Drama

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules

Posted on by bernardovillela

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules is a better film than its predecessor. This was something I rather anticipated, however, I don’t believe its to the detriment of this installment that it is second. There is not too much shorthand used and the narrative is accessible enough that that much enjoyment will not be stripped away if you are walking into this one cold.

This film benefits from a more unified and less episodic plot than did its predecessor as well. Not that it still doesn’t reap the benefit of humorous and well thought out subplots but they weave their way into the larger narrative with more finesse than prior. These tales like Chirag’s invisibility, the new girl, the teacher with a vendetta, are all well-handled and add to the film but do not ever threaten to overtake the film from what the central conflict is.

The conflict being that of sibling rivalry, which is handled very well because you see a relationship in stasis go from just about as bad as it can possibly get to become rather functional. It also contains the peaks and valleys that are requisite for such a struggle, and even more of a credit to the film it goes from being borderline cartoonish in its animosity to being rather real and honest in the handling of the themes of both resentment and insurmountable hatred that sometimes accompany such relationship, especially when the age difference is large.

These discussion points come first to illustrate that despite its varying brands of humor, there is a point to be made in the film and its not just mindless and “low-brow” comedy. As for the comedy, it does do a wonderful balancing act again. As this is a home-based tale, there is more parent-child and husband-wife comedy than before.

Again the Steve Zahn brilliantly plays a dad who wants to be as hands off in parenting as he can and also is a typical guy in some regards and not just your typical distant patriarchal archetype. He is countered wonderfully by Rachael Harris. They are funny enough, however, the comedic quotient in this film is amplified greatly when you consider that the talented and previously under-ultilized Devon Bostick gets to step to the fore in this film. He is astonishingly good in this film and rarely delivers a line that doesn’t elicit some sort of response whether it be a laugh or one that connects dramatically.

Zachary Gordon’s character Greg is somewhat mellowed this time around not as hellbent on achieving popularity and other superficial means of acceptance but glimmers of that self appear even in a more rounded character that he creates just as easily, if not easier than he did before. His honesty in situations that in tandem can be seen as absurd are what carry the film and make it something you can connect to sympathetically rather than watch as a disinterested observer.

This film moves along at a very healthy clip, not only are there some fun and creative editing choices like “Disappointed” montage for Mom but things cut swiftly within scenes such that the whole things seems like its done in a blink and not in a disappointed I-Can’t-Believe-They-Call-That-A-Feature kind of way but in a fun and escapist, easily re-watchable way.

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules allows the narrative, characters and young performers to grow and evolve from where we left them and you can call it an experiment if you like, but if you do it is surely a success. Those who were there are better, more confident and comfortable in their roles and those who are new like Peyton List, who carries off the important role of Greg’s love interest with uncanny ease, blend in perfectly.

It’s a funny, fun, must-see.

10/10

Review- In the Family

Posted on by bernardovillela

It seems to me more often than not, whenever I see a good to great film that I wasn’t necessarily expecting to see there’s always at least a decent story to it. Somehow, in the barrage of year-end awards and best of lists, I missed noting the title In the Family, at the tail end of 2011. I guess I didn’t retain or read Slant’s list as carefully as I thought, either that or I hadn’t seen it anywhere near me so it was almost like it had yet to exist. However, that lack of availability kept it alive for this year’s BAMs. Now, oddly enough when I saw this month’s schedule at Theatre N, I saw it, it seemed like a likely view but it didn’t jump out not right away. Then the weekend it’s playing came, and thanks to an abysmal weekend of new summer releases it was the only game in town, so far as I was concerned. However, I was still under-informed. I read the synopsis, seemed good. However, I didn’t immediately note the running time.

In trying to schedule my day, I did. The film runs 2 hours and 49 minutes. I do not have hard and fast rules regarding running-times, as my commendations for Satantango and Berlin Alexanderplatz clearly indicate. Yes, I prefer comedies that run 90 minutes or less when speaking in generalities, that does not mean I’ve never liked one longer. The Avengers is only about 25 minutes shorter and I never heard anyone complain about how long it is. However, I do have to concede that it is a factor. So what I did was I started to read up on it, just a bit. Based on what I saw I wanted to give a go.

With this film, and my prior example, you have two instances that highlight the difference between running time and pace. Anyone can make a film this long, or longer, if they want to, and frequently early assemblies and cuts are. What matters is what you do with the running time you’ve allotted your story. I’ve seen films a third as long as this one that feel twice as long as it actually is. There are films that feel like they will never end and others you wish wouldn’t, and this one is much closer to the latter than the former.

The term deliberate pace is not, in my mind, a polite way of saying slow. There are scenes that don’t cut, but there are scenes that are rather quick, which add to the tone and help the film pace itself. It is by no means the test of endurance that The Turin Horse is, even though that film is shorter.

So preambles aside, the film works beautifully in large part due to the restraints is shows. The film tells the tale of of a custody battle following the death of one partner in a same sex relationship. That’s the film in its simplest terms, now the film could be handled differently and still work but then it would run the risk of pigeonholing itself as a gay film, or a racial film or a courtroom film, depending on how the plot unfolds. It could quickly become maudlin and melodramatic. However, in restraining its emotion, allowing it to build in its characters and its audience it creates a tremendously universal and human story that I’m sure many can relate to, whether it reflects anything in their life or not. One example of the restraint, and a litmus test of sorts for films with gay themes, is that the words “gay” or “homosexual,” or any pejorative variation thereof are not spoken. This is a clear choice it seems that underlines both the humanity of the story and the underlying hostilities and prejudices that exist.

Dave (Peter Hermann), Eileen (Kelly McAndrew), Jefferson (Eugene Brell), Joey (Patrick Wang), Paul (Brian Murray), Court Reporter (Marsha Waterbury) in In the Family (In the Family)

The drama in the film is always palpable because the film cloisters its characters. In certain scenes it just allows us to watch a few characters behave and interact, without dialogue but there is still much being said. There’s a lot of film theory banter about simply watching behavior, but like everything in this film it doesn’t push this aspect to the extreme either. There are small, delicate, wonderful scenes like this sprinkled throughout; a fantastic example is Chip (Sebastian Banes, credited in this film as Sebastian Brodziak) getting himself and Joey (Patrick Wang) a drink after the funeral.

Aside from having well-tempered scene lengths, the film also structures itself well and interestingly. There are three flashbacks, which all occur post-mortem. The film begins in medias res, after Cody’s (Trevor St. John) death is where we start to get to know him and miss him as Joey does. There are also I believe four segments of the film that begin in black with some audio coming in to precede the scene, bringing us slowly into the current moment and visually dividing the story (the first occurs at the very beginning with a gorgeously languid fade in).

Dave (Peter Hermann) and Eileen (Kelly McAndrew) in In the Family (In the Family)

The acting in this film is quite nearly impeccable. It can be said that a running time such as this gives the actors more time to develop their character, hone their performance but that would be ignoring the fact that the work still does have to be done. Wang particularly has a lot of heavy lifting to do in the third act, his physicality is a lot of what takes us along but at the end it’s just him, speaking to his family and speaking to us and it’s nothing less than monumental that this “unedited” deposition scene works. It keeps with the cloistered aspect of the film but brings things full circle and is riveting. However, Kelly McAndrew’s reaction shots during this scene are breathtaking also. The real find of the film, however, may be Sebastian Banes. Actors around his age, he plays a character who is six, with as much natural talent and charisma are rare. A few scenes in I was already comparing him favorably to Drew Barrymore.

In the Family is a revelation in many ways, not only for my story of not really having heard about it and then having it fall into my lap but also for revealing the tremendous budding auteur that is Patrick Wang. It’s a crime how under-seen this film is and I cannot recommend it to you highly enough.

10/10

Rewind Review- Little Indi

Posted on by bernardovillela

As those who know me, and if such a person exists, cyberstalk me, know I created this blog after writing on another site, which shall remain nameless, for a while. The point is, I have material sitting around waiting to be re-used on occasion I will re-post them here. Some of those articles or reviews may have been extemporaneous at the time but are slightly random now, hence the new title and little intro, regardless enjoy!

Little Indi is a film that is playing as part of a new series called New Spanish Cinema at the Film Society at Lincoln Center. It tells the tale of a boy named Arnau, nicknamed “Little Indian” for reasons unknown to us (one can assume it’s based on his appearance but it is not confirmed), who is desperately trying to earn himself money to pay a lawyer to assist his mom who is incarcerated.

Most of the quiet, sparsely-dialogued film involves Arnau, played by Marc Soto, looking for extra work, going to a dog track or debating whether to sell his prize-winning goldfinch. He is mostly on his own and in many ways caught between adulthood and childhood. One minute he is pounding the backroads seeking more hours of work anywhere he can find them, but he is tending to a wounded fox the next.

The scoring of this film is very distinctive and it never overpowers or sentimentalizes anything but it does help push the story about and also keeps the correct middling tone. A tone believed to be desired because there is little seen of this incarcerated mother, she is seen briefly and it is understood. It is in essence a very observational film. It’s a window into a world.

There are many hurdles and many disappointments which take this film to its conclusion. The ending is open so divulging too many plot details would allow one to know exactly how it stays open.
It is a film that ultimately stays visual so bear with it and eventually you will understand what competition he enters the finch into and to an extent what the judging criteria is. Other things within the film which might also seem foreign but eventually do come to make sense.

Marc Soto is described in the writings accompanying this film as a newcomer, however, the pedigree of a film actor can be gauged more so when they say nothing than when they speak and Soto’s pedigree seems to belie his experience. Words are the domain of the theatre actor; a film actor has to be able to hold our interest in quiet moments of which this film has many. Will we watch him behave and not just speak? Yes. Do you see him thinking? For as much interaction as Soto has yes there is definitely potential for a new star of Spanish cinema to have been born in this part.

When minimalism in a minimal environment occurs it can be much easier to accept. When minimalism occurs in an urban/suburban environment, as it does in this film, it is asking for a bit more patience from its audience. Does the film reward the audience for its patience? Ultimately, I believe that answer to be yes. It’s not a tremendous reward but it is also not a shortchanging experience. It is the type of film that may even go up a rating point or two upon a second viewing as you examine how it works but it does involve you in the avenues that Arnau investigates to try and earn more money and also involves you in how he tries to go about rectifying his missteps.

Also, if you are a fan of Spanish cinema you might recognize the cameo by Agustí Villaronga, director of such disturbing thrillers as El Mar and In A Glass Cage, as the mysterious The Man in White Shoes. Ultimately, it is an enjoyable film that this critic will want to re-examine.

6/10 
 

Review- The Forgiveness of Blood

Posted on by bernardovillela

The Forgiveness of Blood is a film that is about a modern day feud between two families in Albania. The film starts off with what is seemingly a small incident: there is a line of rocks on a road; a man Mark (Refet Abazi) needs access to it to make his bread route shorter. He moves the rocks and with that commences the argument that escalates into a feud, as the road isn’t public and the owner permits no one to use it. Exacerbating this issue is that the families have a history and that land used to be in Mark’s family.

That’s the set-up as the fighting starts, but the film refuses to be about the main combatants but rather about those caught in the crossfire and in a sense about feuding itself. The film has two young leads Nik (Tristan Halilaj) and Rudina (Sindi Lacej) that have to bear much of the brunt of the fallout from this incident.

Now, this is a film wherein there are some idiosyncrasies and details of feuding in this society are implied but are not specifically explained. For example, there is reference to a book (Kanun) wherein the rules of combat per se are laid out, and there is also a special permission to leave the house to attend school for those old enough to be targeted (Besa), however, while these things are not clear upon their initial introduction they are soon made to be clear.

Another thing that must be noted is that there are a few incidents that occur off-screen which is fitting with the theme of the film. The film is not about the combatants but the affected by the fighting. There is a way that the film does try to engage the audience, and that is by having Nik be a bit more idealistic. Such that he looks at things logically rather than relying on what tradition says. His protestations fall on deaf ears but it allows discussions that those who are unfamiliar with such situations to get acclimated as things are somewhat indirectly explained.

The handling of the feud causes a great deal of tension in a few ways: the opposing family whom we only meet sparingly don’t necessarily play by the rules and Mark, who has exiled himself, returns intermittently endangering his family further just to visit.

With all these stressors this creates many opportunities for drama and there are truly a number of very well acted scenes and compelling arguments. While Tristan Halilaj and Sindi Lacej exist in parallel storylines they each carry their own half of the film in very different ways. Halilaj is the brooding, rebellious teen who is seeking to affect change either in his family or in tradition or both if possible. Lacej is trying her best to learn to work and bring in extra money wherever and however possible, in a now very hostile world. Then there is Mark’s abandoned wife Bardha played very well by Zana Hasaj.

Yet the film does layer some and adds a few very important pieces to the equation to give a fuller view of the feud. The first being the younger son in the family Dren (Elsajed Tallilli) who has a fair bit of screen time and has good bonding scenes with his older brother but also struggles to adapt to things like home schooling. Then you also get a more middle-of-the-road angle from the opposing side in Mara (Servete Haxhija) who also illustrates how this is still a male-dominated society.

It’s always interesting to get a glimpse into a foreign culture in any form, especially one you are fairly unfamiliar with, however, I felt a bit of a disconnect at times simply because certain things were left to be assumed or surmised. It was something that the film overcomes but is a slightly shaky foundation. However, it is an engaging and interesting tale.

7/10

Review- Being Flynn

Posted on by bernardovillela

Robert De Niro and Paul Dano in Being Flynn (Focus Features)

If one watches the trailer then a lot of Being Flynn is revealed. This is not an uncommon phenomenon in this era of film, but it was enough to convince me to watch this film, and it also illustrates the major hurdle the film has. The film deals with what occurs when Nick (Paul Dano), a youth seeking direction in his life, starts to work in a homeless shelter and sees his estranged father (Robert De Niro) there.

It’s a plot in the trailer that makes it seem like a very unlikely chance encounter. In actuality, the leap of faith needed to believe this scenario is not nearly as large. There are furtive awkward reunion attempts prior to fate intervening as it does. This is a very good thing indeed and it allows all the baggage the two characters have to be dealt with when tension is at a boiling point.

The film does use a good deal of voice over narration and what’s more it has two narrators, father and son. Voice over is always a treacherous balancing act but this film does rather well with it and gives additional insight into these two not completely dissimilar characters. Voice over can be looked at as a story-telling bridge, bridging the gap that a visual cannot for editorial or aesthetic reasons. The key is to build footbridges not suspension bridges, to build them intermittently and this film does that.

That does not mean this film is devoid of visual signature and style quite the opposite there is quite a bit of visual interest, which is mainly added through the edit. The film has quite a few flashback sequences that mainly serve to illustrate Nick’s upbringing and the impact his father’s absence had. The film enters these passages creatively and more often than expected but always with great results and it really resonates.

These flashes aside from giving us very good fragmentary performances from Julianne Moore, shades of her turn in The Hours, and Liam Broggy as Young Nick, also help establish the tonality of the film. The sequences aren’t juxtaposed as much as they are forerunners to the twists and turns of fate in the present day. There’s a bittersweet quality as it shows what was, with hints of what could’ve been and eventually there are echoes of the past in the present that seem equally unavoidable.

Yet as dour as the film is at times there is a certain balance of emotions at play. There is some humor to it when appropriate and certainly tenable drama not just voyeurism, you feel this movie not only watch it.

This is the kind of film that for all its other merits hinges on its performers and with these two the film excels. This is the kind of challenging emotional and engaging work that Paul Dano does frequently and that Robert De Niro doesn’t do nearly enough of anymore. They work brilliantly together and regardless of the frequency with which either does this kind of film it’s great that they do it here.

Since the Weitz brothers have stopped working exclusively in tandem they’ve done some rather interesting work, and this film is no exception. While this film takes its unexpected turns and ends well but a bit loosely but is very good and worth seeking out.

9/10

Review- Our Idiot Brother

Posted on by bernardovillela

Paul Rudd in Our Idiot Brother (The Weinstein Company)

Our Idiot Brother through its marketing gives you the impression that it’s just going to be a laugh-a-minute-comedy about a slacker brother and his more well-off family’s interactions, while it is funny there is more than meets the eye with this film. That can go both ways but it truly ends up being a good thing in this case.

First and foremost this is a showcase for the comedic talents of Paul Rudd, who rarely finds a vehicle like this where he can really showcase what he can do. From beginning to end in this film Rudd is in top form and there are exchanges whether it’s scripted or he went off-book that only he could make that funny. One of his confrontations with his ex-girlfriend (Kathryn Hahn) comes to mind.

Not to say this is a one man show, quite on the contrary. The aforementioned Kathryn Hahn is hilarious in this film as is her new beau, the good-natured Billy (T.J. Miller). In the family there are strong performances that show a good deal of range from Emily Mortimer, Zooey Deschanel, Elizabeth Banks, Rashida Jones and Steve Coogan. While playing a relatively simplistic character on the surface Rudd displays a different side of himself with each of the aforementioned characters as well as with Jeremy (Adam Scott), his sister Miranda’s (Banks) neighbor/potential love interest, they both share an affinity for Sci-Fi and with River (Matthew Mindler), his nephew, he can see what it is he really wants but never tells his parents.

This film toes the line of drama and comedy very well and in doing so manages not to be overly long. It keeps things funny but also keeps real world consequences involved but doesn’t let the bad things that can and will happen to people put a damper on things. The film like life goes on and it chooses to laugh at it.

Having said all that it is a very funny film indeed and you will likely walk away from it quoting one or two things there are some very good exchanges and some memorable, witty dialogue.

It also has one of Those Scenes. Meaning one of those great scenes by which you will remember the film and Paul Rudd’s performance. I refer to it as The Charades Scene and it is a perfect calling out of all the characters in the film without being too heavy-handed it shows just enough restraint and achieves brilliance due to the writing and performance of it. Naturally, it is also a crucial scene.

The film takes all of its narrative strands and subplots and deals with them rather neatly. Then at the end it meanders a bit and you don’t quite know why. When you find out it’s good for a laugh and a truly happy ending but you’re left wondering if that was truly needed.

Our Idiot Brother is a good comedy with some very good dramatic moments thrown in. Though in the end the results a re bit mixed in some areas, not just the very end, it’s very much worth viewing.

7/10

Mini-Review Round-Up #5

Posted on by bernardovillela

This is something I’m going to do periodically. Basically, I will employ many means to qualify films for the BAM Awards be it either seeing the film theatrically acquiring a DVD either through purchase or on Netflix. This could lead to an influx of several new titles being seen in a short span of time which would be difficult to write full reviews for. At least this way the film gets some of its deserved attention and you get some notion of my thoughts on them.

If you have questions or comments feel free to respond. I always get back.

As always please refer to My Rating Scale for an indication of what the scores mean and if you’re curious where these films might make a dent in my personal awards please check my BAM Considerations.

The Beaver

Riley Thomas Stewart and Mel Gibson in The Beaver (Summit)

One of the quirkiest films I’ve seen this year. It’s a bit inconsistent towards the latter half of the second act but overall it’s effective and all the laughs about the situation are intended. Mel Gibson does a fantastic job in this film. It’s perhaps Foster’s best directorial turn but not her strongest story. The tightness of the cast, few ancillary characters, helps this film connect.

7/10

Super

Ellen Paige and Rainn Wilson in Super (IFC Midnight)

A truly odd little film that can’t escape comparisons to Kick-Ass. While it never does metamorphose fully into a superhero film (and that’s fine) its quirk never really clicks as well as it should and the resolution (meaning the denouement not the climax) is a bit unsatisfying. A very good performance by Rainn Wilson but the film could’ve been much better.

6/10

Tucker & Dale vs. Evil

Alan Tudyk and Tyler Labine in Tucker & Dale vs. Evil (Magnet)

This is one of the few true horror/comedy films because of the very simple and ingenious use of perception and knowledge. We know everything that’s going on therefore we can laugh despite how horrific it is that Tucker and Dale and the college kids never understand one another. It also works like horror film with a classic and funny backstory. It’s truly a treat that ought to be seen by fans of both genres.

10/10

Red State

James Parks in Red State (SModcast Pictures)

I’m sorry but I just do not understand all the vitriol about Kevin Smith. You can say what you like about his P.T. Barnum act with taking this film on the road and the rest of it but I think this is solid stuff and very different than all his prior works. It has a horror aspect, occasional laughs, political overtones and some darn solid acting from James Parks, Kyle Gallner and Michael Angarano. Most of them being involved plus hockey makes Hit Somebody something to look forward to indeed.

9/10

Bereavement

Brett Rickaby in Bereavement (Crimson Films/Anchor Bay)

It’s hard to know where to start (or to stop) talking about Bereavement. It is quite simply a symphony of horror. Though I take back nothing I said about Insidious or Hatchet on Twitter this is the most blown away by a horror film that I’ve been since I first saw Frailty. Spencer List’s dialogueless but significant role in this film is strong enough to make me reconsider my Creepiest Kids in Supporting Roles list. For Stevan Mena as an auteur this is a true tour-de-force as he directs, writes and scores this film brilliantly. It’s one of the deepest casts in a horror film I’ve seen in a long time and one of the few I’ve seen after reaching my Age of Cynicism regarding horror were nothing feels safe or sacred.

10/10

Review- Dolphin Tale

Posted on by bernardovillela

Nathan Gamble in Dolphin Tale (Warner Bros.)

It’s impossible not to like a film like Dolphin Tale. While many of its story elements and motifs are tried and true it does find an interesting way to combine them and bring this dramatized version of a real life story to life very effectively. The only things that can really be cited as negatives about the film are that the edit isn’t as tight as it could be notably some scenes could be excised and there is that familiarity of certain elements and an air of predictability.

In spite of all that, however, the film does excel in creating an emotionally engaging experience that plays like a new age low key Free Willy (Yes, I know that was an Orca), which is a very good thing indeed. What is meant by that is that Winter, the female dolphin in question, is very much at the center of the film and it’s just as much about her as anyone but there’s also a connection between a boy and the animal and we understand and admire this connection without the histrionics the former employed. Not to say that Sawyer (Nathan Gamble) has a perfect home life but not everything in this film is extreme, the problems are more grounded, real and easier to identify with.

One of the more refreshing things about the film is that the social consciousness is already a fabric of the story so it never needs to be awkwardly commented upon as what starts Sawyer’s fascination with marine life is visiting Winter at a rehabilitation center. So unlike some films that deal with animals there’s not an iota of concern about characters domesticating, using them for sport or any other things that would detract from the purity of the fascination.

Another danger of animal related films is that the human characters, some but not all, are less developed and subservient and this doesn’t occur in this film. The editing choices mentioned at the beginning would not be anything that relates to the characters because you learn about all the characters in this film and see them build relationships and unite for a common goal and you become invested in the outcome for all their sakes and not just for the protagonist, which isn’t a frequent occurrence.

Learning about characters can be a delight or a chore depending on the strength of the cast. The cast of this film made it delightful. First, there’s the young lead Nathan Gamble who is the best young actor whom you’ve seen but can’t name. He’s been in such films as Marley & Me, The Dark Knight and The Mist. While his role here isn’t the most challenging he certainly does carry it with the deft of a veteran. The surprise of the film is debutante Cozi Zuehlsdorff who plays his friend Hazel and possesses unteachable ease and charm onscreen.

The adult core gives you solid expected performances from the likes of Kris Kristofferson, Harry Connick, Jr., Ashley Judd and Morgan Freeman but the surprise of that bunch is Austin Stowell. Stowell is an actor who looks the parts of wannabe swimmer and war veteran but has emotional range. He should be taking roles from Channing Tatum over the the next few years.

This is a 3D film, however, the screening I attended was in 2D. It was shot 3D and not post-converted so I plan on seeing it as such. You may want to do the same for a break down of real versus fake 3D check this site.

Dolphin Tale is a film that effectively creates the world of its story and it is a very pleasant place to go for a visit. You will find yourself engaged in it and moved by it. I believe that much like Soul Surfer (but maybe with fewer detractors) it will win over audiences for many weeks to come.

8/10

Review- Alabama Moon

Posted on by bernardovillela

Uriah Shelton, Jimmy Bennett and Gabriel Basso in Alabama Moon (Faulkner-McLean Entertainment)

Alabama Moon is a film whose road to distribution was a long and winding one. In fact, it’s eventual home video release (which is how I ended up seeing it) was delayed because it finally got a limited regional release in the Gulf states, mainly Alabama (naturally). It’s worth noting that this model is not unusual. The straight-to-video release isn’t as profitable as it once was, and for some reason just as maligned even in this Streaming Age, so limited releases will act as a springboard for DVD sales.

Alabama Moon tells the tale of young Moon Blake, a boy who is raised in the woods by an eccentric father who is wary of both modernity and the government. Very early on, and rendered rather dramatically, Moon loses his father and much of the film will deal with how Moon tries to cope on his own, while trying to avoid authorities like a bumbling quasi-humorous cop played by Clint Howard or the clutches of a reformatory.

The standout of the film is the performance of Jimmy Bennett, who plays Moon Blake. He was most recently JJ on No Ordinary Family but is perhaps known for playing young James T. Kirk in the Star Trek reboot. While Bennett has played in much grittier, darker and dramatic vehicles before such as Trucker and The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things this may just be his best performance to date. This role demands a lot of him not just in terms of highly-charged emotional scenes but also some comedic timing is required and he needs to be a grounded normal-seeming character in the film’s goofier moments. As I tweeted immediately after watching it he basically makes it worth watching on his own and is “crazy good.”

There are other performances of note as well. Those deserving first mention are Moon’s friends played by Gabriel Basso and Uriah Shelton respectively. They play very different kinds of characters but are equally good foils because it never seems unnatural that Moon would befriend either because they both seem to reflect disparate aspects of his personality both a fighter and a quiet, solitary type.

The adult casting offers more mixed results. John Goodman’s character thankfully plays a more crucial role later in the film than it seems he will early on and is very well played. Then we come to the last key figure which is the police officer played by Clint Howard. Now merely casting Clint Howard, or that you can cast him in the part, is already an indication of how you intend to play a part. Howard can play a creepy menacing type but more often than not he’s goofy and here he’s like a mean-spirited Barney Fife only less competent.

It’s in that writing and casting decision where the die is cast that the tone of the film will be a balancing act between very serious drama in a coming-of-age vein and lighthearted borderline screwball comedy that must counterbalance one another. It is to this film’s credit that it manages to keep them both in check and make the film both light viewing and emotionally engaging at the same time and also some of that credit once again goes to the cast.

The film manages to deal with quite a few themes in a subtler than expected manner despite the variegated tone. One of the main ones being individuation from parents specifically that one can accept their parents’s faults, love them for who they are and learn from them but must eventually learn to see the the world, and interact with it, in their own way.

It may be easy to read this review and see why this film has fallen through the cracks as it’s not exactly the easiest to pigeonhole, however, I hope that in reading this review you have also found it is worth your time.

I was rather pleasantly surprised by this film and I’m very glad I tracked it down.

8/10

Review- Win Win

Posted on by bernardovillela

Paul Giamatti and Alex Schaffer in Win Win (Fox Searchlight Pictures)

When writing a review I am not one who revels in deliberating on flowery prose with which to acknowledge the contributions of actors in a film. This is not to say an actors contributions to a film are insignificant, the prevailing reason for this fact is that as wonderful or irrelevant as a performance is, my opinion usually boils down to the narrative and how well it functions. However, on occasion you’ll find a character-driven piece that is so perfectly cast that it bears mentioning front and center.

That’s the case in Win Win. This film is all about its characters and each of the actors assigned to their respective characters could not be more well-suited, it’s quite literally pitch perfect. Paul Giamatti plays a more humbled and down-to-earth character than he’s usually given to toy with. The vulnerability there allows us to identify with him even when he makes mistakes and we know it at the time. He is flanked by friends who despite very different outward personas hide hurts from which they seek refuge. Each is played brilliantly by Bobby Cannavale and Jeffrey Tambor respectively.

The mentions of the cast will continue as necessary but I can proceed because what works best in this film is that it never devolves into a self-indulgent character study but allows the plot to flow from the characters.

It takes a sufficient amount of time to develop the characters and then allows the information to progress the story rather than have the plot move ahead and character development is left chasing. A prime example is Alex Shaffer’s character, he first shows up as a complication in Mike’s (Paul Giamatti’s) plan then we learn who he is, he wrestles to have something to do and then we discover he’s good. Director Thomas McCarthy’s gamble to find an actor who was a wrestler first paid off big time, as Shaffer plays the role of a disaffected teenager to a tee and adds more dimension to the role than perhaps was even written.

The dialogue in this film is funny and like everything else is character-driven. Nothing is flippantly tossed out for a laugh but everything grows out of who we learn these people are and how they’ll react to given situations. Jackie, Paul’s wife (Amy Ryan) is a prime example of this. A lot of her dialogue is hysterical but only within the context of who we discover she is and not inherently.

The characters get introduced to in drips and drabs such that we quickly, without being spoonfed, discover what makes them tick. The family dynamic is introduced with a triad of scenes each punctuated in profanity, the depths to which Terry (Bobby Cannavale) is suffering from his divorce is revealed slowly and almost as an aside and even wrestling, which ends up being a major component of the film, doesn’t get thrown into the mix straight away.

The film benefits greatly from having a very tight and neatly structured script that paces itself to perfection. Aside from making sound and effective narrative decisions it is great mechanically. As I was watching it I wondered if Newmarket Press had picked it up for the Shooting Script series (it seems it has not but hopefully it will).

The title of the film reflects itself in the narrative in a subtle way in as you get the resolution you wanted. Yet, it’s the manner in which it’s handled that’s the most satisfying. It’s not a sappy or stereotypical ending. Ultimately, the characters end up with what they want but not how they expected to get and not without sacrificing.

The climactic conflict that needs resolving to get to said point is also very well dealt with. To put it simply it’s wordlessly and cinematically resolved. There are times in life when we know words are futile and an action must either be forgiven or not and life must go on. This is even more true in cinema and few films realize and this one does.

This is a great serio-comic film that resonates with truthfulness and is the rare film I’d categorize as a must see.

10/10