Red Sparrow

First Hit:  Although long at 2h 19min, it had enough twists, turns, and detail to keep me fully engaged.

Jennifer Lawrence (here as Dominika Egorova) is a strong actress and is able to project anger, sadness, and determination with only her eyes. It is this skill that sets her apart from many actresses.

As a Russian ballet dancer Dominika is revered more for her beauty than her dancing. However, she is good enough for the ballet company to give her an apartment and provide medical help for her sick mother. Her uncle Vanya Egorov (Matthias Schoenaerts) is part of Russian Intelligence and occasionally looks in on Dominika and her mom Nini (Joely Richardson).

When Dominika breaks her leg, Vanya recruits her to work for Russian Intelligence. He wants her because of her steely determination. He promises here that if she joins him, he’ll make arrangements for her mom to keep the apartment and her medical assistance.

Her first job is to seduce Dimitry Ustinov (Kristof Konrad). When he tries to rape Dominika, Russian Intelligence kills him while he’s on top of her. Because of her success she’s recruited to become a Sparrow. Sparrows use seduction and sex to get what they want from the people they seduce. They are trained in passionless seduction, hand to hand combat and how to use guns.

The Headmistress (Charlotte Rampling) of the Sparrow school is referred to as “Matron.” And it is her goal to make sure they become passionless seducers and combat ready spies.

Dominika is sent on a mission to Budapest to seduce American spy Nate Nash (Joel Edgerton). The goal is to find out the Russian Intelligence mole he was working with so that this mole can be destroyed.

Throughout the film, we see Dominika developing a path and plan to survive and persevere while keeping her mom’s health, safety, and welfare on her mind. However, as an audience member, we don’t always know what her plan is and how it will work out. That's the best part of this film. The unknowing, underscored with believing that Dominika will, in the end, get revenge, makes this story work.

Lawrence was excellent as the cold-hearted Sparrow who had a soul. I didn’t fully buy her being a premiere ballerina (jumps were barely 6 inches high), but this was completely overshadowed by her ability to embody the role as a spy. Rampling was perfect as the cold-hearted Matron of the Sparrow school. Edgerton was strong as the American spy who risked his life to keep his mole secret. Richardson was good as Dominika’s mom. Mary-Louise Parker (as Stephanie Boucher) was strong in her role as a US Senator’s Chief of Staff. Jeremy Irons (as General Vladimir Andreievich Korchnoi) was perfect. His cold intimidating voice and manner worked well. Justin Haythe wrote a good complicated screenplay. Director Francis Lawrence did a good of not tipping the story’s hand.

Overall:  I enjoyed the film’s puzzle and it was the acting that made it work.

mother!

First Hit:  It was not very interesting, was poorly scripted and had little to offer.

Director Darren Aronofsky probably had something to say by making this film, but I can only come up with snide thoughts like:  The battle between control and chaos is difficult. One needs to ask their partner before inviting people into the house. People like Him (Javier Bardem), need to have their ego stroked. Well-known artists, Him, would sacrifice his family for outside admiration. People will give the artists they admire leeway to act poorly. Life is a never-ending sequence of the same stuff over and over again. I could go on.

One troubling aspect about this film was that Darren had some great actors, but Mother (Jennifer Lawrence) seemed like she was saying lines and occasionally her actions were more engaging. Him seemed to take on the poor struggling artist role rather mediocrely. Together they were a shipwreck ready to happen throughout the entire film.

The story is that Mother has rebuilt a very large house because it burned down in a fire. It was Him’s family home. She’s doing this because she loves Him and the poems that he’s written in the past. However, he’s had writer's block since the fire burned down his family’s home.

One day, Man (Ed Harris), a chain smoking doctor, shows up at their home thinking it is a place where he can rent a room while doing research. Without asking Mother, Him tells Man that he can stay there as long as he wants. Feeling pushed aside, Mother reluctantly goes along with this.

Then the rest of Man’s family shows up. Woman (Michelle Pfeiffer) is pushy and is very passive aggressive while Mother waits on her. All the while Him likes their company. Woman tells Mother that she needs to have a baby to really know what life is about.

During an argument, Him and Mother have make-up sex and she gets pregnant. Also, Woman and Man’s boys come to the house and start a big fight and one of the boys gets killed.

With Mother being pregnant and the killing of the boy, Him writes another poem that causes a national stir and now thousands of people come to the house to both grieve the dead boy and the celebration of this new poem. This makes Mother angry as she tries to kick everyone out because they are wrecking the house she built.

Then the film heads into over weird with rituals and demons and other stuff. Why? I cannot tell you why even if I knew. It is beyond my understanding of the point and purpose of this story and film.

Lawrence gives a uneven performance. It was both difficult and easy to understand her love and devotion based on whatever scene she was in. Bardem had an easier role of being egocentric and caring about himself more than the people for which he professed his love. Harris was OK as the initial interloper. Pfeiffer was interesting because her sarcasm and disdain towards Mother was well done. Aronofsky wrote a confusing and unclear script that came off as being overindulgent towards bizarre behavior. If the audience doesn’t get the point, why do a film like this? As director, the point was lost in the script, and therefore the acting wasn’t reflective of a cohesive story leaving the audience lost.

Overall:  This was self-indulgence at its finest and a waste of my time.

Passengers

First Hit:  This was an enjoyable film with wonderful visual effects and three actors and a director that made it work.

Not only was the overall film enjoyable, I walked away thinking would I sign up for a space journey like the one they were on?

To ask this question meant to me that I bought into the premise of the film that 5,000-people signed up to be put to hibernation for 120 years, loaded onto a spaceship so that they could travel to a distant habitable plant, Homestead II, and start a new life. I’d do it in a heartbeat because it would be interesting to see what people bring to the table and the reasons why they would take this risk. It would also give me a chance to use what I’ve learned to assist in the growth of a new society.

On the way to this distant planet, the starship “Avalon” passes through a massive meteor shower and collides with a very large meteor. The ship gets damaged and although it does its best to repair itself, the system overrides cause additional errors to begin, grow, and cascade. This is gets communicated to the audience by giving them a peek into the Avalon's control bridge holographic visuals of the ship's status.

The damage releases the hibernation sequence in one of the pods and wakes Jim Preston (Chris Pratt) 90 years early. At first, he’s really confused as he wanders the ships massive corridors and meeting rooms only to find out that he’s the only one alive. He makes attempts to re-hibernate himself but learns that it is not possible. He tries to break into the hibernating crew quarters but to no avail. His only friend is a robot bartender named Arthur (Michael Sheen).

After about a year of loneliness and frustration and realizing that he will live the rest of his life alone on this spaceship, he decides to wake a fellow passenger whom he thinks is attractive and interesting. Aurora Lane (Jennifer Lawrence), the person he wakes up, is a creative writer and when she shares her storyline, as to why she made the choice to go on this adventure, it is beautifully expressed.

The struggle for Jim is that he is also giving her the same death sentence he has by waking her. Again, this provides provocative questions:  Would you wake up another person? Would you tell them that you did this?

The visual effects are well done with a few being outstanding. I liked the views of space, the interior shots of the ship, when they venture outside the ship on tethers, and I was especially impressed with the scene when gravity is lost while Aurora is in the swimming pool. I liked the romance that these two created as it wasn't rushed and left to develop nicely with breath of spaciousness.

This story is unique which also adds to this movie’s appeal. When they discover the ship is dying and they have to try to fix it or the remaining passengers and crew will die, the film shifts into another gear.

Pratt was very good and probably the best role I’ve seen him in. His naturally humorous nature was used judiciously while his caring intensity was kept in check. Lawrence was mesmerizing. She has a way with her voice that allows her to seem both intelligent and sultry at the same time. It is a great combination. Sheen was fantastic as the droid bartending robot. His subtle and human nature spiced with robotic witticisms was perfect. Laurence Fishburne as Gus Mancuso a crewmember that also gets mistakenly awakened was good in this minor role. Jon Spaihts wrote a very strong script that incorporated humor, dramatic elements and a great backdrop. Morten Tyldum had a firm and confident grip on directing the actors, storyline and visuals.

Overall:  This was a very entertaining film in all ways.

X-Men: Apocalypse

First Hit:  Much better than the other Marvel (Comic) film “Captain America…” but it felt worn and reaching.

The beginning is a set up based on some past historical idea about a demonic force called En Sabah Nur/Apocalypse (Oscar Isaac) wanting to finish his evolvement which will give him total world domination. But to complete this task he has to usurp the powers owned and inherent in Professor Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), the leader of the X-Men (and women). By obtaining this power he can rule the world.

The film fails to make this important task engaging enough thereby making the film uninteresting, let alone believable by any stretch of the imagination. The other story is that Erik Lehnsherr/Magneto (Michael Fassbender) has distanced himself from the other X-Men(women) and Professor Xavier.

In this distancing, Magneto has joined with Apocalypse and will execute his commands to rearrange the planet by removing the metal structures of the earth thereby making earth’s inhabitants helpless. The interplay between the X-Men is good and does make this film interesting in ways that has some depth.

The most fun part of the film has to do with Quicksilver/Peter Maximoff (Evan Peters) because his scenes are lighthearted, well-conceived, and simply fun to watch. He brings a humorous element to the whole film and when he’s on the screen, I was engaged.

What seemed pressed were scenes with Raven/Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) as it seemed she really didn’t want to be in this role and is done with the X-Men series of films. I’d be surprised to see her in another, unless she needs the money.

Isaac created a good enough demonic Apocalypse character, and the makeup helped a lot. Fassbender was OK as the aloof, isolated Magneto. McAvoy was strong as Professor Xavier. Peters was fantastic and the best part of the film. His tongue-in-cheek and cavalier representation of the character was appropriately in-line with my view of what Marvel Comics were originally about. The rest of it has become too serious and seems only there to extract more money out of the public. Lawrence seemed done with the whole thing and her performance and character lacked inspiration. Simon Kinberg wrote the sometimes witty and sometimes labored screen play. Bryan Singer brought some interesting visual scenes to the screen but the attempt to make this story real falls on deaf eyes (yes I mean deaf eyes).

Overall:  Although fun enough, this franchise has to make more and more unrealistic set-ups to attempt to make the stories continue to work into the future.

Academy Awards - The Oscars

OK, here we are again celebrating another year of film going. Some strong films this year, films that broke box office records, and films that failed. Here are my choices for the following awards and some thoughts around some of them.

• Best Actor - Nominees are:  Bryan Cranston (Trumbo), Matt Damon (The Martin), Leonardo DiCaprio (The Revenant), Michael Fassbender (Steve Jobs) and Eddie Redmayne (The Danish Girl). This is not as strong a field as it was last year. The obvious missing actors are Tom Hanks (Bridge of Spies) maybe because he made it look so easy, and Steve Carell who was so quirky and interesting you just wanted to see what he was going to do next. Both of these were strong performances, yet not in my top two of this listing. Although Cranston's  performance was good, I didn't like the character nor the interpretation. Fassbender was very good, however this role had been done too many times in the last two years. I did not see The Danish Girl therefore I don't have an opinion. However, Damon and DiCapiro's performances were fantastic - beyond amazing. I loved each of them. My guess is that DiCaprio will win the Oscar.
• Best Actress  - Nominees are:  Cate Blanchett (Carol), Brie Larson (Room), Jennifer Lawrence (Joy), Charlotte Rampling (45 Years), and Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn). This is a strong category although I didn't see 45 Years, the others were great. I also see a missing person from this list and that would be Rooney Mara in Carol as well. Between Cate and Rooney I would have picked Mara because I felt as though her evolution through the film was a more powerful statement. However, she is in the Supporting Actress listing. Out of the nominated list, it comes down to two outstanding performances: Ronan and Blanchett. Lawrence's performance was really good and I was fully engaged with her character, however it did not have the power of Ronan or Blanchett's. Larson was also very strong, however so much of her performance is linked to Jacob Tremblay the young boy that it took away from her own performance. For me I'd like Ronan to get this Oscar in an amazing performance in a  wonderful film.
• Best Supporting Actress  - Nominees are:  Jennifer Jason Leigh (The Hateful Eight), Rooney Mara (Carol), Rachel McAdams (Spotlight), Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl), and Kate Winslet (Steve Jobs). As I mentioned earlier I think Mara's performance belongs in the Best Actress category. I didn't see The Danish Girl so I'm making my pick without full knowledge of the selections. However, without Mara I think the most interesting and performance is Leigh's. It was so hidden and yet over the top that I was mesmerized each time she opened her mouth and/or the camera focused on her. These are the top two and in my view either probably deserves the Oscar.
• Best Supporting Actor  - Nominees are:  Christian Bale (The Big Short), Tom Hardy (The Revenant), Mark Ruffalo (Spotlight), Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies), and Sylvester Stallone (Creed). The missing performance is Jacob Tremblay's in Room. He was phenomenal. But this is probably one of the strongest fields in years, so someone had to be left off the list. They were all great and my favorites out of this list are Rylance and Stallone. Rylance had such a small role yet it was so much impact on the film that it was unforgettable. However Stallone will get it for both this performance and his body of work as Rocky Balboa.
• Best Cinematography  - Nominees are:  Ed Lachman (Carol), Robert Richardson (The Hateful Eight), John Seale (Mad Max: Fury Road), Emmaual Lubezki (The Revenant), and Roger Deakins (Sicario). Although Mad Max: Fury Road was big it did not grab me because I thought the film was more on the mindless side. Carol was elegantly shot and fully deserves the nomination. However, The Hateful Eight and The Revenant are over the top amazingly beautiful and powerful. The Hateful Eight deserves a lot of credit for doing so much in one room, while The Revenant wins this award for how shots were made and the perspective by which they were made. The winner - pick.
• Best Adapted Screenplay  - Nominees are:  Charles Randolph and Adam McKay (The Big Short), Nick Hornby (Brooklyn), Phyllis Nagy (Carol), Drew Goddard (The Martian), and Emma Donoghue (Room). Wow, what a list. All great picks. Any one of these could win in any given year. However, my final two would be Randolf and McKay for The Big Short and Hornby for Brooklyn. In the end I'm picking Nick Hornby for Brooklyn because it was a great screenplay and a wonderful film to watch.   
• Best Original Screenplay  - Nominees are:  Matt Charman and Ethan & Joel Coen (Bridge of Spies), Alex Garland (Ex Machina), Pete Docter, Meg LeFauve, and Josh Cooley (Inside Out), Josh Singer and Tom McCarthy (Spotlight), and Jonathan Herman and Andrea Berloff (Straight Outta Compton). Another strong set of contenders. All very different films. In the end I think I like Ex Machina and Spotlight as powerful screen plays for very different reasons. One reflects a horrible set of acts by Catholic Priests and the other about the obsessiveness and controlling nature of technology. In the end I select Josh Singer and Tom McCarthy for Spotlight.
• Best Director  - Nominees are:  Adam McKay (The Big Short), George Miller (Mad Max: Fury Road), Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (The Revenant), Lenny Abrahamson (Room), and Tom McCarthy (Spotlight). Missing are:  Ridley Scott (The Martian), J.J. Abrams (Star Wars: The Force Awakens), Todd Haynes (Carol), Quentin Tarantino (The Hateful Eight) and John Crowley (Brooklyn). To me this is the most messed up nominee listing. How is Max: Fury Road better directed than all my exceptions? It isn't and doesn't hold a candle to them. Also given my exceptions, I think Abrahamson's delivery is not quite there. Anyway, from the nominee list, I would say it is between McKay, Inarritu, and McCarthy. In the end I'd select McKay (with McCarthy a very close second) because he did the most to keep the film on track. Inarritu had too many long wistful shots. However this listing of nominees is really flawed.
• Best Picture  - Nominees are:   The Big Short, Bridge of Spies, Brooklyn, Mad Max: Fury Road, The Martian, The Revenant, Room, and Spotlight. Missing here is Carol and The Hateful Eight. Mad Max: Fury Road is nowhere in the league as these other nominees and, in my opinion, doesn't deserve to be listed. I simply was board stiff by the one long chase film filled with foolish philosophy. It is hard for me to pick as I loved "Brooklyn" as being a wonderfully executed nostalgic story. I thought "The Big Short" told a compelling story of how our economy tanked. "The Martian" was beautifully delivered and Damon made it happen. "Bridge of Spies" and "Spotlight" are both amazing stories about something that really happened. I was totally engaged and felt they delivered in all ways; education and story. The only thing I didn't like about "The Revenant" was that there were too many long scenic only shots which took away from the story.  In the end, of the listed I'd like to see "The Martian" win but can also see the others winning except Mad Max.

Some other thoughts about films this year:

• "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" was amazingly edited.
• "Ex Machina's" visual effects were very strong and so were scenes in "The Revenant".
• "Anomalisa" and "Inside Out" were both amazing Animated Feature films.
• "Carol" had perfectly detailed costumes and overall set design.
• "Writings on the Wall" the song for "Spectre" was dreadful.

Note: I'll be England sitting in silence for 30 days starting late next week. I may be able to see one more film before I go, but otherwise I won't be seeing any films or posting any reviews until the first week of March.

Thank you for viewing my site.