UNBROKEN

Reviewed by  Paul Gibbs & Patrick Gibbs








GRADE: A +

Jack O'Connell, Domnhall Gleeson, Garrett Hedlund,
Miyavi, Jai Courtney, Finn Witrock, Alex Russell

Screenplay by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen and Richard LaGravense and William Nicholson
Directed by Angelina Jolie
Rated PG -13 (violence, adult themes, profanity)

The story of Louis Zamperini is a harrowing, inspiring drama that was crying out to be made into a major motion picture, and the success of Laura Hillenbrand's book assured that it would be. What was less obvious was that Angelina Jolie would be the one to tell it. Fortunately, not only does the acclaimed actress prove herself to be a major talent behind the camera, she also has the brains to surround herself with people who are at the top of their field, from screenwriters to editors to a master cinematographer. The result is an old fashioned Hollywood epic that ranks among the more impressive efforts we've seen from an up and coming actor/director, worthy of comparison to the Oscar-winning successes of Mel Gibson and Kevin Costner from the 90s. And in many ways it plays more like a 90s film that a 2014 release, Not only is it something of a stylistic throwback, but Jolie's restraint in depicting the horrors of war and Zamperini's resilience to them is something we rarely see in today's Hollywood. She has managed to keep the film appropriate for the family audience it's trying to reach without it feeling like a whitewash.

Born in 1917, Zamperini (played most of the way by Jack O'Connell, in a breakout performance) lead an extraordinary life. The son of Italian immigrants, Zamperini begins the film as a delinquent getting into fights, sneaking booze and generally causing his family no end of headaches. When his old brother Pete spots young Louis' gift for running, that becomes an outlet for turning his life around. Soon, Louis is running in the 1936 Berlin Olympics.

With the beginning of World War II, Zamperini becomes a bomber on a B-24. When his plane is shot down, he and two other crewmembers (Domnall Gleeson and  FinnWitrock) spend 40 days adrift in a life raft without the benefit of a volleyball or a tiger.  Unfortunately, when rescue finally comes its at the hands of the enemy, and Zamperini is forced to spend the rest of the war in a Japanese prison camp, where a brutal corporal (Miyavi) singles him out for some of the worst treatment.

While it's a fairly predictable yarn of determination and heroism winning out against impossible odds, Unbroken is saved from becoming maudlin by the skill of those in front of and behind the camera, and by Jolie's obvious sincere respect for Zamperini, which avoids becoming fawning hero worship. Jolie credits co-screenwriters Joel and Ethan Coen for keeping the film from becoming excessively sentimental (it may teeter too close to that for some tastes, but not ours), and composer Alexander Desplat helps elicit emotion with another moving score. But the MVP may well be director of photography Roger Deakins, who works with Jolie to create a look that reminded us of David Lean and Steven Spielberg (especially Empire of the Sun, which was essentially Spielberg doing David Lean). And along with editors William Goldenberg (Oscar winner for Argo) and Tim Squyres, Jolie has escaped the inexperienced director trap of letting her epic drag on too long and lose its sense of pacing. Finally, she's served well by her cast, which is also served well by her capable direction. O'Connell has a charisma and presence which make it easy for him to carry a film like this on his shoulders, and he's ably backed up by the likes of Gleeson and Garrett Hedlund.

While it's sure to be too conventional and "inspirational" for some (as evidenced by the mixed reviews), we found Unbroken to be a moving and life-affirming film which showed a potentially exciting future for Jolie as a director. It swept us up in its narrative and kept us hooked for its 2 hour and 17 minute run time, and wasn't easy to shake off for a few days after. Its not going to win a lot of fans among the edgy post-modern crowd, but for those who can appreciate a skillfully woven and inspiring portrait of survival, it may be the perfect film for the holiday season. For us it ranks among the best movie-going experiences of 2014, where it's a major Oscar player or not.

Unbroken is rated PG-13 for realistic but surprisingly restrained violence, a little bit of profanity and some heavy adult themes. It's an actual,literal PG-13, an incredibly rare case where the MPAA rating actually seems to have it right.  Don't take children much younger than that but there's nothing in it a 13 year old can't handle.

INTO THE WOODS

GRADE: B+
Starring Meryl Streep, Emily Blunt, James Corden, Anna Kendrick, Chris Pine
Screenplay by James Lapine
Based on the musical by James Lapine and Stephen Sondheim
Directed by Rob Marshall
Rated PG-13 (watered-down violence and implied sexuality)
Reviewed by Paul Gibbs

If there's anything I find harder to review than an adaptation of a book, it's an adaptation of stage musical. Musical theatre fans are as hard-core obsessive as any comic books nerds, and as much as they love their musicals, they hate any production which does something they don't like. Usually this is true of a movie version, so even if I loved the film I find it difficult to review because I know there's a good chance the most devoted fans will despise it for reasons I probably can't even see coming. On the other hand, while hardly a musical theatre buff, having spent much of my life in community theatre I have a filmiarity with and understanding of the medium, which means I find it hard to understand where other film geeks and critics are coming from much of the time as well. Many of them don't "get" musicals. Some even ask  "Why are they singing?" So, as someone with a foot in both worlds, i feel i have a unique perspective (not to say it's better than any other, just that's unique).  As it turns out, Into the Woods is one of the few stage musicals I wouldn't hesitate to call brilliant. It's hilarious, imaginative, touching and surprisingly profound.  So I went into this one with a lot of apprehension. Did they get it right? Well, yes and no.

The story begins with a disparate group of fairy-tale characters, each singing about their situation: a Baker and whis Wife (James Corden and Emily Blunt) want a child;Cinderella (Anna Kendrick) wants to go to the Prince's festival; Jack (Daniel Huttlestone) must sell his beloved cow, and Little Red Riding Hood (Lilla Crawford) is headed to see her grandmother in the woods. But when an a Witch (Meryl Streep) shows up at the Baker's home, she sets the plot in motion by telling the Baker and his Wife that a curse has been placed on their family, and in order to have children they must bring back a series of items she needs.

For the most part, the first act goes rather smoothly. Marshall has mounted a good production of the material, and most of his cast serves him well. Streep has a little trouble getting the rapid fire rhythm of her first song, but from there on plays the character rather well (it's pointless to compare her to the original Broadway Witch, Bernadette Peters. Musical or not, that was stage show and this is a movie, and the requisite acting styles are different). Chris Pine is a hilarious standout as Cinderella's Prince, and Corden and Blunt are wonderful as the Baker and his Wife. The only performances that really bothered me was the only I knew wood, Johnny Depp as the Wolf. His odd zoot suit design doesn't fit the rest of the film at all, his singing isn't very good, and he all around sticks out like a sore thumb. It's a rare case where audiences may wish the character was CGI (I certainly did). Still in all, I find most of the first act section to be a high quality cinematic adaptation of the stage work, with Marshall finding inventive ways to make a very talking musical more visual (this is especially helpful in Jack and Red Riding Hood's songs).

Of course, those who know Into the Woods know it takes a darker, more serious turn in the second act, and that's where the film runs into some trouble. Little important content is outright removed, but some is watered-down to a point that robs it of some its power, and which also renders it confusing (a violent death has been changed to be caused by an act that doesn't seem remotely violent enough to kill someone). And some great songs are cut, including a a variation of the song Agony (my choice as the all-time musical theatre showstopper) sung by Cinderella's Prince and his brother (Billy Magnesson) which not only robs the audience of a great moment, it robs the Prince's of some of their character and lessens the nuance of the second act (it should be noted that Pine, Magnesson and director Marshall hit the first Agony out of the. However, the overall drama and staging of the second act is still pulled off well, with the song The Last Midnight performed well by Streep and perfectly directed by Marshall to give the sequence the kind of magic only film can. . Marshall's particular gift as a filmmaker is an understanding of both the stage musical and film mediums, and blending them well (thankfully this time he abandons the "stage of my mind" motif he used in both Chicago and Nine).

All in all, I found Into the Woods to be a good film, and a good production of the musical.  But as an  adaptation , some questionable choices have been made with cuts Disneyizing. These tweaks aren't as bad as some fans feared, but they're probably enough to upset many fans nonetheless. as a film on its own merit it's great fun. It's colorful, it's energetic, it's funny, it's magical, and deeper than you might expect. AInto the Woods (Pine alone is worth the price of admission). But because of the cuts it falls short of being the all time classic the source material deserves to be.
nd I still feel it's an overall good version of

Where the stage show would be a PG-13 for violence and adult/sexual themes, the movie is toned down enough to be a Disney-friendly PG (though families who don't know the play may want to consider it an old school PG, when that wasn't the standard rating for a kids movie and PG could include more adult content, including some discreetly portrayed adultery).

THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES

Reviewed by Paul Gibbs

GRADE: A
Starring Ian McKellan, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Cate Blanchett, Ken Stott, Orlando Bloom
Screenplay by Peter Jackson & Fran Walsh  &Phillipa Boyens & Guillermo Del Toro
Directed by Peter Jackson
Rated PG-13 for war violence

Relax, it's good.

Peter Jackson's The Hobbit trilogy has garnered decidedly mixed reactions, especially compared to his more universally beloved and acclaimed Lord of the Rings trilogy, most of it having to do with the often obvious padding required to turn one fairly short novel into three epic films. Thankfully, he has arguably saved the best for last in The Battle of the Five Armies, a thrilling, emotional and above all just plain satisfying epic. While (for all its admitted shortcomings) I am an unabashed fan of the Hobbit film series, I suspect even some Jackson/Tolkien fans who've been underwhelmed so far will greet Five Armies a little more warmly. Yes, it's still a bit overstuffed and takes liberties with the source material, but it doesn't take as many lengthy detours, and it wraps things up in such a satisfying manner that I felt closer to having seen the Hobbit movie (singular, not plural) I'd always imagined. No, those who truly hated the first two films won't be won over. But those who were ambivalent might find themselves with more positive feelings about the series as a whole. While I rank the leisurely-paced An Unexpected Journey as the most charming chapter,  and the thrilling adventure of The Desolation of Smaug the most fun, The Battle of the Five Armies is the most complete of the trilogy, and not just because it's the only one that gets to build to a full resolution. Jackson and his cohorts have effectively mixed the dramatic elements this time around to give us a rousing climax.

The story picks up where The Desolation of Smaug left off, with the fearsome dragon (who I have no doubt half the audience still lusts after because he's voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch) swooping in to destroy Lake Town, and the heroic Bard the Bowman (Luke Evans) doing his best to defend home and family from the winged menace. Meanwhile, Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage) has assumed his rightful place as King Under the Mountain in the dwarf kingdom of Erebor. But Thorin has changed: he's becoming increasingly greedy and paranoid, so much so that Bilbo (Martin Freeman) is afraid to give him the coveted Arkenstone. After Smaug is defeated,  the men of what remains of Lake Town come to Erebor looking for shelter, help and the gold Thorin promised them. But Thorin's greed gets the better of him, and he refuses to keep his promise. Meanwhile, the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellan)  is still off dealing with the Necromancer, who were learned in The Desolation of Smaug is actually the evil lord Sauron, and the orc Azog (Manu Bennett) converges his armies to march on Erebor, as does the wood-elf king Thranduil (Lee Pace). Soon, all of the groups converge for the titular altercation, an extended set piece which rivals the battles of Helm's Deep and the Pelinor Fields for the most spectacular of Jackson's career.

Despite a small change from the source material which bothered me, the battle with Smaug is every bit as thrilling and spectacular as I hoped. And the film just keeps getting better from there, ramping up the drama and battle action in ways which recall the Oscar-winning The Return of the King. Character interactions are deepened (especially between Bilbo and Thorin, with Freeman and Armitage both doing excellent work), all plot threads come together, and Jackson again proves he can shoot a battle scene as well as any filmmaker in history. Some of the action here is wildly inventive, and as usual Jackson shows an ability to make what would likely normally seem horrific (like decapitations) thrilling and even funny. However, it's worth pointing out that, while short of blood and gore, the film is filled with wall-to-wall violence. Among the emotional character moments, the relationship between dreamy dwarf Killi and elf babe Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly)  feels more than a little rushed. These characters have had very few actual interactions, after all. But Turner and Lilly, along with Jackson, sell it so well that I found my sense of logic losing out to the emotion. Besides, even if he's too good-looking to be a dwarf, there's a short guy part of me that can't help but love the idea of an elf girl falling for a dwarf.

My only real complaints come from the fact that the CGI is sometimes less convincing than it should be (a few sequences with Orlando Bloom's Legolas drift into Playstation territory), and far too much screen time is given to annoying and unfunny comic relief from the weaselly Alfrid (Ryan Gage). Otherwise, I feel Jackson has given us a thrilling, stirring, eye-popping epic that ranks with the best blockbusters of recent years and cements this trilogy's overall success. This is a film which recognizes that big emotions are as important as sweeping vistas and massive armies to creating an epic. Watching it, the problems inherent in stretching the book out to three films faded from my mind, and I found myself reveling in the glory of Jackson's Middle Earth, one of the most memorable world in the history of literature, and now cinema. Freeman is now as definitive to me as Bilbo as Elijah Wood is as Frodo, and the dwarves have been done justice (which is a huge statements from . I'd be depressed to have the series end if we weren't getting that other fantasy trilogy starting up next year. While The Hobbit t hasn't been the unqualified success that The Lord of the Rings was, I feel it has been an overall satisfying voyage there and back again.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies easily ranks among the best blockbusters of 2014 for me. It's rated PG-13 for intense battle violence that (as always) would easily earn it an R if theses were people getting hacked and smashed instead of orcs.

CHRISTMAS FILMS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED

by Paul Gibbs

Looking fora Christmas movie that's a little off the beaten path? Not necessarily Die Hard or Black Christmas, but a change of pace from the stuff you've seen a million times? Here are a few suggestions for Christmas movies that you may not have seen.




SANTA CLAUS: THE MOVIE (1985) 

After Christopher Reeve left the Superman franchise and audiences justifiably ignored Supergirl, producers/shipping magnates Alexander and Illya Salkind hoped to start a new franchise by giving Santa Claus the same treatment. This movie wouldn't be featured here if they'd succeeded (it was ignored by audiences and mostly savaged by critics), but while Santa Claus has its faults, it also has its charms. The design (by a mix of those brought us Richard Donner's Superman before and Tim Burton's Batman after) is imaginative and a lot of fun, with Santa's old fashioned workshop a highlight. Henry Mancini's score is bouncy and fun, and Dudley Moore's lovably scatter-brained elf Patch is a likable protagonist. And we haven't even gotten to the Big Lebowsi himself, David Huddleston, as one of the better live-actions Santas. The child actors are weak (sometimes to an annoying degree), the script is spotty, and John  Lithgow's Lex Luthor-esque evil toymaker is a perfect example of one of those over the top Lithgow performances that is alternately amusing and just irritating, but there's enough in director Jeannot Swzarc (Jaws 2, Somewhere in Time, Supergirl) made one of his more entertaining films here, and I've actually been a little surprised by how few people I encounter are familiar with it.




A CHRISTMAS CAROL (1984)

Okay, you've seen over 200 versions of Dicken's masterpiece. But this Clive Donner directed
TV production from 1984 may be as close to a definitive translation of the actual book as you'll ever see. George C. Scott brings what I can only call a Shakespearean flair to his Ebenezar Scrooge, and he's surrounded by an excellent cast, including David Warner as Bob Cratchit, Roger Rees as Fred, Lucy Gutteridge as Belle, Joanne Whalley as Fan, and maybe best of all, Edward "The Equalizer" Woodward as the Ghost of Christmas Present. If Merchant Ivory in their heyday had chosen to make a holiday film, this is what they would have come up with.









ARTHUR CHRISTMAS (2011)
Aardman, the British animation studio behind Wallace and Grommit and Chicken Run gave us a film that should be a required part of everyone's Christmas, but it was lost in the shuffle of a very crowded holiday season where even Martin Scorsese had a family-friendly film out.  Arthur (voiced by X-Men's James McAvoy) is the younger son of the current Santa Claus (voiced by Jim Boradbent), and while he loves Christmas, he's a screw-up perpetually in the shadow of his older brother Steve (voiced by Hugh Laurie). But when a mistake is made and a child in Trelew, Cornwall is left without a gift, Arthur and his grandfather (a retired former Santa voiced by Bill Night) set out to make it right.  Arthur Christmas is as heartwarming as you might expect, but it's also hilarious, with that distinctive flavor of British comedy (even sometimes the sort biting, edgy, Black Adder style). A must-see.

EXODUS: GODS AND KINGS

 

Reviewed by Patrick Gibbs

GRADE:  B+
Christian Bale, Joel Edgerton, Ben Kingsley, John Turturro, Aaron Paul, Tara Fitzgerald and Sigourney Weaver
Screenplay by Adam Cooper, Bill Collage, Jeffrey Caine and Steven Zaillian
Directed by Ridley Scott
Rated PG-13 for R-rated violence (I give up on understanding the ratings system.).

Exdous: Gods and Kings is a better follow up to Gladiator than 2009's Robin Hood, which wasn't bad, per se, but was so stilted and aloof that it played like it desperately needed an enema.  That's the good news. The bad news is, Exodus: Gods and Kings is trying too hard much of the time to be Gladiator, which in an of itself is nothing new: just this year both The Legend of Hercules and Pompeii have blatantly ripped off Gladiator, and over the past decade or so everything from Troy to 300 to (I am not making this up) Zorro! The Musical have at best worn the influence of Scott's triumphant epic on their sleeve and at worst come close to plagiarism. But when it gets to the point that Scott himself is doing it, complete with lifting lines of dialogue directly from that film and playing the Moses-Seti-Ramses dynamic as a variation on Maximus-Marcus Aurellius-Commodus (though Ramses is far less creepy), it's a bit ridiculous. What's more, at times Scott seems to be having a go at Robin Hood again, as he has given Moses a band of Merry Men whom he instructs in the proper use of the bow and arrow, and at one point I thought that any moment Ramses was going to hold an archery tournament to try and draw out Moses. And then there's the presence of Sigourney Weaver in her once every decade or so "yes, this is a Ridley Scott movie and I was Ellen Ripley" role.

The film follows the well established story of Moses, but from a different angle. Instead of starting with a baby in a basket, we begin in in 1300 B.C, with Moses (Bale) as a general and member of the royal family, preparing  to attack the Hittie army with Prince Ramses (Edgerton). Seti I (Turturro) tells the two men of a recent prophecy in which one will save the other and become a leader. During the attack on the Hittites, Moses saves Ramses' life, leaving both men troubled. Later, Moses is sent to the city of Pithom. Upon his arrival, he encounters the slave Joshua (Paul) and is appalled by the horrific conditions of the slaves. Shortly afterwards, Moses meets Nun (Kingsley), who informs him of his true lineage; he is the child of Hebrew parents who was sent by his sister Miriam to be raised by Pharaoh's daughter.

Seti dies shortly after Moses' return to Memphis, and Ramses becomes the new pharaoh. Ramses does not want to believe it when he hears the story of Moses's true indentity, when the truth comes out, he decides to send Moses into exile. Before leaving Egypt, Moses meets with his birth mother and Miriam, who refer to him by his birth name of Moishe (and I have to admit I was a bit disappointed not to see a scene where Miriam throws a tantrum about all of the attention her brother is getting. "Why is everything always about him? Moishe Moishe Moishe!")

As we all know, from here Moses journeys into the desert, and eventually converses with God, who is presented in this film, quite literally, in the form of a petulant child, in what is likely to be the most controversial aspect of the film among the "they've rewritten the Bible/Darren Arronofsky ate my baby!" Christian right (who, of course, have a solid and singular claim on these movies about the great Jewish Prophets.). This is not an entirely effective choice, but it's not altogether ineffective, either. Let's face it, this story belongs to the Jews, the Christians, the Muslims, and a whole lot of other people who all have different opinions on who or what God is, and it's impossible to portray Him in a way that will satisfy everyone (even now, someone reading this is taking exception to my designation of God as a Him, and I don't entirely disagree.). The relationship between God and Moses in this film is a unique portrayal, and a standard complaint that I am hearing was actually one of my favorite parts of the film, and a key element to why I loved Noah so such: where many are complaining that Moses is too passive, and not taking a enough of an active role in all of this, I love seeing the Prophets of old portrayed as subject to the same confusion, frustration, doubt and anger that we all face as people trying to keep the faith.

What's more, the portrayal of the miracles and plagues in a more subtle and plausible form really worked for me. The popular Ten Commandments portrayal of God making His (sorry) presence an established fact that Ramses is just too stubborn to admit has never really made sense to me, and even less so the idea that the Hebrews quite literally see Moses stand on a rock, wave his magic staff to part the read sea in half through the power of God, leaving the sand underneath completely dry, but once they are across they immediately decide "well, that worked out all right, let's celebrate with an orgy and the building of idols!" When Bale's Moses asks his people to follow his faith, it's nice to see both that this is not an easy request, and that the faith of Moses is something he himself has to work at like the rest of us do.

Bale is terrific as always, though he and Scott do not completely succeed in making us connect with the character, and it seems as if they are struggling to get a handle on him. The biggest issue is that we don't really get a strong sense that Moses has a great love for either Egypt or the Hebrews, pulling him between the two worlds, the way we see in other versions. The strength of this is in making him feel like an odd duck that doesn't fit in anywhere; the weakness is that we aren't swept up into his motivation. But Bale gets enough mileage out of  Moses's horror at the treatment of the slaves to sell it. Joel Edgerton, a sensational actor who needs to be given more star vehicles, gives the most human portrayal of Pharoah we've seen on screen. The performances are successful all around, though Weaver doesn't quite blend with the rest of the cast because she doesn't do an authentic Hebrew or Egyptian pseudo-British accent. The cinematography by Dariusz Wolski is among the very best of the year. There really is a lot to like about this film, and I found that I held a higher opinion of it than most of the members of the press I viewed it with, but it is simply far too lacking in a strong narrative and too detached to achieve greatness.  To summarize: I liked the movie, many seem to genuinely hate it, and I really, really wanted to love it but just couldn't quite manage it. It's definitely worth a look for those with an open mind, but don't expect a definitive version of this epic tale.

(As a side note, the film is dedicated to Tony Scott, the director's late brother and a prominent director in his own right, which is quite touching for fans of the Scott brothers. Although, to put a cynical spin on it, I must say that given the self referential nature of the film, I pictured Ridley thinking "I owe it to my brother to make to the homage to me that he certainly should have if I'd died first.").

SING YOUR WAY INTO THE WOODS CONTEST

 

Disney invites you to show off your singing skills and your love for the Stephen Sondheim musical “Into the Woods” with the online musical contest “Sing Your Way Into the Woods”.

The winning video will be selected by legendary eight-time Tony®, Grammy® and Oscar®-winning composer and lyricist Stephen Sondheim and Tony® winner James Lapine, who also wrote the screenplay. All videos will be judged based on their musicality, creativity and execution. The winner(s) will receive a private advance screening of Disney’s “Into the Woods” and the winning video and the videos from the three runner-up’s will be featured on the film’s official Tumblr site.So let’s see if you have what it takes to Sing Your Way Into the Woods!
 

The contest is open to choir groups, choral companies, musical theater departments, glee clubs and anyone with a passion for the landmark musical “Into the Woods.”. You decide which part you want to sing and perhaps your wish to win a screening will come true!

Go to www.intothewoodscontest.com to watch the trailer for Disney’s “Into the Woods” for inspiration, download the official music and lyrics to the Prologue and gather your friends and record your own version of the last two-minutes of the iconic Prologue from “Into The Woods”. Rules, guidelines and regulations are posted on the site. Deadline for all submissions is 2 PM (PST) December 12, 2014. 

The contest runs from Friday, December 5, 2014 at 2 PM (PST) until Friday, December 12, 2014 at 2 PM (PST). Winners will be chosen and announced on the site on or about Friday, December 19, 2014. *See abbreviated contest rules*

Into The Woods is a modern twist on several beloved fairy tales, intertwining the plots of a few choice stories and exploring the consequences of the characters’ wishes andInt quests. This humorous and heartfelt musical follows the classic tales of Cinderella (Anna Kendrick), Little Red Riding Hood (Lilla Crawford), Jack and the Beanstalk (Daniel Huttlestone), and Rapunzel (MacKenzie Mauzy), all tied together by an original story involving a Baker and his Wife (James Corden and Emily Blunt), their wish to begin a family and their interaction with the Witch (Meryl Streep), who has put a curse on them. Rob Marshall, the acclaimed filmmaker behind the Academy Award®-winning musical “Chicago” and Disney’s “Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides,” directs the film, which is based on the musical stage production by legendary eight-time Tony, Grammy® and Oscar®-winning composer and lyricist Stephen Sondheim and Tony® winner James Lapine, who also wrote the screenplay. Produced by John DeLuca, Marshall, “Wicked” producer Marc Platt and Callum McDougall, “Into the Woods” will be released in theaters December 25, 2014. For more information, like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DisneyIntoTheWoods and follow us on Twitter: @IntoThe Woods.

Disney Contact: Stacey Tesser, The Walt Disney Studios: Stacey.J.Tesser@disney.com

Abbreviated Rules: Sing Your Way INTO THE WOODS: A Musical Contest: No Purchase Necessary to Enter or Win. Void where prohibited or restricted. Open to legal residents of the 50 US and DC, excluding AK, who are at least 18 years old at time of entry. Starts 12/5/14 at 2:01:00 pm PT and ends 12/12/14 at 2:00:00 pm PT. Subject to full Official Rules, available at: www.intothewoodscontest.com. Sponsor: ABC, Inc. d/b/a Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, Burbank, CA.

 

 

THE HOMESMAN

Reviewed by Patrick Gibbs

GRADE: A
Tommy Lee Jones, Hillary Swank, John Lithgow, Miranda Otto, Grace Gummer, Sonja Richter, James Spader, Tim Blake Nelson, Hailee Stienfeld and Meryl Streep
Screenplay by Tommy Lee Jones and
Kieran Fitzgerald and Wesley Oliver
Based on the novel by Glendon Swarthout
Directed by Tommy Lee Jones

Rated R (violence, sex, rape, profanity, disturbing behavior and brief nudity)

Tommy Lee Jones has been behind the camera before,
with two made for television films and the theatrical feature The Three Burials of Melqeades Estrada to his credit. Jones the director is much like Jones the actor, and Jones the man: surly, boisterous, warm, charismatic and completely infuriating all at the same time.

The story, set in the 1850's, follows Mary Bee Cuddy (Swank), a middle-aged spinster from New York, a former teacher who journeyed to the Midwest for better opportunities. She is an active member of the small farming community she now calls home in Loup City, Nebraska, and has significant financial prospects and sizable land ownership.

After a harsh winter, three young women—Arabella Sours, Theoline Belknapp, and Gro Svendsen—begin to show signs of insanity due to the hardships they have faced. When someone must be chosen for the task of taking these women to a church in Iowa that cares for the mentally ill, Mary Bee volunteers for the task alone because she is unhappy with her life and wants an adventure.

After loading the women into a wagon, Cuddy sets out for Iowa, and before she leaves she encounters George Briggs (Jones), a claim jumper, who has been lynched for using another man's land as his own. Sniveling and begging to be saved, Briggs appeals to Cuddy for help. She frees him in return for his help escorting the women, though he only sticks with it because he is getting paid $300.

The Homesman is a riveting film,  unflinching in its portrayal of mental illness and the harshness of life in the period. Some are labeling it a feminist western, and it certainly takes a sympathetic, even loving view of the silent heroines of the times who faced much more dangerous foes than outlaws or Indians, and the fact that they are also prone to the weakness and frailty that comes with being human should not be mistaken for a negative statement: the men in this film are no stronger, and in many cases quite a bit weaker. It's also very likely the only western to ever deal with the subject of clinical depression (though the illness is never named directly) and ultimately the three women are hardly the only mentally unstable characters. In fact, the point of the film, if there is one (and it is surprisingly difficult to tell at times), is that we are all dealing with our own demons, no one is exactly who they seem, and that the best of us (Cuddy) have darkness inside us and the worst (Briggs) are capable of rising to the light if they really want to do so, but we all need help in some form, whether we are quietly pleading for it from whoever there is or are fighting it from those who see something more in us than we do in ourselves. In the end, without someone who cares, all have have is whatever defenses we have built for ourselves.

It is a film that takes quite a bit of of time and thought to digest, and it is so relentlessly bleak and so short on hope that audiences can't really be blamed if they can't get through it.

The performances are excellent all around, and Swank proves once again that she is one of the most daring leading women in film history. Jones can command the screen with the flimsiest of material, and manages to take a character with few if any admirable qualities and pull us toward him, maiking us care far more about him than makes any sense. Otto, Gummer and Richter are mesmerizing as the three women (each is genuinely heartbreaking in their own way), and the rest of the cast is filled with capable actors, including John Lithgow in his second major performance this month (the last being Instersellar.). Between Cliffhanger and 3rd Rock From The Sun, I had grown to think of Lithgow as such an over the top ham that I always get entranced by watching him play a real person.  There are also several extended cameo appearances, which include Jones' fellow Lincoln alumn James Spader and Tim Blake Nelson, Hailee Stienfeld and Meryl Streep (who shares the screen with her real life daughter, Grace Gummer.).  Cameos, especially in a serious film, can be a tricky prospect, and can be distracting and irritating (The Thin Red Line) or subtely effective in creating a feeling that these small characters are real people with their own stories (Saving Private Ryan, Twelve Years A Slave), and thankfully Jones uses these actors very well, giving us the latter. Streep in particular gives a beautifully nuanced performance, providing the film with it's most subtly haunting moment (and I am decidedly not part of the crowd that swoons over every single thing Streep does and thinks she has no peers.).

The cinematography, musical score and editing are expertly done. Jones the director has many admirable qualities, not the least of which is knowing that the camera does not always have to be moving to create a money shot. Jones wears his respect for  the directors that influenced him on his sleeve, whether it is using True Grit's Steinfeld in a cameo or putting a prominent thank you to Steven Spielberg at the end, but if there is one director that Jones channels most, it has to be Clint Eastwood, particularly Unforgiven.

The film does have a slight unfortunate tendency to wander at times,  but it generally finds its way back. Also, like so many other "unflinching" directors, Jones doesn't have the strongest sense of when it's okay to flinch: three scenes in one movie that compete for most graphically unpleasant sex scene of the year is a bit too much for me to be convinced to was essential to the story.

Sill, as a treatise on mental and emotional illness, The Homesman is genuinely brilliant and worthy of recognition.  But if you are going to give this movie a try, be prepared for some very disturbing imagery, including a baby being killed. Don't even try to watch this movie if you are not used to R rated dramas.