Dunkirk

Dunkirk (2017)

Starring Fionn Whitehead, Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy, Tom Glynn-Carney, Barry Keoghan, Jack Lowden, Harry Styles, Aneurin Barnard, James D'Arcy, Cillian Murphy, and Kenneth Branagh

Directed by Christopher Nolan
Written by Christopher Nolan

Summary (in 500 words or less):  A look at the land, sea, and air military actions taking place in Dunkirk, France, during an epic battle during WWII between the Allied and Nazi forces.

• There's a visceral excitement to Dunkirk as director-writer Christopher Nolan drops the viewers right into the action from the film's outset leaving behind backstories about characters and instead focusing the flick's entire 100-minute runtime on the action taking place as Allied troops retreat to coastal Dunkirk, France, while they await to be rescued as the Germans close in on them.
• The fact that Nolan isn't really in the running for the Best Director Oscar (despite being nominated) is shocking to me.  While it's true Nolan's film isn't so much about characters, what he's done here visually and cinematically is stunning. 
• The men on the beaches of Dunkirk fought together and died together and Nolan's desire to treat them as a mass of men instead of singular individuals is an interesting concept.  While it's not something we're used to as a cinematic audience, the film still manages to carry emotional weight which is a triumph.
• Nolan puzzle pieces the land, sea, and air battles together, eschewing a linear timeline which does at times prove a bit confusing, but in the end works as the pieces fit together and we see the whole picture he was trying to create.
• Ultimately, the film doesn't quite succeed at showcasing the MASSIVE battle and rescue attempt that happened at Dunkirk -- in fact, fellow Oscar nominee Darkest Hour did a better job at that -- but Nolan's film is still a great visceral piece of cinema...and this is coming from someone who thinks Nolan has been a bit overrated prior to this.

The RyMickey Rating:  B+

Movie Review - Interstellar

Interstellar (2014)

Starring Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, David Gyasi, Wes Bentley Mackenzie Foy, John Lithgow, Timothée Chalamet, Casey Affleck, Matt Damon, Topher Grace, Ellen Burstyn, and Michael Caine

Directed by Christopher Nolan

I was extremely wary about Interstellar.  During its theatrical run, I found myself avoiding it due to its nearly three-hour running time and the much-gossiped about notion that its story was too talky and too befuddling.  So, with trepidation I sat down to watch director and co-screenwriter Christopher Nolan's Interstellar in one sitting not expecting to enjoy myself.  Obviously, this lede is insinuating that I liked the film and that intimation would be true.  While not without its faults, Interstellar is a surprisingly action-filled drama that, while certainly "deep" and a bit convoluted, is much easier to comprehend than I expected.

To make a (very) long story short, Earth is dying and within several years, it will be uninhabitable.  While driving around with his daughter one evening, former astronaut Joseph Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) stumbles upon a secret NASA facility wherein scientists are building a spaceship that can send a crew to explore the far regions of space to look for another planet that can sustain human life.  Much to his daughter Murph's (Mackenze Foy) chagrin, Cooper agrees to take part in the mission which will likely take him away from home for several years.  This connection between father and daughter continues to take shape as the film progresses with Murph aging into a young woman (played by Jessica Chastain) and Cooper still out in space.

Interstellar works best when it finds itself in space.  There's a harrowing sense of anticipation and excitement in nearly every story element as Cooper and his fellow astronauts (Anne Hathaway, Wes Bentlely, and David Gyasi) desperately struggle to find a place where the human race can survive for eons to come.  As they journey from planet to planet, they're forced to make some tough decisions which are intellectually complex, though at the same time fathomable to the general movie-going public.

Unfortunately, Insterstellar takes a long time to actually get Cooper up into space.  For nearly an hour, we find Cooper and his family bemoaning the state of the Earth and then debating whether Cooper should take on the space mission.  I remember about forty minutes in looking at how much time was left and getting antsy that there was still nearly two hours to go.  I recognize the need to set up a father/daughter relationship in the first act, but Nolan and his co-screenwriter brother Jonathan fail to keep things moving and the languid pace weighs down the entire film.

As mentioned, though, once we're in space, Interstellar becomes an intriguing film.  The special effects are top notch and the sound design (which got dinged a bit by critics who watched the film in theaters) works fine on a small screen sound system.  The acting is solid, but I had a few qualms with Matthew McConaughey's lead performance as Cooper.  First, I wanted him to open his damn mouth when he talked because multiple times it sounded as if he was talking with a handful of marbles in his mouth.  Perhaps more importantly, though, I felt that he looked bored for most of the flick.  Unlike other characters who were desperately trying to save their planet and complete a successful mission, McConaughey's Cooper didn't convey that sense of urgency.  While there are certainly moments in space during which McConaughey successfully showcases his emotions as a father longing to be reunited with his children, overall I felt that Cooper left me longing to connect with him seeing as how he was the crux of the whole film.

Despite some qualms, Interstellar actually provides a rather enjoyable experience.  Did I understand everything that happens at the end as the film veers into some weird metaphysical stuff?  Nope.  But I at least didn't feel like I was completely oblivious to the proceedings.  If you were wary like me to see this because of these fears of confusion (or simply because of the film's length), let me brush those aside for you and beckon you to give Interstellar a chance.

The RyMickey Rating:  B

Movie Review - The Dark Knight Rises

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

Starring Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway, Marion Cotillard, Matthew Modine, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Caine

Directed by Christopher Nolan

I've been avoiding reviewing The Dark Knight Rises for nearly a month now and the only reason I can think of is that after concluding this film there was just a sense of apathy that has only increased as time as passed.  It's not that this final chapter in Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy is bad -- it's slightly better than the Batman Begins origin story, but not nearly as good as The Dark Knight -- but it's really just feels most genericly superhero-ey of the three flicks.

We've got our good guy Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale whose teeth-gritting toughness as his alter ego has worn out its welcome by this point) who has put Batman to rest after the masked vigilante took the blame for killing Harvey Dent in the prior film.  However, evil rears its ugly head again, this time in the form of Bane (Tom Hardy) who vows to fight the capitalistic rich pigs of Gotham by taking all of them down and suppressing the poor himself.  Throw in a petty thief named Selena Kyle (Anne Hathaway) who will later turn into the slinky Catwoman (although I'm not sure that name is ever uttered in the movie), a new love interest for Bruce in the form of Wayne Enterprises board member Miranda (Marion Cotillard), and a young cop named Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) who tries to be the voice of reason to motivate Batman to come back to Gotham after Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) almost resigns himself to the fact that the masked man won't return and the cast for this one is pretty much complete.

The problem is that despite the film's nearly three-hour runtime, the cast isn't given a whole lot to do. Bane as a villain is a disappointment especially coming after the one-two punch of Heath Ledger's Joker and Aaron Eckhart's Harvey Dent in the last film.  The motivation of taking down the upper class is fine (despite it sort of feeling like a retread of Ra's Al Ghul's evil plans in the first film), but the screenwriting duo of the Nolan brothers fail to make the story resonate even in these heightened economic times.

Gordon-Levitt and Hathaway were certainly welcome additions and it was nice that ample time was spent on their storylines since (as I mentioned above) Bale's incredibly one-note performance while in his Batsuit had worn out its welcome.  Unfortunately, Tom Hardy fails to really make an impression as Bane.  After the whimsically evil performance of Ledger's Joker, having Hardy behind a mask for the whole film and failing to see a single facial expression from our central villain is a bit of a letdown that isn't his fault in the slightest.

In the end, Nolan's Batman trilogy is solid, but it's not nearly as fantastic as fanboys and critics would have you believe.

The RyMickey Rating:  B-

Movie Review - The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight (2008)

Starring Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Eric Roberts, and Nestor Carbonell

Directed by Christopher Nolan

The two things I vividly remember about watching The Dark Knight in theaters four years ago was that the show I was seeing had a projector issue causing a "brain wrap" (in projectionist terms) which made the film stop (forcing me to head to another auditorium to watch the end) and that I thought Heath Ledger was perhaps a bit overrated in his role as The Joker.  At that point in time, I thought that Aaron Eckhart was the one who should be getting more praise for his take on Harvey Dent/Two Face and that Ledger's death was giving him some (slightly undeserved) great posthumous reviews.

Years later, I realize that perhaps I was a bit too harsh on Ledger.  Not that I ever thought his performance was bad, but I always felt that because of his death, he was being praised more highly than he would have had he been living.  While that may very well still be a true statement, the fact is that he did a heckuva job with The Joker.  Freakishly malevolent, there's an eerie psychotic presence whenever The Joker is onscreen.  

It's because of both The Joker's maniacal evilness and the stalwart Harvey Dent's shift into the flawed Two Face that make The Dark Knight an infinitely better movie than Batman Begins.  These two figures bring much more to the table in terms of conflict than anyone did in Christopher Nolan's first Batman film, but it's not just the "villains" that are wreaking havoc on Gotham City.  Batman himself is finding himself loved and hated by the city and Bruce Wayne is forced to come to terms with whether he is helpful or harmful to his fellow citizens.  Now that the origin tale has been told in the first film, Christopher Nolan is able to delve a bit more into the psyche of Bruce/Batman and it's a welcome addition.

Once again, supporting turns are all top notch.  Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, and Gary Oldman all add an aire of professionalism to the film which often isn't felt in comic book adaptations.  Maggie Gyllenhaal takes on the role originated by Katie Holmes and fares a bit better.  Holmes was never bad (I feel like I'm one of the few people who actually liked her in Batman Begins), but Gyllenhaal felt a little less morose than the somber Holmes, although it's entirely possible that the role was just given a bit more life beyond "love interest" than in the first film.  Also, I find it invigorating that Nolan isn't afraid to create characters that are capable of dying.  Gotham City isn't a pristine town by any means and by having deaths occur to characters we come to know, Nolan creates a sense of urgency and fear that we don't normally feel in comic book adaptations which always seem to feature immortal characters.

The Dark Knight isn't perfect -- once again, Nolan drags the climax out for much too long -- but it's darn close to the best -- if not the best -- comic book flick I've ever seen.  Here's hoping The Dark Knight Rises finishes off the trilogy on a positive note.

The RyMickey Rating:  A-

Movie Review - Batman Begins

Batman Begins (2005)

Starring Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Katie Holmes, Gary Oldman, Cillian Murphy, Liam Neeson, Morgan Freeman, Ken Watanabe, Rutger Hauer, and Tom Wilkinson

Directed by Christopher Nolan

I must admit that I watched this back in mid-August.  I had planned on a one-two-three punch of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, but that never came to fruition.  That said, with The Dark Knight Rises just arriving in the mail today, I figured I might as well briefly discuss my thoughts on this first flick in the series.

I didn't remember being a huge fan of this when it first came out in 2005 and this subsequent viewing in 2012 didn't really change my mind.  Origin tales always border on tedious for me and this proves no exception.  While I didn't mind learning the story of Bruce Wayne as a kid, once he gets older (and turns into Christian Bale) and travels to Asia to strengthen both his body and his mind, I lost interest.  As Bruce returns to Gotham, the film picks up a bit, but by the end, I found the climax to be much too lengthy.

It certainly doesn't help that Liam Neeson's Henri Ducard/Ra's al Ghul isn't a great villain, and while Cillian Murphy's Scarecrow is more menacing, I felt he wasn't exactly placed into the spotlight his character probably should have been.  Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and Gary Oldman are all quite strong in their roles providing nice characters for Bale's Bruce Wayne to play off of in their respective scenes together.  Katie Holmes is fine as well (although Maggie Gyllenhaal breathes a little more life into the same romantic love interest character in the second film).

As for Christian Bale, I'm not quite sure where I stand on him.  While I respect the choices of the deep voice and stoic emotionless demeanor while in the persona of Batman, it does make the character a bit one-note.  He certainly plays Wayne as a smart (though smarmy at times) playboy which allows for a bit more fun to be injected into things, but when behind the mask, he's almost bland.

While I'm mainly listing qualms with the film, I do think Batman Begins is a pretty solid comic book adaptation and certainly one of the better flicks of the genre over the past twenty years.

The RyMickey Rating:  B-

Movie Review - Inception

Inception (2010)

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ken Watanabe, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Cillian Murphy, and Marion Cotillard

Directed by Christopher Nolan

There are major spoilers ahead here...This isn't so much a review as a discussion of my thoughts a day after watching the film...If you haven't seen the film yet and don't want some key plot points to be ruined, don't read any further.

In the end, some magnificent "parts" of Christopher Nolan's newest film, Inception, don't quite add up to a fantastic "whole."  Now, fair warning -- I'm going to be overly critical here.  A creative film like this wants me to question it...so I'm going to do so.  But, as you'll notice by my rating at the end, I enjoyed myself thoroughly while watching it.  I simply wish it was something I could have loved.

This movie is about Leonardo Dicaprio's character Cobb.  It's about his need to be forgiven for what he considers to be the "crime" of causing his wife's (Marion Cotillard) death.  Being absolved of this sin will allow him to not only return to his children, but also to return to a more peaceful existence with himself.  If this is the main point (which, to me, there can be no argument that it isn't), why does it fall to the wayside for so much of this film's 150 minutes?

The final hour-long act of the film -- the dream within a dream within a dream within a dream where the key players are attempting to complete the inception in Fischer's (Cillian Murphy) mind -- hardly focuses on Cobb's emotional part of the story at all.  Not until we reach the "limbo" stage does Cobb really come into play.  Granted, this whole segment of the film was really amazing -- I truly enjoyed all of the levels within the dreams and that hotel scene is just a gigantic WOW -- but it's really just a huge McGuffin (sort of).  I can't help but think something could have been trimmed here or there (or something even added, if necessary) to bring the focus back to Cobb.  Yes, there were the occasional images of his children, but a larger emphasis on Cobb would have been much more powerful in terms of character development.

Speaking of character development, where was it?  Beyond Cobb, there's nothing.  I guess that could be because "this is all a dream" (an idea which I'll touch upon in a bit) and in dreams, character development is nonexistent, but that seems like a cop-out.  So, if the film's not a dream, that makes it real -- well, "real" in terms of the fact that we're watching a film.  And if this is a film, I'd like to know something about these people I'm watching.  Unfortunately, I know nothing beyond the fact that the girl from Juno is the Architect, the guy from (500) Days of Summer is Cobb's right-hand man, and the guy from Bronson (yes, I know you've never heard of it, but you should watch it anyway) is like some fancy X-Man that can change his form.  Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Tom Hardy are all very good, but they're not really given anything to do beyond what their job requires.  It's like a much more intelligent Oceans 11 film in that sense.

So is the whole thing a dream?  Is the reason that I don't know anything beyond the outer surface of these characters because I'm watching Cobb's dream?  I can't buy that (even if in the director commentary Christopher Nolan tells me that is the case).  For starters, if this is all a dream, how the heck is the story so linear?  Yes, I may have some dreams that follow a general storyline, but for the most part, the restraints are gone when one dreams and logic bears no importance.  Yes, I may be dreaming about work and it may seem perfectly straightforward, but I could change my thoughts within seconds and be some place completely different.  That never really happens here.  Yes, I'm sure there are things that point to this being a dream, but if that's the case, I'd be utterly disappointed simply because things are much to logical here for that to be the case.

Plus, it seems obvious to me that at the end of the film Cobb's spinning top is beginning to wobble.  When a top begins to slow down, the change in aural tone that it begins to make is blatant -- and it does that during the final scene (plus, it starts to wobble).  Yes, one could certainly make the statement that the top was never Cobb's token, but instead was Mal's, so it was never his "way back"to reality.  While that's certainly true, I always felt that the top was his connection to her and since she was so connected to the top, he, in turn, can be taken out of the dreamscape by the top as well.

Okay...enough rambling.  Let's get to a tiny bit of general thoughts here.  Inception was a treat to watch, without a doubt.  The more I sit and think about it, the more I appreciate it.  It's not a perfect film, but it's a more than admirable effort (I still say that its biggest fault is that first point I make above in that the emotional connection for Cobb's character is pushed to the sidelines for too long in the final act).  Nolan (a director and writer who I appreciate, but don't find myself fawning over) once again proves that he's a smart guy with an eye for some special set pieces.  The rotating hotel scene which was shown in the previews really blew me away.  Even though I knew it was coming, I was amazed while watching it.

Additionally, kudos to Nolan for making what could have been a convoluted mess of a film perfectly coherent.  Before going into this, I heard so much about how you "really have to pay attention," but I found the film to be easily comprehensible.  Little asides that in some movies may have made the viewer feel stupid (or made the viewer feel that the filmmaker thought they were stupid) proved to be quite natural and justified in their existence.  (This was actually a very impressive aspect of the film...and the whole point of Ellen Page's character.  Her Architect was "us," the audience, and since she was an intelligent character, whenever she asked for an explanation or elucidated on a certain topic, it was never done in a manner that talked down to the viewer.)

Still, the problem with the lack of character development is that Nolan doesn't allow any of his actors to shine.  None of the actors are problematic or detrimental to the film in any way, but they're not allowed to really add anything to the final product either.  Leo and Ellen and Marion and Joseph and Tom are all fine, but never given much to work with.

Yes, yes, this "review" was perhaps overly negative, but I enjoyed Inception and the more I think about it and the more I discuss it with others, the more I appreciate the film.  Do I wish it was a little better?  Absolutely.  A little trimming of the Fischer dream storyline could've done wonders to the film as a whole.  A bit more character development for anyone beyond Cobb would've been wonderful.

Still, Inception is no nightmare...it's just not the fantastical dream of a film that others say it is.

The RyMickey Rating:  B+