Big Eyes

First Hit:  Captured the era in a great way and was effective in telling this story.

Margaret Keane (Amy Adams) painted the “Big Eye” paintings that captured the hearts of many. The question is would the paintings have been so well known, distributed, and sold if it weren’t for her husband?

Probably not, however Walter Keane (Christoph Waltz) also took credit for painting his wife’s paintings. Walter wanted to be a painter but his skill was in selling. And because he could sell his wife’s work, he also wanted to feed his ego and take credit for painting them as well. Why Margaret agreed to this deception wasn’t explored very deeply.

Although the story was interesting, noteworthy, and gave credence to the power of owning one’s own power, what I liked about the film, were the cars, dress, and representation of the 1950’s and early 1960’s. The brightness and newness of the time after WWII was palatable. To me the defining scene about the time period was early when Margaret and daughter Jane (young Jane – Delaney Raye) escape in the green Ford and head out across the country. The roadside signs, the car and other cars on the road was representative and magical of the time.

Adams was very good as Margaret. She really embodied the time and spirit of a woman wanting to own her power in a societal time where it was felt that men ruled the roost. Waltz was delightfully deceitful, charming and snarky. I loved the courtroom scenes where he ranted, raved and showed that he struggled to paint anything. Both Raye and Madeleine Arthur were wonderful as Margaret’s child Jane. Danny Huston as the reporter Dick Nolan, from which this story is told, was very good as well. Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski wrote this dialogue rich script. Tim Burton, as expected, focused on the cinematography, rather than creating interest in the characters.

Overall:  Although I really liked the story, there was something missing from it to make it memorable.

The Imitation Game

First Hit:  The amazing acting tells a truly amazing story about belief and perseverance.

This is the amazing story of how Germany’s Enigma machine was decoded and used to assist the allies in winning World War II.

Alan Turing is featured here as the father of machines that think (the way machines think/process information – today we call them computers). As a young boy Turing (young Alex play by Alex Lawther) is a smallish, nerd who is picked upon by his fellow classmates. He’s smart and begins to discover his homosexuality through caring about, of, and for his one true school friend – Christopher.

During the war he’s asked to participate in decoding the German Enigma machine. He’s grouped with Hugh (Matthew Goode), John (Allen Leech), Peter (Matthew Beard), Jack (James Northcote) and then Alan finds and adds Joan (Keira Knightley) to the team. Each of them are good puzzle solvers, chess players and/or mathematicians.

Problem with this team is that Turing (adult Turning played by Benedict Cumberbatch) doesn’t work well with others. He believes that he can build a machine that will solve the problem and thinks trying to decode Enigma manually is a useless endeavor. He thinks working with a team will slow him down.

This is an amazing story and the acting is top shelf. However, the problem I found with the film is that it tells this story in three different time frames and juggles them in a way that didn’t work for me. I was fascinated by the young Turing, and as I begin to fully drop into this child’s experience, bang we’re in the 1950’s and he’s being arrested for homosexuality, then bang we’re back into the story of him building a machine to decode Enigma.

All three stories are great and the acting in them is great – it is the jostling of my emotions that I didn’t like by the way it moved from one story to another. However, all told it was an amazingly acted film that told a wonderful and powerful story.

Lawther is absolutely mesmerizing as the young Turing. His expressions and soulful eyes told a huge story. Cumberbatch as the adult Turing is stunning and embodied a man who understood problems and math far more than people. I loved the scene where he stated that he was always decoding because people never said what the meant. Knightly is, again, sublime. She’s perfect as the only bright light in Turing’s relationships with people. Goode is very strong as the chess master who learns to respect what Turing can do. Leech, Beard and Northcote are great in their supporting roles as code solvers. Mark Strong as the MI6 manager of this team is cunningly strong. Charles Dance is perfect as Commander Denniston the man who wanted to run a tight ship. Graham Moore wrote a strong script but he and director Morten Tyldum could have, in my opinion, made a better film if it was more chronological in nature.

Overall:  This was an excellent film sharing an amazing story about how World War II was shortened.

Wild

First Hit:  The story is compelling and I’m not sure it was reflected in its full glory here. Reese Witherspoon plays Cheryl Strayed, a woman who was lost in her life and found herself again by hiking the Pacific Coast Trail (PCT).

The opening scene is great as it shows Cheryl tossing a boot over a cliff after the other one gets clumsily shoved off the cliff edge while she is pulling off a toenail. It shows her naivety in this hiking endeavor along with her quick tempered anger and easily accessed frustration.

This scene fully represents who she is at that moment. It is a great scene. It is unfortunate that not all the following scenes measure up as well. This isn’t to say there aren’t good to great scenes in the film, there are and they just don’t stand up to this opening scene.

Having hiked a lot when I was younger as part of our family backpacking vacations into the high sierras, I enjoyed the scenes of the mountains, meadows, and trails. We learn why she is on the trail through flashbacks which are like thought bubbles, brought up by music, conversation, or situations.

These flashbacks are OK, however they didn’t give me enough context as to why she became a drug addict, slept with everyone in sight, and tried to destroy her life. There was more to the story and it wasn’t here.

Witherspoon was very strong as Cheryl however I think the way the story was told and directed was the weak point of this film. Laura Dern was really engaging and full as Cheryl’s mom. Gabby Hoffman as Cheryl’s friend Aimee was very good. I liked her repulsion of Cheryl’s lifestyle when they were having dinner at the diner. Thomas Sadoski as Cheryl’s ex-husband Paul was also very strong as the man who loved Cheryl through thick and thin. Nick Hornby wrote the script which was very reflective of Cheryl’s book. Jean-Marc Vallee directed this film and this is where I think that this film falters a bit. There is a lot to digest from this book/script and it's a good attempt – not great.

Overall:  I did enjoy the film but I wasn’t satisfied that it told the story deeply enough.

Foxcatcher

First Hit:  Well-acted with a long slow buildup to a disconnected ending by a disconnected person.

John E. du Pont (Steve Carell) lives deeply in the shadow of his mother Jean (Vanessa Redgrave), his family, and the family name.

Having never had to work at doing anything for survival he longs to be connected to something, something that gives him a sense of being a man. He thinks himself a patriot and significant contributor to society. The reality is different – it is the name that is famous.

The question I kept asking myself throughout the film was, was he simply a grossly odd individual, or did he have full mental capacity? When you watch some scenes he comes across as either one or the other -  but you don’t really know. I think that is part of the point of the film, not knowing.

What does stand out is that he is completely shielded by money – his family money – nothing he actually earned. He gloms onto the wrestling Schultz brothers who both won Olympic Gold medals in the 1984 games. He does this because he sees an opportunity to finance this sport and these guys to additional greatness as well as his own notoriety. He wants to be seen.

Dave Schultz (Mark Ruffalo) and younger brother Mark (Tatum Channing) are close brothers and great wrestlers. Mark is plodding, not socially adept, but learns wrestling well from his brother and therefore only moderately succeeds. Dave is a brilliant wrestling strategist and coach. Although Mark cannot convince Dave to join duPont’s Foxcatcher team, he decides to live and practice at the Foxcatcher wrestling facility, at du Pont’s home, in Pennsylvania.

du Pont thinks he has become a coach, motivator and mentor of young Mark but in reality he knows nothing about the sport and just supplies the money. The convincingly twisted relationship he builds with Mark is meant to break the bond between the brothers. Mark’s wrestling goes south because of du Pont’s influence (drugs and arrogance) and when the writing was on the wall for the Foxcatcher team, du Pont convinces Dave to come coach the team.

One of the most telling scenes, is when Jean comes to the wrestling facility and John decides to pretend to be the coach. It is a moment where he really begins to see his failings as a human being. The shots of du Pont’s land and the wrestling are effective.

Carell is an oddly disturbing du Pont. I know nothing of the real person so I can only wonder, could the du Pont Carell created by Carell do the deeds as shown? Yes, Carell made the brooding, icy stares and halting rambling speeches convincing. Ruffalo was really good as the smart, very engaged coach and brother to Mark. Channing was good to great. I found it hard for me to believe he survived on his limited social skills, but as a wrestler I thought he was great. Redgrave was perfect as the mother who told her son, “wrestling is a low sport…”. E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman wrote the script that had some interesting lines and others that were funny but maybe not meant to be funny. Bennett Miller directed this film. Some of the shots of the wrestling and land around Foxcatcher were fantastic, however the story plodded.

Overall:  Despite its failings as a film and it being too long in telling the story, I was intrigued to learn more about this event where a rich man kills a wrestling coach.

The Theory of Everything

First Hit: Extremely well-acted and a very engaging story.

Stephen Hawking (played here by Eddie Redmayne) is a brilliant man. His way of viewing our world is ever changing because he continues to open his mind to concepts while having the tenacity to prove things mathematically. Sharing with us, his thoughts through a body that has basically shut down is a story of perseverance and unending support and love from his wife Jane (Felicity Jones).

The film follows the story of Hawking meeting Jane, his learning that he has a motor neuron disease which will slowly disable his physical movement, how Jane’s support allowed him to continue, flourish in the science community, and finally through the end of Jane and Stephen’s marriage and their continued support each other past their divorce.

This film is beautifully shot as the scenes in the house show both havoc and love - amazing.

Redmayne gives an Oscar nomination worthy performance – enough said. Jones is fantastic. I thought she was equally the heart and soul of this film. David Thewlis as Dennis Sciama was great and embodied the man who helped Steven grow and explore his inner universe. Anthony McCarten wrote an excellent screen play from Jane Hawking’s own book “Traveling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen”. James Marsh did a fantastic job of giving us a view into this great man’s life. He did an even better job of giving us a view of how Jane was the base that empowered Stephen.

Overall: This was a wonderful film to watch.