The Act of Killing (2013)

If your idea of a great documentary is having the real-life mass murdering protagonist singing about peace in front of a waterfall with stand-ins for his victims taking the metal wires used to kill them off their necks, presenting him with a medal and thanking him for sending them to heaven, all shot in Barbara Walters-style soft-focus, then this is the movie for you. This is something so surreal and horrific that, ethical qualms aside, absolutely must have been made a documentary of. Despite the obvious issue of the subjects' perhaps deceit as to the true nature of the film, I think it was something that the director (and the big name exec-producers behind this, namely Werner Herzog and Errol Morris) couldn't in good conscience give up the opportunity to make. It is at once a historical document, psychological drama and participatory documentary (to use Nichols' convention). This is some dark stuff, and I've recently watched an interview where the filmmaker compared making his film to going into a Germany where the Nazis have won and interviewing Hitler. Well, that, except with more chubby asians in drag. Yes, there is humour in there too, at times maybe misplaced, but still. Overall an amazing film to watch, including the cathartic conclusion that brings a sort of much-needed but too-little-too-late kind of closure to the story, if not to the many victims and victims' families affected by the actions of the criminals presented before us.

Jobs (2013)

I sooo wish that this would have gotten the 'The Social Network' treatment. I wholeheartedly believe that even with someone like Kutchner, Fincher would have made a masterpiece out of it. Casting-wise, I wasn't too upset about Kutchner's selection. Having grown with him in that 70s show, he felt like he belonged among all the bearded, long-haired misfit computer geeks from Apple's beginnings. Without Fincher's edge, however, this seems more like a 2 hour, lawyer and marketing-team-approved commercial for Steve Jobs (not necessarily for apple). It claims not to shy away from his negative aspects (showing how he withheld shares from some of the people who were there from the beginning and cutting ties with his daughter), but overall it glosses over that with a story that it wants to portray as one of a visionary taking back what was his to begin with. It is as if it tries to hit all the keypoints in the apple/Jobs history, while not devoting enough to the 'soul' of it all, but rather trying to create a well-balanced, accessible, digestible story that is superficial under the guise of being genuine. I suppose, much like Jobs' philosophy, it projects an image of an ideal, hitting all the key cues for making us believe that ideal, but is, in the end, a simple product - average, but overhyped. 

Warm Bodies (2013)

It's not the latest Shaun of the Dead or Zombieland, but it does the trick in terms of fresh rotting zombie fare "with a twist". it's actually quite adorable and dare I say cute, with good pacing and relatively good cinematography given the budget. Seeing familiar places from Montreal making cameos was also a pleasant touch, and the whole Romeo & Juliette angle along with all the other little jokes are very welcome. With all the vampire romance fiction out there, it was really fun to see the zombies get their share of romance and 'heart warming' adventures. Overall very welcome, and the addition of Rob Corddri and John Malkovich only serve to make the package even more appealing. definitely worth your time. 

Beasts of the Southern Wild (2012)

Heralded as the new breakout film of 2012, both for its director and its child starlet, Beasts boasts characters, acting, location and a plot that can only exist where they do, and I would almost even go as far as describing it as a rare example of a seemingly dichotomous fantasy-cinéma-vérité-drama genre. I would say this is a pioneer in this new genre, but I can’t help but draw parallels to both Pedro González-Rubio’s 2009’s Alamar and (to a much lesser extent) to Pier Paolo Pasolini’s work, especially with his use of non-professional actors coming from the region where the film is set. In fact, Dwight Henry, in the role of Wink, hails from Louisiana and claims he has been “in neck-high water” during Katrina, which gave him a unique “inside understanding for what this movie is about”. Other than the historically inaccurate Aurochs (Zeitlin used baby potbellied pigs that he dressed up with fur and horns, for practical and budgetary reasons), the film’s main weakness is the plot, which despite being captivating and beautifully filmed, is rather thin, relying primarily on the interaction between the heroine and her father with their environment and nature. Fittingly, the film’s only real brush with reality is the devastating plan involving the levee, which leads to the brief but chilling encounter with “real life” and the harsh consequences that it entails when compared with the idyllic and carefree life presented at the beginning (and the end). Ultimately, the film acts as a documentary in the sense that it presents the smooth flow of life and nature in the dream-like Bathtub, and any attempt to pry its inhabitants from this community, effectively waking them up from the dream, does not end well. The ending is thankfully left somewhat ambiguous and open to us, but not without making it clear that Hushpuppy has grown in the course of the movie (thus fulfilling the classical dramatic arc and in a way conforming to the narrative structure Hollywood likes so much). This is not to say that it is not enjoyable and a great work to experience, especially considering it is the director’s first feature. I am curious to see what his next project will be, as he has already set relatively high standards of excellence for himself, especially considering this first film is also his first Oscar nomination. Overall great, well deserving of the nomination.

The Master (2012)

The Master is one of those films that I wanted to see ever since Joaquin Phoenix became sane again (although judging from his performance in The Master, I have my doubts). It is also Paul Thomas Anderson’s first movie since 2007’s There Will Be Blood, which I was hoping would have continued a streak of genius from Boogie Nights to Magnolia and even Punch Drunk Love (which I liked). Unfortunately (and contrary to the many positive reviews) it didn't capture me as much as it did others. I must admit that while the cinematography is amazing (maybe in part thanks to the use of 65mm negative throughout, normally only reserved for IMAX features) and is complemented by great performances well deserving of their Oscar nominations, the film as a whole didn’t do it for me. The whole link to Scientology wasn’t explored enough (and I think it could have made for some very compelling plot) and Philip Seymour Hoffman’s character (the L. Ron Hubbard analogue) wasn’t explored nearly enough as I would have liked. Overall it is disjoint and unfocused, and if it weren’t for the overbearing Scientology angle, this should have really been a movie about the unstable alcoholic WWII vet that we are presented with at the beginning. His whole encounter with ‘The Cause’ and their agenda just serves to redirect the focus to their antics instead of allowing us to fully explore Phoenix’s character, who either seems to barely hold it together or put up a really good show, considering his last stint in I’m Still Here. either way, only for hardcore PTA or Phoenix fans.

Broken City (2013)

It seems like Mark Wahlberg has been slowly building himself a career that involves him being typecast into the role of the down-on-his-luck, working-class maybe ex-cop character, thrust in a web of double-crossing and framing that’s just too much for his simple Joe-six-pack (recovering) self. In a universe that seems to always be Boston,  where characters are always in the midst of the old Hollywood cliché of Irish catholic or Italian (or in this case Latino) communities, there isn't much place for straying from the formula. And formulaic it is, complete with political scandal, financial fraud and “they want to take what little you have that you worked for so hard all your life” mentality. I won’t say it’s not a great fun to watch, considering the expectations. Performances are solid both from the main cast and the supporting characters, and if you like the kind of movies that Wahlberg has been pumping out (you know the kind, Four Brothers, We Own the Night, Contraband and even The Town, which I was surprised to find out didn't include Wahlberg), you’re sure to also enjoy this one. He even has a new one coming out, Pain & Gain, which is a little stray from the formula, and is a Michael Bay project, with all that that implies, but in the end, there is still a heist and Wahlberg’s lovable loser. Definitely a fun watch.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Trying to navigate through the hype and fanboyhood that surrounded this juggernaut, I opted for the 24fps 3D version of the film. Reading through several reviews that panned it, I couldn’t bring myself to sit through 2:50 hours of “soap-opera” effect, but I like 3D so that worked for me. Without going through a comparison to the novel (which I didn’t read), it’s still easy to see that this has taken the source material and stretched it as much as it could. By comparison, the entire The Hobbit novel is shorter than the first Lord of the Rings book, so consider the material that fueled the first movie in LoTR trilogy, cut away some 200 pages, then split that in 3 and make a movie out of each part - that’s the Hobbit. I’m sure financial or “fan service” considerations would have been in play when making this decision. Maybe studio directors were thinking more about how many Hobbit figurines they could sell over the next 3 years than whether this was going to be a good movie. As for the film itself, it is of the same great quality that the first 3 LoTR movies benefited, albeit a little diluted because of duration. This could have benefited from some significant cuts. The usual culprit is the extended dinner/song/dance scene at the beginning, which honestly I didn’t find that long as it was happening, but which contributed to my indifference for most of what followed. I could mostly relate to Gandalf and Bilbo, most likely because I like both actors portraying them, but except for them, most of everybody else was forgettable. As for the CG creatures, Gollum excels again as always, and I did like the Great Goblin which was a filthy yet entertaining bit of goblin royalty. Plot-wise, if this wasn’t based on a book, it would be risible. Gandalf and the great Eagles act a bit too often as a deus ex machina, and some obvious choices seem like they were made for the sole reason of filling in some plot. The most glaring example, like in LoTR, is the Great Eagles fallacy. in the words of the great philosoraptor: “At the end of lord of the rings frodo Gets eagles to fly him back - Why didn't those sluts fly him there in the first place”. But I digress. Overall this was enjoyable, if a tad long. I’ll probably watch the other 2 films, and maybe give 48fps version a shot at some point as well, if I feel really bored. Essentially this is more of the same LoTR goodness, so if you loved those, be sure to not miss this as well.