In my life, I've left many an unfulfilled promise: "Of course I'll stay for breakfast," "I promise I will stay for breakfast," "Baby, I'm in it for the long haul... staying for breakfast should be no problem." But the worst of which has to be my utter failure to win the race against the Oscars in releasing my Best Picture. For this I apologize wholeheartedly. I could launch a Lebron-esque "What should I do?" campaign, but I'm not a phony, albeit wonderfully talented, person who is more concerned about the value of his "brand" than surrounding himself with people who care about making "right" decisions, either for himself or his conscience. What was I talking about again? Oh, the CARMYs. Let's get down to it.
Below, I've listed and reviewed the 7 nominees in no significant order. After each is reviewed, I ask that you give a little drumroll on your desks, your thighs, or depending on surface area, your noses. Then I will reveal the WINNER of the 2011 CARMY Award for Best Picture!!! Read on...
X-Men: First Class
When I first heard they were making an X-Men reboot/prequel, I was nonplussed. Granted, X-Men 3 was a stark departure in quality from the 1st two movies, but there were still places to take that storyline with those characters. After seeing First Class, the first thing I did was travel back in time and slap myself in the face for being so stupid (yes, time travel exists and I have it).
The Good
Our two leads -- Fassbend-her as 'Neto, and McAvoy as Charles Xavier. The characters' relationship on-screen is so f'ing important to the movie. I, for one, believe that the two actors had such excellent chemistry that almost every viewer was forced to think about the complex relationship between Erik and Charles rather than the slick action sequences or the just plain cool sequence where they're putting the team together. The aforementioned relationship is one of mutual respect -- more than that, both identify with the other as soon as they two meet. They build a friendship, although neither agrees with the other's core philosophy, which seems so genuine despite the short amount of time, because the characters literally open the deepest caverns of their minds to each other.
Magneto, outside of the context of his and Charles' friendship, kicks all kinds of ass. The writers really thought of the absolute coolest fucking ways to use his power. Story-wise, his thirst for violent revenge evokes at first an intense sympathy, but as his anger consumes him he alienates himself from the audience and his closest friend.
The broader plot of the movie is captivating throughout. Intertwining the conception of the X-Men with the Cold War worked well in a multi-layered sense. The Cold War serves as a glaring example to back Magneto's theory that humanity doesn't deserve anything but to bow down to super-humanity. It also foreshadows future standoffs between humans and mutants and the X-Men with Magneto's Brotherhood. It also makes for a helluva interesting ride, the kind where you kick back, put your feet on your buddy's dash over his objection, and enjoy yourself.
It also serves as a master plot for evil supervillain Kevin Bacon. Evil Bacon is not the most well-acted character, but a damn good villain all the same. He sets the fire inside Magneto that makes him the world's most well-endowed, errr, badass revenge-monger. He also is pulling the strings behind this whole democracy-communist argy-bargy. He is more than just a convenient mechanism through which the chapter officially closes on the Erik-Charles bromance.
The action sequences are indeed slick, the climactic scuffle amid the backdrop of the Cuban Missile Crisis is, I'd say, more than a worthwhile climax. You know when you building up a jerk sesh for a good long while and then have an underwhelming climax? One that -- apart from the feeling of remorse which can only be described as a soul flushed with shame -- makes you say "wow, that's an hour of my life I won't get back." This wasn't that.
The Notta-too-Good
It's become fashionable to deride January Jones as a poor actress (she is). If she were playing a robot in this movie, man give her the Oscar. But she was not a robot. Man is she hot as hell though. Keep on insulting her talent though, so when I see her crying outside an Ikea, I can give her the ol' "hey baby, what's wrong?" Night NIGHT. In all seriousness though, she was really bad in this movie.
None of the actual X-Men in this movie were all that interesting. Don't get me wrong, Beast and Mystique do contribute a terrific conceptual storyline about the conflict between displaying one's true self versus conforming with social conventions like society's perception of beauty. But the characters are just not all that well acted. I refuse to lick Jennifer Lawrence's balls as an actress just yet. She was great in Winter's Bone, but her performance in First Class was elevated by the strength of her character, and NOT the other way around. The movie works around this minor complaint though as Erik and Charles remain in the foreground throughout.
Midnight in Paris
Owen Wilson, while vacationing in Paris with his supreme bitch of a fiancee and her family in Paris, travels back in time nightly to the 1920s and whimsically encounters the time's leading cultural minds, who double as his personal icons. I'm probably going to sound stoopid reviewing such a smart and above-all an enchanting movie.
The Good
Right now you're thinking "whizzers this sounds pretentious as hell." Indeed, after I watched it I though: "how in holy hell was that not pretentious?" Well, for one, the film never takes itself too seriously. It is rare that a movie can romanticize with daydreaming floatiness about high culture, talkin' life with Gertrude Stein, Hemingway, F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, and the like. Midnight in Paris does just that.
For this purpose, Owen Wilson is, believe it or not, perfect for the lead. If this choice was deliberate as it seemed, then hats off to Woody Allen. Wilson was a major contributor to the movie's light and comic tone. Even during the "conflict" of the movie is in full swing -- a row with the aforementioned BITCH fiancee -- Wilson's typical persona is what makes us ask whether any of this, his relationship, the fights about money, etc., really matters.
This is a very personal list, and as such, if a movie speaks to me on a personal level, it likely was ranked near the top of the list. You know I'm lovin' a movie that playfully preaches that we rummage through the trivialities of our own lives to leave behind what we want to leave behind; to not live in the past, however great it may be (or how great college was).
The historical figures -- Kathy Bates as Gertrude Stein, some guy as Hemingway, Tom Hiddleston and Allison Pill as Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, etc. -- were all delightfully colorful, Hemingway especially made the most of his screen time, and gave the gift of endless quotability.
Woody really does a terrific job all-around, but the pacing is near-perfect. The film really jumps into the time-travelling from the opening scene and remains speedy throughout. While most films can't survive a feature-length dash to the finish, such a rate is appropriate for Midnight in Paris, a movie without a real conflict. Despite being multi-layered, this does not seem like a movie that wants us to do too much thinking while viewing, and perishes the thought of overthinking. It is fun, flighty, and drunk with whimsy and charm. On that note, I might add that Paris is the perfect setting for such a hopelessly romantic movie, itself being the embodiment of the film's theme.
The Not-a-too-Good
Well, it is a little pretentious... insofar as it is smart. But pretentious nonetheless.
Kung Fu Panda 2
The Good
Kung Fu Panda 2 certainly wins the non-existent CARMY for Best Visuals. Apart from Avatar, I have not been this enchanted by the 3D visual effects of a movie. Most of the beauty is expended on the landscapes. For instance, there is one scene where Po and the Furious Five are floating lazily down a river on a raft/boat which is breathtaking in both its realism and its grace. All the scenes involving water are so f'ing remarkable it leaves me speechless.
I realize that good pixel rendering alone does not a good movie make, and we'll get past this, but let me wax poetic for just a few moments more. The color scheme is also carefully managed throughout the movie, with black, white and red taking the forefront. Our hero, our villain, and the most intense scenes are rendered in these colors. For instance, the inside of the villain's metalworks factory is tinted a fiery red, and the climax, a battle on a river, shows the red from the lamplights reflecting off the water's surface.
Now, the story. Wait, check that, let's talk more about visuals. The fight scenes are grandiose in the best way. In a word, they are cool. And plentiful. From about the 10-minute mark forward, I don't think there's a full 10-minute wait between giant, exciting brawls.
OK, now the story. Well, it's shockingly well-done for a non-Pixar animated movie. I said in an earlier part of this seemingly endless CARMY piece that when it comes to animated movies, the plot tends to cater towards children, whereas some in-jokes are done for the adults in the audience... and sometimes vice versa. Here, the plot was layered enough to be both for children and adults. If you are a child, you watched a movie about Po and his friends trying to fight a Peacock who knows how to kill Kung Fu. If you are an adult, you saw much more. So much more that it gets its own paragraph.
The hero and villain are two sides to the same coin. Po, the titular Panda (or as I say when I go to the zoo, human in Panda costume), is struggling, in light of finding out he's adopted, to find out who he really is. The villain, Shen, was told by a soothsayer at a young age that he would be felled by a warrior of black and white. He then forged cannons using the fireworks technology his parents' kingdom was known for and killed all the pandas, or so he thought. When his parents found out what he did, they disowned him. So, both hero and villain are struggling with the thought that their parents did not want them. Po, on the one hand, can attain inner peace and let go of the past, while Shen cannot.
I don't know why we love villains so much. We don't necessarily root for them in the movie, but knowing it is just cinema, we tend to latch onto the portrayal of the villain as the lynchpin of the movie. Do we see ourselves as inherently good, thus recognizing a higher degree of difficulty in playing these sociopathic, corporeal forms of evil? Heath Ledger as the Joker, Denzel in Training Day, Javier Bardem as Anton Chigurh, Cristoph Waltz as Hans Landa... these were all Oscar-winning roles. While I'm not comparing Gary Oldman's voicework as Shen to any of these iconic roles, he does tremendous work (what else would one expect from Gary Oldman?).
The Notta-too-Good
I can't decide if the movie contains a heavily- or not-at-all-veiled environmental message? The villain in the movie uses technology to kill (including endangering Pandas), and those on the side of technology find it exceedingly difficult, nay, impossible to ever attain inner peace. What do we think?
Hugo
Writer's Note: Beware, for I am a Scorsese MARK. At this point in his career, his moviemaking and my tastes are so goddamned in tune that every one of his movies will be an instant hit. I've heard both good and bad about Shutter Island. But it is anchored into my Top 25 movies ever.
The Good
What many people don't know is that Hugo is one giant curveball. I didn't go into it knowing all that much about the supposed plot or synopsis, but what I did know was completely wrong. Well, not wrong, just misleading. I thought the movie was about an orphaned boy living at a train station in Paris trying to solve a mystery about some automaton that will bring him closer to his deceased father. It was... kinda. Hugo is actually a sort-of love letter from Martin Scorsese to movies, particularly to those of early 1900s filmmaker Georges Melies -- SPOILER ALERT, Ben Kingsley's character in the movie. MORE SPOILERS AHEAD. Y'see, the titular young lad discovers that the crotchety old man who works the toy shop at the train station is actually down-and-out, forgotten filmmaker Georges Melies. Hugo's quest becomes to show the old man that he isn't forgotten; that his "dreams" still mean something to people. It is this plotline that forges the movie's strong sentimental connection to the viewer.
I had no idea going in that the character I -- and I'm assuming most of the audience generally -- would form the strongest emotional bond with would be Ben Kingsley's character. But Kingsley is heartbreakingly stunning as an old man whose life's work, whose dream, whose passion -- once hugely successful -- was crushed by the realities of war and the human struggle. With all of the award recognition Hugo got, and to a large extent deserved, I'm surprised Kingsley (an Academy favorite) was not nominated for his efforts. If I weren't such a rugged, manly, hardcore bro, I would have been fighting back tears for nearly every moment Kingsley was on screen after we find out his real identity. He plays Melies with an air of quiet dignity, who just crumbles on the inside when he's reminded about his films literally being destroyed by mankind's loss of imagination, given the realities of war (particularly World War 1).
Let's talk about visuals bc hey, I love me some visuals. Hugo is, and was largely marketed as, stunning cinematography. With the previously mentioned Kung Fu Panda 2, Hugo is proof, to me, that 3D is here to stay, and that that is a very good thing. The train station, and particularly the station's innards, where Hugo Lives, are Scorsese's way of establishing an imaginative dreamworld, like those of Melies, steeped heavily in reality. He shows us, and Melies, that imagination is not dead... it's about how you choose to see the world around you. The 3D enhancement is, I like to think, Hugo's way of seeing the world around him, even among his daily struggles -- being an orphan, clutching dearly the memory of his father, having to steal food just to stay alive, etc.
The Notta-too-Good
I don't know if this was an intended move on Scorsese's part, but god damn was the pacing of the movie inconsistent. The first half of the movie creeeeeps by. The second half, doesn't fly by, but it is rather up-tempo. If this was intentional -- say to illustrate how slow and plodding the world was before Melies and his films -- then it was artistically brilliant. Either way, it doesn't translate well.
Super 8
This one was super secretive too. I knew this was about some sort of alien attack on a small town but that was it. Once again... wait, actually I saw this before Hugo... once, I was delightfully surprised.
The Good
Had I known that the stars of this movie were basically all 12-13 year olds, I might not have seen Super 8 at all, let alone in theaters. The too-smart-for-their-age, wise-ass pre-teen archetype we see in movies like Every Dakota Fanning Movie really pisses me off. No kid is that wise.
Having said that, I love the child's point of view. The Little Prince is one of my favorite all-time books in large part because it treasures a child's way of perceiving the world around him, as opposed to the overly-practical, ends-based adult perception. While the Super 8 kids are by no means Little Princes, they are certainly not Dakota Fannings either (ironic because one of the youngsters is played by Elle Fanning). The kids, and the actors who play them, are delights. They all, or at least the 3-4 of them that actually matter, have very real problems -- a dead mother, a drunk, jobless father, etc. -- but they remain rife with playful innocence. They are also legitimately funny. The plot, in a sense, revolves around an amateur zombie movie that Charles (one of the kids) is making. The "movie" plotline is full of particularly charming humor.
The youthful innocence I speak of is aided by the fact that this movie is very much a period piece. Taking place in the 1970s, one can't leave the theater without wondering if there was ever a better time to be a child. I couldn't help but smile when I saw two friends talking to each other on walkie-talkies, or bikes being the only mode of child transportation, parents not afraid of letting their kids out of their sight, or parents not having any reason to worry about letting their kids out of their sight.
The lead boy, Joe Lamb, played by Joel Courtney, is terrific. His mom died, he is not connecting with his father, and an alien is threatening to destroy his town and everything in it. He carries all this around with him but he is still very much a child. His father, played by Kyle Chandler, is great too. The strength of these two leads really create an emotional father-son relationship, both dealing with loss but refusing to deal with it together. Their moments of interaction are consistently empathetic. SPOILER ALERT: There is one scene after Chandler is made the acting police chief where his son, Joe, is upset that his father isn't there for him, and Chandler's character, speaking of his new job, screams "there's a town full of people depending on one person. There used to be someone else but now it's just me!" Chandler's face as he realized he just described, too, the scene inside his home was wrenching.
Obviously, the movie's about an alien "attacking" a Midwest town, so it's quite odd that I've not mentioned any alien to this point in the review. The alien attack provides the movie's excitement, and adds intrigue, but it's really a heavily-veiled deus ex machina. It is an unlikely, near miraculous event that really serves to get the characters where they need to go. It is a realization that illustrates why I love this movie so much; despite the fantastical alien romping through the streets, Super 8 always remains a movie about genuine and developed characters.
I won't give any details but the movie's resolution, but it is as magical an ending as one can hope for, especially in a time when the most heard complaint about movies is "I hated the ending."
The Notta-too-Good
The alien itself was a little too CGI-y, and a little too Cloverfield-y, meaning that we never really got a good enough look at it (until the end) for it to be any more than an amorphous being with flailing limbs. It's also so clearly computerized that at no point does the viewer believe it's actually there. It wasn't until I watched the DVD extra on creating the monster that I made peace with the design.
Additionally, the military was a little too military-y. You know what I mean. The military is imminently ready to kill women and children, or anyone who gets in their way, without any real reservations. There may be some complete sociopaths in the armed forces, but these conscious-less goons are merely a plot device.
50/50
Joseph Gordon-Levitt is told he has a rare type of cancer. His friends, his family, and the viewer are forced to watch a very real, and sadly profound account of a man struggling to survive as his youth, and potentially his life are taken away.
The Good
50/50 was just... real. Not to sound contradictory, because I've defended tooth and nail movie containing incredible coincidences -- if something is a one-in-a-million shot, a movie about the once is endlessly more interesting than the 999,999 -- but there was no depiction of human action in 50/50 that was so unlikely or fantastical as to depart from the grisly reality of a young adult with cancer. Not only the myriad emotions one deals with when they're told they have a disease that might give them only a few months to live, but what that person's friends and family members go through. Now, I don't know if this is true because the story is pretty tightly based on the screenwriter's own experience with cancer, or because of the utterly brilliant acting performances.
We'll start at the top: Joseph Gordon-Levitt has made a brotha proud, rising up from his not-so-humble beginnings as a boy who could see angels. He is the runaway winner of the 2011 CARMY for Best Actor for his performance here. He runs the gamut of emotions in 50/50, all of them completely genuine for a 29-year old who may not live to see 30. When he first finds out, his main concern is assuaging the concerns of his loved ones -- after all, he's gonna be fine! He's young and heathy! Having cancer is more annoying than anything else. Quasi-SPOILERS ahead... Then chemo starts, and he deteriorates physically. One embarrassing sexual experience later, he's angry. He realizes death is likely and that there isn't anything he can do about it. He tries to stay calm, but he flips when people tell him he'll be fine. He's not fine! But he claims to be okay with it (he's not). A few more emotions later, we get heartbreaking scene after heartbreaking scene. One of which, prior to a surgery which he may or may not ever awake from, JGL pleads with the nurse to give him the anesthesia in a way so that he wakes up after the surgery, then finally breaks down in his mother's arms. He portrays perfectly an unimaginable scenario: a moment which he is consciously aware could be his last.
Anjelica Huston, JGL's mom in the movie, is wonderful. The scenes shared by Adam and his mother are all arresting and genuine. I can easily imagine most 20-somethings become annoyed at their mother's overbearing concern for his life -- "I'm fine, ma... Ma! I'm fine." SPOILER... When he finds out his mom has been going to a support group for parents of cancer victims, I, and any other non-robot viewers wanted to jump into the screen and hug them both.
Anna Kendrick is terrific as the quirky, psychology ph.d. candidate who is smart but has terribly inappropriate bedside manner. She brings a lot of humor to the table, and provides the best argument for this movie being marketed as a "dramedy" (it is clearly far more dramatic than comedic). Seth Rogen too, while mildly funny, has his share of heartwarming moments.
I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the two old men who befriend Adam during his chemo sessions. They have both made their peace with their cancers, but there is palpable sadness in their eyes at moments when interacting with the much younger Adam.
I imagine that anyone who has dealt with, or has had anyone close to them deal with cancer, which is sadly almost everyone, can be thoroughly touched by 50/50, and I recommend it for everyone.
The Notta-too-Good
Now, I know this was based on a true story so I can't complain too much about writing choices if they are really telling the story of the writer's life, but the dad's affliction with Alzheimer's was kinda overkill. If it were not steeped in reality, then I would think that he was given Alzheimer's for the benefit of one single line: "so your mom has a husband that can't talk to her and a son that won't." (diss).
I also refuse to believe that any doctor would be so dismissive after telling someone they have a life-threatening tumor on their spine.
The Muppets
You know I was in the audience on opening day for this one. If I haven't made it clear that I'm a huge Muppets fan, then you don't know me well enough.
The Good
It's the Muppets. Back on the big screen. 'Nuff said. Shouldn't be a surprise that this was the only movie I saw twice in theaters this year.
I had a lot riding on this movie. If it failed, either critically or commercially, the Muppets franchise would be dead to me (at least until 10 years from now when they did a no-puppet remake of the original Muppet movie starring Jaden Smith Jr. as Mr. Piggy). Sure, if it were a commercial, but not critical success, we would've gotten remakes. But the remakes would be free of any incentive to comport with the classic Muppet standards of quality. In other words we'd get Muppets 2: The Squeakquel. Thank goodness this movie garnered critical acclaim and was a box office draw because now the Muppets are back.
More true than with any other 2011 movie you will see, The Muppets will leave you feeling... good. In that sense, yes, it is the feel-good movie of the year. As I write this, I'm realizing the number of ways in that it's really true. First, and foremost, it was so refreshing to see these guys again, in something new -- the movie is not only about reuniting the Muppets with each other, but very openly about reuniting the Muppets with their fans. As soon as I saw Statler and Waldorf (if my memory serves me correct, they were the first two Muppets, besides Walter, to be shown on-screen in new footage), I smiled widely. I realized how cool it felt to be seeing a Muppets movie in theaters.
Next, it was riotously funny at times though the aforementioned giddiness I was experiencing probably could've enabled an Asian stand-up to kill it at the Apollo. I will standby my assessment though -- the funny was still funny upon second viewing. Even afterwards, I laughed sporadically for a few days about Camilla and the Chickens' rendition of Forget You.
Then of course there's that classic Muppets charm. I don't know what more there is to say about this -- you acknowledge it or you don't.
The songs are quite good for the most part, although not as consistently so as in, say, A Muppet Christmas Carol. I still occasionally sing Life's a Happy Song, Man or Muppet, and Pictures in My Head. Also, if you don't get chills when they do Rainbow Connection then you could probably drown puppies and then sleep soundly at night.
Then there's the story. You want these Muppets to succeed, and desperately so. Who hasn't fallen out of friendship with someone you've been very close with? Kermit's (yes I realize he's a puppet) obvious heartbreak draws humongous sympathy even though he's at first unwilling to try to reunite everyone. I've been there, years of separation could probably be repaired by a phone call which is just for some reason too hard to make. SPOILER ALERT: So the plot-line about the gang saving their old theater isn't really that important. They put on the show because when they're together, and they entertain, the Muppets make magic. The villain isn't as much oil baron Tex Richman as it is the tendency to let things slip away. Thankfully, for everyone, the Muppets have a firm grasp on togetherness, for now.
The Notta-too-Good
I looooove Jason Segel. I don't think he detracts from the movie but the choice to make both a human actor and a new, unknown muppet the stars of the movie does detract from the amount of classic Muppets comedy on the screen. To be fair, I think they needed a human star to attract the audience that are maybe too young to be Muppets fans or were disenfranchised by the franchise's dip in quality over the past decade. Apparently they are now working on a Segel-less sequel (say that 5 times fast).
And briefly, there was also something different about this iteration of Muppets humor. Not better, not worse, just different.
**********************************************
AND THE CARMY GOES TO.................
This was a remarkably difficult decision. Hell, ask me this same question next year and I might give you a different answer. But I will say that from the moment I saw Super 8, it was my favorite movie of the year.
Thanks for putting up with my downright affection for missing deadlines. Stay tuned for CARMYs 2012, coming next week... (what better way to end this atrocity than with a terrible joke?)
-- Carmine
Posts
