SUPER (2010) review: "Shut up, crime!"

SUPER is a 2010 film starring Rainn Wilson and Ellen Page, written as well as directed by James Gunn. The film looks in on the life of Everyman, Frank Darbo (Rainn Wilson) attempting to save his wife Sarah (Liv Tyler) from the influence of drug lord Jacques (Kevin Bacon) by crafting his own superhero known only as The Crimson Bolt.

----------

The definition of a flawed gem, Super is a profoundly intriguing mash-up of comedy, drama, satire and countless other genres and is highly refreshing as it dares to take a realistic yet oddly whimsical and also highly emotional look at superheroes, that anyone can be their own.

Rainn Wilson is the aforementioned Frank Darbo, the lonely and socially awkward average Joe working as a fry cook at the local diner. Rainn Wilson is perfectly cast in this role, nailing the little nuances and quirks with his character and standing out; being delusional enough to create his own superhero, but strangely relatable at the same time as he recalls the "perfect moments" from his often disappointing life. He is a train wreck that you cannot peel your eyes from and is truly endearing because of that, as he steps into his wonderfully shoddy costume for the first time and you also then see him in "action" for the first time you can't help but just keep watching and hopefully as I did, laughing profusely. You relate to Frank in some (some I emphasise) of his socially disturbed tendencies but laugh at his extremities, as while his alter ego has good intentions and he has the passion for said ego, he lacks any form of capability to deliver his heroic skills with only one exception in the film towards the end. Rainn Wilson is great in this movie, his whole character is genuinely well performed and you feel bad for him as his character is delivered so sincerely with little odd quirks in his dialogue that delivers the laughs.

 Ellen Page is Libby, a typical girl not too far from Frank who works in the comic book store that he stumbles upon whilst crafting his hero and eventual sidekick. Her character can be seen as one of the many potential breaking points for some audiences with this film, as she gives an incredibly unpredictable and erratic performance as her somewhat unhinged character which could translate to some as annoying. I personally found her ability to snap back and forth between a more down-to-earth Libby to the mentally deranged Boltie astounding, hearing her maniacal laugh drone over the nasty fates of some of the characters within the film. Whilst you may attribute this to borderline psychosis, similar to Frank, her heart is in the right place, only having the best of intentions whilst as Boltie attempting to stop crime with some almost innocent mannerisms, looking to Frank as a mentor and only wants to do good, but for entirely different reasons to Frank. I found Ellen Page to also have been cast very well - she does her character a great service and pieces in quite nicely next to Rainn Wilson portraying the initially innocent comic book girl effectively.

All of the casts performances be it Liv Tyler or Kevin Bacon to Michael Rooker or Nathan Fillion are simply great. Of all of the cast members I do think that Liv Tyler is given the least to do within the film, but she still pulls it off convincingly, similar to Michael Rooker, albeit its good to see the assembly of James Gunn regulars coming together again for another film. Nathan Fillion specifically deserves a mention for his ludicrous parody as The Holy Avenger which is Frank's inspiration for his superhero as he sees his show on TV, delivering cheesy production values and ham fisted morals not too far from a He-Man cartoon, therein lying a cameo from James Gunn himself also. You can just sense the fun they were having when they were shooting those scenes, not saying that doesn't apply to the whole film, but those scenes especially it shows and it adds to it.

"All it takes to be a superhero is the choice to fight evil."

The writing and directing by James Gunn is sadly where most of the film's flaws show, but it is also because of this that this film has an unshakable charm - a personality or an edge to it that is beyond perverse. The film has the same elements that has made past James Gunn films enjoyable like Slither, lots of violence and bizarre humour, but what Super has over Slither is an emotional core to it which takes it past trashy and merely entertaining to something that sticks with you long after the film is finished and it for me at least demands repeat viewings. The movie really does subvert your expectations, making it either a delightful surprise or deceitful trickery to a viewer, it is also because of this that it struggles to find a consistent tone, taking a somewhat realistic tone going to an absurd dream sequence then going to a full-blown explosion of violence by the end. A particular thing that I liked the most about Gunn's writing in Super is that it's not about the costume that Frank wears. He's on his own spiritual journey that only happens to have a costume attached, it's about him. Not the costume, one of the only things established near the beginning of the film and kept consistent. It is because of this inconsistency that I believe the film provides charm however, as how often does a film like this emerge; taking a simple idea and running with it in one of the most intriguing and hilarious ways possible. Direction is well done, siphoning the best possible performances out of each of the cast members, regardless of their role. I particularly liked the use of handheld cam throughout the movie, giving it a slight shake and a natural feel to the film, not overdoing it and crossing over into the realms known only as shaky cam. The film has to be immensely applauded for its looks, looking better than some films with four or even five times the budget, it just looks great. The animated intro and comic book elements inserted into reality are very well done and only add to the entertainment value.

"Maybe I couldn't shoot beams out of my eyes or fly..."

The score by Tyler Bates is great, it fits in perfectly to the more light-hearted segments of the film. The track in particular "Two Perfect Moments" is my favourite, sticking in my head for several days after hearing it. The score is mostly composed of clean sounding instruments to create this ideal feeling of whimsy, as heard on the aforementioned track and the rest of the score. It also makes use of some licensed music, adding to the montage sequence where Frank utters some of the movie's best lines, also fitting near perfectly.

Overall, Super is a flawed film most definitely, but it is undeniably one of the most unique films I've seen in a long time and is not just highly entertaining - it sticks with you because of its charm. The emotional core that the film has as mentioned prior is where that charm lies, you care for Frank so much through his disappointments and sadness and really want to see him with a satisfying conclusion. Whilst it may not be the one that he wanted, it definitely leaves him in a better stance on life than in the one where he started. It's not about the "superhero", it's about the man beneath the costume. I would highly recommend Super to those who are looking for something different, a weird combo of twisted humour, violence and surprisingly a heartfelt tale of self-discovery that so many people have sadly overlooked.

SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK (2008) review, "Everything is more complicated than you think..."

SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK is a 2008 film starring Philip Seymour Hoffman and being written as well as directed by Charlie Kaufman. The film follows theatre director Caden Cotard as he struggles with his work and attempts to craft the most uncompromising play imaginable, whilst trying to manage his own personal demons such as his fear of death and being forgotten by his loved ones. However, his excessive commitment to realism within his work causes the boundaries of his life to be blurred between his fiction and his reality.

----------

There’s a reason the late and great Roger Ebert hailed “Synecdoche, New York” (2008) as the best film of the decade in 2009. “Synecdoche, New York” stands the test of time as one of the most thought-provoking dramas of all time. Whilst it may seem nonsensical initially, it grows on you as you explore the multi-layered story and the film’s countless themes as well as the exceptional performances from every actor seen within the film, no matter their screen time.

To start, the cast. Philip Seymour Hoffman stars as Caden Cotard, the troubled theatre director. His performance within “Synecdoche, New York” is my personal favourite performance throughout his career. Initially, you feel pity upon his character, suffering from the tasks of everyday life: routine, repetition and so on. However, as the film progresses, how Hoffman reflects his character ageing and his worries of death left an irrefutable mark on me as a viewer, as his views and worries are then reflected onto you. The symbolic nature of his character is seen further upon knowing that Caden’s second name “Cotard”, is a reference to “Cotard’s syndrome”. The delusional belief that a person thinks that they are already dead, adding onto Hoffman’s performance and his fear of death. The somewhat chilling performance from Hoffman and the motives of his character are seen from the start, with his character consistently reading the obituaries within the daily newspaper and nothing else. Death is his only concern. Caden is essentially the definition of self-pity. The character of Caden Cotard stands as Hoffman’s career-defining performance, even after his passing. This film was the first film I watched after his aforementioned passing, not because of the film’s theme of death, but because it is a performance and a film to be remembered by.

Catherine Keener takes the supporting role as Adele Lack, Caden’s wife. Following on from Hoffman’s performance is another strong performance, the character of Adele could be seen as the opposite to Caden. She has no focus or fear of death, she just wants to enjoy life as it comes instead of worrying about the future and eventually tackles her life’s aspirations. The burden on her character initially is their only child, Olive (Sadie Goldstein). She is dealing with their life problems as Caden attempts to dodge them in his depression, you can feel that Caden is being arrogant with his pity and Adele is the one there to take care of the issues. The look of her character whilst with Caden is genuinely tired and disappointed with her life and you become as invested in her performance as you do with Hoffman’s.

The rest of the cast, Samantha Morton, Hope Davis, Tom Noonan and Emily Watson are all equally to be proud of their performances as there is not a single weak performance within this film. The reason I don’t wish to talk about them and breakdown their characters is because it would ruin the film for first-time viewers, for the sake of spoilers. They are all to be applauded immensely.

"I'm just a little person..."

The writing and directing effort by Charlie Kaufman is masterful, as with his previous films such as “Adaptation” or “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind”. With this film comes the recurring subject often seen within Kaufman’s previous work, the state of the human mind and it perception of reality, desire, dreams and in this film, death. The writing task undertaken by Kaufman is immense as you feel that Caden crafting his masterpiece reflects on to Kaufman, he is writing his masterpiece, joining the journey that Caden is going through. The amount of subtleties presented within “Synecdoche, New York” is beyond perplexing, Kaufman’s intention is for the viewer to watch it repeatedly and have a different experience each time, be it because there is a detail you missed the first time around or derive a different interpretation because you’re in a different mood or even years later when you’re a different person. What particularly fascinates me about the writing done by Kaufman within this film and his previous films is how Kaufman himself leads a deeply private life yet interjects so much of his personality into his work. It is truly a wonderful insight into his mind, fears, regrets and triumphs. While it may struggle to ring coherent for some initially, it eventually builds to become the definition of melancholy. A bitter sweet tale of a man’s life on Earth. As also mentioned, it is the directorial debut of the veteran writer and it is a strong debut. The style of his direction is similar that of Spike Jonze, which isn’t surprising as he has been the director of Kaufman’s scripts like “Being John Malkovich”. However with this slight similarity, Kaufman takes his already personal script and owns it, it allows him even more creative freedom to tell the story that he wants to tell when he handles both the departments of writing and directing. On the topic of this, some critics of “Synecdoche, New York” may disagree with me, thinking that Kaufman needs a director like Spike Jonze (or Michel Gondry for that matter) to keep Kaufman's ideas restrained, focusing on crafting as cohesive of a narrative as possible. I feel that the film's difficult and surreal structure only enhances it, adding to the film's message about life. This however, is the cause of frustration for most, audiences struggling for something to follow or grab onto instead of allowing the story to be told to them as the film operates on a different plain of reality, a deeply personal reality that some will get and some won't. That aside, Charlie Kaufman is a personal role model and I shall always await his next film, no matter the subject matter. “Synecdoche, New York” only solidified his already spectacular body of work.

"One person in a sea, of many little people..."

The cinematography seen within this film is by none other than Frederick Elmes (Blue Velvet, Eraserhead), and is sharp and done to a level of precision that blends nicely with the rest of the film. It remains devoid of colour, having a heavily desaturated look, all in the name of depression. It is a very dim looking film with a few objects standing out from the colour palette to display significance or intensity, therefore it is difficult to comment on, however it serves its purpose and is well done to the standard necessary from Kaufman.

A final note about “Synecdoche, New York” before moving onto a conclusion is the score composed by Jon Brion, notable for his early work with Paul Thomas Anderson on films like “Magnolia” or “Punch-Drunk Love” and also on Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Tracks like “Little Person” really do bring an already depressing film down on it's knees, not surprising considering Kaufman wrote the lyrics from most, if not all the score heard within the film, keeping in line with the films explored themes and tone. The melancholy felt whilst listening to a track like “Something You Can't Return To” is honestly overwhelming, yet addicting. The score is just as distinctive and bizarre as the visual aspects of this film, compiling together to create this sinking feeling, a feeling you can't describe, but it's wonderful, a feeling I've felt while watching no over film, it overwhelms you and your senses. An incredible score.

Overall, “Synecdoche, New York” is a triumph of cinema. It is a meticulously crafted insight to Kaufman's thought process and a fascinating one at that. It is definitely a decisive one however, some, like myself will find it engrossing from start to finish and demand multiple viewings. Others will find that it is pretentious nonsense that demands no more than one viewing or not even a viewing at all. Whatever you may think, you have to commend Charlie Kaufman for creating one of the most uncompromising efforts ever seen within cinema, it is that lightning in a jar that you don't see often due to studio interference or reasons similar. Whilst it may have been the definition of a box office bomb, it has garnered a cult following with an also polarised view of the film, just like the critics. It deserved better, as this essence of creativity is very rarely seen, and is becoming less and less common within popular cinema. How unique this film is demands that you should see it, or at least try it – and while you're watching it, remember that the end is built into the beginning.

"Who are not aware of me..."

BLUE VELVET (1986) review, "An idyllic small town..."

It's a strange world...

BLUE VELVET is a 1986 film starring Kyle MacLachlan, Isabella Rossellini and Dennis Hopper, as well as being written and directed by David Lynch. This film follows Kyle MacLachlan as Jeffrey Beaumont, a curious young soul who discovers a seedy underbelly to his small town when he discovers a severed human ear in a field after visiting is sick father in hospital. The less you know the better.

----------

Blue Velvet is yet another one of my personal favourites, it is simply the quintessential small town mystery.

Kyle MacLachlan takes the starring role of Jeffrey Beaumont, the aforementioned small town teenager. This role sees MacLachlan in quite possibly what is the biggest opposite possible when compared to Dune, David Lynch's prior work, it is easily MacLachlan's best performance alongside his famed character Special Agent Dale Cooper in the simply wonderful Twin Peaks. Jeffrey is played as an unassuming and mostly naive character by MacLachlan as he dives into the underworld of his small town of Lumberton. You really do feel for Jeffrey throughout his oddly perilous journey, even though his journey is as a result of his curious nature. However, this is a situation that most can associate with, especially when at a young age, wanting to experience new and dangerous things just to see what its like. Taking any opportunity. MacLachlan's soft-spoken manner and brittle physique compliment the character of Jeffrey nicely, that he is a curiously fragile character who only returns back to his home town after his father suffers an almost fatal stroke. It is quite amazing how such an understated performance can have a lasting impression that sticks with you, even seeing the film with repeated viewings.

Isabella Rossellini takes the secondary role as Jeffrey's somewhat love interest, a mysterious woman which is the cause of Jeffrey's intrigue and eventual trouble. Similar to MacLachlan's character is that Dorothy Vallens is involved with the wrong people, of how she got there is never explained. She is left to struggle as she is controlled by the underworld that she entered presumably long ago. Another stand-out performance in a film chock full of stand-out performances, the initially elegant Dorothy is found to be a very vulnerable and lonely woman as the film progresses and those layers to her character is what makes the performance ever so special. She is tortured and is struggling as she is used by the underworld and Jeffrey is seen to be her way out of it.

Dennis Hopper is Frank Booth, the film's main antagonist and what is seen to be the leader of the town's criminal underbelly as Jeffrey uncovers his criminal actions ranging from drug abuse to horrible feats of sexual violence and murder. Hopper is truly unnerving in this film, his unstable look and dark presence making any scene involving his character feel uneasy and often beyond disturbing. How his character arrived at this sorry state is up for debate, but what isn't up for debate is that this exceptional performance essentially revived Hopper's career after previously reaching his peak with films like Easy Rider and a supporting role in Apocalypse Now. This film demonstrates how perfectly versatile Hopper as an actor was, prior to passing away recently. It is definitely a performance to be remembered by.

Finally, fellow Lynch collaborator, Laura Dern takes the other innocent actual love interest of Jeffrey, Sandy Williams. Dern is no stranger to the surrealist mind of David Lynch with this being her very first performance with Lynch, effectively leading her into his world as with her character. Her performance is by no means weak, but her character falls into a similar situation that Jeffrey subjectively benefits from, that some may consider a con, that her acting is subdued in order to what I feel is to project your image onto their characters and follow their experience as it is your own.

The other fellow cast members including Dean Stockwell are to be equally lauded, all of the characters within this film are well performed, it's difficult to find a bad performance in any of Lynch's work.

"Blue velvet..."

The cinematography by another previous Lynch collaborator, Frederick Elmes stands as sweet yet haunting after it's initial ruse of a perfect suburbia with a less than perfect dark side. Elmes serves his purpose with some distinctive camera work, such as the shot of Jeffrey hiding in the closet from Frank in the trailer seen above, the shadows cast upon his face. Meticulously done. A final note is the contrast between the neighbourhood scenes and the noir-esque scenes whilst in the criminal underbelly is outstanding.

The writing and directing seen by David Lynch in this film is amongst his best work. As much as I love the pure unadulterated Lynch seen in his films like Eraserhead, I feel that I enjoy Lynch's films that slight bit more when some of his mannerisms are restrained as they can become self-indulgent to a degree. Blue Velvet benefits from the human element of Jeffrey, something that even more general audiences can easily connect to and grasp a hold of. In retrospect also, the idea of a small town mystery has became a well-trodden setting since Blue Velvet's release, giving it a sense of familiarity to those who may have seen works inspired by this very film and then go back to watch and see the resemblance. That aside, the writing injects Lynch's trademark surrealist style and adds a twist of film noir, with the tortured femme fatale that is Rossellini's character, not only leaving it at that but adding the erotic elements seen within the film also.The symbolic nature of this film in how it is written is also of note, with the ear that Jeffrey enters and eventually leaves by the film's climax serving a note as his character entering and leaving the criminal underbelly. It takes a now conventional plot and puts it on it's head. His direction is as always incredible, always having a knack for it, giving his actors a surreal world to move around in, with distinct character movements and actions. He knows exactly how to gather the best performance for what the film demands, nailing it to a tee.

"And I still can see blue velvet..."

The score by the legendary Angelo Badalamenti is his best, with the film's ending track "Mysteries of Love" featuring Julee Cruise being the perfect way to end the film, with the ambient and surreal tracks throughout highlighting the nightmarish scenes that Jeffrey finds himself going through. The score is a mix of a classical style with timeless pop songs such as Bobby Vinton's "Blue Velvet" or Roy Orbison's "In Dreams", reflecting the David Lynch's attempt at a timeless setting as well as serving to flesh out the tone of the film, being neo-noir. The juxtaposition between the classical score and licensed music adds to the unsettling aspects of Blue Velvet. It is an incredibly memorable score. You'll have the line: "She wore blue velvet..." drilled into your head before the film is over and sticking with even after it is over.

Overall, Blue Velvet is a classic within American cinema and stands as my favourite David Lynch film, tied with Mulholland Drive. It combines so many different elements and creates a subversive and unquestionably surreal story that enthrals you until the end, whilst it may be confusing or too disturbing for some, fans of Lynch such as myself, those who are looking for an entry point to Lynch's filmography or are just wanting to see something ever so different, I would definitely recommend Blue Velvet. It's too good to pass up.

"...through my tears."

BIRDMAN or THE UNEXPECTED VIRTUE OF IGNORANCE (2014) review: "To call myself beloved..."

"...to feel beloved on the Earth."

BIRDMAN or THE UNEXPECTED VIRTUE OF IGNORANCE is a 2014 (or 2015 if you live in the UK) film starring Michael Keaton, Zach Galifianakis, Edward Norton and several other great actors to long to list, as well as being written, produced and directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu. The film follows washed-up actor, Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) as he struggles to overcome and reclaim his past glory of playing an iconic superhero by mounting a Broadway play in attempts to resurrect his broken career.

----------

Michael Keaton stars as the infamous Birdman and is impeccable, Keaton really does shine in this film and easily demonstrates how much of an underutilised actor he is in terms of drama. How the story of the film seemingly blends quite nicely into Keaton's actual career makes you think that this role was tailor-made for him and he plays it to perfection, every time he's on screen he captivates you and he honestly sucks you in. I can't fault Keaton for what is perhaps an Oscar-worthy performance.

The rest of the cast, the aforementioned Zach Galifianakis, Edward Norton, Andrea Riseborough, Amy Ryan, Emma Stone and finally Naomi Watts are all here and giving great performances as you would expect, the reason I've bundled these cast members into one paragraph is that they are all equally as good as one another and there isn't a single weak performance throughout the entirety of the film. As per Edward Norton and Emma Stone, I find also quite fitting for the roles in this film as with Keaton, as they've both featured prominently within superhero films of their own such as The Incredible Hulk and The Amazing Spider-Man. I can't praise the performances of the supporting cast enough as they're all phenomenal and shine as much as Keaton does in terms of their said performances.

"How did we end up here?..."

The cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki (who has previously worked on films such as Children of Men and Gravity) is also nothing short of astounding, with seamless tracking shots and an overall exceptionally colourful and eye-popping look to the film. The tracking shots in particular feel so smooth it is mind-blowing, as the whole film is cheated or made to look like it is one continuous shot and you honestly can't tell where the cuts are actually made. It's like the camera itself is a character constantly following these other characters around, observing their lives and experiences. It is a highly impressive technical feat that immersed me completely.

The writing by Alejandro González Iñárritu as well as Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. and Armando Bo follows suit as great, with nothing notable in terms of issues besides from the slightly odd and off-key lesbian romance between Watts' and Riseborough's characters which is lost throughout the film's layered story. It may be something that's subjective, but I felt that it was quite odd that it's created as a secondary plot point that is then left behind as the more prominent plot takes place. On that note, it could be intentional as a tying of the knot or end for those two characters to focus on the plot of the main character and how that is developing. The writing is most likely the weakest part of this film, but that isn't saying that it's anywhere near close to being bad.

The direction by Iñárritu fairs better and is honestly the best directing for the past few years, with the entirely fluid shots and equally as fluid performances that he has extracted out of each of these actors, I struggle to find words that could do justice to the directing talent that Iñárritu has. It's frankly amazing.

"We had it all. You were a movie star, remember?"

Finally, the film's score by Antonio Sánchez is a very quirky and jazzy score entirely composed of drums, which is something that is not often done within films, if at all. It makes a nice change of pace and fits with the film perfectly, escalating with Riggan's increasing desperation and schizophrenia as the film progresses and definitely highlights these moments of insanity as well as accompany the more down-to-earth scenes of backtalk between two characters to always give you something to listen to.

Overall, Birdman may just be my favourite film of 2014 (I would personally consider it a 2014 film because it was released first within 2014) because all of the pieces that bring a film together are all done masterfully well with only one or two very, very slight niggles that I had throughout that won't even affect most watching. It feels like a deeply personal film, rising from the ashes in attempts to rescue the career of a down-and-out actor. It is a seamless experience that doesn't hold out and keeps you pulled in until its end, even with its unconventional and loveably odd story as well as characters, it serves its purpose as a fantastical black comedy.

"Let's make a comeback."

BOYHOOD (2014) review: "Life doesn't give you bumpers..."

12 years in the making...

BOYHOOD is a 2014 film starring Ellar Coltrane, Lorelei Linklater, Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke. The film is written and directed by Richard Linklater. The film follows the tale of Mason Evans, Jr. (Ellar Coltrane) as he journeys through his childhood, from age 6 to 18, including all of the tough personal choices involving him and his family, making and learning from his mistakes then ultimately deciding what he wants to do with his life.

----------

Opening as the main cast member, the boy in Boyhood itself is Ellar Coltrane as Mason Evans, Jr. The performance given by Coltrane is for the most part good, not far from great. There are some slightly iffy scenes in the film, which Coltrane's performance feels odd and often unnatural as you can tell that the 12 year development cycle shows not only his character Mason grow, but you also see him grow as an actor and eventually growing accustomed to it. Thinking of his character in this way definitely provides an interesting layer to the film, even if it doesn't always benefit it. Regardless of an off-key performance in some cases, you will grow to love and understand Mason as a character as he finds out what he wants to do with his life, seeing some of his aspirations becoming true and some not. The experimental choice of having a literal coming-of-age story benefits Coltrane massively and to a certain degree, overshadows him. For a first time role, you can definitely do a hell of a lot worse.

Lorelei Linklater is Mason's sister, Samantha. In terms of performance, the same points and criticisms that I have could be levelled at the character of Samantha also. With this brings similar points to praise about her performance, by no means is it bad, you see her character grow with Mason, albeit not to the same extent of Mason as the film primarily focuses on the growth of him, checking back on Samantha shortly with each of the scenes. The interaction between her and Mason is pretty great, their chemistry and the film in general does benefit with the elongated production cycle, as the actors grow to know each other, their characters grow to be more comfortable with one another as brother and sister.

Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke are Samantha and Mason Jr.'s parents, Olivia and Mason Sr. respectively. Both give an equally exceptional performance and some of the best scenes in the film can be attributed to Arquette and Hawke, they truly do enhance the film. They both do a great job in giving the audience the feeling that a relationship was once there and what was once between them is now nothing but shattered fragments of a past time. It is similar in a way to (500) Days of Summer in that it is a romance where they don't end up together by the film's ending. They both mutually respect each other end go their separate ways, continuing their own lives. This is in turn also similar to Mason and Samantha, who both leave their parents to pursue their own futures and eventually grow their own families, potentially ending up in the same situation as their parents in the long run. Their characters demonstrate the mistakes that their kids should learn from, which they hopefully do.

The rest of the cast are serviceable are perform their parts adequately, they do the best with what they're given, with the exception of one or two cast members such as the character of Sheena, Mason Jr.'s girlfriend whose performance suffers from the same reason as both Coltrane's and Linklater's performances, their acting talent grows with recurring appearances over time.

"Who do you wanna be, Mason? What do you wanna do?"

The cinematography by Lee Daniel and Shane Kelly is decent, with one or two well choreographed tracking shots and long takes, generally focusing on a sharp, colourful image to perhaps accentuate some of the nostalgia that can be felt throughout the film, especially earlier on in the film, with the opening shot being a static shot of the sky and the clouds and it is quite stunning at times. The bright colour palette as aforementioned could be contributed to some of the nostalgia that you will most likely have for your childhood, the bright colours representing a once optimistic outlook on life. It can be flat, with the emphasis of the film being placed on the characters in the movie, the style to have is that there is no style.

The writing and directing by Richard Linklater is obviously great, being the foundation of the film, the glue that holds it all together. There are several minor issues that could be contributed to the film's script however, aimed mostly at the dialogue for the kids/teenagers within. This dialogue in particular is fairly cringe worthy, I recall at one point the film that a kid actually says, "True that". No joke. It feels out of touch, Linklater's attempts at replicating teenager dialogue, it feels exaggerated to the point where it seems intentional however, which would make sense, or perhaps I'm looking far too much into it and Linklater just wrote what he felt was appropriate. Hopefully not the latter. This is more of a nitpicky aspect of the film, but after all of the overwhelming praise I have seen for this film, no one has seemed to have mentioned besides from a select few. I'm not saying it ruins the film, but it does take you out of the atmosphere of what is otherwise a very plausible world. In some cases, you can feel that how the script was finished and altered until the last minute to adapt to the actor's lives, negatively affecting it in this specific area, but ultimately benefiting the film more than it harms it, as the script adapting to the actors' actual lifestyles instead of staying out of touch with their personality is far more important. It's a balance, the realistic approach to the main characters slightly harms the minor characters. Following onto the direction by Linklater, it fairs better than his writing, which was already good in the first place, it isn't necessarily comparable but the direction fairs better. All of the actors interact with each other as they should, with none of them feeling or looking lost on set as they do interact with each other and the world around them. It feels natural and at times improvised, which is purely speculation, I get vibes that this natural feel between the actors does give it the film a tender quality that comes with the dealings of a childhood. 

"You know how everyone's always saying, "Seize the moment"?..."

The score for this film leans towards the unusual side, as it is entirely composed of licensed music from various artists to represent each of the 12 years within the film, music that is popular within that time or music that is appropriate to the progression of the characters within their lives. It creates another layer of nostalgia for those who grew up within the same generation as Mason or even if you didn't. It fits perfectly with the film and is definitely an interesting choice instead of using a traditional film score, giving the film a more personal touch.

Overall, Boyhood is a highly emotional and touching film, held back by a slightly odd script and some questionable performances from initially inexperienced actors, but it ultimately builds up to be one of the better films of 2014, and by many others the best film of 2014, if not the decade so far. The film tugs on your heart-strings (in a good way) regardless of generation, it bridges the gap cross-generation for everyone to sympathise with the childhood tendencies literally being witnessed on screen as the coming-of-age story unfolds in front of you and you witness everyone grow, change and eventually mature on screen within the matter of 3 hours. It is oddly fanciful yet somewhat depressing that you witness 12 years of someone's life in such a minuscule amount of time, the formative years of our main character as he moulds into who he is and finally goes on with his life as an adult. After you finish watching this for the first time, regardless of its highly subjective flaws, it will most likely stick with you.

"...You know, like, the moment seizes us."

ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND (2004) review, "The world forgetting, by the world forgot..."

You can erase someone from your mind. Getting them out of your heart is a different story.

ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND is a 2004 film starring Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet, directed by Michel Gondry and written by Charlie Kaufman. The film follows Jim Carrey as Joel Barish, an emotionally withdrawn and exceptionally shy person who stumbles upon Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet), who is a total opposite in terms of personality, yet they somehow connect. After their relationship eventually goes sour, Clementine decides to have Joel erased from her memory to end the suffering of their relationship and Joel follows suit. At the last minute, Joel realises that he cannot deal with the consequences losing Clementine from his memory and attempts to fight back.

----------

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is one of my favourite films of all time, with its non-linear narrative constructing an infinite love loop that is destined to repeat for eternity. 

Jim Carrey as aforementioned, stars as Joel Barish and is simply fantastic. This performance easily being one of the best of his career, if not the best. Some find Carrey insufferable because of his repetitive patterns of comedy and often his other performances being overshadowed by his own personality. You feel as if his character is himself in other films such as Yes Man or Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. This is not one of those cases however, his performance not overshadowing his character, but blending perfectly into the tortured soul that is Joel Barish. You really do feel as emotionally withdrawn as he does and you connect with him as a result, as bizarre as that may seem initially. It is a performance that I thought I would never see from Carrey, not since The Truman Show, which has yet to be replicated again in any of his appearances to this day. If only he would gravitate towards more dramatic work rather than comedy, as it is an untapped goldmine that needs to be seen more of. Carrey shows some incredible potential as a dramatic actor and it really needs to be realised in some of his later films, but has not been seen since, sadly. 

Kate Winslet takes second billing and is the other emotional half to Joel, Clementine. Winslet is equally as breathtaking in terms of a performance as Carrey, the ultimate counter to the subdued and quiet Joel is the energetic and emotionally unstable Clementine. Winslet once cited this as her favourite performance in any of her films, and its with good reason. Clementine is Joel's emotional core, that she destroys when she impulsively erases Joel from her mind. Winslet plays the impulsive, high-maintenance girl with a tender side that you have to tap into. It is because of this that their relationship initially works, even with their radical personality differences, but with those differences inevitably come problems which causes it to fall apart. Your reaction to Clementine is negative to start with, but you uncover her flawed personality as you progress through the film and unravel the couple's history which makes you gradually like her more and more. That's the beauty of her performance, it grows on you and eventually wins you over. You feel protective of her whilst she is being manipulated by characters later on in the film, using her lost emotions and past relationship and spinning it into their own relationship, plagiarising someone that no longer exists.

The rest of the cast is similarly stuffed full of great performances and now big names, Kirsten Dunst, Mark Ruffalo, Elijah Wood and Tom Wilkinson. Respectively most known for Spider-Man, The Avengers, The Lord of the Rings and In the Bedroom. With Mark Ruffalo being the only actor whose most known film was after this films release. The entire cast is stellar, with Elijah Wood as the exceptionally slimy and manipulative Patrick, using Joel and Clementine's relationship to fuel his own relationship with Clementine, which inevitably backfires. There is also notably Kirsten Dunst's titular speech recites a poem by Alexander Pope, or "Pope Alexander" as she puts it in a daze. It stands as one of the emotional high points of the film that doesn't involve Joel and Clementine, a stand-out scene in a film already full of them.

"Meet me in Montauk."

The cinematography in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is quite beautiful in an oddly dystopian way, everything looks washed out almost to the point that it is intentional. Once the more vibrant sequences towards the end of the film kick in whilst Joel's memory is being erased and his once hopeful life is seen it creates an effect of urgency, these colours scream to you that Joel has to hold on to what was once better and that it is not better to forget the past, but to look forward and learn from your mistakes. The colour of Clementine's hair and clothing also represent this, that it is the last vibrant shard of his life, and also reflect Clementine's attention seeking nature, the bright colours draw the attention of those passing by. Overall, a good job from the relatively unknown Ellen Kuras also working with Michel Gondry on Be Kind Rewind. 

The screenplay by Charlie Kaufman reinforces him as being my favourite writer of all time, writing these deeply personal tales and adapting them to the screen, in other great films such as Being John Malkovich, Adaptation and of course, Synecdoche, New York. Kaufman has crafted an intricate world with his characters and non-linear narrative, with Joel's memory and disconnected subconscious serving as the majority of the film's plot, navigating his maze-like mind and making you feel hopelessly lost, as he is. The overall arc of Clementine and Joel ties into the theme of Caden Cotard in Synecdoche, New York. That to every end is a beginning, the end is never truly the end. Joel and Clementine's relationship is doomed to fail every time it begins and with each erase comes a new start for their relationship. The screenplay is masterful, opting to use the characters as the focus of the plot, and in doing so, creating two truly flawed characters whose weaknesses forward the plot and urge them to forget what they should attempt to fix, the Lacuna clinic serving as Clementine's impulsive way out, linking to Joel's reluctant outing of his suffering. You can feel Kaufman's imagination oozing from the script and onto the screen, if this subject matter were to have been tackled by another writer it most likely will not have ended up being as smart and as exceptional as Kaufman's personal touch.

The directing is similarly daring, with Michel Gondry creating these very intricate looking scenes, especially with the dream sequences, imagery that definitely sticks with you long after viewing, such as the childhood dream sequences where Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet are surrounded by younger children, whilst they themselves play as their younger counterparts, but as themselves and also the faceless people who are left to sulk around whilst Joel's memories are in the process of being destroyed. It has some genuinely psychological moments that strike close to home, Gondry emulates the dream-like essence of the whole film to a tee and I can't imagine this film benefiting from another director, only being worse in the hands of another. Gondry really did draw a fantastic performance form both Winslet and especially Carrey.

"Remember me. Try your best. Maybe we can."

The score by Jon Brion adds onto the list of things great about this film, crafting a quirky yet oddly touching score and soundtrack that overall compiles into the emotional struggle that is Joel and Clementine, it fits the film almost too perfectly, it is as beautiful as is the tale of the two main protagonists, with the end of the soundtrack comes the beginning.

Overall, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is one of those films where if you had to give an arbitrary numbered rating which I don't generally like doing, it would be a perfect 10. This film is highly subjective to me however, what may seem to me as the perfect film could be complete nonsense to another, as this film is definitely not for everyone, however I believe that it is much more accessible compared to some of Michel Gondrys' or Charlie Kaufmans' other works, that those who are looking for a face value experience are sure to enjoy, but is open for interpretation on several different levels for those who are willing to dig deeper and watch the film multiple times to fully understand the aforementioned non-linear narrative. No matter what you deride from it, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is an immaculate film in my opinion and stands as one of my few favourite films of all time. I would highly recommend it to those who are looking for a drama with a slight sci-fi twist or for those who are looking for something that is different from the typical going-through-the-motions picture.

"Mierzwiak! Please let me keep this memory... just this one."

THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES (2014) review: "The Lonely Mountain..."

The Defining Chapter...

THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES is a 2014 film starring well over a dozen actors, most notably Martin Freeman and Ian McKellen, and directed by Peter Jackson. The film follows Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins on the final part of his journey, with his company forced to defend the Lonely Mountain against the titular five armies ranging from Orcs to Elves.

----------

The Battle of the Five Armies stands as the hopefully final film of the Middle-Earth saga with a reasonably satisfying conclusion to the otherwise middling trilogy.

The cast of this film is far too large to have a complete breakdown - however all of the performances seen in this film are more than serviceable, if not great, with the slight exception of a rather CGI-looking Billy Connolly. For some reason his character in particular definitely crosses the uncanny valley. Swiftly moving on, as aforementioned there isn't really any notable stand-out performance throughout the entire film. Everyone does as expected, not bad but not outstanding either.

Will you have peace... or war?

The cinematography by long-time Peter Jackson partner, Andrew Lesnie is as good as the previous Lord of the Rings trilogy, you can understand why he got an Academy Award for Best Cinematography, at least with that trilogy. The film did undeniably look great, however much of that can I owe to the cinematography? That's questionable. The film overall did have a nice style to it - but doesn't have any specific stand out moments that I could pick out because it all really does blend together.

Just like the cast, there is an unusual amount of people writing the screenplay or script. A total of four, including the previous writers of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Peter Jackson and his wife Fran Walsh, as well as Phillipa Boyens, with the rather odd addition of Guillermo del Toro, director and writer of the frankly incredible Pan's Labyrinth as well as most recently, Pacific Rim. 

The screenplay overall is adequate with several little niggling issues such as the obvious initial pacing issues with the character of Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch). His character was there to die and complete the cliffhanger set up by The Desolation of Smaug, the previous film in the trilogy. The reason I consider this a pacing issue is that there is this sudden burst of action for the first 15 minutes of the film only thereafter to be swung into an entirely different plot. However, this may or may not be attributable to the writers of the screenplay so much as the production, distribution and marketing companies. Without the cliffhanger set by the last film, there would have been no drive the see the next with general audiences, therefore the pacing and overall quality of the films has to suffer in order to ramp up hype for this inevitable final part. Put it into perspective when the whole trilogy gets its also inevitable home release, you're re-watching the whole trilogy and The Desolation of Smaug ends, that whole cliffhanger is rendered entirely pointless unless you're able to conjure up a years worth of hype the entire minute or so it takes to swap discs. (Or choose the film from a digital menu, if you're inclined towards streaming.) It is there purely to service those who don't care about the actual film itself - and only care about the amount of money the film takes at the box office.

There is also some laughable moments tied to Legolas' (Orlando Bloom) fight scenes with Azog the Defiler (Manu Bennett), some of the spectacle fighting that goes on in these scenes is sometimes too far even for a epic fantasy such as the Middle-Earth saga, such as Legolas using falling stepping stones to climb back up and ultimately win the fight against Azog, which makes me feel as if some parts of these scenes aren't scripted (which is heavily unlikely) or were them writing themselves out of a corner frankly. Hell, I could and most likely am thinking way too hard into it and they were just writing these fight scenes on the basis of what they think is the most entertaining... and frankly a bit too over the top.

Howard Shore, also a previous Peter Jackson collaborator on the Lord of the Rings (also doing some other great stuff with David Cronenberg on A History of Violence, Eastern Promises and countless other films), composes yet another epic score to go along with The Battle of the Five Armies, one of the best parts about the film in my opinion, with a mostly gentle or soft quality to it that isn't afraid to ramp up when the titular battle happens... three quarters into the movie.

"I will have war."

I usually don't mention this but really should, the production design and sets utilised by this film, as the Lord of the Rings before it is simply amazing, it creates this living, breathing world that simply looks great while the characters traverse from one set piece to another, the detail of each of the sets lost to some of the film's aforementioned questionable pacing, either going too slowly or far too quickly.

Overall, as much as it may seem that I dislike The Battle of the Five Armies, it is an enjoyable film, but it is a film that should not exist. With the Lord of the Rings you could understand stretching that into a trilogy, as the books themselves were in three parts at about 400 pages a piece. The Hobbit however was only one book that was 300 pages in length. That brings it to roughly a hundred pages per film. The Hobbit trilogy is somehow so bloated with such little story involved. Peter, you will always be a good director, but please, move on. The Middle-Earth needs to be left to its own wits, there is literally not more that you can do with it. The whole Hobbit trilogy seems to follow a similar theme: exceptionally made, all of the pieces should come together and add up, but there is this emotional disconnect that struggles to pull you in. I could only ever recommend this film to anyone who is desperate to see the end of what will hopefully be the last of the saga, but to everyone else? Just go watch the Lord of the Rings trilogy instead.

"Will you follow me, one last time?"