Bernie (2012) Review

Jack Black has always been a likable guy but lately he has kind of disappeared, however here he gives what I consider the best performance of his career. Bernie is a great example of a comedic actor doing something a bit more serious, showing he has acting range, but in a role that still allow him to use his trademark comedic traits.

Jack Black plays a guy who seems to be the nicest guy ever, a man who is a prime example of someone with a Freudian superego. Bernie works as a funeral agent, arranging beautiful ceremonies, preparing their bodies after their souls have gone to heaven, he often follows up the widows of deceased men, giving them gifts and caring for them, with no thought behind it other then caring for someone. One day he begins a very close relationship with one particular, rich, widow, whom he forms a relationship with over a couple of years. However she eventually grows protective over him, bossing him around. Bernie, the nice guy he is, doesn’t have the courage to the talk back to her, until he at a point snaps and kills her. Confused about what to do he starts to pretend she is very sick and never leaves the house, convincing the town to believe she is still alive.

It is a role that Black nails to perfection, with a lot of dark comedy at times and also just plain out comedy based on his performance. He never goes out of character for the sake of being funny, and he even shows that he can be good in the emotional scenes as well.

The film is based on a true story and from what I can tell, it tells it pretty accurately. What makes it interesting however is that it is part documentary. Throughout the film there are interviews with people from his town and after some research, it seems that some of these are real interviews with the townsfolk speaking about the real Bernie. I do have hard time believing that these are genuine interviews, however it is hard to find answers to this. Even if they are real townspeople who knew Bernie, there has to be some form of scripting, because some interviews were actually hilarious. So while I have my doubts to those who claim the interviews were real, though I will believe some were real townspeople who take something from their real experience with Bernie. It is a pretty cool concept, and the documentary style brought a very authentic feel to the film. That being said I think there were a bit too many interviews at time, which caused the film to lack a driving force throughout.

Throughout the film I kept thinking this is something that would have been amazing in the hands of the Coen brothers. At times it had that oddball-darkly humorous feel that the Coens often use, however there were times were I felt it was a bit inconsistent in it´s humour as it all of employed slap-stick humour which didn’t fit the tone as well. That being said I did find the film very funny, though it could have used a tad more character development, or had us care more for the characters.

3.5/5 

Frankenweenie (2012) Review

Aaaand he’s back! Tim Burton finally recovers after two big failures (though one big financial success), with one of his best films to date. Based on a short film he made back in 84 when he was working for Disney, we get the story of a boy and his resurrected dog. There is a definite Burton feel to it, but it is more focused and not as quirky as his last few efforts. While I love Depp, I think leaving him out of this was a good choice, same goes Bohem-Carter.

The film is set in a classic Burton suburban neighbourhood, where outsider Victor Frankenstein, looses his best friend, Sparky the dog, but finds a way to use lightning to resurrect him, which eventually causes problems as other kids discover his method of resurrecting dead animals.

The film is animated using stop-motion, and while it may not be the most technically advanced stop-motion ever, I think the fact that the stop-motion is a tad bit out-dated adds to the charm. After all this is big love-letter to old school horror cinema, hence the black and white, and everything looks like something from a 50s horror film. The film is also full of references, some that fans of the genre will get, and some I think most film fans will be able to get. When going for the old school feel, it is interesting that they choose to do it in 3D and do they do acknowledge this is in some way in the opening scene in a funny and clever way.

The film relies heavily on the relationship between Victor and Sparky and it is very effective. The first act of the film is spent setting up their relationship, prior to Sparky dying, which gives an emotional pay-off. Outside these two characters, few characters are very fleshed out, but I thought that was fine as they were the focus and the other characters, while shallow, they do their role and it doesn’t really matter that they aren’t explored.

For an animated movie it is surprisingly scary at certain parts, yet always with a dark sense of humour. The film felt like it was better suited for an older audience, though still enjoyable for kids, but the fact that it homages so many older film, and is shot in black and white, makes it harder for a kid to enjoy I think and I noticed that I was laughing more then a lot of the kids in my theatre.

In the end I found this be a just perfect animation, one of the best in years, and one of Tim Burton´s best films ever. The great character design and animation, mixed with great humour and a good emotional arc made this just so incredibly fun to watch and still has me smiling when thinking about it the day after.

5/5

Django Unchained (2012) Review

The western genre has often been present in Tarantino´s film and now he finally makes a western, paying homage to greats like Sergio Leone. The story, set in the 1800s, follows two bounty hunters, a German Dentist and a slave he freed as they bond and track down the wife of the freed slave.

You can instantly see the Tarantino-isms in the films dialogue, however it wasn’t as bizarre as his last few films. Notably, he dropped the non-linear chapter story telling, giving a more straightforward story. While I really enjoy his odd non-linear story telling, it is nice to see him not relying on it anymore as he has done it a bit much, and so it is nice to see Tarantino mixing it up a bit. I also felt that, as he didn’t rely as much on his style that we got a tighter story this time around. That being said there were moments where I felt certain scenes could have been left out. Take for example the scene with Jonah Hill, it was hilarious, but it felt incredibly out of place even though it was one of the best written scenes in the film and even though I like Jonah Hill, the fact the he was there to effortlessly blurt out like two lines just made him kind of distracting and unnecessary.

One thing that has to be mentioned is the acting; there are so many incredible performances in this movie that I want to say almost everyone steels the show. My favourite is probably going to have to be Cristoph Waltz. From the trailers I thought he was going to be similar to his Oscar winning performance in Inglorious Basterds, but it was very different and he was hugely likable and even had some touching moments. If he got the Oscar again, I wouldn’t mind at all. Another great performance is DiCaprio, taking a risk in a role we have never really seen him in before, as a vile plantation owner, and trust me he is really cruel. Possible just as cruel is Samuel Jackson character, but damn was he funny at the same time. I would almost say that Jackson has been snubbed for nominations during awards season, because that guy was just fantastic. Jamie Foxx is in a less funny role as the quiet lead and he did a very good job as well.  

Now like I mentioned above, I enjoyed Tarantino´s directing maybe more then ever before here, simply because while he had his Tarantinoesque style in there, it wasn’t too much and too over-bearing. That being said there were a few of his usual out place music choices that didn’t work for me. From what I remember there were two hip-hop songs used and while one worked very well, the other was a bit distracting and felt wrong.

In the second half of the film Tarantino reached a place of brilliance I don’t think he has ever been before in the scenes with Jackson and DiCaprio, and I was genuinely invested in the movie, something I´ve never quite been with Tarantino. The extended scenes with all the characters talking had this underlying psychological tension between the characters, while still having the occasional uncomfortable laugh. The first half was definitely the part where maybe some things could have been cut down.

The big shoot-out near the end did go into the Kill Bill style over the top, gratuitously violent action in an intense shoot-out, but in the end it felt kind of fitting to a western film and didn’t feel as purposely over the top as the restaurant scene in Kill Bill. It was really nice to have a Tarantino film again that felt a bit more serious, but there a few moments in the shoot out, like when a person got shot and flew backwards, that did take me out of it. Then again this is Tarantino and I don’t really think he tries to be immersive.

Tarantino´s latest has some of the best writing and acting of the year, and potential to be his best if he cut out about ten minutes of unnecessary footage here and there. It does have flaws but it the end it is both exciting, controversial, funny, even a little touching and a hell of a fun ride.

4/5  

Silver Linings Playbook (2012) Review

In his follow-up to the Oscar winning The Fighter, David O. Russell gives us a heart-warming romantic comedy about a dysfunctional family trying to work things out. For a romantic comedy it has a very unique feel to it and much more human drama then your average romantic comedy.

David O. Russell has written an amazing script, which perfectly balances drama, comedy and romance, while also fleshing out all characters pretty well. The wide cast of characters all seem to have some problems with their life, either mental, economical or a dysfunctional family or marriage, so there is a lot to grasp at, but I feel the script balances it all very well. I can´t remember last time I saw a film, where I felt every supporting character was as interesting as the main characters almost and they all felt like unique yet believable characters.

Yet again Russell shows us that he is a man who knows how to direct actors. Bradley Cooper a performance that is both touching and comedic as he struggles with mental problems. It was very well done in the scenes where he has breakdowns as they managed to uncomfortable in way, yet they would make you laugh, and it takes a very good actor and director to accomplish that. Robert De Niro and Jackie Weaver also do wonders as his parents. Robert De Niro actually surprised me a lot in the film as his character seemed a little odd at first, but as his character unfolded throughout the movie, I really grew to love his performance. The big star of the film however is Jennifer Lawrence, as the dysfunctional Tiffany who forms a bond with Patrick. Lawrence gives a great, unpredictable performance and her character is so well written and Lawrence is perfect in the role.

 

Now while I think Russell does a great job with the actors and in balancing the comedy with the drama, I do have some problems with how he chooses to film. It is easy to see his style carry over from The Fighter, but I do feel that sometimes there is too much movement in the camera. I am a fan of having a constantly moving camera, but at times it felt like he had the cameraman running around all over the place and it became distracting to a certain degree. I also noticed that during the first act I felt there were way too many close-ups, but he started mixing it up after a while. Another issue with the fast moving camera is that at times when switching shots between a shot moving one way to a shot moving differently, I could tell the shot begin as the editor kept half a second too much in the beginning of the scene so that we could see the movement start, something that took me out of the film a couple of times.

My issues with camera work aside, I really enjoyed this film. Russell directs very well for the most part and he has written a masterful script. The actors utilize the wonderful script they have been given to give both funny and touching performances. The film is one of the best romantic comedies in the last few years and a great time at the theatre.

4/5

Amour (2012) Review

When a foreign film receives both director and best picture nods at the Oscars, you know they are doing something right. Going into this film I kind of didn’t want to like it, simply because it stole Ben Affleck´s much deserved best director nomination, however to my great disappointed, this was brilliant.
With such strong characters, it is equally important with strong performances and these are some extraordinarily strong performances. Emmanuelle Riva, aged 85, gives a performance unlike anything I have seen all year. He life is slowly decaying after a stroke and her performances perfectly captures the depression and hopelessness of somehow who knows the end is near. Near the end when her character is at her lowest point, it becomes hard to watch, as her performance seems so incredibly real. Jean-Louis Trintignant, who seems to be getting overlooked when it comes to awards, gives a touching performance as a man desperately trying to make his dying wife happy.

From the first few scenes I could tell there was something genius about the film. The scene where we meet our main characters is just a long shot of an audience at a piano concert, showing everyone, not focusing in on anybody, and it was so interesting even though nothing happened, because of how in that short scene you got so many impressions from members of the audience. The film then silently introduces us to the relationship of these two people and their apartment, which we never leave after that opening sequence, as far as I recall.

Michael Haneke both writes and directs the film with perfection. The script is very excellent, making the characters and situation very believable and there were so many instances where dialogue sounded like something people I know would say. It is within the dialogue, and visual allegory, that he really tells the story. Within these devices he really fleshes out the characters giving enormous depth to both the main characters.

The film is very unpleasant and hard to sit through. Haneke uses mainly static shots that go on for quite some time. There are scenes where I felt like I had to look away because of the harshness of some scenes, yet I never quite managed to take my eyes of the screen.

It is a film that I may not ever be able to sit through again, but because of how masterfully written and directed it is and how uniquely it conveys human emotion, I feel it really has to be experienced by anyone who think they can manage. I fully sympathize with people who do not like this movie, as it was immensely painful to sit through and it really requires your full attention, but if you willing to make an effort, you´ll be rewarded with a masterpiece.

5/5