Saturday, September 29, 2012

Looper

Sixteen years ago I drove from Spring Canyon (near Buena Vista) to the nearest movie theater (35 minutes away in Salida) to see perhaps the greatest time travel movie of all time; “12 Monkeys”. What made it great was its Calvinistic approach to the space-time continuum. The cardinal rule in most other time travel movies is that we are masters of our fate. Prime examples of this can be seen in “Back to the Future” or “Terminator 2”, where time travel is used to alter historical events. In essence this view of time travel allows for branching parallel possible futures; each event has the potential of altering the course of time. “12 Monkeys” broke that convention, basically stating that if time travel were possible it would be bound to the confines of a pre-ordained path. Although the characters in this film feel as though they are independent actors in a chaotic world, ultimately their action are all part of the pre-determined plan. “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban” is another exception to the Hollywood standard; the time travel which takes place in that film is an integral element of Potter’s destiny. While the chronology of time is skewed, the end result cannot be altered. Maybe you already figured this out, but I love time travel movies. While I liked “12 Monkeys” because I actually agreed with its perspective, really I like any time travel movie if it is able to adhere to logic. From a philosophical perspective I completely disagree with the “Back to the Future” series; yet they are thought provoking and extremely entertaining. As you will read in a moment, I feel the same way about the new film “Looper”. While this film follows the standard time travel convention, it does so wholeheartedly, with some notable twists that kept my attention, even though I found the entire premise utterly preposterous…

In “Looper”, Joseph Gordon-Levitt ages to look just like Bruce Willis. That in and of itself is kinda cool, but that’s not really what the movie is about. Usually time travel movies feature characters who are extremely self-centered. Whether the world is good or bad is judged through the eyes of the main character. “Looper” varies this theme by allowing Present Joe (played by Gordon-Levitt) and Old Joe (Willis) to interact. While this is the same person, he has a different perspective on life depending on when he is from. Obviously Present Joe has less life-experience and his decisions are primarily reactionary and somewhat principle-based. Old Joe has come to different conclusions about the meaning of life, in some ways he has outgrown the childishness of Present Joe. At the same time it becomes clear that regardless of when Joe is from, he is a selfish person. When he comes to realize this is the moment at which “Looper” rises above the standard time travel cliché. While the trailers for this movie have focused primarily on the time travel hitman element, it really is concerned with something deeper. That being said, the filmmakers definitely enjoyed playing with the action afforded to them by a dystopian future in which mobsters send their victims back in time to hitmen armed with blunderbusses. My final thought will be this; if you liked “12 Monkeys” you’ll almost certainly enjoy “Looper”. If you’re saying “what in the world is this ’12 Monkeys’ movie Peter keeps talking about?” and you really enjoyed the Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves time travel movie “The Lake House”, then I think you should take a pass on “Looper”.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

The Master




There are two distinct approaches to reviewing movies:  The first being reactionary, wherein the review is primarily describing the film and its effectiveness.  The second approach is a deeper exploration, an attempt to determine why the film was (or was not) effective.  What do I mean by effective?  Even the silliest of movies is trying to do something; whether the filmmaker is preaching or just trying to make you laugh, every movie ever made has a purpose.  All too often I lose sight of this principle; I overthink movies that were never intended to provoke thought.  All this is my preamble for the review of “The Master”, which is a movie that demands further examination.  I liken the experience of watching this film to that of viewing “Collateral” (with Jamie Foxx and Tom Cruise).  It’s possible I suppose that some may have walked away from that movie with memories of intense action and great performances by two good actors.  For me that film was a jolt; life isn’t your plan for some point in the future, it’s what you are doing right now.  I place the message of the film into the context of my beliefs and I know that I am not to worry about tomorrow; I have a responsibility to honor God today.  If each new day is a devotion to this precept, then I am confident that God will take care of the future. 

                It is my hope that each movie I review not only entertains (or informs) you the reader, but also encourages and builds-up each and every one of you (alright, the two or three of you).  From now on there will be three separate categories of movie reviews:  Kid Friendly family movie reviews, Basic “Avenger” this movie doesn’t have much depth reviews, and Thorough reviews.  I will keep each category separate, but it is up to you to discern which one the movie falls into.  For example, “Monsters University” will be a Kid Friendly review, while “The Master” which is rated “R” is definitely going to be a Thorough review.  I typically don’t comment on why films receive their MPAA rating, since I know that Focus on the Family does a profanity count (in case you’re keeping score) and the official MPAA website gives specific reasons for the movie’s rating.  Recently I have mish-mashed reviews together in a thoughtless way, and I do apologize for inappropriately discussing certain films in a flippant manner.  Also, if you ever have any questions about something I say (or neglect) please don’t hesitate to call or email.  I love talking about movies anytime.  You’re probably wondering, “I thought this was a review of ‘The Master’!  What’s all this?”  Well, here you go…

                “The Master” delivers a message of hope.  Or maybe it is simply a character study revealing the stubbornness of one man.  While the intentions of the director Paul Thomas Anderson may be impossible to determine, I can tell you that I came away with the message of hope.  As the film opens we are introduced to Freddie Quell, a troubled man played by Joaquin Phoenix.  Freddie has seen the horrors of World War II in the pacific, and now is wandering aimlessly through life.  He is plagued by a multitude of sins, which ferment within his being, exploding in fits of violent anger.  We can tell that his soul is tormented, not only by his evil behavior, but also by the contortions of his face.  Enter Lancaster Dodd (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman), a religious leader who is known by his followers as ‘Master’.  He recognizes and praises the abilities and qualities that he sees in Freddie.  He makes Freddie feel welcome and important.  He promises Freddie that he can relieve him of his burdens and deliver him a happy life.  The film excels during scenes in which Dodd is attempting to convert Freddie.  Like the light saber duel from “The Empire Strikes Back” or the chariot race in “Ben-Hur”, this film presents a sequence of extraordinary fights scenes.  The obvious distinction being that “The Master” portrays a battle of wills instead of a physical confrontation.  There is no doubt to us in the audience that Dodd is the leader of a cult, a religion devised and operated for his own gratification.  Yet as is the case with any cult, those caught-up in the fervor cannot perceive the truth.  Does Freddie become a follower?  I don’t want to ruin the movie for anyone, so I will not elaborate on the plot any further.  What I will do is make a comparison to an earlier Joaquin Phoenix film, “Walk the Line”.  The best part of that film was what happened after the movie is over; knowing what Johnny Cash became after his turbulent rise to fame is the uplifting element.  Of course, strictly speaking, what happens after a movie isn’t really part of the movie; yet I would argue that what we bring into the movie does influence what we take out.  Therefore, recognizing that Johnny Cash’s salvation later in life came even after the events portrayed in “Walk the Line” led me to believe that it was a good film.  So “The Master” doesn’t have an ending where everyone has repented of their sin, and are down on their knees begging God’s forgiveness.   It does end with a reminder that even the most persuasive of false prophets will never have a 100% success rate. "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect” (Matthew 24:24). Even so, ultimately God is in control and through his grace even those who seem most susceptible to being led astray have hope.

Sunday, September 16, 2012

The Bourne Legacy and ParaNorman


In a sense, today's review is merely a formality, a chance to wipe the slate clean and prepare for (hopefully) some movies worth watching and therefore worth reviewing. I will briefly comment on two of the last movies based on the chronological order in which I viewed them.

"The Bourne Legacy" was a suitable branch-off from the thrilling Jason Bourne series. Personally I thought the first Bourne movie was an amazing breath of fresh air; a leap forward in the espionage genre. The third, "The Bourne Ultimatum" was about as good as it gets, building on everything from the first two films and injecting the series with a dynamic love story; I really liked that movie. Now with "The Bourne Legacy" everything is kind of starting from scratch. The ingredients are good, and its a proven recipe, but we've seen it before. Perhaps a follow-up could have a great story, unfortunately this movie is another back-story introduction which just isn't that interesting.

The kids and I saw "ParaNorman" and I am glad to report that I stayed awake through the whole movie. Whether it's Sony Animation or Dreamworks, I just can't stay awake through this drivel that they're marketing to kids nowadays. If I need a good nap I turn on an "Ice Age" movie (or "Iron Man", but that's another story), find a cozy blanket, and I'm out for the count. "ParaNorman" on the other hand is like old-school Tim Burton. There's a heart-warming story, quirky and genuinely funny characters, and creatively creepy visuals that spark the imagination. My kids like to ask "what was your favorite scene?" while we're walking back to the car after the movie. This is the kind of movie that has memorable scenes throughout... You'll need popcorn for this movie, not Breathe-Right strips.