Casablanca

This movie is widely regarded as the greatest movie ever made and stars Humphrey Bogart who is worthy of being called the greatest actor who ever lived. Casablanca is the pinnacle of what filmmaking can achieve and stands as a testament to the power of phenomenal acting and the power of a compelling story. A timeless classic, this movie stands above all others and should be watched again and again.

Characters

The brilliance of Casablanca begins and ends with Humphrey Bogart. Rick Blaine is the performance of a lifetime given by the world’s most skilled actor. Here we see Bogart’s incredible range on full display; he is the cutthroat and cynical saloon owner, the romantic in flashback, the jilted lover, and the heartbroken man who is torn between choosing the woman he loves and doing what he knows to be right. Bogart is entirely believable in this role, so much so that it’s hard to imagine Bogey isn’t the cynic with the heart of a sentimentalist that he portrays. Anyone who hasn’t seen Bogart as Charlie in The African Queen, Sam Spade in The Maltese Falcon, or Captain Queeg in The Caine Mutiny cannot appreciate how diverse an actor Bogey was and while he was great in every role he played, Rick Blaine stands above the rest. When watching Casablanca and seeing the story of Rick’s past romance with Ilsa unfold we feel his pain, we share his anger and his confusion as if it was our own, whether we are watching for the first time or the hundredth time. Rick is every man who has ever been in love, who has turned cynical after having his heart broken, and who will do anything—even sacrifice his own happiness—to ensure her happiness. To be able to connect with such a complex character is possible because of Bogart’s genuine delivery. He succeeds where so many rom com actors fail in forcing us to feel his pain and to root for him to get the girl in the end, even after we’ve seen the movie before. Bogart’s onscreen love for Bergman is all the more impressive when one considers that Bogey and Berman hardly talked off screen, but their acting performance was enough for Bogart’s wife to accuse him of having an affair with Bergman. Bogart’s role as Rick will stand the test of time as one of the most legendary performances in film history.

Along with Bogey, the support he receives from every other actor in this film is astounding. Ingrid Bergman is flawless as Ilsa Lund. Her cold demeanor towards Bogey throughout most of the film combined with the frustrated love of his character creates the perfect chemistry. Bergman holds her cards tight to her chest and keeps us guessing as to whether she will choose to rejoin Rick or escape with her husband Victor Laszlo and even more importantly, which man she loves more. In many modern romantic comedies, tv shows, or dramas that involve love triangles there is usually an element of cheesiness towards the whole situation that is thankfully absent here. Both Bergman and especially Laszlo are compelling characters with a purpose greater than acting as a love interest and foil to the main character’s love for a woman. Additionally the audience does not feel the resentment towards Bergman that is common towards women in love triangles as quite often the woman is portrayed as either willfully manipulating the two men for her own pleasure or as painfully indecisive about who she loves more. This is not the case with Bergman’s character for whom we feel genuine sympathy for her genuine dilemma between choosing her husband she thought dead, or the man whose love kept her going afterward.

My personal favorite character in this film is Captain Renault played by Claude Rains. Rains portrayal of the French captain whose loyalty “blows with the prevailing wind” is brilliant in its own right and in no way overshadowed by Bogey and Bergman. Part of what makes Rain’s performance so impressive is that he is able to add a level of comic relief to the film while still maintaining the seriousness of a captain of the police when the occasion calls for it. He is both the man who can shut down Rick’s Café for gambling while collecting his winnings. This balancing act is noteworthy because so often characters in comic relief roles today are reduced to either a bumbling incompetent fool who we can laugh at or when they try to contribute lines outside a strictly comedic purpose they cannot be taken seriously. Consider John Rhys-Davies performance as Gimli in the Lord of the Rings. While Davies succeeds in his role as comic relief, he is unable to provide any serious contribution outside of it and therefore becomes limited by it. Such is not the case with Rains whose ability to amuse us with his one-liners and charming smile for most of the film does not restrict his ability to deliver real suspense when he is faced with decision of whether to have Rick arrested or let him go.

While Rick, Ilsa, and Rains are the primary focus of Casablanca, what puts this movie over the top is the depth of talent it receives from its secondary actors. There are strong performances all around from Sydney Greenstreet as the profit oriented businessman Senior Ferrari, Peter Lorre as the sleazy criminal Ugarte, and Sam as the warm-hearted and amenable pianist. These characters may not contribute on a large scale but their performances maintain the film’s high quality of acting.

Directing

Casablanca is a rare case where the Michael Curtiz, the director of Casablanca, deserves credit for recognizing that remarkable acting and an exceptional story should be the focus of this film rather than intricate camera work or special effects. Essentially Curtiz deserves praise for having a mostly hands off approach as a director and not trying to insert a particular style unnecessarily into this film. In Casablanca we see nothing out of the ordinary for a typical movie from 1942: some flashbacks, a gunshot, and mostly scenes of dialogue. While on its surface this may appear boring to a modern audience, this is all part of Curtiz intentional effort to direct the audience’s attention away from special effects or props, both of which were limited during the war effort, and towards the masterful dialogue and acting.  A more modern audience should understand that not only did Curtiz play to the strengths of the film but all of Hollywood was limited in its special effects and Casablanca is the model of all that can be achieved without great effects.

Dialogue:

Along with acting, what separates this film from all others are its lines. Not just the half dozen that appear in the American Film Institute’s most famous movie quotes, twice as many as any other film, but lines like “You’ll get along beautifully in America,” “There are vultures, vultures everywhere,” or “I stick my neck out for nobody…A wise foreign policy” are what make this movie not only powerful but enjoyable to watch. It all starts with great acting but to be the best movie of all time you have to have a great script and Casablanca has the best.

Music:

“As time goes by”, “Knock on wood”, and “The Marseilles” deliver a lot for just a few songs. The Marseilles scene is arguably the most emotional musical performance is cinema history, made especially powerful by the fact that many of the French citizens in the café were real-life emigrants during the war and shed real tears as they sang in the movie. While “As Time Goes By” may be the song most famously remembered for Sam to play again, it is “The Marseilles” that marks the turning point in the film. Showing the French citizens overpowering the Germans serves as a powerful symbol of the French resistance to the Nazis and was also written for an American audience that had just entered the war following Pearl Harbor only months earlier. The audience feels the genuine struggle of war-torn Europe instead of the artificial feel of propaganda that made some other films feel like a war time commercial and a cheesy ploy for enlistment. This scene is also of significant importance to the story because of what happens right before it. While it is Laszlo who tells the band to play the Marseilles, the band does not do so until Rick nods for them to go ahead. In this moment Rick does much more than tell the band to play, he breaks the last and most important of his precedents that he had maintained before Ilsa arrived: his neutrality. By nodding for the band to play, Rick knows that he is symbolically siding with the French and that the Germans will now view him as a threat to their mission to arrest Laszlo. It is in this moment that Rick makes the decision to help Laszlo and to give up Ilsa and his café. Scenes like this display the powerful acting at work in Casablanca and the beauty in the power that one look and a simple nod can have.

Conclusion:

Grade: WRAP: 100%

Simply the greatest movie of all time. Citizen Kane and The Shawshank Redemption cannot hold a candle to this movie and with the current trend towards emphasizing CGI over acting, it is possible no film ever will. 

Hard Candy

This film is everything every independent film should aspire to be. I saw this film for the first time because I had just seen An American Crime and I was looking for another movie with Ellen Page. I had no idea that this movie would lead to Ellen Page becoming my favorite actress, that I would be blown away the acting genius who is Patrick Wilson, and that I would fully appreciate what a low budget film with nothing more than great acting, creative directing, and a thrilling story could accomplish.

Acting

Ellen Page and Patrick Wilson deserve Oscars for their performance in this movie. For a little over an hour and a half they are able to captivate an audience without a set larger than a few rooms or the assistance of any other characters, let alone special effects.

Ellen’s role as a sixteen-year-old girl who turns the tables on her would be predator is really a story of two roles. For the first half hour she sells the audience on her performance as a naïve, oblivious teenage girl who will do anything to impress mid-thirties Patrick Wilson, only to drop the charade and reveal her true character’s nature as a “cute, vindictive, little bitch.” Her transition from naïve to manipulative is an incredible transition that most actors in Hollywood could not pull off, which makes it all the more impressive that it’s coming from eighteen-year-old Page. Her performance throughout the film is one of the most honest I’ve ever witnessed and the credits might as well say that Ellen Page never appears in this film but that Hayley is cast as herself. Not only is her character entirely believable but the range of emotions and the depth of her character is incredible; she is a combination of weakness, power, anger, sadistic joy, and sarcasm rolled into one. This range is fully displayed when she pretends to become reassured by Wilson that he will not punish her if she releases him. This movie, not Juno, marks the launch of her success as an actress.

As fantastic as Page is in this movie, Patrick Wilson is arguably superior. His role as a thirty-something predator in disguise presents a challenge for any actor and Wilson more than delivers. He begins the movie as a coy, flirtatious, and confident man whose witty charm is only unsettling when the audience realizes it is being directed toward an adolescent girl. Just as Page transforms over the course of the movie, so too does Wilson. From a suave and seemingly innocent stranger Wilson becomes a helpless captive who plays with our sympathies and then, once his true nature is revealed, violent and emotional. Yet even as his character develops, peeling back the layers of his innocence to expose himself as a monster, Wilson’s performance continues to project the sympathies that make his character so complex. What makes this movie so compelling is the conflict the audience should feel between condemning Wilson’s character for being a pedophile and their sympathy for the terrible situation he is in at the hands of Page; much of this conflict is owed to Wilson’s ability to sell the audience on his character.

Dialogue

Part of the brilliance of this movie should be credited to the screenwriter Brian Nelson. One unique aspect of this film is the nature of the dialogue between Page and Wilson. As the story of Wilson’s alleged pedophilia and potential acts of murder unfolds, the audience is left wondering which character is the real monster. At first Wilson seems the obvious monster as Page confronts him about giving alcohol to a minor and being drugged by teenage flesh. “Busted.” But the audience’s judgement becomes muddled as Wilson attempts, through his dialogue, to convince the audience first of his innocence then that he is undeserving of his punishment. The audience is caught between an epic tug of war between Page and Wilson that leaves the matter of whether justice was served unresolved. While the performances from Page and Wilson are the drivers of the story, the intense and clever writing of Nelson is its vehicle.

Directing

From the opening scene, director David Slade introduces us to the types of innovative methods rarely used in mainstream movies; the decision to have the camera swivel and zoom in during the IM’ing between Page and Wilson, the early reference to Lensman319 which carries significant relevance later, and the symbolic use of red and blue in the text. This first scene is representative of Slade’s brilliant directing throughout the film; he takes an ordinary and functional plot device (an IM chat which tells the audience that Page and Wilson have a flirtatious relationship and are making plans to meet for the first time) and very effectively enhances the audience’s interest with his camera work. The gradual zooming in and lingering on particular lines of text provides an eerie and unsettling feeling that contrasts with the flirtatious tone of what Page and Wilson are typing. From the beginning of the movie the audience is held captive by the tension between these two characters and the uncertainty of what will happen next. This initial camera work subtly highlights that tension in the same way that creepy music enhances the audience’s feelings of suspense in a horror movie. That Slade is able to achieve the same effect with the way he uses his camera is a testament to his directing abilities in this film.

We see this same subtle affect also with his use of colors, mainly red and blue, throughout the film to manipulate the audience’s emotions. These colors appear in many forms; the color of page’s jacket is red and Wilson’s shirt is blue, the colors of the walls in Wilson’s house are various shades of red and blue, and the camera lens at times takes on either a reddish or bluish tint. Slade appears to have two uses for these colors, the first being representations of the characters themselves. Page wears red which is the color of passion, anger, love, etc. all emotions that she displays throughout the film as she seeks to exact revenge on Wilson. There is also a possible correlation between Page’s character and that of Little Red Ridinghood who likewise enters the lair of the wolf except in Page’s case not unknowingly. Wilson’s character on the other hand wears blue: a much cooler and calmer color than red and representative of the cool innocence he desperately clings to not only in an attempt to convince Page but also to reassure himself that he is not a monster.  Slade also uses these same emotional associations with red and blue to provide an added layer of emotional depth to each scene: most notably when Wilson reaches his emotional eclipse and goes after Page with a knife only to finally embrace his identity as a monster, the backdrop of this scene is the blood-red walls behind him which he actually engages with when he begins stabbing the picture on the wall. This scene is one of many where the color transcends its role as just a symbolic reflection of the emotions being displayed and becomes a part of the scene itself. Another example is the way the camera acquires a blue filter in the scenes where Page is interrogating Wilson. The blue is more than just a color in that scene or a representation of Wilson’s cool demeanor in the face of her questions, it becomes the visual gateway of how we are to view the characters, dialogue, and emotions in that moment. For the sake of this film colors are more than mere symbolism they are a roadmap for how we are to follow and decipher the emotional rollercoaster this film takes us on. While the story of a girl who holds a potential pedophile hostage and threatens to castrate him is already an interesting story, Slade’s clever use of camera work (zooming, fade outs, his choices of how to transition from one scene to the next, etc.) and his creative manipulation of colors are part of what makes this movie the pinnacle of independent films.

One final element of Slade’s directing in this film that is worth noting is his use of close-ups. Slade uses more close-ups in this film than I have ever seen in another. The audience is frequently shown the faces of Page and Wilson, bringing every detail of their emotions to the forefront of the screen. For most movies this technique would not only not work, but it would give audiences a headache or it would reveal the limitations of the actor in question. The reason it works so well here is because this film only takes place in one building with only two characters and therefore requires techniques such as this to keep the audience interested. It also works because Page and Wilson not only stand up to such a level of scrutiny but this technique actually becomes a showcase for displaying how completely immersed they are in their roles. Credit should be given to Slade for taking this risk and for its successful execution.

Conclusion:

The greatest independent film and one of the best films in general I have ever seen. This movie reminds me of Casablanca on a lesser scale because of how well executed it is across the board: acting, directing, screenplay, etc. Films like this which don’t require CGI or even more than a limited set and a couple actors are a refreshing reminder of how much film can do with so little. Hard Candy is exceptional because it does not rely on special effects to maintain the audience’s interest but instead, like movies before the 1980s, makes use of great acting and directing. This film should be a reminder that audiences can appreciate the nuances of film (acting and directing) and be more than the simple minded and attention deficit masses that filmmakers like James Cameron and Michael Bay assume them to be. Whether an audience is consciously aware of all the directing techniques at play or fully appreciates the level of acting in this film, these elements enhance this film nonetheless and make it the masterpiece that it is.

Grade: WRAP: 100%

Jurassic World

Let me first say that I went into this movie knowing it wouldn't live up to the first movie and after all, how could it? The first Jurassic Park is one of the greatest movies ever made and to hold this movie to that standard would be unfair and only leave me disappointed and frustrated. I knew from this movie's previews and current Hollywood trends that this movie would overwhelm me with CGI, most likely at the expense of the characters and the story. So with all that in mind, here it goes.

Directing: Who the hell is Colin Trevorrow and how did he get this job?

The most glaring flaws in this movie could have been prevented had someone with more experience directing than a few shorts and one independent film been at the helm. From the incredibly painful to watch and headache inducing close-ups to the very rushed pacing of this film (especially in the first ten minutes) Trevorrow's inexperience as a director was glaringly evident. Without holding Trevorrow to the impossible standard of Steven Spielberg who has proven himself to be one of the greatest directors of all time, there was several areas where this movie proved too momentous a task for him. No failure was greater than the overabundance of close-ups which I can only assume were an attempt at creating intimacy between the audience and the characters/dinosaurs, but instead left an audience reaching for an aspirin. Worse than the headaches, however, was the effect they had on the visual presentation of the movie, especially the dinosaurs. Part of what made the first movie great was the suspense that was built by NOT SEEING THE DINOSAURS. Most who have seen Jurassic Park probably don't realize that the actual screen time of the dinosaurs is limited to only 15 minutes. What Spielberg realized with the first film is that the moments of anticipation (the puddle of water rippling, the snapping of the wired fence, the turning of the door handle from the raptor's claw) are just as exciting as actually seeing the dinosaurs. While we saw some of the this in the new movie, such as the claw marks on the wall and the realization that the Indominus Rex was still in its cage, for the most part Jurassic World relied on close-ups visuals of dinosaurs and action scenes to entertain its audience, rather than suspense. Because the audience's attention was forcibly zoomed in on so many shots, it also meant that there was a lack of grandeur that only panoramic shots such as the first introduction of the Brachiosaurus in the first film can provide. Yes people want to see dinosaurs but part of the what makes the dinosaurs appealing isn't just their destructive capabilities but also the wonder that seeing such magnificent creatures creates. I would argue the first Brachiosaurus scene in the first film is every bit as powerful as the famed scene where the T-Rex attacks the Jeeps.

While a movie is the product of a team of people, it is the director who is ultimately responsible for the feel of the film and the techniques that are used to facilitate that director's style. This director seemed like he couldn't decided between whether he was making a suspense/action/thriller or a superhero movie.

Characters:

I was pleasantly surprised by how much I liked the main character in this film: Owen. I have not seen Guardians of the Galaxy and therefore Chris Pratt was new to me. He gave a balanced performance without being overly dramatic or cheesy. The same could be said for the boys who seemed natural in their roles and I give credit to Trevorrow here for not making them too helpless but also not exaggerating their realistically limited contributions in the face of the dinosaurs as was done with the girl in Lost World (gymnastics to take out a raptor?  Yeesh). Claire's character ironically became more whiny and forced as she progressed from a naive semi-antagonist to someone who appreciated and respected the dinosaurs. Overall the main characters were the most pleasant surprise of this film.

The secondary characters were, unfortunately, not nearly as strong as the main characters. While at times Ryan, aka New Girl's Jake Johnson, provided comic relief, the rest of the characters were not the least bit compelling. I find it hard to believe that anyone watching could really feel anger, disgust, or dislike towards Henry Wu or Hoskins. These recycled cliches of a doctor/military person who narrow-mindedly abuses research for the sake of power they don't appreciate or understand have been exhausted to the point of boredom. Wu's character was left unresolved (sequel anyone?) while Hoskins was killed the most boring and predictable way possible (at the hands of the same raptor that he didn't respect and thought from the beginning that he could control - who didn't see that coming?). Neither of these characters incited more than a yawn from me and I felt nothing at the death of Hoskins. Compare this with the characters like Dennis Nedry or Robert Muldoon from the first film, both of whose deaths were well done, clever, and left you feeling justice was done to Nedry and sad at the loss of Robert. Malcolm, Mr. Arnold, John Hammond, and even Genaro (man killed on toilet) all had distinct roles to play and this along with the interactions with other characters and the park made them an interesting vehicle for the story. You cared about them and when they died you were upset, unlike the multiple squads of park security in Jurassic World whose only seems to show us how effectively dinosaurs could kills. While I acknowledge there is great entertainment value in seeing dinosaurs eat people, the assistant's death being the best in this film IMO, those deaths are all the more compelling when you have a reason to be affected by their loss for good or bad, which was lacking in this film.

Special Effects:

Way too much CGI but surprisingly not as much as I anticipated. Too many close-ups meant we got to see every minute detail of CGI created dinosaurs, meaning that unlike the first film where the raptors were hidden in the shadows or used very sparingly to hide the fact that they look fake. In Jurassic World we see just how artificial looking they are as we are constantly bombarded by green-screen animation that at times looks more like a videogame than real life. I could go on about this forever, but for the most part I was begrudgingly content with how much CGI was used when I consider how this movie COULD have been (ex: Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars)

Storyline:

New dinosaur is created, it escapes and wreaks havoc, ultimately it is killed. Very predictable but still enjoyable plot. I recognize that these movies aren't meant to be riddled with plot twists and for the most part the audience should know how the movie will end before it begins. That being said there were still things i really loved about the film and others that had me cringing in my seat.

First ten minutes of the film: WAY TOO CHOPPY! Felt like I was back watching the new Superman movie where everything is going 100mph and you have no time to get a feel for the characters or to get attached to the story. Thankfully the film settled down once the boys arrived at the park but it was still a little fast paced for my liking.

Scene where they reintroduce the old park's main room: By far my favorite scene in the movie. The old banner, staircase, test tubes, jeeps, painting on the wall of the raptor, goggles, all gave me goosebumps and reminded me of how much i love the original movie. I really appreciated this scene and thought it was a great move for the makers of Jurassic World to pay tribute to the reason we are all in the audience. They tied these elements in and incorporated them into the plot seamlessly. 

Gyroball tour: Also a cool part of the movie and as a sucker for the herbivore scenes I thought this was an inventive and creative twist on the jeeps from the original movie. Jimmy Fallon's cameo was also entertaining and this scene was a good way to introduce the Indominous once it had escaped its paddock. Well done. 

Scene of Owen and Claire kissing: NO. No. NO!! When will Hollywood ever learn that NOT EVERY MOVIE NEEDS A LOVE STORY!!! I couldn't help but think of how disgusted I would be had the first film sank to the level of having Dr. Grant and Ellie kiss. To do it here was every bit as cheesy and corny as it would have been then. Mad Max recently got it right in showing that you can have a very successful action film without the woman having to fall in love with the guy. It also reduced Claire's role to the helpless female which is tiresome and annoying. Please, Hollywood, spare us next time.

End fight scene between Indominous v. T-Rex and Blue (also mosasaur.): This scene started out awesome. Raptors getting killed and so they call for the first film's most fearsome carnivore: the T-Rex. i saw this as an awesome nod to the first film and a creative battle between the dinosaurs. This scene quickly became cheesy and far less enjoyable, however, when Blue made his return from being smashed against a wall. Reality of a T-Rex being intelligent enough to side with a raptor aside, the addition of Blue was completely unnecessary and undermined a potentially original and unpredictable death for the Indominous without the aide of Blue by instead having it killed by the mosasaur as the T-Rex, forces it into the water. I enjoyed the scene as good but couldn't help feeling robbed of a potentially great scene.

Music

I was really hoping for a lot more of the original score but I guess I should at least be grateful they included it.

Conclusion:

Grade: WRAP: 67%

While I did my best not to judge the film with the expectation of it being like the first movie, respect and consideration for the first film is hard to separate and somewhat owed in evaluating any sequel. I thought it met my expectations and was somewhat disappointed it could not exceed them. Too much CGI, poor and inexperienced directing, and a weak secondary cast kept this movie from being great, but ultimately it was still very entertaining just being a Jurassic Park movie and I was pleasantly surprised by the main characters and some elements of the story.