Winnie the Pooh (2011) Review

Less childlike and more childish the latest installment in the franchise is an overall abysmal and highly disappointing turn for the characters and the stories created by A.A Milne and popularized in the United States by Walt Disney.

Attempting to return to the form presented by The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh the film is more a series of animated shorts compiled into one film. Among them are the story of Eeyore (voice of Bud Luckey) losing his tail and Winnie The Pooh, Tigger (both voiced by Jim Cummings), Owl (voiced by Craig Ferguson), Rabbit (voiced by Tom Kenny), Piglet (voiced by Travis Oates), Kanga (voiced by Kristen Anderson-Lopez) and Roo (voiced by Wyatt Dean Hall) all begin a contest to find a new one. While misinterpreting a note from Christopher Robin (Jack Boulter), Owl convinces everyone that he has been kidnapped by a horrible creature known as the Backson (Back soon) and Pooh attempts to find honey.

There are several songs in the film (written by Robert Lopez and Kristen Anderson-Lopez) and every single one of them fails to live up to the wonderful songs written by Robert and Richard Sherman for the previous shorts. There is a lack of charm and constant laziness in the new songs that causes them to be unmemorable. Repeating "honey" thirteen times does not make a good song and the complete shortage of talent in Zooey Deschanel is apparent in her singing of at least one of the songs.

One thing I have always loved about the characters that were originally created by A.A. Milne and illustrated by E.H Shepard was how honest and open they were with each other. They never tried to pull anything over on one another. In this film that is gone. The script, developed by no less than ten individuals, is so chock full of somewhat sinister actions (such as "toss in the pig") and lying that the individuals perpetually border on unlikeable. Perhaps I am lamenting for an era of animation and a style of storytelling that is gone or maybe I haven't given many programs the chances they deserve. Whatever the reason, I was severely disappointed in what I have been given by Disney in their attempts to update the characters to fit into a world of cynicism.

If I was to say anything good about the film it would be the voice work by Jim Cummings. He is the only member of the cast whose performances I didn't hate. His near pitch-perfect imitation of the late Sterling Holloway is so spot on that you would swear it was the same person. Of course he has had years to practice but he, nonetheless remains true to his characters unlike the rest of the cast.

★

The Grey (2012) Review

Man vs. nature. There has been several of these type of films as I am sure you are aware. The films present a major fear of humans. How does one survive when they are lost in the wilderness going up against the animals that live full-time in that wilderness? The Grey exploits that fear in a satisfying albeit predictable way.

John Ottway (Liam Neeson) is a member of an oil drilling team based in Alaska. His job is to kill wolves that surround and threaten the team. On his last day he writes a letter to his wife and walks out into the woods to commit suicide. However while kneeling in the snow with his rifle in his mouth he hears a wolf howl which stops him. Upon completion of the job the team and Ottway board a plane headed for home. The plane is unable to withstand the power of a blizzard and crashes in a barren wasteland killing all but Ottway and seven of the oil-drillers. Ottway immediately assumes control of the group whose initial plan is to stay with the destroyed remnants of the plane but upon realizing they are in a wolf pack's territory (especially after one member is torn apart by the wolves in the middle of the night) the team decides that it is better to walk south in the hope of being rescued or finding civilization. The wolves continue to hunt the men on their journey and, as you would expect, one by one the men are killed by the cold, wolves, trees etc.

The film unfortunately is far too predictable at times to really feel as original as I wanted it to feel. I was literally able to sit in the theater and know who would be killed next and/or how they would be killed and so the film follows a formula and plays it safe. It doesn't shock or frighten nearly as much as it should when one factors in the harsh environment the fortunately fully fleshed out characters are in.

Previously I mentioned the film's satisfying use of the fear the characters have. It might seem as though I am contradicting myself but the truth is that half the film is predictable while the other half is a lean forward in your seat type of film. The scenes in which the characters are surrounded by the wolves or face to face with them are among some of the most frightening and intense scenes in the film. Dracula's opinion of their musical prowess comes to mind in several scenes. I only wish the filmmakers had focused more on the eyes of the wolves which are the feature that an audience relates to most in an animal onscreen. There are issues with the CGI animation of the wolves but to be fair Hollywood has always had issues with the animation of wolves and indeed the animation of creatures with fur. The wolves lack weight when running or attacking and their size in the film is excessive and visibly surpasses the average wolf size while some of their hunting behavior is inaccurate.

The trivia section of imdb for the film mentions that the atrocious Bradley Cooper was initially cast in Liam Neeson's role and all I can be is thankful for the change because Neeson's performance is one his better. As my friend remarked after the film's credits, "when I grow up I want to be Liam Neeson."

An interesting take for the film's cinematography is to create it in a coherent style with the film's title. There is a lot of attention obviously given to the color palette and style of the shots (although I wish there weren't so many establishing shots of the snow covered mountains). Everything is either gray, white or black which creates a feeling of dreariness to the film.

An overall fear-provoking and intense picture that walks a balance and unfortunately sometimes falls off into predictable and pointlessness.

★★★

 

 

 

Anonymous (2011) Review

Anonymous is about what you'd expect. Ludicrous hypotheticals abound in this film directed by Roland Emmerich, who you might remember directed the equally ludicrous though far worse 10,000 B.C. The film's tagline reads "What If Shakespeare Was a Fraud?" which basically sums up what the film is about. It subscribes to the Oxford theory and suggests that the plays were written by the 17th Earl of Oxford (Rhys Ifans). Due to his status as an important individual in society and his relationship with William Cecil (David Thewlis) and Queen Elizabeth I (Vanessa Redgrave and Joely Richardson) he cannot take credit for the plays and sonnets so he decides to make Ben Jonson (Sebastian Armesto) put his name to them and have them performed. Who should happen to take credit from Jonson but the film's biggest buffoon William Shakespeare, played entertainingly by Rafe Spall. The next hour and a half is as slow and tedious as Shakespeare can be to read.

As I said the film is filled with absurdity. It does not follow a chronological story but instead tries a rather transparent tactic of confusing the audience by fastforwarding and backflashing to mask it's absurdity and historical inaccuracies (such as Young Elizabeth having near constant relations with several men and birthing several bastards) and anachronisms (for example Macbeth is seen being performed during Elizabeth I's reign even though it was performed during the reign of King James. There is also a scene where the Globe burns down nearly ten years before it actually burned down).

Despite the ridiculousness of the film there are several things of merit. The performances by Ifans, Redgrave and Edward Hogg (who is particularly creepy as Robert Cecil) are all of a fairly high quality but it is David Thewlis who shines in his role and gives quite possibly the best performance of his career thus far. The character of William Cecil goes through, physically speaking, the most change transforming from young to old to dying but a great makeup is only going to be able to carry an actor so far. Without the subtleties that Thewlis gives in his role it would simply be a great makeup wasted.


Besides the performances the film is actually good from a technical standpoint. When I say technical I am referring to the costumes, cinematography, makeup, art direction etc. I guarantee that there will be some Academy Award nominations for those moments

I know the theories and arguments about who wrote Shakespeare is quite polarized and I admit I am not an expert on Shakespeare. Oxfordians think that the Stratfordians are idiots and vice versa. I know a lot of you Shakespearean scholars and students will think me an idiot because I refuse to "pick a side" but the truth, my friends, is that at the end of the day it doesn't matter who wrote Hamlet, Henry V, Sonnet #81, Macbeth, A Midsummer Night's Dream, King Lear or Romeo & Juliet. They all were written by someone and exist for us to analyze, praise, scrutinize, be bored by or just plain enjoy.

★★★

Beginners (2010) Review

Rarely do you have a film like Beginners. It is a film that works on mostly every level and is so wonderfully simple in its complexity. Graphic designer Oliver (Ewan McGregor) meets a free-spirited actress named Anna (Mélanie Laurent) after his father, Hal (Christopher Plummer) has passed away. As Oliver gets to know Anna he realizes that he is very much inexperienced in the prospect of a long-lasting romantic relationship. Oliver's memories of his father, who, following the death of his wife of 45 years came out of the closet to lead a full, energized and wonderful life and possibly encourage Oliver to find a woman and do the same and find true happiness. Oliver ends up taking in Hal's dog, named Arthur who can understand up to 150 words but does not talk except in subtitles. It is unclear as to whether the words at the bottom of the screen are what the dog is thinking or just what Oliver decides the dog would say if he could. One thing does remain clear and that's the fact that Arthur is the only character in the film that truly has a good bead on his life and is able to be happy with no effort at all.

The film moves from time period to time period with surprising finesse and fluidity. All too often a filmmaker attempts to do this in a way that is fresh and doesn't annoy the audience and fails in their attempt. Writer/director Mike Mills succeeds by presenting all the flashbacks as Oliver's memories. This allows the audience to feel comfortable with the seemingly random jumping around because the human mind recalls memories at random. The script really doesn't feel chaotic as one would expect or would easily happen. Oliver's narration in the film provides the set up by saying, "this is 2003. This is nature and the stars and the president and movies. This is what happy looks like in 1955. This was smoking etc."

The three leads (McGregor, Laurent and Plummer) all deliver great performances in the film with special mention going to the perfection of Christopher Plummer in his now Oscar-nominated role. As Hal he is a cheerful and simple man that is surprisingly transparent. He does not overplay the stereotypical gay man but instead plays it as a man who is finally being true to what he is. This makes Plummer's performance one of his most human performances. I do admit that although I have only seen her in one other film (Inglorious Basterds) I predict and expect great things to come from Laurent throughout her career in the US. I guarantee that she will bring many other great performances in the future.

One of the things that bothered me the whole film though was the musical score. Don't get your dander up. I do not say that I necessarily disliked the score as much as it's placement in the film. It feels out of place in this film. It is almost as though composer Roger Neill wrote the music for another film and decided to put it to use here. Although pleasant to listen to by itself it simply does not fit here. Still the film is so wonderfully made on every other level so I suppose in the grand scheme of things the issues I have with the music are a minor inconvenience.

★★★1/2