Latest Reviews

Entries in matthew mcconaughey (3)

Wednesday
Nov052014

Interstellar

As a general rule, director Christopher Nolan doesn’t make bad movies. While not all have been great, neither have any been bad. In regards to consistency, at least, one could argue he’s the single best director working today and early buzz for his newest film, “Interstellar,” seemed to indicate magnificence. Some reports even stated that it was on a philosophical level of Stanley Kubrick’s masterpiece, “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Having now seen it, I feel like I can definitively say that it’s not quite up to that level. “Interstellar” is a great movie, one that will inevitably end up on many critics’ best of the year lists, but to make such a direct comparison is overenthusiastic hyperbole. It’s Nolan’s most narratively ambitious film to date and it does a good job of exploring complex themes, but its philosophizing doesn’t always land. Still, when most science fiction films these days involve little more than assault-on-the-senses action, one can’t help but appreciate that this one strives to be intellectually more.

And it’s that intellectualism, even when it’s not up to snuff, that gives “Interstellar” its edge. In a real world that seems increasingly anti-intellectualism and anti-science, with societies hell bent on holding onto archaic beliefs and ideologies, it’s a breath of fresh air to see onscreen characters portrayed in a way that highlights scientific curiosity and hope, even in the face of extreme adversity. Matthew McConaughey, in what could very well be his best dramatic performance to date, plays Cooper, a brilliant engineer and scientist who, due to apocalyptic weather patterns diminishing Earth’s resources, is relegated to farming. He’s a naturally curious person and has passed that curiosity down to his children, namely Murph, played by Mackenzie Foy, a young girl who swears there’s a ghost in her room trying to tell her something.

Eventually they learn the strange occurrences in her room are gravitational anomalies that began around 50 years ago. Around the same time, a wormhole in space appeared and has remained stable ever since. Using this wormhole, NASA was able to send its bravest men and women to a new galaxy with potentially habitable worlds. The data they’ve since received indicates a handful of those worlds could work to save the human race, so they enlist Cooper to leave his family behind and embark on a dangerous mission. Knowing that inaction could mean extinction for his species, he begrudgingly agrees.

In many ways, “Interstellar” is the polar opposite of last year’s sci-fi hit, “Gravity.” While that movie was essentially a 90 minute action movie in space with minimal characterization, “Interstellar” nearly doubles that length and is all about character. A few tense action scenes pop up in from time to time, but it’s the effect those scenes have on the characters that makes them so interesting. Before the characters even lift off into space, the stage is set for some wonderful human drama. The relationships are built in a believable way, which allows later scenes to lead to some truly heartbreaking moments. Characters aren’t mentioned in passing like Bullock’s daughter in “Gravity,” but are instead grown and explored through many years and even decades, thanks to a clever narrative mechanic grounded in real life science.

In fact, the lengths “Interstellar” goes to be scientifically accurate are both welcome and impressive. It takes liberties, of course, to form its story, but it dares to show its scientific literacy when other movies would have taken the easy way out. A great example comes in its portrayal of artificial gravity. Nolan could have very easily had the characters flip a switch to turn it on in their spaceship, but he instead has a 10 minute sequence where their ship docks with a circular apparatus that then begins to rotate, creating artificial gravity through centrifugal force. Is this sequence necessary for the characters or the drama? No, but it helps create a real, living world and, though minor in the big scheme of things, it allows viewers to sink fully into the desired immersion.

These details show a genuine love for the subject matter, for space and even for the unknown. The writing from Nolan and his brother, Jonathan, indicate as much. Wonderful scenes that mock Apollo landing conspiracy theorists and early dialogue discussing the merits of scientific study highlight a passion for scientific endeavors as well as the wonders of both the human spirit and the insignificant role we play in the immensity of the cosmos. The visuals similarly show this affection, with truly stunning imagery that looks pulled from NASA’s archives. This is a movie that understands not just the frightening and dangerous nature of our universe, but also its grandiosity and quiet beauty. If you too share such awe, as I do, then you’ll find plenty to love here.

When “Interstellar” stumbles, it’s not due to these things, but rather a narrative that occasionally misses the mark. When the characters start to hypothesize about the meaning of everything, one starts to babble on with silly nonsense about love, about how it could potentially be an extra dimension beyond time and space that we aren’t yet able to perceive. In a movie as grounded as this one, scenes like this are worth little more than an eye roll.

It also loses some narrative momentum in its final moments. Despite a deliberate pacing and a runtime of 169 minutes, its conclusion is rushed beyond plausibility. Although undeniably interesting and unexpected, a specific character comes to a revelation completely out of the blue with little convincing context behind it. However, it must be said that this moment also leads to one of the emotionally impactful moments in the entire film, which makes it easier to forgive such hurriedness.

If nothing else, “Interstellar” goes to show that there are still some great ideas out there that the science fiction genre can lend itself to beyond giant robots crashing into each other. It might not be the intellectual equivalent of “2001: A Space Odyssey” as some have argued, but it’s a wondrous movie in its own right that tackles complex themes, builds believable characters and hits all the right emotional chords while rarely relying on heavy-handed manipulation. Even with its faults, it’s one of the year’s best.

Interstellar receives 4.5/5

Tuesday
Dec242013

The Wolf of Wall Street

There’s no doubt that Martin Scorsese is one of the greatest directors to have ever lived. From “Taxi Driver” to “Goodfellas” to 2010’s underrated “Shutter Island,” he has given filmgoers some of the best and most memorable movies ever created. He is a force to be reckoned with. With that said, “The Wolf of Wall Street” is his most ridiculous and over-the-top movie yet, with a questionable closing message that echoes (in a decidedly lesser manner) the misguided sentiments of 2011’s “Limitless.” Scorsese has always reveled in the illegal, this time tackling the seedy underbelly of the corporate world, but never has he been so forgiving of his subjects. Though it’s not a bad movie (it is Scorsese, after all), “The Wolf of Wall Street” is surprisingly off-putting, overlong and morally skewed.

Based on the true story of a former stockbroker who would do anything to make a buck, even if that meant breaking the law, “The Wolf of Wall Street” follows Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio), a young up-and-comer who starts his own business, Stratton Oakmont Inc., running a penny stock boiler room. With the help of his assistant, Donnie Azoff (Jonah Hill), they soon strike it rich, but the feds, led by head investigator Denham (Kyle Chandler), are planning on taking them down.

It’s a rather simple story for a movie that takes only one tick under three hours to play out—though one could argue the bloated length compliments the thematic exploration of excess—yet in spite of this length, “The Wolf of Wall Street” never drags. The dialogue is sharp and witty and it comes furiously, almost as if the cars from the “Fast and Furious” franchise transformed into spoken words. Labeled as a “dark comedy,” the film is indeed quite funny, at first. Jonah Hill, being the usually hilarious comedian he is (“The Sitter” notwithstanding), brings the goofiness while DiCaprio, in a sharp turn from his usual approach, chews the scenery like he never has before. His over-the-top performance compliments the film’s over-the-top nature.

But it’s that very nature that eventually starts to degrade the film. As the stakes get higher and the circumstances become more dour, the humor starts to fall flat. Rather than acknowledge the trouble the characters are in, the movie makes fun of it, making light of inexcusable behavior. Belfort, though written to be charming and likable, is a scumbag. He’s a liar, manipulator, thief, heavy drug user and womanizer, one who feels the need to sexually molest woman as he passes them by fondling their breasts. The problem doesn’t necessarily lie in his actions, but rather in the way they’re portrayed: as glamorous, fun and acceptable. To put it simply, the writing does its best to gloss over the repercussions of Belfort’s actions. When you’re supposed to be laughing at the destruction he causes to not only himself, but also those around him, you realize the movie has failed to set a justifiable tone.

Perhaps the strangest part of “The Wolf of Wall Street” is its decision to not just glamorize or make humorous this lifestyle, but to downplay the true effects of it so much that it begins to resemble a cartoon, including a baffling sequence where Belfort speaks what can only be described as telepathically to a Suisse banker, played by Jean Dujardin. It comes as no surprise later in the film when it actually makes a direct comparison to “Popeye,” only with cocaine being the source of power rather than spinach. That sequence is just one of many with a questionable message. Further hurting the overall film is its strange and out-of-place alternative soundtrack consisting of bands like the Foo Fighters, who only fit the film’s tonal intentions if you make the unreasonably large leap that the rock 'n' roll lifestyle matches those portrayed on-screen. Aside from perhaps this year’s “The Great Gatsby,” there hasn’t been a soundtrack that fits this poorly to its visual counterpart in years.

Still, with all that said, “The Wolf of Wall Street” is not a bad movie. In fact, it’s a fairly engrossing one; its issues seem more apparent upon reflection than in the moment. It looks fantastic, its editing is smooth, the aforementioned dialogue is gripping and its supporting cast all knock if out of the park, including an all too brief cameo from Matthew McConaughey, who, even with his very limited screen time, wholly deserves a Best Supporting Actor nomination. What it all boils down to is that “The Wolf of Wall Street” is a clumsy movie full of questionable decisions and shady messages, but luckily, even a clumsy Scorsese movie is a good movie. Just don’t expect it to blow you away. It’s good, but it’s not Scorsese good.

The Wolf of Wall Street receives 3/5

Friday
Mar182011

The Lincoln Lawyer

Throughout the years, Matthew McConaughey has made a name for himself, though the name isn't one he should be proud of. He has become “the romantic comedy guy,” starring in such films as Failure to Launch, Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, Fool’s Gold and How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, all of which, for all intents and purposes, are awful (yes, even the last one). He has become the laughing stock of critics around the country, to the point where my colleagues and I, before each of his movies, make a bet as to how many times he will take his shirt off. But if he keeps doing movies like The Lincoln Lawyer, he may turn that around. It’s his first legal thriller since 1996’s A Time to Kill, which, coincidentally, is the last time he made a good movie and while this isn’t quite as good as that film, it’s definitely worth seeing.

McConaughey plays Mick Haller, a smooth talking lawyer who seemingly always finds a way to win. He’s generally disliked among the law community for representing scumbags who probably shouldn’t be on the street, but he doesn’t care as long as he gets paid. His next client, wealthy playboy Louis Roulet, played by Ryan Phillippe, who personally asked for his assistance, is now under investigation for attempted murder and the brutal beating of a prostitute. However, he claims he was set up and that she’s only after a chunk of his change. Along with his investigator, Frank, played by William H. Macy, Mick begins to put his case together and discovers that somebody isn’t telling the truth.

As is to be expected, The Lincoln Lawyer, for much of its runtime, speaks in legal mumbo jumbo. It’s a language I don’t fully understand, but the film never bogs itself down in it and manages to be easily understandable even to those without law degrees. It uses those words because it has to due to the nature of the story and, even though the direct meaning of some of them flew over my head, the context of the sentence defined them for me. Not once was I lost watching the movie. Conversely, I was intrigued until the very end. Once you’ve invested yourself in this story, it’s impossible not to be.

Unfortunately, the path to that end is a bit bumpy. While not excessive, The Lincoln Lawyer is plagued with awkward cuts and a number of dramatic miscues. From a random post sex explosion of anger from his ex-wife and colleague to an abrupt and sudden cut where Mick goes from pinning a character against a wall to sitting at a bar with a drink, the movie repeatedly makes questionable decisions.

This is most evident in the back half of the picture when the actual trial takes place. While I’m no lawyer and can’t speak from experience, the court proceedings seem uncouth and exaggerated for dramatic effect, full of sustained stares and long, exhaustive monologues from characters at the stand. Although much of it is intentional, these scenes become comedic, a stark contrast to the preceding hour that highlighted murder, alcoholism and more. In a courtroom drama, you expect the courtroom scenes to be the most gripping parts of the movie, but because of these problems, they are instead the most inauthentic.

Nevertheless, The Lincoln Lawyer is a solid movie and it’s carried by a powerhouse performance from Matthew McConaughey. He hasn’t put this much vigor and passion into a role in quite some time and he has proven himself as more than the joke many have made him out to be.

The Lincoln Lawyer receives 3.5/5