Operation Finale

Operation Finale (2018)

Starring Oscar Isaac, Ben Kingsley, Lior Raz, Mélanie Laurent, Nick Kroll, Joe Alwyn, and Haley Lu Richardson

Directed by Chris Weitz

Written by Matthew Orton

Click here for my Letterboxd review

The RyMickey Rating:  B

Movie Review - By the Sea

By the Sea (2015)

Starring Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie Pitt, Mélanie Laurent, Melvil Poupaud, Richard Bohringer, and Niels Arestrup

Directed by Angelina Jolie Pitt

Due to circumstances not involved with the film, I had to stop watching By the Sea at just about an hour and fifteen minutes into my first viewing.  Upon returning to the film a mere few hours later, I had to re-find where I had stopped.  For the life of me, I couldn't.  Why is that?  Because By the Sea is essentially two hours of the same scenes over and over and over again - a mopey couple sitting around a luxurious French seaside hotel (either together or alone) pontificating about why their relationship went south and what they can do to make it better, whether that be attempting to connect with one another sexually or watching another younger couple connect sexually through a peephole.  Stagnant in its drama and overly repetitive, By the Sea is an interesting departure from Angelina Jolie's previous directorial feature Unbroken, but it's unsuccessful in its attempt to mimic some classic 1970s relationship dramas.

Jolie and her real-life husband Brad Pitt are Vanessa and Roland, a couple married for fourteen years who find themselves in obviously troubled relationship times.  Roland is a writer who is finding himself blocked so he decides to take a journey to a quaint, tiny French seaside town.  Upon arrival, Vanessa is distant, detached, emotionless and, quite frankly, a bit of a dramatic ice queen.  Inferences are made to something having happened in their past that has led to the emotional chasm that affects them now and while Roland hopes that this trip will help them reconnect, he finds himself met with reticence from Vanessa.  While Roland works in a local bar, Vanessa mopes around the hotel room where she discovers a circular peephole that peeks into the adjacent room where she watches the lives unfold of recently married and honeymooning couple Lea and François (Mélanie Laurent and Melvil Poupaud) whose lust for life stand in sharp contrast to her obvious depression.

I was along for the slow ride of By the Sea for nearly its first hour.  Sure, it had a meandering pace, but I was particularly interested and surprisingly invested in Brad Pitt's writer character and his struggle to get his wife out of her emotional funk.  However, as the film's second half came into focus, By the Sea felt like a film that didn't know where it was going, instead circling around the same scenes and themes over and over again.  Jolie (who also wrote the film) has crafted a movie that looks beautiful and sumptuous, but fails to create a substantive story to match the visuals.  Rather than feel well-rounded, her character Vanessa is excruciatingly one-note in her emotions.  Even when she begins to blossom after spying on the honeymooners, Vanessa's motives never seem reasonably explored.  And, quite frankly, the less said about that aforementioned something that caused Vanessa's deep depression, the better.

I'm oddly pleased that I gave By the Sea a chance because I'm still mildly intrigued by the notion of Angelina Jolie as a director (as I mentioned, the film looks gorgeous and the first hour was uniquely lensed), but she's missing something as a writer.  It's in the screenplay that By the Sea flounders and unfortunately it flounders too much to even think about recommending.

The RyMickey Rating:  C-

Movie Review - Enemy

Enemy (2014)

Starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Mélanie Laurent, Sarah Gadon, and Isabella Rossellini

Directed by Denis Villeneuve

It's difficult to judge a movie that you liked all the way through only to have the final shot throw everything on its head and disappoint you, leaving you feeling lost, confused, and frustrated.  So is the case with Enemy which stars Jake Gyllenhaal as an intelligent, though seemingly troubled (or perhaps just bored), college history professor named Adam Bell who, while watching a movie one day, sees a man who looks like his twin.  Intent on finding this lookalike, Adam tracks down Anthony Claire and the two find themselves thoroughly confused by their identical looks.  The twists that happen next are best left unsaid, but the tone in which the story plays out is decidedly creepy and a little unnerving.

And that's certainly not a bad thing as director Denis Villeneuve (who brought us last year's Prisoners which also starred Gyllenhaal) certainly succeeds at keeping things a little unsettled as the film progressed.  Unfortunately, the film has an ending that the vast array of the "normal" moviegoing public will find disappointing.  Rather than give us a logical, sensical ending, the last shot throws everything into a confusing loop.  In certain films, that's okay.  We buy in from the beginning that we're going to be watching something to which we have to pay really close attention, but Enemy didn't present itself that way to me.  I was thoroughly interested in the story all the way through, but I didn't find it overly confusing or convoluted.  I thought I was watching a straightforward film that would presumably have an ending that explained itself.  Instead, the final scene left me befuddled to the point that I had to go online to see what others came up with to explain its nonsensical nature.

Admittedly, upon looking up these "answers" from the online community, I appreciated the different ideas they came up with to "solve" the movie.  However, because I didn't realize I was watching something that was going to throw me for this loop at the end, I felt a little let down.  Had I known that I had to really pay attention and really think about possible twists or "solutions" to the strange notion of doubles/twins/look-a-likes that the film sets up, I may have found the ending a bit more palatable.  Don't get me wrong -- I often like movies that throw a twist in at the end and make you question what came before.  However, oftentimes, the director keys you in on the notion that things aren't quite what they seem as the film progresses.  For some reason, I didn't get that from Villeneuve here -- although, in retrospect, I probably should have considering some of the weird quirks he brings to the table.

Still -- and here's the odd thing -- I really liked Enemy.  Jake Gyllenhaal as an actor has really come alive this year and Enemy is perhaps a better role than his already fantastic performance in Nightcrawler.  Here, Gyllenhaal needs to play two roles with differences that at first seem rather large, but grow much smaller as the film progresses.  Two seemingly polar opposite characters gradually find their characteristics and mannerisms morphing into one as Adam and Anthony get to know each one another, however Gyllenhaal is always able to easily allow the audience to delineate which character we're seeing onscreen -- and that's a huge feat as the story progresses and the two characters' lives begin to intertwine.

In the end, the odd thing about Enemy is that I want to watch it again.  Although disappointed by the conclusion and let down by the notion that this mystery required more "involvement" from the viewer than I was aware I needed to give it, I liked it quite a bit.  So, if you decide to watch it, my suggestion is to "think" while you view.  Be aware that what you're watching isn't as "straightforward" as you think and that the ending will require you to ponder everything that came before it.

The RyMickey Rating:  B

Movie Review - Now You See Me

Now You See Me (2013)

Starring Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher, Dave Franco, Mélanie Laurent, Common, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Caine

Directed by Louis Leterrier

I've always had a problem with Robin Hood stories.  Maybe it's the Republican in me shining through (a trait that I always have to suppress when it comes to the entertainment industry), but someone who robs the rich (simply because they have money) to give to the poor strikes me as an unspoken tenet of liberalism.  So perhaps in the deep recesses of my mind, Now You See Me -- a flick that revolves around a group of magicians who perform a series of heists to give money to their "deserving" audiences -- was destined to disappoint.  However, even if you take the repressed political aspect out of the equation, you're met with a film that had some modicum of potential except for the fact that it's saddled with a main plot that leaves too many gaping holes and an ending that feels like a cheat rather than magic.

I'm all for movies that have you root for the bad guys -- just look at my favorite movie of all time for proof of that.  However, when a movie presents a group of people as saintly good guys when they're absolutely doing things that are tremendously and justly illegal, I have a tough time buying into the premise as a whole.  If you set the quartet of magicians up as nasty guys, I'd have bought into the concept a little more willingly, but the characters portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg, Isla Fisher, Woody Harrelson, and Dave Franco are supposed to be good folks.  To me, good folks wouldn't be doing what this movie tasks these characters to do and this fundamental difference between what the movie wants me to believe and what I actually believe created quite a schism that it couldn't overcome.

That isn't to say that Now You See Me isn't slickly directed.  Louis Leterrier keeps the whole thing moving and it never lags for a second.  In addition, Jesse Eisenberg and Woody Harrelson in particular are certainly engaging.  (The less said about Isla Fisher and Dave Franco the better, and I'll avoid all discussions about Mark Ruffalo except to say that this actor whom I once liked has grown increasingly more obnoxious to watch over the recent years.)  Still, the positives aren't enough to overcome a final act that terribly disappoints.  I'm not quite sure the last time I've been so let down and upset by a third act twist that still has me aggravated a week after watching it.

While the first paragraph of this review was meant to be humorous, there is certainly truth in it in terms of my opinion about the overall concept of the film.  Your mileage may certainly vary when it comes to Now You See Me simply because it had to overcome an already self-imposed bias on my part to succeed.

The RyMickey Rating:  C-

Movie Review - Beginners

Beginners (2011)

Starring Ewan McGregor, Christopher Plummer, Mélanie Laurent, Goran Visnjic, and Mary Page Keller

Directed by Mike Mills

After forty-four years of marriage, recently widowed seventy-five year old Hal (Christopher Plummer) reveals to his son Oliver (Ewan McGregor) that he is gay in the opening scenes of Beginners, a lovely film that has a few faults, but in the end is a charming ode to the relationship between fathers and sons.  Much like the title suggests, the film is all about new starts as Hal explores his rediscovered homosexuality which he had been repressing for decades and Oliver embarks on a new relationship with the cute as a button French aspiring actress Anna (Mélanie Laurent).

The film, directed and written by Mike Mills, jumps around in time and the two new beginnings mentioned above don't happen along the same time line.  However, because of this juxtaposition between the two storylines, a certain poignancy is achieved because the newly single Hal is also diagnosed with an inoperable form of lung cancer in the film's opening moments (I promise I'm not spoiling anything with that reveal).  Oliver falls for Anna only after his father has passed away and it causes him to react much differently to relationships than he did when his father was alive.  Thanks to his father's final years, Oliver finds himself much more a "live in the moment" type of guy than he ever was before and he finds himself reawakened much like his father was.

Unfortunately, the film falters a bit when dealing with Oliver and Anna's relationship.  I was along for the ride until about two-thirds of the way through when things change for the lovely couple and cracks begin to surface between the two.  The "problems" that the duo faced never seemed the least bit "real" and I couldn't help but feel like the screenwriter just pigeonholed conflict in the story for the sake of conflict.  It ends up being a rather large detriment to the film as it makes the serious final act of their story seem rather out-of-place with the whimsical charm of the first two-thirds.

That said, the viewer is treated to three very solid performances here.  Ewan McGregor is at his best, playing a lonely bachelor who we can't help but root to find love.  Once he does in the equally engaging and somehow plainly gorgeous Mélanie Laurent, we never want the two to part.  McGregor and Laurent have a palpable chemistry that exudes precisely the right tones one wants to experience in a newfound relationship.  With the exception of the aforementioned troubling moments in the final act of the film, their scenes together are played to near perfection.

Christopher Plummer is seemingly the man to beat for the Supporting Actor Oscar this year and while I'm not sure I'd go that far at this point, he's at the top of his game here.  Simply charming, he conveys a sense of excitement as he embarks on his late-in-life change of heart, while at the same time continuing to provide a fatherly sounding board for his forlorn son, making sure that Oliver knew that he never regretted for one instance the choices that he made to be his father.  When he gets his rather ominous medical diagnosis, it's all that more heartbreaking seeing as how he hasn't really lived his life to its fullest potential yet.

While Beginners was advertised as a piece about an old man discovering his homosexuality, the film is much more than that and is certainly worth checking out in anticipation of this busy upcoming awards season.

The RyMickey Rating:  B

Movie Review - Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Time to admit I was wrong. Just checked out this flick again on dvd and Tarantino has crafted a witty and thoroughly entertaining film. Scenes that I thought were much too long seemed to flow much better upon a second viewing. Pitt, Waltz, and Laurent were great. Yes, it's gimmicky at times and yes Tarantino goes over the top too often (that "music video" scene introducing the last chapter is ridiculously silly), but (in the complete opposite fashion of the last time I viewed this) the 150 minutes flew by.

So, I grossly misjudged this flick back in August '09. Take a look at my old review and the new rating below.

Original Post: 8/24/90

Starring Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Eli Roth, Diane Kruger, and Mélanie Laurent
Directed by Quentin Tarantino

Admittedly, I'm not a Tarantino savant. I've only seen Pulp Fiction (which I think is good), Kill Bill Vol 1 (which I think is amazing and near perfect), and Kill Bill Vol 2 (which I think is a pretentious pile of you-know-what). The problem with Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds is that I feel like he's only copying himself. Nothing about this new flick feels original. You want long scenes of dialogue that are essentially about nothing? They're here. You want violent deaths? He's got you covered. You want moderately cool camera shots and odd musical accompaniment? He doesn't let you down in that regard (even though he's copying these camera shots and reusing some music he's used in his other flicks). The thing is that even though I've only seen three other Tarantino movies, I've seen all this stuff before...and it's getting old.

As my fellow movie-goer and I were discussing after the flick last night, the movie wants you to think that this movie is about this group of Jewish-American soldiers headed by Brad Pitt's Aldo Raine known as the Basterds who trek across Europe killing and scalping Nazis. However, the flick really focuses on Christoph Waltz's Nazi "detective" Hans Landa. At the start, Landa is seeking out Jewish refugees, but as the flick continues, Landa starts to track down the Basterds.

Although that's a short summary for a movie that's over two-and-a-half hours long, that's really all you need to know. Tarantino peppers his movie with incredibly long scenes of loquacious dialogue that, admittedly, end with something cool happening, but force the viewer to sit through interminable chitchat. There's probably 45 minutes of good (even great) stuff in this flick, but it's nestled amongst 110 minutes of pretentiousness.

And that's the thing -- there is some really super stuff here. The last reel of the film is amazing. Nonstop entertainment and a fitting end to the flick. Additionally, all the acting is pretty top-notch. I was dreading director Eli Roth as a Basterd (because if Tarantino's acting in Pulp Fiction is any indication of directorial acting chops, Roth was in trouble), but he was oddly funny. Christoph Waltz is also quite good in what I'd consider the lead role of the film. Unfortunately, it's during his scenes where the dialogue never seems to end. The two ladies of the flick -- Diane Kruger's German movie star working undercover for the Allies and Mélanie Laurent's Jewish movie theater owner with a stunning revenge plan against the Nazis -- were also enjoyable to watch.

The film, however, belongs to Brad Pitt. After watching the previews, I was not looking forward to Pitt's performance at all, but Pitt seems to realize that there's no point in taking himself seriously here. He's over-the-top, but not so much so as to remove the viewer from the "realism" of the flick. With the recent Burn After Reading and to a lesser extent Mr. and Mrs. Smith and the Oceans flicks, Pitt definitely has a knack for comedy and he needs to pursue humor much more than the emotional melodrama of Benjamin Button.

As I'm watching the film, Tarantino just begs you to ask the question, is he a good director because he mimics other filmmakers/techniques/ideas and mashes them together into one movie? Or is he simply a copycat (even of himself, at times) who is adept at fooling people into thinking they're watching something original? Maybe that's a little harsh, and, if I'm being honest, I don't really ever want to see a "normal" straightforward Tarantino film. Despite the fact that I may not be effusively praising this flick, I would still much rather watch Tarantino at least do what he does than watch nearly any other action flick that came out this summer. But he's really kind of a joke to me now...he needs to expand his horizons a bit. Lord knows it's not as if he's making a movie a year, so maybe he needs to take some time and try something a little different on his next venture.

So, Inglourious Basterds is a conundrum. There's some really good stuff here, but it's too few and far between. The rating below is not going to fall into the "recommendation" category, but I actually urge folks to go and see it simply because, if you're a movie fan, it's worth viewing simply to be able to have a discussion post-movie. This movie commanded the longest post-movie discussion between me and my pal since My Sister's Keeper (you may think that's a joke, but the post-screening talk on My Sister's Keeper went on for over an hour). And should you watch the flick, I ask you this question...what exactly is Tarantino saying about film in general? The movie is very focused on the notion of cinema and what it can do to/for the masses and I don't necessarily think he's saying something positive (I'm sure he thinks he's cool because he's ironic in that regard...).

The RyMickey Rating upon initial release: C
The NEW RyMickey Rating (as of 2010): B+