Hunger Games Mocking Jay Part 1

If you haven’t seen or Hunger Games and Catching Fire Or read the trilogy by Suzanne Collins then I suggest you do so before you decide to watch Mocking Jay.  While some may argue that a movie has to be evaluated independently, those who haven’t seen the prequels will never be able to understand the story completely.

Hunger Games : Catching Fire

Apparently Gary Ross (Director of Hunger Games) turned down the opportunity of directing the sequels.  After approaching 8 more directors including the likes of Alfonso Cuarón (Gravity) and Joe Cornish (Star Trek 3), the opportunity landed on Francis Lawrence’s table who has then proceeded to give us a rendition that tempts me to ask him to remake Hunger Games 1.

The Master

I hate art house cinema.  Primarily because I am never sure if the movie was good or not.  So it becomes extremely difficult to rate or review.  It exposes my limitations and makes me look and feel very vulnerable.  I am an amateur critic but a wrong review will of course go a long way in hampering my credibility. 

Moneyball

Which one of the following do you really like 1. Baseball
2. Statistics
3. Economics
4. Sport in general
5. None of the above

If you ticked on 5 then I suggest that you avoid Moneyball like the plague. You will find nothing in it that will keep you riveted to the screen. Chances are that you will walk out of the hall scratching your head and cursing the Academy for yet again picking a dud for the Best Movie nomination. If you ticked on 1 or 2 or 3 and have a deep love for either of these subjects then chances are that you will find the movie very interesting and will comfortably sit through for more than 130 minutes. But you need to pay close attention to what is being said. If you ticked only 4 then you will struggle through the movie. You will have to be patient enough to survive the parts that are heavy and I mean really heavy on numbers and strategies. You need to be even more cued into what is being said and you have a good chance of understanding the movie better than people who have not done what I have recommended.

In the unlikely event that you have ticked 1, 2 and 3 then you have hit yourself a jackpot. Chances are that you are Peter Brand (Johan Hill) who is an economics major from Yale and has found his calling in baseball. Who strongly believes that getting the championship is about winning more games. Winning more games is about getting to more bases and getting more people out. Winning more games is about scoring more runs that the opposition. Adds up doesn’t it? And who would have been better placed to experiment with this method than the General Manager of the Oklahoma As i.e. Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) who is at his wits end trying to figure out how to manage a baseball team @ a budget of $38 million a year which is the lowest in Major League Baseball. The two went on to revolutionise player and team selection over the early part of the previous decade. Stuff that case studies are made of.

Based on a book written by Michael Lewis "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game" – the movie has earned itself 6 nominations. None of the nominations – including Best Picture – are surprising. That it may not win the best picture is mainly due to other movies such as The Descendants and The Artist being better made on more parameters than the 6 that Moneyball finds itself nominated. Excellent editing for certain and great performances from both Pitt and Hill who seem to have a chemistry of sorts on screen. They just get along seemingly very well. Havent read the book so cannot comment on the quality of screenplay adaptation and I am not qualified to comment on the sound mixing either.

What I can definitely say though is that the movie is well made and worth a watch. But keep a look out for what I called out in the first paragraph. An understanding of basic baseball, economics and statistics will go a long way in understanding the movie. 7.5 on 10. Deservedly in the top 10 movies of the year. But not surprising that it hasn’t released in India yet.

Watch the trailer at http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi3229326361/

The Ides of March

I am a huge fan of movies direted by George Clooney. Many of you may have read my review of “Good Night and Good Luck” which was a runaway success both commercially and at the Oscars. Of course, with GNGL he had a stellar performance from David Strathairn to prop up the movie but then Clooney has always been one to pick up his cast with utmost precision. And The Ides of March is no exception. Other than himself (surprisingly in a dark role), he picks the vastly under rated Ryan Gosling, the always bankable Paul Giamatti and the truly versatile Philip Seymour Hoffman as the lead male cast. Not much of a role for the women in TIOM with the exception of the bit part given to Marisa Tomei which I thought was a waste of one of the most talented and capable actresses of our time. One could argue that the role was pivotal but the screen time was too little – 3 scenes if I remember it correctly.

But despite the strong cast and some stunning performances, I still believe that The Ides of March was a below par delivery from an otherwise very capable director. One expects George Clooney movies to be a bit slow and intense which TIOM is. So don’t get me wrong here. I believe all aspects of movie making were covered exceptionally well in our man’s 4th attempt at direction. All aspects but for the story – honestly that left me stumped completely. The build up in the first few minutes of the campaign of Governor Mike Morris (Clooney) in the primaries was superb and leaves you gasping for more. And just as you believe that the dominoes are all falling in place for a strong finish in the 2nd half, Clooney decides that the movie is just going to peter off into a damp squib. Somewhat like a question – “What? You expected some kind of a twist or something? Sorry mate. That’s not going to happen”. Maybe there was some larger than life reason or greater good at stake in this political drama or something that I am not familiar with but really TIOM didn’t cut much ice with me.

What you could watch the movie for would be the fantastic performances that I spoke about from each member of the cast, some superb cinematography and excellent editing. Clooney pretty much gets everything else bang on. Can easily be used as a bench mark for the technical aspects of movie making. I had a sense of déjà vu. The same incomplete feeling that I got from Steven Soderbergh’s Contagion earlier this year. So I guess Clooney has just added credence to the hypothesis that the most important part of a movie is the story and not the star cast. I give The Ides of March 5 on 10. I know most people are raving about the movie but I don’t think most of India is going to resonate with it. Hope to see a stunning come back from George Clooney.

Watch the Trailer at http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi1103731737/

25th Hour

Montgomery Brogan (Edward Norton) has lived his life with his name thanks to his mother being a huge fan of Montgomery Clift. His father James (Brian Cox) wasn’t too pleased with it but doesn’t really bother with a debate with the wife. Monty loses his mother when he is 11 years old and his dad goes into a depression that drives him to alcohol. However, Monty gets into a prestigious school on a scholarship thanks to his above average intelligence. Now it is the same above average intelligence that gets him started very early in life with drugs. We are not talking about consumption – Monty is way too smart for that. We are talking about dealing. Pressures at home are increasing continuously with Dad getting into a financial mess and Monty wants to help him out. So he chooses the easiest way out that he sees at that time. Marks the beginning of a hugely successful and profitably career as a drug dealer which gets him thrown out of school but gets him into the company of Uncle Nikolai (Levan Uchaneishvili) a Russian Drug dealer who has made New York his home and Nikolai’s henchman Kostya Novotny (Tony Siragusa).


Monty seems to be doing quite well for himself not only monetarily but also on the personal front with a very hot Puerto Rican girlfriend with an exotic name – Naturelle Riviera (Rosario Dawson – who of late hasn’t been looking too hot but was quite sizzling in 2002 I guess). He continues to be close to his bum chums Frank Xavier Slaughtery (Barry Pepper) and Jacob Elinsky (Philip Seymour Hoffman). Frank is a successful broker on wall street and Jacob is a high school teacher who is lusting for a 17 year old Mary D'Annunzio (Anna Paquin). Yep its quite a warped bunch I guess. But the story is still due. Monty gets squealed upon to the DEA who raid his house only to find a kilo of narcotics and loads of cash. They try to set him up to compromise Nikolai which Monty wriggles out of. He gets 7 years in the pound in return (surprising coz he should have got 15 for a first offence with so much of narc). He is spending his last day as a free man (didn’t know you could plan your dates for going to prison but I trust Spike Lee to have done his research. Damn convenient arrangement right?) and is tearing his hair apart to figure out who gave him away.

Spike Lee weaves a slow but intriguing story primarily focused on the emotions that Monty seems to be going through and the emotions of people who are closest to him. The fear of being beaten up in prison, being degraded to the level of someone’s bitch and a host of other worries. His doubt about Naturelle being the one who gave him away. His best friends who are caught in the conflict of being there for him through the seven years or just moving on. And most of all his dad who in the hypothetical 25th hour convinces him to run away from all of this into some remote place where he cannot be traced back to ever in his life. 25th Hour is a mélange of emotions which could have been pulled off only by a director as talented and under rated as Spike Lee. Other than the fact that it was very slow, I for one could not find out any errors in the movie per se. Maybe I wasn’t looking hard enough. The acting performances were all above par making it into a movie that more than made the cut but wasn’t too brilliant over all. I give it a 6.5 on 10. Worth a dekko when u find the time.

Watch the trailer at http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi3350397209/

Magnolia

Let’s start with the Frank T J Mackey (Tom Cruise), a super aggressive man in his thirties who runs one of the several courses that are prevalent in the US which have enough and more suckers that pay money for them – I don’t say that, the movies say it. This one is for men who have been dumped by their past relationships and are desperately looking for getting back on track and more importantly desperately seeking confidence to get laid – sooner than later. Frank is the son of Media Magnate, Earl Partridge (Jason Robards) who deserted both son and mother, Lily when Lily was suffering from cancer and Frank had to take care of his mother. Earl is on his death bed thanks to Lung and Brain Cancer. Frank hates the thought of his father who is now married to a super eccentric Linda (Julianne Moore) and is being taken care of by a male nurse, Phil Parma (Philip Seymour Hoffman).

Let us now move onto Jimmy Gator (Philip Baker Hall) who has been hosting the oldest quiz show on television, What Kids Know for over 33 years now. The channel and show are owned by Partridge. On the show tonight is Stanley Spector (Jeremy Blackman) a kid facing the highest possible pressure of knowing too much. So he is called a nerd by most of his friends. And his father, Rick (Michael Bowen) cannot take his step of the pedal coz he wants his kid to make as much money as possible – obviously because he doesn’t want to work after that. He desperately needs a class on good parenting. Watching them is Donnie Smith (William H Macy) who was the winner of the same programme a few years back and works for a store that is owned by Solomon Solomon (Alfred Molina). Add to all of these, 3 pivotal characters – Rose Gator (Melinda Dillon), Jimmy’s wife who is blissfully unaware of his promiscuous ways. Claudia Wilson Gator (Melora Waters) – coke head, depressive, estranged daughter of Jimmy who doesn’t want to see his face ever. Officer Jim Kurring (John C Reilly) who bumps into Claudia on one of his usual rounds.

Having described the key characters in the movie, now I strongly suggest that you watch it because Magnolia my dear friends is the precursor to the likes of Crash and Babel. Multiple story lines that are inter linked to each other by some weird twist of fate or luck or whatever it is that one wants to call it. But it does make sense. With the exception of the severely over the top scene of raining frogs – yes frogs – at the end, it’s a great movie which is finely woven together with superbly haunting background music and a couple of songs, one of which got an Oscar nomination. I suspect it is the frog sequence and the fact that is 188 minutes long that deprived Magnolia of a nomination for best movie. Yes, Tom Cruise was good but that doesn’t qualify him to be a deserving Oscar nominee for Best Supporting actor – probably the jury was too stunned to find out that Cruise can actually act. Overall, the cast is fairly average. Paul Thomas Anderson’s direction is quite compact and although the movie is long, it moves quite quickly. Worth a dekko. Have some patience to see the movie through though. 7 on 10.

Watch the trailer at http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi894043161/