaged in a scene, and I honestly began to want for breath. There were many long, artistic scenes designed in the same manner, each of which were amazingly engaging. The only true criticism I have of the way the film developed was how it dealt with the "12 Years" aspect. To me, the events of the film felt more like "12 Months," and, as the end of the film approach, I kept waiting for a "10 years latter" or something similar. Then, the movie was wrapping up, and I had to rethink the time frame in which I had imagined the previous events of the film. Not to take away from the great story, but it is something that you can be more aware of, if you do go watch the film.

 

Characters:

It may be early in the Oscar season, but I would bet a good sum of money that 12 Years a Slave will be favored to win best ensemble at the SAG Awards, in January. If I got to choose who won, you could bet everything you had on their victory. It's quite early to make such a bold prediction, but I was so, so impressed with these amazing performances.

 

Negatives:

The only character that I didn't care for, in what turned out to be an extremely but necessarily large cast, was Alfre Woodard's Mistress Shaw, whose role I felt was too small. She offered a lot of wisdom, in her short time on screen, which I would have loved to see more of. I don't know how much of this was due to the amount of time she was discussed in Northup's book or how much was due to the fact that there were so many great characters and so little time in which to enjoy their presence. Regardless, I wish she would have been a bit more prevalent.

 

Positives:

Where do I begin?... There were so many great performances in this film that there is no way I can touch on them all, so you will have to watch for yourself. Chiwetel Ejiofor was brilliant in the lead role, and he will surely merit a best actor nom for his performance. Paul Dano's Tibeats, a full-fledged slave-hater, was probably the most entertaining character in the film. Dano is a fantastic actor, and I thought he did such a great job in this role. Benedict Cumberbatch and Sarah Paulson also gave fantastic performances. However, there is absolutely no performance that could possibly measure up to that of Michael Fassbender! I was utterly blown away by Fassbender, who is quickly becoming one of the greatest actors in Hollywood, and, honestly, his performance was probably the best I have seen since I started this blog. Kudos to Fassbender and anyone involved in the casting of this film. It was absolutely brilliant.

 

Conclusion:

Much of my praise is likely brought on by the fact that I had no clue what to expect when I headed in to watch 12 Years a Slave. Regardless, I'm so, so, so glad that I decided to watch this film, particularly in the theater, where everything just tends to come to life a bit more. 12 Years a Slave is one of those movies that tugs at your emotional heart-strings, and we can all use a little emotion in each of our movie-watching lives. Kudos to director Steve McQueen and the entire cast of 12 Years a Slave for allowing us to share a unique story about a man who was not even meant to be a victim of the injustice that was occurring in the days of slavery. I could continue praising this film, but, instead, I want to challenge all of you guys to go out and watch this movie and see what it has to offer. I give 12 Years a Slave 3.78 out of 5 stars.

Star Trek Into Darkness

 

Expectations:

If you’ve ever read my blog, it’s likely that you know about my great love for J. J. Abrams. Some may even call it “an obsession.” However, as someone who is often asked for his opinion on entertainment issues, I believe this obsession is healthy! Regardless of my love for Abrams, 2009’s Star Trek was absolutely brilliant, and I believe that most people would agree with me. The recreation of the classic Star Trek characters was done so, so well, and I don’t think it really received the praise that it deserved. Of course, as good as the first film was, my expectations for Star Trek Into Darkness were very high, and I honestly believed that Abrams could pull it off. On top of that, he kept almost every detail of the film secret. There is nothing more exciting to me than a director hiding details! Really, there was not even a small piece of me that thought this film could be bad… AT ALL!

Plot:
Because of the secrecy of the trailers and the news, I will avoid saying too much about the plot of Star Trek Into Darkness. I will lead off by saying that, after watching the film, I don’t really understand the broad title, so don’t try to find answers in the “Into Darkness.” With that being said, I thought the storyline, along with the twists and turns, was great. Abrams managed to fit a lot of happenings into a short (for a blockbuster) two hour run time, and that made me happy, because I was able to go to bed at 2:30 on Wednesday night, after the midnight premiere. I will say that there were a few extremities, with regard to the events of the film, which were a bit over the top. However, the entire Star Trek name encompasses nothing but over-the-top extremities, so it is to be expected.

Characters:
The only real problem that I had with Star Trek Into Darkness was the lack of screen time for some of the main characters. Somehow, in his first Star Trek film, Abrams was able to create a back-story for every single character from the original Star Trek cast and come up with a time-travelling storyline featuring two Spocks (all in just over two hours!). In the sequel, it seemed like situations were created just so the characters would have something to do. In particular, John Cho’s Sulu and Anton Yelchin’s Chekov just didn’t have anything to do, and I like each of those characters, so it was tough for me get over that. Very few of the characters were BAD, but many were a bit underutilized, in my opinion.

Negatives:
The only real negative in this film was the random addition of Peter Weller’s Marcus. While the character was important, I just didn’t like the fact that he became SO important SO quickly.

Positives:
If you've seen 2009's Star Trek, you know just how great the entire cast of this film turned out to be. Honestly, there were no low points in the casting of the first film, which is so so so rare when dealing with a remake of any kind. If you take a great cast and use that entire cast in a sequel, you are most likely going to get success in the category of "characters." That was certainly the case with Into Darkness. Every returning cast member was just fantastic, and I really thought Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto excelled in furthering the relationship between Kirk and Spock. This film leaves you with no doubt that you care about both of these great characters. In addition to the returning cast members, Benedict Cumberbatch's turn as bad-guy John Harrison was brilliant. Filmmakers are getting so good at creating villains, and I'm quite glad.

Conclusion:
Iron Man 3 may have been a good start to the summer movie season, but it's highly unlikely that any other May film will shine quite like Star Trek Into Darkness. A successful cast and storyline usually make for a good film. Throw in the great ending and the graphics, and Into Darkness is a GREAT film! With J. J. Abrams jumping ship to helm the next Star Wars film, the future of the Star Trek film series is in question, but we can all hope that whatever comes next is somewhere close to the greatness that was Star Trek Into Darkness. If you haven't seen 2009's Star Trek, watch it! If you don't really care for science fiction films, watch this one! With the great plot and great characters, you will forget that space is even a part of the equation. I promise!!! I give Star Trek Into Darkness 3.93 out of 5 stars.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Expectations:
While I didn't quite understand what was going to happen in this movie, I did hope that I would be impressed with the storyline. All I did know about the movie was that it was going to be about the British version of the CIA. At least that's what I thought. This movie has received a lot of Oscar hype and even brought Gary Oldman his first ever nomination for best actor, so you just assume that it is going to be good. There were many great names attached to the film, such as Colin Firth and Tom Hardy. Everything about this movie pointed toward it being good, but I just had no clue what it was about. I don't know about you, but I love it when I have no clue about the movie heading into the theater. Everyone remembers how clueless they were when they went in to watch Inception, and some remember how clueless they were when they left. Based on this cluelessness alone, I had to watch Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.

Plot:
While I won't give away much here, I will say that this is the most complicated and in depth storyline of 2011. No other movie this year even came close to making me wonder what was happening, but Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy had me wondering the entire time. The problem was that I never really figured out what I was wondering about. Maybe I'm just not as smart as I think I am, but I left that theater not really knowing what just happened. The movie started very slow, and there were a lot of useless people walking around. I thought I was following it quite well, but I guess not. I can't really say if the plot was great or not, just because I didn't understand it.

Characters:
As I said, this was a very star-studded cast, and it certainly didn't hurt the end product. Colin Firth was great as usual in the role of Bill Haydon, one of the top dogs in the British Intelligence. Another one of the top dogs was Toby Esterhase, played by David Dencik. Esterhase was a good character, but I just didn't understand how someone so nervous could possible work for the British Intelligence. Tom Hardy's character, Ricki Tarr, added a lot of depth to the plot, but I didn't see why anymore depth was needed. He was important but unnecessary, if that's even possible. Last, but not least, Gary Oldman was not impressive as George Smiley, not in my opinion at least. He certainly wasn't bad, but I don't understand how he could possibly merit an Academy Award nomination on this performance.

Best Character: Toby Jones is one of the eeriest actors on planet earth, and he added a great eeriness to his character, Percy Alleline. Many of you might remember Jones from Captain America. I just don't understand why he is so scary, but he just is.

Worst Character: Peter Guillam, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, was probably the most useless of the useless characters. If they would have cut his character out, I think Smiley (Oldman) would have been a lot more interesting. They spent too much time on Guillam's back story, and it didn't matter one bit.

Conclusion:
I honestly don't know what to say about this movie as a whole. I promise that you HAVE to pay great attention to every single detail, but I still can't promise that you will understand. Although I did understand bits and pieces, I will have to rent this movie in a few months to have complete closure. The biggest problems I had with Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy were the very slow opening and the very quick ending. Not to discourage you from watching, but I just didn't understand. When I left, I wasn't quite as clueless as I was when I got there, but I was close. You may love it, though. Who knows? Because I didn't understand, I am not going to give a rating for the movie. If you are super curious, just go watch it...