The Idea of You

Director: Michael Showalter
Starring: Anne Hathaway, Nicholas Galitzine, Ella Rubin, Annie Mumolo, Reid Scott, Perry Mattfeld, Jordan Aaron Hall, Mathilda Gianopoulos, Meg Millidge
Running Time: 116 min.
Rating: R

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

Michael Showalter's The Idea of You explores that weird phenomenon of coming face-to-face with a celebrity and realizing they're an actual person rather than a famous construct you don't know at all. In other words, you're forced to see them as human rather than some entertainment commodity intended for mass consumption. But this movie's single mom eludes that moment since the famous pop singer she meets views her as the real catch. Down to earth and relatable, she's unlike anyone he normally meets, and while it's infatuation at first sight, we get why.  

Consistently humorous and intelligently written, the film's generic title fools you into thinking it's another fluffy rom-com, but this adaptation of actress Robinne Lee's 2017 debut novel of the same name makes the most of a simple premise. And even its title makes more sense when considering the mere idea of a relationship seems crazy until each overcome their preconceived notions. It might work or not, but they at least have to try, resulting in an unusually smart dramedy that finds them discovering this could be even more difficult than they thought. 

On the eve of her fortieth birthday, divorced art gallery owner Solène Marchand (Hathaway) plans to spend the weekend on a solo camping trip, until she's contacted by scuzzy ex-husband Daniel (Reid Scott). Called away for work at the last minute, he's unable to take their teen daughter Izzy (Ella Rubin) and her friends to Coachella, causing Solène to reluctantly fill in, accompanying them to the festival's meet-and-greet with British boy band August Moon. 

Looking for the bathroom in a VIP area, Solène accidentally enters band member Hayes Campbell's (Nicholas Galitzine) trailer, resulting in an awkward but flirtatious encounter with the singer. Immediately smitten, he dedicates a song to Solène and even shows up later at her gallery. Despite feeling self conscious about their sixteen year age gap and the dissolution of her marriage, there's genuine chemistry. But as they embark on this exciting new relationship, she's forced to consider whether the unforgiving, judgmental glare of the spotlight is too much. 

It would be easy for viewers to roll their eyes at the script's implication Solène is somehow "old," a "cougar" or "past her prime" when Hathaway looks young enough to pass for her screen daughter's sister and not much older than the late twenties Galitzine. But that's hardly the point. The film isn't sexist by dwelling on age, but instead accurately reflecting how the public and media do. We know exactly how this relationship would be viewed so Showalter and co-writer Jennifer Westfeldt deserve credit for digging into it, enabling Hathaway to convincingly convey the mistrust and insecurity an average woman might feel in such a situation. 

Hathaway possesses an almost otherworldly presence and charisma, but she's always strongest playing real, everyday characters you wouldn't mind giving up your place in line for at the supermarket. Or in this case, the bathroom. A reminder of just how valuable she remains in the genre that launched her career, she smooths out some of the rough patches, like an improbable meet cute and a concert full of cringe worthy pop songs. Her lead performance is a big reason this amounts to much more than the gender swapped Notting Hill it was trumpeted as. 

Solène's resistance has less to do with her age than the lingering trust issues left over from a lying, cheating ex, while Hayes (who's clearly based on Harry Styles) is laid back, but persistent. His biggest fear is being viewed as a complete joke whose fifteen minutes are up, with little to show for it. Galitzine holds his own with Hathaway, believable as a charming, self-effacing pop star who's itching to prove himself as a person and artist, but could still be a womanizing bad boy capable of hurting her. Of course, there are also many scenes focusing on how his fame begins infecting every aspect of Solène's life, in ways both funny and profoundly uncomfortable.

The couple actually break up twice, first for a predictable reason, then again for a very understandable one, demonstrating how often it can all just be about timing. That this has a few endings should be a detriment, but Showalter's so good at balancing them that it actually improves the story. There's real purpose in delaying a payoff that hits harder than you'd expect, only to be topped by an aftermath worth sticking around for. Problems and complications may pile up, but they're earned, recalling many of those 90's rom-coms where likeable stars played interesting people worth rooting for.     

Armageddon Time

Director: James Gray
Starring: Anne Hathaway, Jeremy Strong, Banks Repeta, Jaylin Webb, Anthony Hopkins, Tovah Feldshuh, Ryan Sell, John Diehl, Jessica Chastain, Andrew Polk
Running Time: 115 min.
Rating: R 

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

While watching writer/director James Gray's semi-autobiographical, coming-of-age drama Armageddon Time, it's almost impossible not to subconsciously think of Steven Spielberg's The Fabelmans. But even as both respected filmmakers' childhoods are defined by complicated relationships with their Jewish families, there are key differences. This is more intimate, dryer and less showy than Spielberg's effort, which isn't necessarily a put down. And with the exception of a couple of cameos sure to stir debate, it's not nearly as eccentric. A subdued experience that functions as a time capsule of early eighties New York, it's also a project that transcends the director's own nostalgia to convey larger points about inequality and prejudice. 

Gray deserves credit for making this less about him than how a kid his age viewed a changing world. Known for smaller character driven pieces, it snuggly fits into his filmography, and since Gray isn't the public figure Spielberg is, it feels like less of an event. But that works well in managing viewer expectations, enabling us to more easily lose ourselves in the story and performances. Despite a downbeat tone, the care and attention to detail make it a comfortable universe to reside in for nearly two hours, as its young leads convey an authentic friendship that's tested by the biases surrounding them.  

It's 1980 in Queens, New York and on his first day of sixth grade, Paul Graff (Banks Repeta) befriends a rebellious African-American student named Johnny Davis (Jaylin Webb), who was held back a year. When the two start getting into trouble, Johnny receives the brunt of the blame, while Paul's ambitions of becoming an artist are scoffed at by his caring but strict Jewish parents, Irving (Jeremy Strong) and Esther (Anne Hathaway). Only grandfather Aaron Rabinowitz (Anthony Hopkins) encourages his artistic pursuits and dispenses sage advice, while still acknowledging he has some growing up to do.

When the two boys are caught smoking a joint in the school restroom, Paul is sent to the same private school as his older brother Ted (Ryan Sell), trying to fit in as he and Johnny's bond is challenged by the move. Feeling burdened by the weight of his parents' lofty expectations, Paul soon realizes just how much his friend's perilous situation is dictated by outside forces far beyond their control.   

Shot in this brownish, old timey hue by cinematographer Darius Khondji, it sometimes feels as if this takes place earlier than 1980, with references to the Beatles and just a general feeling that Paul's being guided into conforming to the standards of his parents and grandparents' generation rather than his own. Some of the best scenes are at school, with him and Johnny immediately forging a friendship based on shared interests and a penchant for creating chaos. 

The story reaches a point that that you start wondering whether the adults are inadvertently pouring gasoline on the fire, with the kids' behavior worsening with each new warning or consequence. We also get the impression that they're being held to entirely different standards, with many believing Paul's been corrupted by this new black kid in class. That both could be equally responsible rarely crosses anyone's minds, leading to even uglier consequences later on.

Paul dreams of becoming an artist and Johnny intends to work for NASA, but both are discouraged at every turn, which is ironic considering how anyone today would be impressed a pair sixth graders have such grand ambitions at all. But these goals are really only attainable for Paul, who's white. Johnny has no parents and lives with his grandmother, while his more privileged, connected friend has a mom on the school board and a hard working father with high standards. Young actors Repeta and Webb are extremely likable in their roles, even when doing unlikable things. And is this gets progressively heavier, both are up to the task, subtly projecting a potential in their characters that flies over the heads of these authority figures.    

Anthony Hopkins makes the most out of his supporting role as the boy's pragmatic grandfather, a wise, empathetic figure who stands in stark contrast to Paul's dad, or so we think. It's revealed just how much the pressure of living up to that example weighs on Irving, with a performance from Jeremy Strong that only becomes more nuanced as the film progresses, establishing the character as someone more than a strict disciplinarian who reaches for the strap every time Paul tests him. 

Hathaway is effortless in her part, sliding into Gray's early 80's universe as a working mother  contemplating conflicted feelings of concern and uncertainty over the right way to handle their son's behavior. Paul fears the beating of his young life when his dad discovers his worst transgression yet, only to realize that's preferable to the actual punishment, which involves a transfer to Forest Manor Prep in Queens. This leads to a face-to-face encounter with the school's primary financial donor, a mustachioed businessman by the name of Fred Trump (John Diehl). 

If that wasn't enough, Paul even sits through a speech by Fred's daughter and school alumna Maryanne Trump (Jessica Chastain). So even if it may be more interesting to watch a documentary detailing Gray's conversation with the Oscar winner about taking the role, this apparently happen, as the family's involvement at Forest Manor during this time is quite real. Their brief inclusion, as shocking as it is, does seem less about them than what they represent. Fred's most infamous son may not be in it, but Gray's intentions still come across loud and clear.

Maryanne's motivational talk foreshadows the film's ending, even if Gray has a tougher time directly tying that to the featured news clips of Ronald Reagan, who takes more of a thrashing here than the Trumps, as he's frequently mocked by Paul's liberal, minded parents. This all makes it sound like a political film when the intention is really to point out the uneven playing field Johnny continuously endures.

For certain people to succeed, others are inevitably thrown under the bus, and the best Irving can do for his son is make him acutely aware of it, preparing him for the inevitability that life's more unfair for some than others. There's a moment in the last act where Gray has an easy out, but instead decides to go a step further and write the characters into a corner that forces them and the viewers to confront harsher realities. It's through this that Paul realizes just how fortunate he is and how you sometimes take the lucky break, no matter how bad or wrong it feels. 

At its core, Armageddon Time is a period piece about kids who just want to be kids, despite having little wiggle room to learn, grow or make mistakes. And unfortunately for one, there's no room whatsoever. The hypothesis Gray eventually reaches is something we know, but isn't often expressed through a child's perspective. It's blunt but effective, leaving a lasting impression that sure to receive criticism better reserved for films far less accomplished at handling the tricky material this does. Gray walks a thin line in attempting to draw parallels between his childhood and the world today, but he mostly pulls off, enveloping us in a deeply personal story that suggests far broader implications.                                     

Locked Down

Director: Doug Liman
Starring: Anne Hathaway, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Stephen Merchant, Mindy Kaling, Lucy Boynton, Dulé Hill, Jazmyn Simon, Ben Stiller, Ben Kingsley, Mark Gatiss, Claes Bang, Sam Spruell
Running Time: 118 min.
Rating: R

★★★ (out of ★★★★) 

Advertised as one of the first official pandemic movies, both shot during and incorporating COVID-19 into its plotline, HBO Max's appropriately titled romantic caper, Locked Down, wouldn't appear by defiinition to provide a happy escape from reality given its topic. But you'd be forgiven for not knowing it actually isn't the first to tackle this topic, as the critically reviled Songbird attempted a similar feat some months ago with a sci-fi bent, resulting in a creative disaster that offended nearly everyone who saw it, and even some who didn't. Whether there's such a thing as "too soon" before subjecting viewers to this dramatization, the better question might be whether the pandemic's incorporation into a cinematic plotline has anything constructive to say about either the event or our reaction to it. 

Locked Down does pass that relevancy test, even if it's best described as a light relationship drama, serving to confirm much of what we already knew rather than offering up any revelatory insights. One of those is that quarantine can be more of a stressor for some than others, bringing to the surface a myriad of issues not being directly addressed prior to this catastrophe. For its two main characters, this means endlessly getting on each other's last nerves and wallowing in their failures, both as a couple and individually, until a major opportunity comes along to shake them up. Most of it's handled well, even if you can argue its most exciting section is given the least amount of time and attention. Luckily, the protagonists seem real enough, played by two actors who together and separately are dynamic enough to overcome those faults.

Delivery truck driver Paxton (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and fashion company CEO Linda (Anne Hathaway) are a couple whose relationship collapsed prior to them being locked down in their U.K. home during the pandemic. Forced to continue sharing space together, a depressed and irritable Paxton gets a call from his eccentric boss, Malcolm (Ben Kingsley), asking him to step in and make some high-value deliveries under a false identity due to a shortage of drivers. Sensing the chance to finally move up the ranks and put his life back on track after an assault arrest 10 years earlier derailed him, he reluctantly takes the assignment. 

Embroiled in a work crisis of her own, Linda is tasked by her oblivious superior, Solomon (Ben Stiller) to clear out inventory at a nearby Harrod's department store where she used to work. But upon realizing her schedule intersects with Malcolm's delivery, she knows he won't be able to get past the security checkpoint she set up there. Agreeing to help him get through, they contemplate a plan to steal a £3 million diamond from the Harrod's vault, replacing it with the replica. But before attempting to gain access, they'll need to summon the courage to actually go through with this operation, and somehow manage make a safe exit without getting caught, or strangling each other first. 

After this and outings like 2015's The Intern, it's clear Anne Hathaway always impresses when playing CEO's and other similar Type A corporate personalities. It's an oddly specific skillset, but even trapped within the confines of a single location and planted in front of a screen for virtual meetings for much of the film's running time, it still shines through, with her baring the comedic load of these Zoom-centered scenes. Linda's an excecutive not completely comfortable in her own job or skin, which becomes apparent very early on when given the most unenvious of tasks, made that much more awful by the impersonal technological means by which she has to do it. A nervous wreck before, this meeting takes her over-the-top, drinking and smoking non-stop in hopes she can erase the person staring back at her in the mirror, a self-proclaimed sell-out she no longer recognizes. 

Paxton is wound just as tightly, taking to the street to recite poetry aloud to his locked down neighbors and procuring drugs from his backyard garden. And both he and Linda seem more than happy to virtually share their relationship failures with best friends David (Dulé Hill) and Maria (Jazmyn Simon), who look on in awe at this implosion in the making. Ejiofor, usually known for essaying cool, calm, and in control characters plays Paxton as an unfocused dissheveled mess, but in many ways similar enough to Linda that it's inevitable they'd be on the outs before quarantine even started. And now they're stuck with each other for what could be an indefinite amount of time, having long lost touch with the people they were upon first meeting.  

We know where this is going, as Paxton and Linda will attempt to pull off this heist together because, why not? It's by far the best, if not entirely most logical part of the film, assuming viewers aren't already burnt out by their lengthy monologues, virtual meetings and quarantine bickering by then. Still, it's hard not to be intrigued by the process behind their plan and wish there was even more of the actual heist than we get since Hathaway and Ejiofor are so good in those scenes with their back-and-forth, whether their characters are feuding, or on exactly the same page in working toward a shared goal in the film's last act. 

A filmmaker synonomous with efficiently delivered mainstream action entries like Mr. and Mrs. Smith, Edge of Tomorrow and American Made, this marks somewhat of a departure for director Doug Liman in being smaller-scaled and more character driven than usual. A lot of that feels like a necessity, while also giving off the impression we would have gotten something similar anyway, regardless of the circumstances. It's also not the heist caper it was touted as, which is either a positive or negative depending upon your mindset going in. But with him being so skilled at depicting this admittedly smaller slice of the story, you wonder why he just didn't go ahead and make that movie instead. 

Steven Knight's script seems intent on examining the effects of the pandemic through this couple, the worldwide health crisis providing less of a mere backdrop than the axis around which its entire story revolves. If a really well-off couple breaking the law to get even richer may not seem like the most socially resonant premise on paper, Locked Down is still fine for what it is, elevated greatly by its performances to end up a solid effort, if not necessarily the one we thought we'd get. That may not be an enthusiastic rave, but it succeeds in agreeably passing time that's been in longer supply than unusual. Consider it a measuring stick for forthcoming attempts at addressing the event, many of which will undoubtedly fare both far better and worse than this. 

Colossal

 
Director: Nacho Vigalondo
Starring: Anne Hathaway, Jason Sudeikis, Dan Stevens, Austin Stowell, Tim Blake Nelson
Running Time: 110 min.
Rating: R

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)
  

**Spoiler Warning: This review gives away some plot details**

If judged entirely by its trailers and commercials, it's easy to fall into the trap that there isn't anything all that different about Colossal, and once you set aside a fairly unusual narrative hook, there's only one direction for it to go. That at best it could result in a reasonably satisfying and entertaining diversion headlined by two likable enough actors most recognized for lighter, more mainstream fare. One of them is a major star so there's that. Marketed as a sci-fi romcom of sorts, the genre-bending film never stood much of a chance catching box office fire since those rarely tend to work and audiences know it. But now after seeing what this actually is, I get it. Nothing about this is even the slightest bit safe or diverting. And anyone who has viewed it can't say much without the benefit of spoilers.

Those, among many other factors, was cause enough for Colossal to flop hard. Not to mention the fact no one goes to the movies anymore unless it's to see superheroes, which this draws some sort of strange inspiration from. And as much as I'd prefer to avoid categorizing as that, there's no escaping its influence. The main difference here is that writer/director Nacho Vigalondo doesn't feel the need to advertise the fact he's sliding one in there and have the movie high-five itself in celebration of the script's subversiveness, like M. Night Shyamalan did at the end of the otherwise brilliant Split. He knows to let the audience read this as they may and trusts them to intelligently interpret his ideas how they see fit.

Scene-to-scene there's a genuine sense of danger and unpredictability surrounding the actions of the film's main characters, and what they'll do or say in reaction to an oddball situation we've never seen depicted on screen before. At least not exactly. And this scenario couldn't be more ridiculous. It's catnip for a silly romantic fantasy if Vigalondo wanted to go there. For a little bit, it looks like he will, until completely pulling the rug out, exploring issues related to alcoholism, the internet, bullying, and how childhood experiences shape who we eventually become.

Vigalondo never wavers, and when things get very bleak and surprisingly deep, the material still retains its darkly comic tone, while providing Anne Hathaway the opportunity to give her most emotionally naked and vulnerable performance since Rachel Getting Married. Being John Malkovich and Adaptation meets Godzilla and Unbreakable in what could not only be described as 2017's most original release thus far, but possibly its best and least problem-ridden. And that's no small feat considering all it attempts.

Gloria (Hathaway) is unemployed writer and functioning alcoholic who's been crashing at her boyfriend Tim's (Dan Stevens) New York City apartment until she finds work. Only she isn't really looking, spending her nights out partying with friends while spending most of the following day trying to sober up. Losing patience, Tim kicks her out, forcing Gloria to move back to her New Hampshire hometown, temporarily taking up residence in her parents' vacant house. But a reunion with childhood friend Oscar (Jason Sudeikis), leads her to take a job working at his late dad's bar, which he now owns.

As late nights at the bar with Oscar and his friends worsen Gloria's drinking problem, she wanders to a children's playground and passes out, eventually waking up the next morning to tragic news of a giant, Godzilla-like reptilian monster attack in Seoul, South Korea that's killed and injured many.  After noticing the monster's mannerisms and retracing her steps, it's clear that her presence at the playground at 8:30 a.m. causes this creature to emerge halfway across the globe, making movements that directly correspond to her own. Upon realizing she's unintentionally controlling an inexplicable terror, she enlists her new friends in a quest to take matters into her own hands, possibly preventing further casualties. But as her friendship with Oscar grows, so too does her desire to know the creature's purpose and its mysterious link to her own childhood.

Considering its set-up, you could definitely envision a cookie-cutter version of this that plays out like your typical romantic comedy, where the female protagonist returns home to straighten out her life and romantically reconnect with a childhood friend. Think Sweet Home Alabama, only with a giant monster thrown in. And as strange as it seems, there are few signs pointing in any other direction early on. The introduction of this monster element undoubtedly sets it apart, but it's understandably played for laughs at first, giving few hints at the depth and complexity to follow.

From the start, the movie has more on its mind than you'd think since Gloria's too much of a wreck to make for an entirely likable romantic lead, the humor is dark and cutting, and the character of Oscar is as equally messed up as her. And even when he's right, her current boyfriend, Tim, can't help but come off as a nagging, judgmental jerk. Then it happens. A crucial incident that takes the story down a completely unexpected, thrilling path from which there's thankfully no retreat. No one is who we think they are, the creature plot doesn't exist for the reasons we believe it does and the relationship between Gloria and Oscar is both more and less complicated than we thought.

There's this added element involving Gloria's past, shown in snippets of flashback that pay off in a major way. While watching, you never get that sickeningly frequent vibe that the project was conceived in a boardroom with a group of studio executives trying to determine "what sells." Vigalondo seems to be working in direct opposition to that, not for shock value, but because the narrative calls for it and its true to the tone and characters. Making few concessions in executing his twisted vision, all the creative choices cause reassessment of everything that came before, inducing in viewers the realization that what they were watching was more nuanced and substantial than initially suspected.

As if we needed a reminder of how good Hathaway is at playing flawed people going through real, relatable problems, this serves as one. The situation Gloria finds herself in may be extraordinary, but she makes sure the character isn't. This only makes the victory she eventually earns that much sweeter. But there's nothing simple about what Hathaway does, or how she gets inside the head of this damaged woman and manages to keep pace with the script's many shifts that call upon her to express various stages of depression, self-loathing and elation. That she manages all this while remaining consistently funny serves to only further highlight the full spectrum of her abilities. It's been a while since she's been this good, if only because the material hasn't let her take the risks she's afforded here.

While everyone's been trying to make Jason Sudeikis "happen" for a while now, after what's seemed like an endless string of forgettable comedies, he finally happens, shedding the goofiness to not only display an edge well-suited for leading man status opposite Hathaway, but a natural instinct for more dramatic material thought to be far outside his comfort zone. When talking about the unpredictability of the film, you may as well be referring to everything Sudeikis says and does, constantly keeping us on guard as to what Oscar's true motivations are. It's a difficult role, and he rises to the occasion, forcing those familiar with his comedic work to reassess what they assumed of him as an actor.    

It's hard to miss the irony in Hathaway starring as a character who's actions unwittingly draw the ire of legions of internet trolls across the world. On top of everything else, there's that meta aspect at play in a story that very much works as one giant, or colossal, metaphor itself, as all of Gloria's demons manifest itself as this creature. The ending is surprisingly moving, mainly because it's accompanied by an infrequently delivered message in movies: That sometimes you just have to tune out the noise, dig deep and do it yourself. No one will help you. You're on your own. For this character, the realization is a breakthrough that's been hard earned, culminating in a brutally honest final scene that's just simply perfect. You can almost literally hear the sound of the book closing on this chapter of her story, with the knowledge that she's now the architect of her own future, wherever she chooses to take it.         

Interstellar

Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Ellen Burstyn, John Lithgow, Michael Caine, David Gyasi, Wes Bentley, Bill Irwin, Mackenzie Foy, Casey Affleck, Topher Grace David Oyelowo
Running Time: 169 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Well, at least we can't continue claiming there aren't any fresh, original ideas left in movies. Christopher Nolan's gigantic sci-fi think piece, Interstelllar, is full of them. Whether I could explain them or decipher what they all mean is another issue entirely but no one could leave the film disappointed that it didn't have enough to say. Every time a space-set sci-fi entry is released, inevitable comparisons to the trailblazing 2001: A Space Odyssey are made, whether warranted or not. Here, they are, and not just visually either. With an overreaching ambition that spans across time, space and humanity, Nolan hasn't just swung for the fences, he's run right through them. If someone asked me to explain what exactly occurs in the film's final hour, I'd give it a decent shot, but would likely fail. But it is surprising that many of these scientific facts do hold up to logical scrutiny even when the actual plot's gone too far off the deep end.

At times, you'll be wondering if this has anything to do with science at all or co-screenwriters Christopher and Jonathan Nolan are just making this up as they go along. It turns out they're not, as Caltech physicist Kip Thorne actually consulted on the film and it's at its best when playing in those waters, which is luckily 80 percent of its running time. Faltering only when awash in Spielbergian sentimentality that's partially earned, the whole thing is kind of unprecedented terms of the number of influences it draws from. If Kubrick, Spielberg and Shyamalan raised a cinematic child, it would be called Interstellar, so it's easy to understand how it's garnered such polarizing reactions.  It may take years to calculate or comprehend its creative worth, but any picture aiming this high had little chance at achieving perfection. Instead, it's Nolan's most gloriously imperfect endeavor, and one sure to be discussed and analyzed for a while to come.

In the near-future on a resource-depleted Earth, former military pilot and NASA astronaut Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) is struggling to run the family farm the midst of a crop blight that's slowly destroying civilization. His 10-year-old daughter Murph (Mackenzie Foy) is not only struggling in school in the wake of her mom's death, but claims her room is being haunted by poltergeists. But these "ghosts" are really unidentifiable intelligence leaving coordinates to a secret NASA facility being overseen by Professor John Brand (Michael Caine).

Brand's discovered a wormhole by Saturn leading to three potentially habitable planets in the galaxy that could offer a chance for humanity's survival. Cooper joins Brand's daughter, biotechnologist Amelia (Anne Hathaway), scientists Romilly (David Gyasi) and Doyle (Wes Bentley) and a pair of robots named TARS (voiced by Bill Irwin) and CASE (voiced by Josh Stewart) aboard the Endurance shuttle in search of a new home. But the clock keeps ticking faster, as Cooper's torn between reuniting with his family on Earth and insuring the future of the human race. 

The opening hour of the film is confounding, with the viewer dropped into this post-apocalyptic wasteland without much of sense of time or location. Nolan trusts us to figure it out  Everything that happens initially becomes clearer by the end, but what a strange trip it is getting there. With depleted resources and the crop crisis, the biggest fear early on is that we're heading into Shyamalan territory. The mention of poltergeists and the appearance of a rogue NASA unit operating as covertly as the CIA, does little to quell those concerns. Fortunately, the explanation of the mission doesn't involve aliens or Twilight Zone twists, but a very real mission more rooted in scientific fact and placed into fantastical fiction. It's when the crew takes off and enters that wormhole that the craziness begins and the story starts to peel its many layers.

Rarely has a space epic been so thoroughly concerned with the passage of time and all the consequences surrounding it.The realization of a massive gravitational time dilation ends up being the foundation on which all the film's most powerful themes rest, with one hour on the surface equivalent to seven years on Earth. It is a "race against time" in the strictest, most literal sense, as each minute Cooper spends investigating could represent a birthday missed or a wedding passed. And the more details we learn of Professor Brand's plan, the less likely Cooper's reunion with his kids seems, especially considering they're now adults his age.

The moment Jessica Chastain takes over for Mackenzie Foy as Murph is emotionally brutal, if not only for the transmissions Cooper sees from home, but the moral quandary the screenplay presents, testing the boundaries of sacrifice and selflessness. It's the ferry boat dilemma from The Dark Knight taken to a cosmic scale with the fate of humanity hanging in the balance. Well suited to their roles, Chastain and Casey Affleck are completely plausible as the adult counterparts of Cooper's kids 23 years later, with Murph still harboring a grudge against her father for abandoning them. When their story of trying to survive on an inhabitable Earth starts to take center stage, Nolan juggles it well with the ongoing space mission, which quickly deteriorates from a potential return home to a race against the clock.

For the first time since 1997's largely underrated Contact, McConaughey finds himself in a giant sci-fi space epic, and while he was clearly the weak there, he's now entering this project as not only an recent Oscar winner, but ten times the actor he used to be. Much more relaxed and confident as a performer compared to his rookie years, he must this time carry the entire load of this movie on his back, appearing in every scene and selling some pretty heady stuff in the third act. He's a farmer, father, pilot and equally adept at playing each and all in a role that actually earns him all those Paul Newman comparisons that have been made over the years.

Anne Hathaway joining McConaughey enables us to watch two of the best at the top of their game, feeding off each other with their characters' differing philosophies toward the missions' ultimate purpose and steps toward fulfilling it. The biggest discussion point isn't whether Hathaway's more believable as an astronaut and scientist than Sandra Bullock was in Gravity (hint: she is), but just how much she manages to do with Brand's eyes and subtle facial expressions. That's why it's disappointing whenever Nolan gives her too much to say about feelings that should be demonstrated rather than discussed. There's a cringe worthy speech she has in the vessel about that would have been unbearable had any actress but Hathaway delivered it. In a way, when given clunky dialogue she proves just how good she is, as this deserves to rank amongst her most rewarding performances.

There's also a third major name uncredited the film whose identity has been concealed in the advertising for mostly valid reasons. It's not a well kept secret, but I was still completely taken aback by the magnitude and importance of the part, which heavily informs the film's themes. Again taking from the Spielberg playbook, it can't be a coincidence that the character is named "Mann" given the nature of the role, which is fleshed out to perfection by the star playing him.

Viewers wouldn't even need to be told that this project forgoes the use of CGI in favor of practical effects and miniatures since it's plainly obvious just watching it. Or maybe I should say it's not obvious at all, since the effects sequences don't call attention to itself like green screen work so often does. If ever there was a case not to use it, Nolan wisely knew it was here, as a hard science fiction tale with big ideas is basically begging for a traditional approach that's the antithesis of what's in theaters now, making it easy to see why he rejected a 3D release. While there were supposedly numerous complaints from those who saw it on the big screen about the sound drowning out dialogue, the only sound-related issue that caught my attention was Hans Zimmer's score, which seemed to be constant in every scene, as rarely a minute passes without it. 

It's questionable whether the ending's a complete success. It is somewhat incomprehensible and gutsy, not to mention the closest mashup of the 2001 "stargate" sequence and the final scenes of A.I. as we're going to get, strangely without cribbing either. There's again probably a bit too much discussion about what Cooper's experiencing to reach the transcendent heights Nolan's aiming for, but we could only hope an eighth of the movies released each year had as much ambition as this picture's final hour. It isn't strictly a survival story set in space, as Gravity was, but a hardcore sci-fi fable hinging on thoughtful ideas  As if it wasn't already apparent, Nolan solidifies his status as a visionary storyteller whose decision to leave the Batman franchise is justified by just how much he has to say outside of it. While many currently rank this effort among his least and most flawed, I'm not entirely sure whether that assessment will stick. Ironically enough, that's something time will have determine.       
       

Les Misérables

Director: Tom Hooper
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Samantha Barks, Aaron Tveit, Isabelle Allen, Helena Bonham Carter, Sacha Baron Cohen
Running Time: 158 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

As someone who's usually not a fan of musicals and was completely unfamiliar with Victor Hugo's Les Misérables on stage or screen, here presents that rare opportunity for me to go into a movie cold. Knowing so little about it, preconceived notions tend to disappear, or at least fade as far into the background as possible. But it still turned out to be a more fulfilling and entertaining experience than my few expectations had prepared me for. It's also a bizarre one, as certain creative and technical decisions are made by Academy Award winning director Tom Hooper that will likely raise the eyebrows of even those who care little about these sorts of things. Arguments could go on all day as to whether they enhance or detract from the material, but at the end it may not even matter. Since all fans will remember is whether it remains true to the source, Hooper's preaching to the choir here. Everyone else will likely be more divided, but it's pretty cut and dry what works and what doesn't, as one section of the story clearly surpasses the other. At the top of the list of successes is the inspired casting, followed closely by a sensational opening hour that sets in motion a chain events that spans nearly twenty years and claims more than a few victims. As the running time wears on and the characters start dropping like flies, it's almost too easy to revert to the joke that this should have been titled Les MISERABLE. Few will debate the film starts losing steam after the opening sixty minutes, but there's still a lot to recommend in a story so expansive that there's genuine doubt all the characters could die of old age before the final credits roll.

Opening in 1815, Les Misérables really tells two tales that eventually converge as one giant, sweeping one. The first involves convict Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman), who's released on parole by prison guard Javert (Russell Crowe), but manages to escape and start a new life for himself, eight years later becoming a factory owner and mayor of Montreuil-sur-Mer in France. When one of his workers, Fantine (Anne Hathaway), is fired and forced to sell her hair and turn to prostitution to support her illegitimate daughter, Cosette (Isabelle Allen) Valjean steps in to become the girl's guardian. Now, years later and set against the backdrop of the French Revolution, Valjean is still being trailed by police inspector Javert while an adult Cosette (Amanda Seyfried) becomes the object of Marius Pontmercy's (Eddie Redmayne) affections, much to the dismay of his good friend, Éponine (Samantha Barks), who harbors a secret crush on him. As Javert draws closer to apprehending Valjean, the political turmoil escalates, putting all their lives in danger as a country's future hangs in the balance.          

The first hour of this film is so strong on every level possible that it was almost inevitable that the remainder of it wouldn't be able to keep pace. And Anne Hathaway's Oscar winning supporting performance as the dying Fantine is the major reason why. She has only maybe a little more than 10 minutes of screen time, but makes the most of each grueling moment, effectively selling her character's rapid descent into hopelessness.  Losing her hair and over twenty pounds, her gut-wrenching rendition of "I Dreamed a Dream" is without question the defining scene of the movie and it's a magic that isn't quite recaptured once Hathaway makes her exit. Was the role predestined, if not calculated, to win her the Oscar? Maybe, but who cares when she's this good.

It's also the best work Jackman's done in a while as a man on the run, shamed by his secret past as a criminal and racked by his own guilt. The decade plus cat-and-mouse game that unfolds between him and Javert is the film's greatest narrative asset, even when being overshadowed by other goings on in the third act. Russell Crowe himself would probably readily admit his singing isn't exactly the most polished in the cast, at times coming across as a strange hybrid of William Shatner's spoken word albums from the '60's and Pierce Brosnan in Mamma Mia! Crowe's not a singer, but because he's such a formidable actor he's able to pull off absolute lunacy with confidence and conviction. Whether it was for the right reasons or not, I looked forward to every appearance he made. As the swindling, manipulative Thénardiers, Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter feel as if they've just stepped off Tim Burton's set, embodying comedic goth creepiness as the innkeepers mistreating young Cosette and extorting her mother. Cohen is fantastic in the role, making "Master of the House," in which he sings about cheating the inn's patrons, the most raucous and purely enjoyable number in the film. If nothing else, the characters deserve credit for their surprising staying power, as few would guess these seemingly one-dimensional villains figure into the action as much and as long as they do.

Unfortunately, everything comes to a grinding halt once we get to the love triangle, which never seems to take off despite spirited efforts from all involved. Because the time jump is so sudden and jarring, it's difficult to immediately adjust to Amanda Seyfried and Samantha Barks as older versions of the child characters we got to know earlier. But they do well nonetheless. Seyfried, besides being a dead ringer to child counterpart Isabelle Allen in looks, is definitely the best singer in the cast, while Barks, who actually played Éponine on stage, sings and acts her heart out in a role that might not be quite as large as you expected. That her part almost went to Taylor Swift would be shocking if not for the fact that the content of this romantic sub-plot isn't entirely dissimilar to that of her hit songs. As for Redmayne, this marks the second time after My Week with Marilyn that he appears to be a spectator in his own movie as the young lovesick revolutionary. In some ways, Aaron Tveit, who plays his friend and charismatic leader of the movement, Enjolras, makes more of an impression. What saves this section is the music and the fact Hooper gets his act together in time for a strong, emotional finale focusing on the characters we want to see, even if most of them are dead by that point.

This isn't one of those movie musicals that directs itself or is in any way shot like a stage play directly transposed to the screen. Hooper's style is umistakenly "in your face" with weird dutch angles and extreme close-ups that could feel like an invasion of personal space for certain viewers. This is especially true of the Hathaway sequence, where the camera doesn't leave her face the entire time. At times it is too much and it's easy to see why many may not be on board with the approach or feel it's just a filmmaker showing off at the expense of the material. But for me, any bells and whistles were necessary since this was just never going to in my wheelhouse no matter what. The best that could be hoped for was to be sufficiently entertained and Les Mis did deliver that in spades It's never boring or uninteresting. Strangely, it sometimes suffers from the opposite problem, moving a mile a minute with hardly a moment to breathe and take it all in. But as far as problems go, that's a pretty good one to have.          

Burning Questions from the 2013 Oscars

Boy, that opening monologue sure was long, wasn't it?

And wasn't it kind of a mess?

Didn't Seth MacFarlane initially seem very nervous?

Can you blame him?

Is there a more thankless task than hosting this show?

Will the Mr. Skin website see increased traffic now that MacFarlane has outed all those actresses' nude scenes?

Wasn't Tommy Lee Jones cracking a smile a great start?

Did your enthusiasm dampen when you realized that would be the highlight of the entire night?

Did it truly test the theory that William Shatner makes everything he's in better? 

Wouldn't it have been great if HE sang all the nominated original songs?

Were Charlize, Channing Tatum, JGL and Daniel Radcliffe blackmailed into being involved in that?

But didn't they all do a pretty good job?

All other complaints aside, doesn't MacFarlane have a tremendous singing voice?

Wasn't there entirely too much singing (as usual)?

Between that and Kristin Chenoweth on the red carpet, didn't this feel more like The Tonys?

So, MacFarlane or Hathaway/Franco?

Did everyone immediately go 0 for 1 on their Oscar scorecard when Christoph Waltz was announced for Supporting Actor?

Am I the only one still amazed that Beasts of the Southern Wild's score wasn't nominated?

Is Roger Deakins ever going to win an Oscar?

And if he does, by that point, will he even care?

How tasteless was the Jaws music playing the winners off?

But wasn't it still really funny?

Wait, THAT was their "tribute" to 50 Years of Bond?

Looking at that montage, isn't it astonishing just how few truly great Bond movies there have been?

I knew Connnery would be a stretch, but couldn't they at least get a couple of the Bonds to show up?

George Lazenby and Timothy Dalton were busy?

Did Shirley Bassey sing the hell out of "Goldfinger" or what?

But shouldn't it have started a medley?

How about Duran Duran?

Paul McCartney?

Chris Cornell?

Carly Simon?

Didn't the pacing of the show feel particularly painful this year?

Wasn't that obvious when we were only an hour in?

How about John Travolta's mispronunciation of "Les Miserables?"

Were you thinking, "Join the club, John?"

Did you notice how little "singing" there was during the musicals tribute?

And out of all the classic Hollywood musicals they pick Chicago and Dreamgirls?

Remember when Dreamgirls was "a lock" to win Best Picture?

And Eddie Murphy for Supporting Actor?

Should I be proud that I still haven't seen Dreamgirls?

Or that I can't remember whether or not I've even seen Chicago?

Can Hugh Jackman host this again? 

How funny was Mark Wahlberg trying to convince the audience that there really was a tie?

How bad is it that, despite the tie, I STILL got the Sound Editing category wrong?

Were you wondering how insane it would be if there was a tie in a major category like Best Actress?

Am I the only one who has no recollection of Christopher Plummer winning Best Supporting Actor last year?

Why does the always classy, gracious Anne Hathaway get such a bad wrap?

Is there something wrong with wanting to win an Academy Award and being thankful for it?

Wasn't her husband great in Drive?


Didn't MacFarlane drastically improve when he started mocking the show and his own hosting of it?

Isn't it kind of cool that the Academy gave a lifetime achievement Oscar to Hal Needham, the director of Body Slam?

Any bets on whether that film was included in his highlight reel?

Can we just all agree now that the Jurassic Park theme is John Williams' greatest composition?

While Streisand was fitting, wouldn't it have been nice to have a montage of the late, great Marvin Hamlisch's screen contributions?

Am I saying that partially so I get to see The Swimmer make it onto the Oscar telecast?

Shouldn't we cut Kristen Stewart a break since there's a good chance we would have been bored presenting at this show too? 

Did it occur to anyone that it could have just been nerves?

Can you believe I'm defending Kristen Stewart?

Is it wrong that I laughed at MacFarlane's joke about Rex Reed reviewing Adele's performance?

Did it top his other one about John Wilkes Booth being the only actor to really get inside Lincoln's head?

Isn't that song from Chasing Ice great?

Wasn't it a missed opportunity not having Scarlett Johansson there performing it?

Charlize Theron and Quentin Tarantino...neighbors?

Since the Affleck snub, did everyone's chances for correctly guessing Best Director go up in smoke?

Isn't Jennifer Lawrence's maniacal laugh in the diner scene awesome?

Could they have possibly picked a better clip?

After that fall, should she also get an Oscar for stuntwork?

Wasn't her reaction just further proof of how cool and self-depricating she is?

What does it say about how much of a lock Daniel-Day Lewis was that Meryl Streep didn't even need to open the envelope?

Can you believe that massive spoiler clip they showed for Flight?

Isn't it always great to see Jack Nicholson at the Oscars?

Doesn't The First Lady deserve a lot credit for agreeing to do this and doing it well?

Could you actually picture Nancy Reagan announcing Platoon as Best Picture in '87? 

Wouldn't this make for a fun project of matching previous First Ladies with coinciding Best Picture winners of their terms?

Given how much the Obamas have publicly been supporting Beasts of the Southern Wild, weren't you a little concerned before Michelle opened that envelope?

How cool was it that Ben Aflleck thanked the director of Gigli, in his speech?

How many people picked up on it?

And who ever thought Affleck would get to the point where that would happen?

With that win (and beard) has he now fully completed his transformation into the new George Clooney?

Was being snubbed for Best Director the best thing that could have ever happened to him?

Will the media have their knives sharpened for MacFarlane?

Was the whole night him trying to find a balance between crude humor and song-and-dance routines?

Sometimes successfully, sometimes not? 

Am I wrong in thinking there's way too much Broadway-style theatrics for a show supposedly honoring movies?

Even though it didn't come anywhere close to being the longest show in the Academy's history, didn't it kind of feel that way? 

Wasn't that a strange show?

So, who's hosting the Oscars next year?

Dennis Has a Podcast: 2013 Oscars Preview (with Jeremy The Critic)

After almost a year absence I returned as a guest to my good friend Dennis' fantastic Dennis Has A Podcast (great logo by the way!) and discussed all things Oscar. We previewed the big show tomorrow, offered up our predictions, talked about what we hope to expect, and still found time to cover some other fun stuff too. As always, it was a blast. Plus, you get to listen to me rant about why Silver Linings Playbook deserves to win Best Picture. What's not to like?

Click here to listen

And don't forget to check out other episodes of DHAP on iTunes, TuneIn, and Stitcher, like him on Facebook, and follow him on Twitter.

The Dark Knight Rises

Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Anne Hathaway, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Marion Cotillard, Morgan Freeman, Matthew Modine, Nestor Carbonell, Juno Temple, Ben Mendelsohn, Brett Cullen
Running Time: 165 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)

So, here we are again. It's been four years since the release of The Dark Knight, but it definitely seems much longer. Re-watching it again recently I was surprised how poorly it's held up and how on target my original complaints were. They only loom larger now. Poor editing choices, pacing problems, cringe-worthy dialogue, a poorly written love interest and a third act mess. And it was still pretty great. Much it saved, or at least greatly covered, by the late Heath Ledger's unforgettable Oscar-winning performance. It really was the rare case of one actor rescuing an entire film and a lesson in the danger of heightened expectations.

Now, with the arrival of The Dark Knight Rises comes the closing chapter in Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, and another instance where it's difficult to approach a Batman film without seeing it through the prism of a real-life tragedy. At least for a while. We can only hope that doesn't last, because very little of what occurs in this final installment bares little resemblance to a reality we know. And what a relief. This is escapism at its finest. It's not only by far the strongest film in the series, but Nolan's grand-scale masterpiece and the movie everyone insists its predecessor is. He takes the gloves off, raising the stakes and escalating the mayhem. Knowing this is the end frees him up to anything, and boy does he take full advantage.

A palpable sense of fear and tension comes from sensing everything's up for grabs and anything can happen. And it mostly does. There seems to be no rules, but within that framework Nolan still manages to create something structurally sound and airtight, free of filler and flaws. Nearly three hours breeze by without a minute wasted. Of course, there's no performance like Ledger's, but there shouldn't be. In fact, it wouldn't even fit here. What's delivered instead is a more ambitious threat both terrifyingly physical and deliberately planned, as well as two tour-de-force supporting turns that steal the film outright. The results on screen don't lie. But the real story isn't how much better this is than Nolan's previous Batman outings, or anything else in the genre. It's that it isn't even close.

Revealing anything is probably giving away too much, so it's best to tread lightly when discussing the plot, which is as multi-layered as The Dark Knight, but more focused, with much of its thematic content calling back to Batman Begins. Eight years have passed since Batman took the fall for District Attorney Harvey Dent's death and a crippled, bearded, Howard Hughes-like Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) remains secluded in his mansion, even as trusted butler Alfred (Michael Caine) unsuccessfully attempts to coax him out of seclusion. Wayne Enterprises is crumbling after a failed investment in Miranda Tate's (Marion Cotillard) energy project while Commissioner Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) grows tired of living the lie that inspired the Dent Act, a bill that's cleaned up crime and restored peace to Gotham City. At least temporarily.

Enter Bane (Tom Hardy), a masked mercenary with an intricate, carefully orchestrated plan to gain control of the city and instigate a revolution, restoring power to the people. With support from Gordon and most of the Gotham Police, including rookie detective John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), Batman/Bruce Wayne is drawn out of retirement. But he must also contend with the arrival of cat burglar Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), whose own motivations may or may not include helping him.  

From the exciting opening hijack scene revealing Bane, the film grabs hold and doesn't let go. Sounding like a Scottish Darth Vader, talking and breathing heavily through his life-sustaining gas mask, he's a horrifying presence as much for his oratory delivery as his freakish, hulking physique. All the complaints about his voice being unintelligible are unfounded and the few times I did had to concentrate on what he was saying was well worth it since its so hypnotically creepy. You actually look forward to his soliloquies about the troubles of Gotham and hang on every word, which is a good thing considering he lectures a lot.  Beyond that, the physicality Tom Hardy brings to the role is astounding, making his fights with Batman the most intense the series has seen. There's a feeling he could literally die at this man's hands. Brilliantly skirting the line between comic book adversary and reality inspired cult leader, he's true enough to be believable in both worlds, but successfully functions as both in Nolan's.

Bane's motivations aren't outright political or socioeconomic, nor are his actions (most notably an attack on Gotham's stock exchange) meant as some kind of endorsement or condemnation of the Occupy movement. The film isn't a social commentary. It's about Batman. And this may be the first Batman film that really is. Or rather, it's more about Bruce Wayne. The line between the two is fuzzier than ever in this installment, if not eliminated entirely. As a result Nolan plays fast and loose with Batman's identity, finally freed from the constrictions of having to "hide it," making Bale's performance more compelling as a result. The two personas are so inseparable that when a major character finally pieces the two together he feels out of the loop and the last to get the memo. Bale spends his least amount of time in the Bat suit, which feels right and means more when he's eventually back in it. That gravely voice is still there, but for some reason it bothered me less this time, either just because he isn't under the cowl as much or there's too much else going on to care. The movie is literally it's title, and that focus results in Bale's best work in the role yet.

Gotham City is also for the first time becomes a living, breathing character and fleshed out as much more than merely an action setting. This is a story that feels epic in scale, more so when Bane's plan starts to come to fruition and we head into the exhilarating final act, which contains a pair of shocking, game-changing twists. The city is literally at war with itself but the movie never feels like its playing in standard action territory because these sequences are seamlessly presented with minimal CGI, and the story stakes feel so high. Unlike The Dark Knight, nearly all of that action takes place in broad daylight so we can actually see what's happening and the camera isn't shaking, which makes for a notable improvement in presentation.  It might also mark the first time a nuclear bomb is used in a movie in a way that doesn't feel contrived or ridiculous.

Nolan's script opens up the entire city and pushes every important supporting character to center stage alongside Batman. It could have easily felt like an Inception reunion with so many cast members from that film on board, but it doesn't because each is plugged into wildly different supporting roles that help piece together the ambitious narrative. Morgan Freeman's Lucius Fox probably has the least to do this time around while Michael Caine gets some of his most emotional moments in as Alfred. Despite being laid up in a hospital bed for nearly half the film, Oldman still manages to be as much of a force as Jim Gordon, this time eaten up with regret. And taking the requisite Eric Roberts/Tom Berenger veteran character comeback role in a Nolan movie, Matthew Modine turns in exceptionally solid work as a clueless, but power-hungry Deputy Commissioner Foley. 

If the Two-Face material felt shoehorned into the last act of the last film, than this one represents the most successful integration of two villains yet, if you want to classify Selina Kyle as a villain. Bane doesn't care about the haves or the have nots, the one percenters, or the rich getting richer, but Selina does and let's Bruce Wayne know about it. Yes, it's true she isn't referred to as "Catwoman"  by anyone during the course of the film which makes perfect sense since it wouldn't fly in this context. Of all the villains in the pantheon, Nolan was supposedly most resistant to incorporating this character into his grittier, more grounded universe, and it's hard to blame him. Michelle Pfeiffer's performance in Batman Returns, falsely held up as the gold standard, may have been appropriate for that film, but the interpretation is campy beyond belief, and that's coming from someone who loves the classic 60's TV series.

As the trailers have hinted, Anne Hathaway absolutely knocks it out of the park, delivering the definitive interpretation of the character by making her a believable human being with real motivations. Devastatingly sexy and lethally dangerous, Selina's damaged goods who might have past the point of redemption and I loved how the usually super-expressive Hathaway's eyes just seem to go dead. There's legitimate doubt which side she's on that lasts until practically the final scene, and is only enhanced by Hathaway playing Selina as if she might not know either. And I love the catsuit, which actually seems like a functional uniform for her job rather than a costume. She's also given just the right amount of screen time to make the necessary impact. Much like Ledger, in hindsight it seems impossible anyone would think she was miscast or another actress could have done this better. And I've thought it too. We couldn't have been more wrong.

Marion Cotillard's Miranda Tate is thankfully no Rachel Dawes, and along with Selina Kyle, finally disproves the allegation that Nolan is incapable of writing strong female characters.Calling Hathaway's performance the picture's strongest is high praise, especially considering Joseph Gordon-Levitt almost walks away with it. Despite what you may have heard, his part as Gotham cop John Blake is so huge in both camera time and importance that you may as well consider him a co-lead alongside Bale. As the only hopeful, idealistic cop left amidst a sea of corruption, he seems to understand Bruce Wayne in ways no one else can, and Levitt plays him as the ultimate good guy, struggling to hold on to his values even as his city collapses around him. The movie's as much about him as it is Batman.

There comes this point in the picture when Nolan does something we didn't think he'd ever do, that he swore he'd never do, and even Christian Bale said he better not even try. But somehow he pulls it off, and without us even realizing he did until it's over. It's surprising just how powerful this ending is. Talk about sticking the landing. It feels like the cherry on top of a sundae, bringing the saga circle and confirming that Nolan hasn't been overpraised for his resuscitation of a franchise that was left for dead before 2005's Batman Begins. Even when the execution had holes, his overall vision for the trilogy was airtight. So now the strongest film gets a somewhat divisive reaction. Why?  Because Ledger's not in it?

The Dark Knight Rises, besides actually being fun, feels like The Empire Strikes Back of the series, fulfilling all its lofty ambitions while still leaving us wanting more. Nolan could easily continue, but he's right to go out on top. Saving the best for last, he's come the closest to shaking the stigma associated with comic book movies by using its origins as a jumping-off point to something bigger. His work's done, but the beauty of the Batman franchise has always been how open it is to wildly different interpretations. Just pity the poor director who has to follow this one.

Love and Other Drugs

Director: Edward Zwick
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Anne Hathway, Josh Gad, Judy Greer, Gabriel Macht, Oliver Platt, Hank Azaria, George Segal, Jill Clayburgh
Running Time: 112 min.
Rating: R

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

An ambitiously entertaining mess, Love and Other Drugs deserves credit for being an unconventional romance that attempts to give us something we haven't seen before. It isn't often a raunchy sex comedy doubles as an emotional medical drama set in the world of pharmaceutical sales. Besides breaking a cinematic record for onscreen nudity and featuring an unintentionally hilarious depiction of the mid to late 90's, it's also noteworthy for stretching a couples' third act break-up crisis over an hour. All over the map in terms of tone, I found myself liking it anyway, with its flaws making it more fun than it otherwise would have been if everything flowed perfectly. It's also one of the few recent rom-coms that might actually have some re-watch value, if only because it's so wacky. But if you replaced Anne Hathaway and Jake Gyllenhaal it wouldn't have worked. They bring needed dimension to questionably written, sometimes unlikable and self-pitying characters who aren't the easiest to root for. It's one of those rare star pairings that not only looked good on paper, but exceeds expectations on screen.

It's 1996 when charismatic electronics salesmen and med-school dropout Jamie Randall (Gylenhaal) is fired for sleeping with the store manager's wife and his millionaire brother Josh (Josh Gad) lands him a a medical sales rep job for pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. Working alongside his more experienced partner Bruce (Oliver Platt) Jamie initially struggles in the field, pedaling Zithromax and Zoloft to Dr. Stan Knight (Hank Azaria), posing as his intern and bribing and seducing his receptionists. It's during an impromptu breast exam he falls for one of Knight's patients, the feisty, sarcastic Maggie Murdock (Hathaway), a 26 year-old with early onset Parkinson's Disease who has as little interest in a serious relationship as he does, making them the perfect match. But when Jamie unexpectedly wants something more, he finds the one woman he may be incapable of winning over, so angry and closed-off because of her condition she's unwilling to let anyone in. This is all happens just as the new drug Viagra, hits the market for Pfizer, changing Jamie's prospects considerably and putting him at the forefront of a major drug boom.

The first hour of this film is fantastic, working really well as a screwball romantic comedy, while cleverly sending up the drug industry. It isn't exactly a scathing social commentary but the life of a medical sales rep is something we've haven't seen on screen before so there's a freshness in watching how they push doctors to prescribe medications by promising perks and bribing them. For a while at least the screenplay flawlessly juggles this topic with the entirely physical relationship between Maggie and Jamie. Just in case you didn't get the memo, Anne Hathaway likes to do nudity. Or if she doesn't, she's a much better actress than we thought since there's a hardly scene in the first 60 minutes where she isn't topless. Given the total amount of graphic sex scenes it's kind of shocking director Edward Zwick wasn't slapped with an NC-17, especially considering the MPAA's notoriously prudent stance on sex and nudity. After a while there's so much of it you almost lose track of whether it's gratuitous or not. If the purpose is to convey Maggie and Jamie's relationship is purely physical that point gets across loud and clear, and in a strange way, it's kind of a relief to see a film so unafraid of going all the way with this. Either way, the first half is a blast before turning deadly serious. The Parkinson's becomes a factor, but not in the way you'd expect, which is mostly due to the fact that the disease is progressive so the clock on her life isn't rapidly ticking like it would for a "disease of the week" melodrama like Love Story or Autumn in New York. It becomes more about whether Jamie can break down the wall she's put up and stick around despite the certainty her condition will worsen (he even gets to hear exactly how it in the film's most brutally honest scene). And if he does stick around, the question becomes whether he'll be able to do it for her rather than out of self-guilt.

There's definitely some clumsy writing and the tone's all over the place in the third act but Hathaway and Gyllenhaal possess such an understanding of their characters that they're able to make the necessary adjustments to sell it. I can't say I was thrilled with the arc Maggie took, being this strong, free spirit who deteriorates into an emotional mess, but it's fairly realistic given the context of the story. It's also a tough role for Hathaway since she has to not only convey the physical characteristics of the condition but all the baggage that comes along with it. Gyllenhaal's character also has take a more serious turn and while I prefer the how both started much more than how they ended up, both actors don't miss a beat in having to perform in what seems like two wildly different films. Jonah Hill clone Josh Gad as Jamie's overweight, annoying brother Josh brings what's expected to the sloppy sidekick role while Hank Azaria is so believable as a doctor you'd think they accidentally cast a real one. Once again, the awesome, should-be-famous Judy Greer is delightful in another one of her "crazy chick" supporting roles, and it does soften the blow a little this time that she's playing second fiddle to a genuine talent like Hathaway instead of Heigl, Aniston or Hudson.

Why this is set in a late 90's time period aside from the fact it's based on the non-fiction book, Hard Sell: The Evolution of a Viagra Salesman by Pfizer's Jaime Reidy, isn't exactly clear, but that small detail sure makes the film funnier. Did they really still sell boom boxes at electronic stores in '96? Was anyone still listening to the Spin Doctors in '97? What were we thinking with the Macarena? Was the internet really so popular then that doctors worried about patients diagnosing themselves? But being a big fan of everything mid to late 90's I was just happy to see that time period depicted in a film at all, no matter how ridiculous. Any points lost for historical accuracy is made up for with originality. Playing by slightly different rules and crossing conventional genre boundaries, Love and Other Drugs is a risky alternative, proving it's sometimes better for a film to suffer an identity crisis than have no identity at all.

Burning Questions From The Oscars

Why does the Red Carpet pre-show seem to feel longer each year? (despite me only catching 10 minutes of it)

Did the opening montage finally confirm it was a good idea to go to 10 nominees?

Or at least that they mostly picked the right movies?

Inception is getting pretty popular to spoof on awards shows isn't it?

Did that opening spoof confirm that this is Franco's show and Hathaway's just along for the ride?

Is there a cooler guy on the planet than James Franco?

Am I the only one relieved that Hathaway and Franco are still considered "young" by today's TV demographic standards?

Was Tom Hanks' Oscar history lesson supposed to be an ugly foreshadowing of what would occur later with The King's Speech?

Did I breath a sigh of relief when Alice in Wonderland took Art Direction instead of The King's Speech?

Did I ever think I'd breath a sigh of relief when Alice Wonderland won anything?

Wally Pfistser for Inception?!

Did anyone see that one coming?

Did you know this makes Pfister the first graduate of my high school to win an Academy Award?

Would you have had to attend my high school to grasp how big an accomplishment that actually is?

How awesome was it that Kirk Douglas milked the announcement of the winner for as long as humanly possible?

Should we insert the obligatory Sally Field "You Like Me, You really like me!" joke in here for Melissa Leo's win?

Should we be thrilled it at least went to someone we know for sure wanted and appreciated it?

Did they regret giving it to her after she dropped the f bomb?

Does this mean we can now officially "CONSIDER" her an Oscar winner?

Will I ever get Animated Short right?

Was there any doubt that Sorkin would (justifiably) win adapted screenplay?

And isn't it the best script to win in a long, long time?

Wasn't it cool he mentioned Network?

Who would have guessed he's a fast talker?

Did anyone else think that Nolan possibly had a shot at Screenplay after Inception shockingly won cinematography? (Yeah, me neither)

Is anyone else tired of hosts singing at the Oscars (no matter how well they do it)?

Didn't Franco look scary as a woman?

Did he look as scary as Russell Brand does clean shaven?

Wasn't Franco's Charlie Sheen joke pretty funny?

Wouldn't any Sheen joke be funny at this point?

Can we give Christian Bale's beard get a separate award for its performance over the past two months?

Wasn't the orchestra's take on The Fighter music kind of catchy?

Doesn't "Academy Award Winner Trent Reznor" sound great?

Have I ever been happier to get a prediction wrong?

Was I wrong in kind of hoping TRON: Legacy would win SOMETHING, even if it's just in sound?

Who would have thought that at any point in the night Inception would be leading in Oscar wins?

Was I thrilled that almost an hour and a half into this that The King's Speech only had one win?

Wasn't it cruel of them to get my hopes up like that?

Shouldn't Kevin Spacey host the Oscars already?

As brief as they were, weren't you glad they went back to performing the Original Song nominees again?

Especially when one of them is performed by Mandy Moore?

And doesn't that beat last year's interpretive dance routine for... The Hurt Locker?

Wasn't that the truth when Gyllenhaal said that shorts were the toughest category to predict on your ballots?

Did you have your fingers crossed for an Exit Through The Gift Shop win like I did?

Seriously, shouldn't it have been nominated for Best Picture? 

Doesn't it suck that we'll never know what Oprah would have done had Banksy showed up?

Where was James Franco the entire show?

Did the Henley rowing sequence alone confirm The Social Network should win Best Editing?

Hasn't Jennifer Hudson lost way too much weight?

Nothing against Florence but why didn't Dido perform "If I Rise?"

Wasn't Paltrow's vocal performance underwhelming?

Didn't Hathwaway sound better?

Isn't it surreal in all the wrong ways having to see Dennis Hopper in the "In Memorium" tribute montage?

Will I be wondering how voters can sleep at night knowing they gave Fincher's Oscar to Tom Hooper?

Seriously, Tom Hooper?

Does this mean Fincher will have to wait decades to be rewarded for a lesser film?


Wasn't it nice that they had Jeff Bridges actually say something about the actress's performances and substantial clips were shown?

Wow, how different does Jennifer Lawrence look from the character she played?

Doesn't Michelle Williams eerily resemble Mia Farrow with that haircut?

Did I just accidentally give Hollywood another remake idea?

Is Williams the only actress in that category you can legitimately say will be back soon as a nominee and mean it?

Safe for me to say it's unlikely Portman will be returning to that podium again as anything other than a presenter?

That said, didn't she still really deserve this?

Should she also receive an honorary Oscar for her work as an uncredited script consultant on The Social Network?

How sad is it that a win for an actress I don't even care for is my favorite of the night?

Now that she's officially won does this mean my complicated, bi-polar love/hate feelings for her come to an end?

Or at least temporarily subside until Your Highness is released?

How great is it that they referenced Franco's General Hospital stint twice during the night?

Wouldn't it have been even greater if they showed clips?

Isn't it ironic that the two big winners from The King's Speech both gave incredibly boring speeches?

Should anyone not named Alanis Morisette ever ask a question that begins with the phrase "Isn't it ironic...?"

Did you recognize the music Spielberg came out to as John Williams' incredible Jurassic Park score?

Can you believe that score wasn't even nominated in '93?!

After this show can we even really be surprised by that?

How great was it for Spielberg to apologize in advance for The King's Speech winning?

But isn't he right that losing just might be the best thing for The Social Network?

Was there a need to play dialogue from The King's Speech over all the other contenders?

Could they have been any more obvious?

Is it fair to say Hathaway and Franco won't be asked back next year?

Didn't Hathaway seem to be trying too hard all night?

Should this be a lesson to producers that doing mean impersonations of actresses on Saturday Night Live doesn't necessarily qualify someone to host the Academy Awards?

Or play Catwoman?

Would my ideal alternate ending of the show be a Social Network Best Picture win followed by that kids' choir covering Radiohead's "Creep?"

Does it even makes sense to hire "younger, hipper" hosts if a film like The King's Speech will just end up dominating?

Wouldn't it make more sense to recruit "younger, hipper" Academy members instead?

All things considered, didn't the show at least move faster than usual?

Don't I say that every year?

Am I kind of glad this whole thing's over?

Passengers

Director: Rodrigo Garcia
Starring: Anne Hathaway, Patrick Wilson, Andre Braugher, Clea DuVall, David Morse, Dianne Wiest, William B. Davis
Running Time: 93 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

Passengers is a deeply misunderstood movie. Misunderstood by nearly all critics and audiences who saw it. Yep, all five of them. Dumped into theaters for about a week before hitting DVD it's the latest victim of mismarketing and false expectations. It isn't a cheesy "B" horror movie or a "suspense thriller" as the posters, taglines and cover art imply. And that's why it's successful. It's a compelling if only slightly uneven human drama that doesn't belong in the bargain bin like you've heard. More surprisingly, it's made too well to even be considered a guilty pleasure.

Yes, there's a big twist ending but everyone was too busy pointing their fingers at what other movies it may have "ripped off" that they forgot to actually look at the context it was presented in or notice that it worked very well. I didn't think a film focusing on the mysterious circumstances involving a plane crash and featuring such diverse talents as Anne Hathaway, Patrick Wilson and David Morse could possibly be awful. I was right. They have nothing to be ashamed of for appearing in this, especially Hathaway who gives a performance that not only rises above the material, but elevates it. Those hoping to see her slumming it for a quick payday will be sorely disappointed. I guess you'll just have to rent Bride Wars instead.

The film appears to make its first mistake within the opening minutes by not showing us the horrific plane crash that jump starts the narrative or letting us get to know the passengers on any personal level. But there are reasons. They're not entirely surprising, but are much more rewarding than I expected. It opens, Lost-style, with the few surviving passengers wandering aimlessly as the plane engulfs in flames. A frazzled, inexperienced psychotherapist Claire Summers (Hathaway) is assigned by her superior (Andre Braugher) to counsel the survivors and deal with their post-traumatic stress. In her late twenties, she's spent more time collecting diplomas and masters degrees than living life, which proves to be a major hurdle in helping these people. As far as grief counselors go, she isn't a very effective one. And knows it.

Each of the passengers handle their ordeal in different ways, but one of the survivors, Eric (Wilson), appears to be on a euphoric high after the crash, relishing every moment and making major life changes. In other words, he's in complete denial and could explode at any moment. A major part of his new self-improvement program is trying to get the repressed Claire to loosen up enough to sleep with him. Claire is concerned when Eric starts showing signs of "E.S.P.", knowing things about Claire only those closest to her (and probably just about everyone else on the planet) would, like that she takes milk and sugar in her coffee and has a sister.

The more the mysterious details of the plane crash present themselves the more interested she becomes in piecing them together to give her patients closure. This raises the ire of an airline beaurocrat (David Morse) who's trying to cover up the company's possible negligence in the crash. Since he's played by Morse you probably could have guessed that he's really creepy and talks in an evil whisper. Tensions escalate when the surviving passengers start to go missing and Claire's relationship with Eric crosses that "ethical line." Worse yet, her kooky neighbor (Dianne Wiest) won't leave her alone and yes even the Cigarette Smoking Man (William B. Davis) from The X-Files shows up to join in the action.

I was worried this movie would go the way of the dreadful Julianne Moore supernatural thriller The Forgotten from a few years ago. Strong premise, pathetic follow through. Instead what shows up onscreen more closely resembles Peter Weir's Fearless, the definitive entry on the psychological scars of a plane crash and a character driven drama interested in examining how we choose to live our lives. The central mystery involving the crash isn't that interesting (at least until the final minutes) but it's to director Rodrigo Garcia's credit that he knows this and focuses instead on the relationship between Claire and Eric.

Despite his considerable talent, I fully expected Wilson to be roped into doing a poor man's Jack Shepherd from Lost, minus the beard and prescription drugs. But what he does with the character is kind of bizarrely brilliant and hysterical...in a good way. He's definitely not your typical traumatized survivor and a lot of things that came out of his mouth were really funny. In fcat his delivery was so funny and his chemistry with Hathaway so breezy you get the impression that if he signed up for a romantic comedy opposite her it would be excellent. We saw glimpses of his deadpan humor in Little Children but this was a completely different kind of part for him. He's not just playing a variation on the "everyman" here or "Mr. Nice Guy."

Hathaway is given a surprisingly complex, multifaceted character to play for this type of film, completely believable as a counselor without the confidence in herself to do the job, or do anything. Toward the final act you realize her role was even better developed than you thought and a good effort was put forth into fleshing her out, both by the writer and the actress. I've been very slow to come around on on Hathway but in the past year with Get Smart, Rachel Getting Married and now this she's proven she's got the goods to stick around a long time. Consider me a fan. A true test for any actor is always whether they can not only survive starring in a movie like this but actually make it entertaining. She's been criticized left and right for the choice but if anyone looked closer they'd see she wasn't just playing a pawn in a cheap thriller. Her character drives the plot and I can see why the role looked inviting beyond the paycheck.

I won't claim the twist ending is some big shocker and I'd be surprised if no one guesses it (minus a few details) by at least the halfway point, but I can argue that's it's handled with restraint and resonates emotionally. It's not treated as some big "GOTCHA!" moment. Instead, Garcia uses the final moments to explore the characters and it goes a long way to help explain some of the more problematic and confusing sections of the film away. The best example is the payoff involving Morse's character. It's unexpected, but sure makes a lot of sense when you think back on the picture.

The real twist here isn't the actual twist, but that you thought you were watching one kind of film and Garcia gave you another. Compare this to Flight Plan or Red Eye, where we're promised something huge and then cheated in the final act when it devolves into a routine thriller. This goes in the exact opposite direction. We think we're getting a routine thriller but its conclusion proves otherwise. The plane crash, when we do see it, is gripping and good technical decisions are made throughout, such as a subtle, unobtrusive score and rich, textured lighting from cinematographer Igor Jadue-Lillo. The PG-13 also rating feels appropriate, not a cop-out where you can tell certain sections were watered down in post-production to appease the masses. Garcia isn't a mainstream director, specializing in intimate character driven pieces, and the film is all the better for it. It's more of a pensive and reflective experience than a thrilling one, but explaining exactly how would require more information than should be revealed.

It's a pity when a film is mismarketed. THIS IS NOT A THRILLER OR A HORROR MOVIE. Had that important distinction been made in the advertising Passengers could have cleaned up a little at the box office or at least broken even given its premise and star power. A movie shouldn't be punished for what it isn't, but judged on its own terms. And blame most definitely shouldn't be placed on Hathway and Wilson who go way above and beyond the call of duty with their performances. They made me care about both these people and the story. I knew they were good, but this is further proof of just how good. Watch Passengers because of them, but also watch it because it's actually far smarter and much better than you'd expect.