Written by: Kevin Berge
Last week, the most prestigious and highly recognized movie awards, the Academy Awards, aired. While the award show is far from a perfect representation of the best films of each year, the award show is always a great way of introducing fans to many underappreciated films from the preceding year.
While I knew about many of the big winners of 2017 before the end of the year, I did not have the chance to go see any in theaters. Therefore, I only know am finally getting to these movies. To catch up more quickly, I'll be giving perhaps the four biggest movies from the Academy Awards quick reviews.
The four films I will be covering are Greta Gerwig's honest coming-of-age tale Lady Bird, Guillermo Del Toro's fresh take on a tale as old as time The Shape of Water, the passionate romance Call Me By Your Name, and the contentiously aggressive Three Billboards Over Ebbing, Missouri.
These reviews will cover at most the basic set-up of the story of these films and will not contain any spoilers. Given these will not go as in-depth as my usual reviews, I will likely not cover everything about the film.
While I knew about many of the big winners of 2017 before the end of the year, I did not have the chance to go see any in theaters. Therefore, I only know am finally getting to these movies. To catch up more quickly, I'll be giving perhaps the four biggest movies from the Academy Awards quick reviews.
The four films I will be covering are Greta Gerwig's honest coming-of-age tale Lady Bird, Guillermo Del Toro's fresh take on a tale as old as time The Shape of Water, the passionate romance Call Me By Your Name, and the contentiously aggressive Three Billboards Over Ebbing, Missouri.
These reviews will cover at most the basic set-up of the story of these films and will not contain any spoilers. Given these will not go as in-depth as my usual reviews, I will likely not cover everything about the film.
(Image Courtesy of: nytimes.com)
Lady Bird
There was not a single movie from 2017 I was more disappointed I didn't get a chance to see earlier than Lady Bird. In a year dominated by huge movies, Lady Bird was quietly one of most acclaimed, starring the always excellent Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn) and introducing a fascinating new director in Greta Gerwig.
I was not disappointed. In a similar vein to 2016's Edge of Seventeen, this is a smart, funny, and realistic depiction of teenage angst, a teenage coming-of-age story that isn't reliant on unnatural drama or frantic romance to drive the tale.
The driving force of the film is the relationship between Lady Bird (Saoirse Ronan) and her mother (Laurie Metcalf). They fight and argue all the time. Lady Bird often is convinced her mother does not like her, and it makes their relationship often strained.
The name Lady Bird is one she gave herself as an expression of who she feels she is, but it is also a rebellion against the name her parents gave her, Christine. It's a millennial movie in every sense written and directed by Gerwig who called it semi-autobiographical even though it does not directly tie into real events.
While it is a flawed examination that sometimes floats and sometimes flies by, it is poignant and genuine. It is tough not to get invested in the story and its protagonist as she makes mistakes, discovers new ways of thinking, and ultimately lives as best she can.
While I was coming in with too high expectations, I was nonetheless satisfied with the experience of this film. It is a perspective I can relate to and a story I can feel as much as enjoy with fantastic performances from both Ronan and Laurie Metcalf.
I was not disappointed. In a similar vein to 2016's Edge of Seventeen, this is a smart, funny, and realistic depiction of teenage angst, a teenage coming-of-age story that isn't reliant on unnatural drama or frantic romance to drive the tale.
The driving force of the film is the relationship between Lady Bird (Saoirse Ronan) and her mother (Laurie Metcalf). They fight and argue all the time. Lady Bird often is convinced her mother does not like her, and it makes their relationship often strained.
The name Lady Bird is one she gave herself as an expression of who she feels she is, but it is also a rebellion against the name her parents gave her, Christine. It's a millennial movie in every sense written and directed by Gerwig who called it semi-autobiographical even though it does not directly tie into real events.
While it is a flawed examination that sometimes floats and sometimes flies by, it is poignant and genuine. It is tough not to get invested in the story and its protagonist as she makes mistakes, discovers new ways of thinking, and ultimately lives as best she can.
While I was coming in with too high expectations, I was nonetheless satisfied with the experience of this film. It is a perspective I can relate to and a story I can feel as much as enjoy with fantastic performances from both Ronan and Laurie Metcalf.
Grade: A-
Pretty sure Beauty and the Beast already got a Best Picture nomination. Didn't know the same movie could get two. (Image Courtesy of: digg.com)
The Shape of Water
The Shape of Water can easily be misconstrued. It's a Beauty and the Beast ripoff. It's a movie about a woman loving a fish. It's just another beautiful monster movie from Guillermo Del Toro. The last one is not entirely true, but it's also a simplification.
This is a movie about difference that frames itself around its central image. The story here is not about a woman falling in love with a monster but rather two people defined by their difference finding love in one another. It has the trappings of old school film-making with fresh storytelling paint.
For whatever reason, I've always had a bit of trouble connecting to Del Toro's work, but his eye for imagery and impressive symbolic storytelling always make for fun and meaningful films. Shape of Water is no different. It is an immaculately shot film with a great message.
Where it does not quite interest is its period setting, and that's purely a personal issue. I frequently check out when it comes to period movies even ones as exciting as this can be in its third act. The setting (1962 in Baltimore, Maryland) works mainly to set the mood, a time of severe mistrust, prejudice, and racism.
Unsurprisingly, the acting in the film is top notch. Sally Hawkins (Happy-Go-Lucky) dominates the screen in a difficult role as the mute Elisa, and Octavia Spencer (The Help) was as always great as the supporting friend to Elisa. Richard Jenkins (The Visitor) and Michael Shannon (Take Shelter) are perfectly cast in the most likable and most hateable roles.
While the movie gets going in a fun way in its second half, the period setting makes it a film that is not entirely for me. With its look at difference, love, and acceptance, I am glad Del Toro made the movie though I don't see it as anywhere near the best films of the year.
This is a movie about difference that frames itself around its central image. The story here is not about a woman falling in love with a monster but rather two people defined by their difference finding love in one another. It has the trappings of old school film-making with fresh storytelling paint.
For whatever reason, I've always had a bit of trouble connecting to Del Toro's work, but his eye for imagery and impressive symbolic storytelling always make for fun and meaningful films. Shape of Water is no different. It is an immaculately shot film with a great message.
Where it does not quite interest is its period setting, and that's purely a personal issue. I frequently check out when it comes to period movies even ones as exciting as this can be in its third act. The setting (1962 in Baltimore, Maryland) works mainly to set the mood, a time of severe mistrust, prejudice, and racism.
Unsurprisingly, the acting in the film is top notch. Sally Hawkins (Happy-Go-Lucky) dominates the screen in a difficult role as the mute Elisa, and Octavia Spencer (The Help) was as always great as the supporting friend to Elisa. Richard Jenkins (The Visitor) and Michael Shannon (Take Shelter) are perfectly cast in the most likable and most hateable roles.
While the movie gets going in a fun way in its second half, the period setting makes it a film that is not entirely for me. With its look at difference, love, and acceptance, I am glad Del Toro made the movie though I don't see it as anywhere near the best films of the year.
Grade: B
(Image Courtesy of: vox.com)
Call Me By Your Name
I came into Call Me By Your Name expecting the story to all about Timothée Chalamet's Elio and his coming of age. I was expecting something along the lines of Moonlight's second act. I was surprised to find this is absolutely a romance of two characters though far from ordinary.
The story is from the viewpoint of Elio, but Armie Hammer's Oliver is far from a simple vehicle for his affection. The two actors have impressive chemistry that makes the film work. In fact, it is their chemistry and the smart intellectual writing that make the film work.
This is a slow burn that works because it is driven by its setting, in the summer of 1983. The story follows the entire summer through its somewhat unfettered highs and lows. The romance does not as much build but move in waves with much left to interpretation.
Chalamet is phenomenal throughout, and Hammer is better here than I've ever seen him. The problem is that there's little else. So much time is spent on Elio's other relationships, but they don't amount to anything no one else here fully realized unlike the two central characters.
While Elio has some good moments with his parents, even those largely pale in comparison to the interactions between the two leads. The movie would have been perfect if it cut out some of that fat and focused most directly on the exchanges Elio and Oliver have.
This movie is passionate at its best moments and fleeting at its weakest, but there's too much here not to enjoy to forgive its length. I don't know that I would watch this whole movie again, but I would return to certain scenes often, dialogue between Elio and Oliver at their most intense and most emotional.
The story is from the viewpoint of Elio, but Armie Hammer's Oliver is far from a simple vehicle for his affection. The two actors have impressive chemistry that makes the film work. In fact, it is their chemistry and the smart intellectual writing that make the film work.
This is a slow burn that works because it is driven by its setting, in the summer of 1983. The story follows the entire summer through its somewhat unfettered highs and lows. The romance does not as much build but move in waves with much left to interpretation.
Chalamet is phenomenal throughout, and Hammer is better here than I've ever seen him. The problem is that there's little else. So much time is spent on Elio's other relationships, but they don't amount to anything no one else here fully realized unlike the two central characters.
While Elio has some good moments with his parents, even those largely pale in comparison to the interactions between the two leads. The movie would have been perfect if it cut out some of that fat and focused most directly on the exchanges Elio and Oliver have.
This movie is passionate at its best moments and fleeting at its weakest, but there's too much here not to enjoy to forgive its length. I don't know that I would watch this whole movie again, but I would return to certain scenes often, dialogue between Elio and Oliver at their most intense and most emotional.
Grade: B+
(Image Courtesy of: vox.com)
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Three Billboard Outside Ebbing, Missouri is a fascinatingly relevant film for today, a story about police power and accountability that is not kind to the men in uniform. It takes a fairly simple concept and runs with it, exploring characters that at first feel like caricatures.
This could have easily been a one-note comedy. The movie does include several actors known for comedy including Woody Harrelson (Zombieland) and Sam Rockwell (Seven Psychopaths), but it instead gets serious quick by focusing on the effect this scandal has on the small community.
Director and writer Martin McDonagh (In Bruges) has never pulled his punches with his explorations of violence, and this might be his best work. The script is often biting, and he pulls incredible performances out of the cast especially Frances McDormand (Fargo) and Sam Rockwell.
The main issue with the film is its exploration of race or lack thereof. Despite being clear there are racist cops particularly Rockwell's Dixon, the film seems to treat race more as a symbol than a point of interest. This feels like an oversight in a movie that seems heavily involved in issues that can be tied to race.
Despite this, Three Billboards is a great movie. It's dark and intense without relying on the exploitation of violence. More importantly, it can be heartwarming and honest even with characters that are often more bad people than good.
This is a story about humanity, its ugly side with all the difficult complexities. These people hate each other, but they also care about each other and their community. No one is completely in the right or solely acting with good conscience. They are all just acting on their emotions.
This could have easily been a one-note comedy. The movie does include several actors known for comedy including Woody Harrelson (Zombieland) and Sam Rockwell (Seven Psychopaths), but it instead gets serious quick by focusing on the effect this scandal has on the small community.
Director and writer Martin McDonagh (In Bruges) has never pulled his punches with his explorations of violence, and this might be his best work. The script is often biting, and he pulls incredible performances out of the cast especially Frances McDormand (Fargo) and Sam Rockwell.
The main issue with the film is its exploration of race or lack thereof. Despite being clear there are racist cops particularly Rockwell's Dixon, the film seems to treat race more as a symbol than a point of interest. This feels like an oversight in a movie that seems heavily involved in issues that can be tied to race.
Despite this, Three Billboards is a great movie. It's dark and intense without relying on the exploitation of violence. More importantly, it can be heartwarming and honest even with characters that are often more bad people than good.
This is a story about humanity, its ugly side with all the difficult complexities. These people hate each other, but they also care about each other and their community. No one is completely in the right or solely acting with good conscience. They are all just acting on their emotions.
