I didn't include a trailer because every one I looked at gave away a huge twist I did not see coming. Screw trailers these days.
Anyway, here's what you need to know about me before I give my brief review:
- I'm not a huge fan of boxing movies.
- I love me some Jake Gyllenhaal.
- I'm left handed, so if I could be a Southpaw.
- I'm not a boxer.
With Southpaw, I got pretty much what I expected - an average boxing movie.
Right after the big twist, I saw the rest of the movie flash before my eyes, and that's pretty much how it played out. Gyllenhaal definitely carried the movie for me, and I did think the beginning and ending were both really satisfying. The middle kinda dragged on.
It also didn't really feel cohesive: I couldn't tell if I was supposed to be inspired, or bloodthirsty, or just kinda bummed out. I guess in the end I was a weird combo of all three.
The boxing choreography was well done.
Hope's daughter was a great little actress.
There were a lot of weird zooms I wasn't really a fan of.
In the end, this was just kinda "eh" for me. Which bums me out because I want Gyllenhaal to win an Oscar. I haven't lost hope yet - we still have Everest and Demolition.
I had no idea what to expect, especially for all the time the movie spent in development hell; but Ant-Man succeeded in being everything I look for in a Marvel movie: (SPOILERS AHEAD)
1. ACTION
Ant-Man fighting is so awesome to watch. I was always obsessed with the "Honey I Shrunk the Kids" movies as a little kid, and having tiny action scenes in huge everyday environments is so much fun. I was really impressed by how crisp everything looked.
2. A GOOD AMOUNT OF HUMOR
Some Marvel movies fail to find the balance of humor, or mistake their identity for a comedy, (cough A:AoU cough) but all of Ant-Man's humor fit the tone and hit the nail right on the head. You could even call Ant-Man a comedy if you wanted to, but it worked because it was genuinely funny and had me laughing out loud. Paul Rudd is absolutely perfect for the smart-ass known as Scott Lang and it's gonna be interesting to see him as a part of the Avengers. You could definitely see traces of Edgar Wright's writing, and I can't help but believe the finished product would've been better with him at the helm, but the end result was hilarious nonetheless. Michael Peña stole the show as Lang's enigmatically goofy/sophisticated best friend. I hope we haven't seen the last of him either.
3. MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE-NESS
I love seeing connections to other Marvel movies. Plenty of awesome lines are dropped (Why don't we just call the Avengers?) and Ant-Man even fights an Avenger. At the end of the movie, a line even nods toward Spider-Man. How exciting.
4. MEANING
This isn't just a disaster porn movie or even a superhero porn movie. Even though she may seem like a plot device at times, Lang's daughter Cassie is adorable and you can't help but root for him on his quest to prove to her that he's a good guy. "Be the hero she already thinks you are".
Since this movie hit all of my Marvel checkpoints on the head, I instantly loved it. Here's some other great stuff it has going for it:
- I liked how the stakes of this movie seemed simultaneously big and small. The fate of the world wasn't really at stake, but it didn't need to be - the main goal was to save Lang's own image of himself in his daughter's eyes. That was enough.
- The ending was really cool in that it would've been so easy for the writers to make the step-dad a bad guy and have Lang completely replace him in the end, but I liked the route they went - the movie ends with Lang eating with his daughter, his ex-wife, and her new husband in harmony. It was refreshing.
- This movie made me seriously sad when an ant died. That alone is an accomplishment.
Here's some stuff I didn't love about it:
- The chemistry between Dr. Pym and his daughter wasn't quite right. I still can't put my finger on it but something was off. Kinda awkward maybe.
- It suffers from the typical Marvel syndrome of having a villain with the same powers as the hero and weak, uninteresting motives.
Overall, this was such a fun flick and I'd definitely see it again. Can't wait to see what's in store for Scott Lang.
AFTER CREDITS SCENE?
Yup. 2. Stay planted in your seat 'till the lights come on.
Before you see this movie, you should read the book. It's the funniest book I've ever read, and I was so stoked to see it on the big screen. I picked up the book after seeing it advertised as the antithesis to "The Fault In Our Stars". After reading the book, I can confirm this as an accurate description. Both books deal with a girl with cancer, but "Me and Earl" pulls no punches in its realism, often making fun of the sappiness of "The Fault in Our Stars". The main character, Greg, is an awkward, often narcissistic teenager with a love for movies. His mom makes him hang out with an old acquaintance, Rachel, who has fallen ill with leukemia. It's not a love story in the slightest, but it's charming because of this.
Both the book and movie have incredibly authentic characters. They're each unique, well developed, and never become genre tropes. They really bring the story to life. Even Greg and Earl's teacher, Mr. McCarthy, who could have easily been the typical high school movie mentor, is a guy with tattoos on the back of his neck that frequently exclaims, "Respect the research".
The screenplay for the movie was written by Jesse Andrews, the author of the book. You can tell - the tone of the movie does a great job of matching that of the book, and visuals give the book's humor a whole new dimension. The movie is hilarious, with Greg's humor often manifesting in quirky daydream sequences (sometimes in stop-motion).
This is a movie about friendship - and what happens when a teenager opposed to making friends is forced to be a friend. Though the movie sugarcoats Rachel and Greg's relationship slightly more than the book does (Movie Greg's life is more changed/learns more from Rachel than Book Greg), there are clearly no romantic undertones - I am thankful the movie is faithful to the book in that respect. The movie and book end on a slightly different note, but I appreciate both equally in their respective mediums.
I really appreciated the unique camera angles and movements - you can see a few in the above trailer. There's some beautiful steadicam work and really well done long takes - all acted by a stellar cast. Overall, it's a fun movie teeming with heart and emotion that any teenager can relate to. Go check it out.
I loved this movie, but had three main gripes. These gripes contain some big-time spoilers.
SPOILERS AHEAD
Gripe #1: A big part of the story is that Greg and his friend Earl agree to make a film for Rachel. In the movie, Greg shows the film to Rachel before she dies, but the film is barely seen. You can vaguely make out some sort of blood-cell-esque stop motion, but there is a huge disconnect that occurs when you can't see the film and the passion in the film that makes Rachel cry.
Gripe #2: Near the end of the movie, Greg has a minor squabble with Madison, a girl who he thinks to be extremely attractive. Madison ends up asking Greg to prom. The entire prom dynamic wasn't in the book, so I was intrigued as to how it was going to unfold. Long story short, it didn't. Greg gets in the limo, but goes to the hospital instead (This is good.). He spends his prom night with Rachel instead of with Madison (This is good). After this scene, in which Rachel dies, Madison and Greg don't interact for the remainder of the movie (This is bad). There was no real resolution to this minor sub-plot, and the whole prom thing ended up feeling useless and unnecessary. We are left without a clue as to how Greg and Madison's relationship stands.
Gripe #3: Throughout the movie, Greg tells us in the form of a voiceover that Rachel doesn't die at the end. He assures us of this multiple times.
Rachel dies in the end. Greg says something like, "I know I told you Rachel wasn't going to die, but I really did believe that." For me, it was dumb and misleading and again, didn't add anything to the plot.
BONUS GRIPE: Near the end of the movie, Greg discovers Rachel's hidden talent of cutting up books to make art. (OK, so what?) The movie tries to push the whole "you can learn new things about people even when they're dead", but Rachel's secret crafty superpower seemed forced and unimportant.
The short that premieres before Inside Out is titled "Lava", and centers around a romance between two volcanoes. Only Pixar could make me emotionally attached to a volcano and take me on a roller coaster ride of feeling in the course of 5 minutes.
The entire short is also a song - it's a Hawaiian ukulele song and it's still stuck in my head.
Though the story of this short is weaker than past Pixar shorts, the musical aspect and the tropical aesthetic instantly won me over.
INSIDE OUT
With my first viewing, I loved every bit of this movie. I am continually amazed at how well this concept was executed. It takes mad writing skills to create a believable story about the emotions in an 11 year old girl's head. It's incredible that the majority of the movie can take place within the infinite expanse of the human brain - and yet nothing feels missing.
In typical Pixar fashion, it looks and sounds beautiful - the visuals of the mind are very creative (Train of thought! Imagination land! Dream Productions!) and Michael Giacchino's soundtrack of "short instrumentals to accompany playtime and spark daydreams" is spectacular.
The wonderfully animated (both in character and in aesthetic) core emotions play off of each other in hilarious and intellectual ways, making the movie enjoyable for kids and adults alike.
The message of the movie is beautifully real - sadness is a part of life, and that's OK.
Ranking Pixar movies is nearly impossible for me, but Inside Out is up there with Toy Story and Monsters Inc. More than any other Pixar movie, Inside Out is a celebration of life and all life's parts: including growing up, losing innocence, and accepting sadness. Please, please don't miss this movie.
Below is a chart of the emotional combinations in the movie. Check it out!