The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)

Lionsgate has truly crafted the next big film franchise with Hunger Games. I realized this when all the music, sound effects, and special effects died down and a particularly tender moment between Katniss (the astounding Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) was allowed to take center stage with only the sounds of their dialogue, accentuated by their intake of breath for emotional punctuation, as they barreled along in a hover train to their destination at Panem's Capitol. The scene showcased more emotion and raw talent than I've seen in a blockbuster in quite a long time. These are characters that I cared deeply for, and I teared up more than once at the trials their government puts them through.

If you're a fan, this film will definitely not disappoint. It has everything I loved from the book packaged in some of the tightest screenwriting and editing I've seen all year. The film is visually gorgeous, at first noticed in the cinematography. The characters are staged in such a way that they draw your eye around the screen. I knew I was in skilled hands. The costumes were the next thing that I marveled at, and if you enjoyed the first film's flamboyant world contrasted with the gritty pallet of District 12, then you get to see a lot more this time around. The world is so completely realized. I wanted to stay just to see what these people in the Capitol did in their daily lives. But, alas, we all know where this movie is headed, and it isn't going to be a cake walk.

Katniss and Peeta are forced to live a romantic lie at the demand of President Snow (Donald Sutherland, menacing as ever, but with a vulnerable streak). The reason? As the winning tributes from the 74th Annual Hunger Games, Katniss and Peeta are paraded around to each District to give speeches and cause unrest in the lower parts of the country. Needless to say, these two actors bring their all to the roles, and they pour out so much compassion in the first fifteen minutes that the weight of the games is brought front and center. This is a country where teenagers are forced to fight to the death until one is left out of 24. Luckily for Katniss and Peeta, they only have to struggle with their PTSD and putting up a false front for everyone. Liam Hemsworth plays the object of Katniss's desires this time around with more bravado that I found myself worried about how she could keep up the farce with Peeta when she so clearly loves Gale? This was the part that had me torn.

That is, until it's announced that the 75th Hunger Games will be a Quarter Quell in which the tributes are drawn from the existing tributes of all the past games. The games are designed this time by Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and the twists (literally) are fantastic. I won't spoil any of them here, but if you read the book, you know just what these tributes of all ages have in store.

What is visually and emotionally different this time around is that the tributes are from all walks of life. Mags (Lynn Cohen) was immediately my favorite, besides the dashing Finnick Odair (the coveted role played by Sam Claflin, famously turned down by the career-suicidal Garrett Hedlund) who you want to trust, but you don't know if you should. Katniss says right off the bat what I was initially thinking: "Peeta, how can we kill these people?"

The show must go on, however, and there is plenty of scene stealing by the perfectly cast and tear-inducing (both comically and sentimentally) Elizabeth Banks, who once again plays Effie Trinket, a fan favorite from the first movie. Here she is allowed to be more fleshed out and reveals that she does have a heart despite the gaudy display she puts on for the Capitol. Woody Harrelson once again plays Haymitch with the brutality that the character requires, and he is integral at instilling the fear of the games into the audience before we are lifted into the mysterious arena with Katniss and the other tributes before the horn blows and the fight for survival begins.

There are so many things I could talk about, but they all need to be experienced to be fully appreciated. I saw this film in IMAX and was stunned by their usage of the format. Only the actual game is filmed in true IMAX aspect ratio, and it was wonderful to see all the detail in such a large frame. The team behind this film had such respect for the source material that there was never a hint of hesitation in what they were creating on screen. Everyone, from the lighting designers, to the actors, to the direction - all of it - they knew that what they were creating was something special and important to fans around the globe and the end product is something to be proud of. This is a film about trust, and how fitting could it be that the author of these superb, thought-provoking books trusted Lionsgate to do her work justice, and they proved the first time around that they could do it. Now, the studio is trusting that the fans will come along for the ride as they bring us through this world and into the middle of a much larger story that will play out on screens in two more films. Do I trust that they know what they're doing?

Absolutely. Give me more of this dystopian future.

Gravity (2013)

I am in complete awe of Gravity, the masterpiece of cinema from Alfonso Cuaron starring George Clooney, charming as ever, and a show-stopping performance by Sandra Bullock. Never have I been moved so deeply by a single actress on screen, displaying raw emotion that immediately causes me to connect with the character.

I don't need to go into the story because the premise itself is all that you should know going into this movie. Bullock plays a doctor who is working on the Hubble satellite when debris from a Russian satellite causes herself and her crew to be separated in the vast expanse of space. It's realistic, edge-of-your-seat entertainment and brilliant storytelling. I've said it probably a dozen times this weekend, but if you can see this film in 3D, do so! It's not a gimmick. It's designed entirely for this experience. Count the number of cutaway shots in this film. I dare you. There are hardly any! It's immersive in 3D in the fact that your eye isn't forced to readjust every ten seconds to a new shot with new depth perception. It's the way the technology was designed to be used.

I also have to comment on the storytelling aspect of this film. The characters are phenomenal. There is just enough hinted at of their previous lives back on earth to make us empathize with them and root for them to fight their way to safety in the perilous reaches of space. Cuaron is to be commended for researching everything down to the very alarm systems that an astronaut would hear in every situation. Speaking of sound, the score is entirely appropriate and haunting.

If Bullock doesn't get a nomination let alone the Oscar for her performance it will be a real shame because this is a role that she took to the highest level in order to make everything else in the film believable. The film asks us to think about things such as life and death, as well as the choice to live and the choice to give up. What are the pros and cons of each? Which one is easier, and which one would you as an audience member choose were you in these astronaut's places?

One thing's for sure - I have a greater appreciation for the men and women who courageously have ventured into space to create the technology that we use on a daily basis.

The Bling Ring (2013)

This review is a little more informal than my normal reviews. My past reviews, while technically fulfilling, were very exhausting to write. I prefer to speak generally about the films that I love, and I definitely loved The Bling Ring.

If you were like me, you didn't get a chance to see this film in theaters. It ended up coming to Portland for a week, but I was unable to find someone to go see it with me and ended up not going. Thankfully the film hit Redbox a month later and I found myself eagerly waiting to make it home in order to see what all the fuss was about.

The fuss was entirely Emma Watson. She is fantastic in this movie, and I found myself laughing out loud and cringing at the same time. I laughed because her character, Nicki, was so flaky that you couldn't believe that she was supposed to exist in the real world. I cringed because her character did indeed exist in the real world - albeit, under a different name, probably due to some protection of privacy requests.

The film follows a group of California teens who decide to rob various celebrities while they are away enjoying the good life. It was shocking that many of these homes were so easy to get into. Who locks their front door but forgets to lock the patio? Nearly every point of entry was a sliding glass door.

Part of the novelty of this film is that many of the stars allowed the director, Sofia Coppola, to film in their real homes. This meant that most of the possessions in the shots are the real deal. I drooled over some of these places! I love architecture and interior design, and some of these homes were to die for. I didn't particularly like the ones that were made almost entirely of glass, however. It makes me feel like living in a fish tank.

In the end, of course, the teens are caught and arrested. Robbing people seemed like such a stupid thing to do in order to fulfill a high. Didn't these teens get involved in drama, or writing, or something creative with their time? Apparently not. The lesson is, don't take things that belong to you. For the rich viewers, the lesson is to lock your doors and have security alarms. Coppola made the experience feel authentic and organic, something that I really appreciated and kept me watching even when things slowed down briefly near the middle.

Moral of the story part two: Fame is fleeting. Don't go crazy trying to get it. Once you have it, it doesn't last forever.

The Conjuring (2013)

This movie is terrifying! I expected no less from director James Wan of Insidious and Saw fame. Based on the real cases investigated by Ed and Lorraine Warren, The Conjuring begins by introducing one of the most menacing characters to be put on film in the past decade.

A doll, cracked, dressed in a dirty outfit, and always staring with wide eyes and a mischievous smile, is turned in to Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (the fantastic Vera Farmiga) when the three college-age friends believe it to be possessed. In a genius piece of screenwriting, writers Chad and Carey Hayes lay the groundwork for the rest of the hauntings in the film. As with the Paranormal Activity movies, most of the scares and creatures stalking the Perron family later on are invisible - only seen when the tension has been ratcheted up so much that it feels like the audience is going to die of suffocation. Since what we imagine is more terrifying than what the filmmakers can actually portray on screen, we are given clues as to what the unseen forces in this world - our world, as the text on screen reminds us - look like. As Lorraine explains, these menacing beings are not ghosts at all.

They are demons, animalistic creatures that have never walked this earth in human form. They strive to possess and wreak havoc and death upon everyone with an impressionable mind. They will use objects to get our attention and break us down until we can be completely possessed by them.

Of course, things start out small for Carolyn and Roger Perron (Lili Taylor and Ron Livingson) who have just bought a house in the country by a tranquil river, bringing along their five young daughters with them. This film takes place in the 1970's and Wan makes great use of period costumes and hit singles from the day as he lulls the audience into a false sense of normality. But, when the lights go out, that's when we are treated to the doors moving on their own. Numerous series of three knocks are heard, constantly moving throughout the house, as if leading the Perrons on a wild goose chase when they see that there is "nothing" there and shrug it off.

But, this is horror, and as we all know, there is always something there, lurking in the shadows. I am particularly impressed by Joey King, recently seen this summer in White House Down. She is the first daughter to be terrorized at night after the family discovers a boarded-up cellar beneath the house, complete with cobweb-draped furnishings and an unnerving piano at the foot of the creaky stairs. King is nearly ripped from her bed and, in one of the most convincing pieces of acting I've seen from a young actress in a horror movie, King struggles to find her voice and wake her sister. She points to the dark corner by the open door, exclaiming that there is someone standing there. My hair stood on end as the family walked through the space to inspect what they believed was just an empty corner - but again, this is horror. Things take a turn for the worst as the malevolent spirits in the house delight in being found out.

Hats off to the writers for finding a way to tie together the cliche stories of a haunted country home and the team of renowned paranormal investigators who come to save them. Even though the film is based on actual events, however embellished for entertainment value, the old solution of calling an exorcist has been laughable of late. However, the Hayes create an emotional strand that connects the two families and forces them to work together to drive out the demons haunting their property. Are they successful? I won't spoil it here!

This is absolutely a film to be seen in cinemas. The sound design is unmatched by any recent horror film I've seen, and Joseph Bishara's music is hands down his best contribution to the genre to date. I was completely invested in the story of these two families and the horrors they come up against. There are some very sobering questions posed in this film that gave it weight for me, in that the characters acknowledge good and evil, as well as God and Satan. These topics create a moral dilemma on top of all the supernatural trickery going on and brings about a great moral struggle for the characters as they continue to witness things that shouldn't exist. When I got home later in the early morning, I looked twice whenever I heard an unexplained noise in my sleeping home.

Remember, it's all fun and games until demons are involved.

The Lone Ranger (2013)

It's clear that The Lone Ranger was a passion project on the part of director Gore Verbinski and star Johnny Depp. This film, a revamp of the classic television and radio program, frames the adventures of John Reid - who becomes the masked Lone Ranger (Armie Hammer), and his sidekick-turned-headliner Tonto (Depp), in the middle of two bookend pieces of story between an elderly Tonto, ambiguously employed as part of a Wild Western exhibit at an amusement park, and a young boy dressed in a Lone Ranger costume who is shocked when the figure of Tonto comes to life and begins telling the tale of how he met Reid and convinced him to take up the mask of justice.

I will be honest. I anticipated this movie more than any other this summer. A huge fan of Gore Verbinski and Depp as a team, I salivated over every teaser and theatrical trailer released for this film. Westerns have been a tough sell the past decade, and this film will have a lot of work to do in order to get the audience it deserves. Lone Ranger is a philosophical hero's journey disguised as an action movie. Hammer is wonderful as the astute "learned man," coming back home to see his brother Dan Reid (James Badge Dale), who is married to his old love, Rebecca (Ruth Wilson). From there, the train is hijacked and Hammer becomes shackled to Depp, and their journey together begins.

Don't let the action overwhelm you, however. For all the train sequences, with cars becoming derailed with Reid and Tonto flying all over the place, this film also showcases a touching and grounded performance by Depp as an outcast Comanche native. I have a fascination for Native American culture, and Depp brings a sense of loss and inner wound to Tonto - albeit accentuated by his typical character eccentricities. We see that Tonto was tricked as a child into trading his entire village for a cheap pocket watch, and it's that idea of trading that pushes Tonto to trade back vengeance with the villain of the film, a menacing Butch Cavendish (played amazingly by William Fichtner). Of course, there are more villains than just Cavendish in this crowded Western world.

Admittedly this film has a tone that is all over the place at times. I would consider this picture akin to World War Z in that large cuts from the script were made and alterations were done to lower the production budget before shooting could commence. I remember reading that some of the actors took pay cuts just to ensure that this story was told, and their performances show dedication and verve. For those who say that the film lacks heart, I say that they weren't looking in the right places. The heart of the picture is Depp, despite all the nay sayers that wanted the central character from previous tellings, the Lone Ranger himself, to take center stage. As it is, this is not possible with today's audience. It is Tonto's role to convince the Ranger to fight for justice, to pick up the gun he is so opposed to at the beginning of the film, and defend those he loves from not only those who wish to do them physical harm, but also from the greed of those in power who are willing to put entire towns and tribes of people into poverty to fatten their own wallets.

As the film pummeled forward, through set piece after set piece, I had to marvel that such a crucial piece of character in Tonto was the constant to keep the trademark Jerry Bruckheimer action meaningful. Yes, the train sequences and explosions are unrealistic escapism, but the film is trying to revitalize a dead genre in Hollywood. Lone Ranger is also trying to correct one of the great tragedies of American history by giving Tonto the limelight that he deserves after his people had their homes and their lives taken away by the very railroad tycoons that the characters in the film face off against. There are tears in elderly Tonto's eyes, and it was at that moment that I realized it all mattered. With new technology on the side of the white men, Tonto needed the help of the Lone Ranger, someone who could act as a bridge between the disadvantaged natives and the settlers, to fight back and defend a way of life that was being taken away by ruthless men. If the Ranger cared about Tonto's plight, then perhaps other settlers and fortune seekers would as well. Reid was chosen to be Tonto's partner by none other than the white spirit horse, after all. They may not agree one hundred percent, but they both bring unique things to the table that create a whole when fighting as a team. Reid brings his knowledge. On the flip side, Tonto knows how to handle a barrel of explosives. Again, to the nay sayers, I ask: since when did the movies have to be so serious? I'll take some dual train fighting on horseback any day of the week.

World War Z (2013)

World War Z is a frantic and adrenaline-filled movie about a retired United Nations worker who is living his daily life as a family man when a zombie outbreak takes place. This film was designed as a vehicle for Brad Pitt who plays the reluctant hero as only he can, with a look of awe in his eyes and hair that wouldn’t be out of place on Sawyer from Lost.

This film has been a long time coming, and for a while I didn’t believe it would actually get made. This is one of those properties based on a best-selling book that struck the right chord when the zombie craze was just hitting its stride. I haven’t read the book, but it’s marketed as a chronicle of humanity’s fight against the zombie plague. The film relies heavily on setup. The opening title sequence serves as a montage-heavy explanation of the movement and evolution of various diseases across the globe - any one of which could be the source of the outbreak we witness after no less than what I believe was about twelve minutes. Pitt, who plays Gerry Lane, is thrown at the audience along with his two young daughters (Abigail Hargrove and Sterling Jerins) and his always half-smiling half-sad wife, Karin (Mireille Enos). The family is established so briskly that it is obvious to the audience which tropes are being used on which character. His eldest daughter suffers from asthma and his youngest is scared easily. They want a puppy for their birthday. Needless to say, that idea is thrown out the window in ten minutes. His wife also acts as if she is keeping secrets about her husband’s past employment at the U.N. because she seems generally nervous whenever her daughters bring up his previous work. What exactly did he do that is so tear-producing?

I will admit that this film was exciting. I was on the edge of my seat almost the entire time, excepting the middle portion that took a detour away from where I was expecting it to go, and it lagged for a bit. But, my main gripe with the film was that it offered nothing new to the zombie genre that other films and even television’s The Walking Dead haven’t already contributed. I could say the writers were clever with their solution to the zombie problem, but that's about it for creativity. This is still just a movie where the main characters are trying not to be infected by zombies. Potential spoiler alert: the source of the outbreak, indeed, the global origin of the outbreak is never fully revealed. The entire film hangs on this premise that a viral epidemic has swept humanity and causes all those infected to become deranged animals. It’s not clear what the infected are after. They are fast and they don’t exactly feast on the uninfected. They simply go crazy and attack long enough until those who are bitten become the same as everyone else. They are good zombie friends after that since entire cities of the infected become dormant. They simply wait for noise. They are attracted to any audible stimuli. They are also very noisy themselves.

As far as characters are concerned, many of them drop like flies after half the film is complete. Earlier on I couldn’t help but be reminded of Spielberg’s War of the Worlds as Pitt tries to coax his daughter, suffering from an asthma attack, into breathing in and out. I wanted more from the family. I wanted to see their lives, other than in the kitchen or piled in the car. They are our sense of normalcy, the kind that Pitt struggles to return to for the entire movie. Sadly, they are split up for the majority of the film. There are also eccentric characters to take our attention: a doctor who is the last hope for humanity (played by Elyes Gabel) and also a group of W.H.O. employees barricading themselves in their infected laboratory that holds the key to a possible antidote. When the film is running briskly, it is at its best. However, it is obvious that the pacing of the film went through a series of test audiences to arrive where it is now. The downtime is very quiet, as it always is in a horror movie. The film wants to get you with your guard down so that it can jolt you out of your seat. Trust me, it will.

I’m sure that audiences will jump at all the right places as I did, and curse the characters for stepping willfully into a dangerous and disastrous situation like I did - multiple times. The film was a lot of fun. However, as far as intelligence is concerned, don’t be fooled by the critics who say that this film is the smartest one of the summer. It was well plotted, but the questions that were left unanswered and the re-filmed final forty minutes felt like they were merely a lead-in to a new franchise. Studios just can't resist, after missing the boat on Walking Dead. More films could be good fun, but I don’t know how long my disbelief can go unrewarded in the form of credible reasons for the outbreak. I'm always wondering if we brought the plague upon ourselves, or if it's something else at work. I wanted to say to this film, “Throw me a bone!” Or maybe an entire severed arm.

Thoughts On Man Of Steel

This isn't an official review of Man of Steel, but I loved this film so much that I couldn't wait until I actually get down to business and write up a critique.

When I think of a summer blockbuster, this is what comes to mind now. Zack Snyder has given a new cinematic life to Clark Kent/Superman, and I am so grateful! Just to give this opinion some background - I started my official journey with Clark back in 2001 when, as fate would have it, the WB network was still in existence, and the first season of Smallville aired on Wednesday nights. I actually caught the very first episode by accident, not realizing what I was watching, until Jonathan and Martha Kent picked up the infant Kal-El from the rubble of his ship and brought him to their farm in Smallville, Kansas.

It was a journey that saw me through many life changes and stages. When the characters graduated from high school, I also graduated and went to my senior prom. I also started college at the same time as them, and journeyed out into the world with Chloe, Lana, and eventually Lois (who took some time to become my favorite). Needless to say, the man in the cape has been as dear to me as a close friend ever since. So, I was nervous for a new big screen version to come out. Coupled with that anxiety, I was also excited as hell.

Everything paid off. The mythology was revised and expanded in a way that felt so organic and futuristic without turning to the harsh, unlivable crystal fortresses that dominated the films of Richard Donner. Snyder and co. managed to give Russell Crowe one of his best roles in a good many years, and I was on the edge of my seat with glee every time he showed up. Bravo to Jor-El for turning into a heartwarming and intelligent force for good, one that Clark (Henry Cavill) can look up to, as opposed to his previous stern iterations. Also, hands down to Amy Adams. I already loved everything this woman has been in because her acting chops are bar none, but she brought such a depth to Lois that I truly believed that she could hold her own (and boy, is she ever resourceful) and also still need the assistance from Superman that kindles their own relationship. They needed each other, and they were perfect for each other. I am so thrilled to see where it goes.

After gushing about the leads, I must say that all the side characters were so well acted that I truly believed the special effects. One scene - which would have been just another computerized effect - involved a gravity-reversing machine on a massive scale. Cars and pieces of buildings are hurled to the sky and then slammed down to be crushed, further and further outwards as the radius builds. Trapped in its path is a stellar and touching performance that could have been just another forgettable ensemble group, but no - the woman trapped is a tearful and totally convincing Rebecca Buller as Jenny, an intern, watching on as her death moves forward. You can see it in her eyes that she knows that there is no way that she will make it out alive, along with a stoic Perry White, played with gusto by Laurence Fishburne (welcome back, Morpheus!) who struggles to free her in time with the help of another colleague. Of course, this wouldn't be Superman without some truly nail-biting saves, and of course, he lives up to his name in this case - though I won't spoil how. How many times have I been touched by an action movie in the past ten years? I can count them all on two hands, and one of those was last year's The Hunger Games, if that gives you any timeline to follow.

I can go on for pages, but I'll try to save something for the official review (which is very behind, sorry!). Lastly before I head out into the world for the evening, if you were worried that replacing John Williams's iconic score was blasphemy (I know, I had my trepidations too) fear not. Hans Zimmer has done it again, and I have his deluxe edition score in my iPad, played on repeat. It is wonderful and captures the urgency of the film along with the more subtle, emotional character beats. This movie was high-stakes in the plot sense, and it was also high-stakes in the Warner Bros. sense. I believe that the audience showed that it is ready for some competition to go against Marvel's non-stop cranking of hero flicks, and if this is how they're going to be, you have already sold me on the entire thing.

The Iceman (2012)

The Iceman is a film that I never thought I would have the privilege of seeing in theaters, mainly because it is a limited run film. Those generally don't make it north of Boston, and in that case, if they aren't available on demand, I have to wait until they hit DVD or a streaming service. I heard the film mentioned in a magazine because it is one of Winona Ryder's biggest - and greatest - dramatic roles since Black Swan. The film also shows off Michael Shannon's already undeniable acting talent before his big-screen bow as General Zod later this month in Zack Snyder's Man of Steel. The man can play brooding, emotionally conflicted characters unlike any other I've seen on screen, and it's for that reason that The Iceman is a great success, and also a modern era tragedy, based on the real life events surrounding Richard Kuklinski and the estimated 100 or more people he was hired to murder.

Richard Kuklinski (Michael Shannon) opens the film with his aged, bearded face filling the dark screen. He is imprisoned, but for what, we don't know yet. He's fumbling for words to say, unable to put into words what he is feeling. It is this theme of being unable to express himself that ties the film's many threads together into one overall arc.

Shortly after being told the fate of Kuklinski, we meet his future wife, Deborah (Ryder), and get a glimpse at what their life will be like. She wants someone to take care of her, and she doesn't normally go on blind dates. They eat at a restaurant and share some talk about themselves. Richard admits that he's not much of a talker, but Deborah doesn't mind. Soon we see that they've married and had their first daughter. But things are not completely rosy, since it is revealed that Richard is leading a double life.

Unbeknownst to Deborah, Richard works for a mob family that dabbles in illegal goods and loan sharking. (She thinks he works as a currency exchanger) Kuklinski works as an underground porn bootlegger, prepping the prints and selling them to customers. It is Kuklinski's bad fortune, or good luck - depending on how you look at it, that he is confronted by the leader of the family, Roy Demeo (Ray Liotta), and told that his position is being eliminated. However, he does have a second chance at a different kind of job. After having his loyalty to the Demeo's tested, and confirming his ability to follow orders without second-guessing, Richard is enlisted as a murder-for-hire hitman. The money rolls in quickly and we see what a cold-blooded killer the family man can be when nobody's looking. Still, his family is clueless about where Richard goes during the day, content that he doesn't talk about his job and is generally a silent figure.

At one point in the film he recites a small speech during his daughter's sixteenth birthday party, written on a piece of stationery. The room claps enthusiastically, with tears in their eyes, and his daughter comes over and embraces him, saying, "I didn't know you had it in you." Therein lies the great emotional turmoil of the film. None of the characters realize that Richard is capable of expressing emotion because he hides behind a mask of ice-cold placidity. Even with a gun held to his face, his employer, Demeo, remarks, "Don't you have anything you love? Why do you act as if you don't give a shit what happens to you?" The audience wonders as well, but it's an answer that we won't get beneath all the layers of masculine brawniness Richard's built up over the years. Like so many other criminals behind bars, the reasoning behind Kuklinski's actions may never completely be understood or revealed. The motivation, however, is always the money.

Despite the heartless killings that Kuklinski committed, he did feel emotions. He feared being unable to provide the life of luxury that his wife so admired. He feared that his daughters would be targets of the men he was working against. He also, I believe, felt love for his family, but the great tragedy is that he was ignorant of how to express that love. It's as if in the whirl of trying to provide all the material possessions that his wife and daughters enjoyed, Kuklinski overlooked the one thing that was irreplaceable to his family, and that was the time spent with them as a part of the family unit. As Ryder exclaims during a moment alone at the pivotal birthday party, "You're so full of shit, Ritchie. I'm going down to the party, and you should come with me." Of course she's right. He is filled with emotional childhood memories that he can't escape, involving a Catholic upbringing, and constant beatings by his mother. His family deserves better than what he grew up with, so he provides every comfort he can for them. However, the curtain over his murderous job can only be draped for so long before it is pulled back and his family's eyes opened.

Filling out the secondary roles is a stellar cast that includes a spot-on performance by Chris Evans as Mr. Freezy, a hitman masquerading as an ice cream truck driver; James Franco as Marty Freeman, in a scene that showcases Kuklinski's thoughts about his Catholic upbringing; and surprisingly, David Schwimmer, almost unrecognizable as Josh Rosenthal, the "adopted" son of Roy Demeo. There is always something going on between all of these characters that keeps the tension in check. I could barely look away, and wouldn't even leave my seat to go grab concessions for fear of missing out on a character's demise.

In the end, the real victims are Kuklinski's family. They escape neither physically nor emotionally. I was left wondering what life would have been like if Kuklinski had turned away from the hitman job. Would he still be living with his family, enjoying old age with his wife and seeing his grandchildren as they started their lives? We'll never know. As he sits in his cell for two life sentences he struggles to apologize. Tears well in his eyes, and he reveals something that we knew the entire time: he's afraid of letting others see his emotions. This was a film about a broken man that resonated with me long after I left the cinema.

Epic (2013)

Epic surprised me immensely. I went in with low expectations and left uplifted and very entertained. Epic is the rare movie that is advertised for children, yet not insulting to the adults accompanying the kids. I went to see this movie with a group assembled of all ages, and everyone found something to love. Hopefully the beauty of this movie is a sign of things to come from Blue Sky Animation.

The film introduces us to two very different worlds which are both connected, and it is delightful to watch how the two become joined. Bomba (voiced by Jason Sudeikis) is an eccentric nature investigator, constantly checking his surveillance equipment for signs of miniature life in the forest surrounding his remote home. Thankfully he is not the main character of the film, because he is quite a bumbler, as his name suggests. It is his daughter, Mary Katherine, (or M.K. as she prefers to be called, voiced by Amanda Seyfried) a well-developed teenage heroine who arrives after the sudden death of her mother that will bring us through the worlds of the film. The painful subject of the loss of a parent is only hinted at and never referenced directly by any of the characters, and appropriately so. This movie is filled with wonder and action, and more than a dose of humor.

In the miniature world of the forest, the keepers of all that is thriving in nature, the Queen Tara (voiced by Beyonce Knowles) is preparing to pass the torch to a new little girl. Everyone has gathered for the pod ceremony during which Tara will send forth the power of growth to bloom during the full moon, yet, all is not as it should be. The nemesis of the film, a surprisingly dark king of decay, Mandrake, voiced by the phenomenal Christoph Waltz, sabotages the ceremony and Tara passes the power onto a very unlikely person - M.K.

From there the audience is whisked away ala Honey I Shrunk The Kids style shrinkage, and we follow M.K. as she meets her new companions for the journey of bringing the pod to bloom. It is now her responsibility to do so, though she doesn't know why she was chosen. Colin Farrell voices Ronin, the stern soldier who had a relationship with Tara and is now mourning her loss. On the opposite end of the spectrum is Nod, voiced brilliantly by Josh Hutcherson of The Hunger Games, who is a rebellious soldier in training, learning how to be responsible and valiant as he accompanies M.K. Also as the comic relief are the slug and the snail, Mub (Aziz Ansari) and Grub (Chris O’Dowd), who provide an abundance of laughs that never feel like they were thrown in just for the sake of a shallow gag.

The comedy is woven throughout the narrative, and when it takes you by surprise, it’s a breath of fresh air that counters the character’s inner wounds and family issues. One laugh in particular involved Mub and Grub at a party where they ask a fruit fly what it’s like to have such a short life span. The fly, starting as a child, ages within ten seconds, ending as an elderly fly and then falls over, succumbing to the circle of life. I grew up in the woods, and still live there because of its beauty - and I saw many naturally occurring events in Epic that morph into the unseen acts of the little people. It was fascinating, and a world I wanted to spend more time in. The film's creators even find a good usage for video-chatting by the end of the story that had me chuckling.

If you have children, or are a child at heart, Epic is the movie for you. It reminds us to appreciate the rejuvenating power of nature and that if we fight for it and team up together, no darkness can overtake the world’s natural beauty. We are responsible for protecting the natural world, even though sometimes we don't know why we were chosen.

The Great Gatsby (2013)

Gatsby has come under a lot of critical scrutiny, most of it unjustified. Directed by Baz Luhrmann of Moulin Rouge fame, this film follows Leonardo DiCaprio as the legendary Jay Gatsby in his pursuit of rekindling a past romance with his old love, the gorgeous Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan). Gatsby, a self-made man masquerading as a member of Manhattan’s wealthy elite, turns to his next-door neighbor, Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire), for help in recapturing the romantic interest of Daisy. However, things aren’t as clean-cut as Gatsby would like, when Daisy’s husband, Tom (Joel Edgerton), slowly catches on to the plot and leads all the characters of this dazzling film down the path to disaster.

The critical scrutiny I mention comes from Warner Bros. decision to push the release date from December of 2012, a crowded holiday month, to the first month of the busy summer season, May of 2013. Since the film has been in release for a few weeks prior to this writing, the gamble on the studio’s part paid off financially, as the film provided the explosion-heavy summer months with some high-quality drama, a nice denouement for the more discerning moviegoer. Yet, the delay wasn’t just for a chance at a better release date; it was also for a post-conversion of the film into 3-D.

I have not seen the film in 3-D. I have become burned out by the effect, much like most of the audience in my part of the globe. Yet, this film should not be judged on its stereoscopic effects. The world of 1920’s New York is dazzling, and everything is bright, flashy, and new. The decision to enlist Jay-Z to provide a re-tooling of R&B hits from modern day as jazz era music fit perfectly, and the songs even got a few intended laughs from me, most notably during a breathtaking car ride into the city with DiCaprio and Maguire, where another car is passed with the riders dancing in their seats to “Izzo (H.O.V.A)”. All the parties at Gatsby’s are beating with this life force of music, and it is very welcome. For the more emotional and touching character scenes, Luhrmann once again teams up with long-time collaborator Craig Armstrong. There isn’t a full score CD release yet, but I sincerely hope there is. “Daisy’s Theme” brought back a lost era of true romances on screen for me, and I found myself entranced by every scene that DiCaprio and Mulligan lived in.

DiCaprio is at the top of his game as Gatsby. I never doubted that he was this character for a moment. He seemed to live and breathe the man written by F. Scott Fitzgerald. DiCaprio has played his fair share of mentally disturbed individuals in the recent past, most notably in Christopher Nolan’s Inception, where he chases after dreams to find the answers he is seeking. In Gatsby, DiCaprio continues on with the dreams motif, creating a world out of his own imagination in the hopes of capturing the attention of Daisy. To no surprise on the audience’s part, it works, though only for a little while. Reality sets in, and the characters are left having to face the consequences of their actions. Mulligan is to be commended for bringing such dimension to Daisy. Every glance at DiCaprio is filled with emotion, and the chemistry between all four of the lead actors is electric.

I won’t spoil the ending for anyone who has not seen the film, or read the novel, but it left me sitting stunned in my seat until halfway through the credits. This film captured me and took me on a ride into a world not unlike the one we are living in today. People are rich, and they seem to be getting richer with each passing day. But, how long can this be sustained? In Gatsby’s case, he uses his riches in the pursuit of Daisy, yet he fails to realize that a relationship involves two people, both with free will. In order for his dreams to work, Daisy must also share a mutual affection for him. Though she admits that she loves him, tearfully so, it is clear to everyone but Gatsby that Daisy is not the same girl he fell in love with five years earlier. She is just a memory.

I highly recommend seeing this film in the cinema, the way it was designed to be experienced. The sights, the sounds, and the music blend together into an emotional journey - the likes of which I haven’t experienced for a few years at the movies. Gatsby is a film that teaches you that to desire someone is perfectly natural, yet, when that fascination is replaced with action, anything can happen, for good or ill.