Prisoners

Prisoners has been getting great word of mouth. A friend of mine even claimed it was the best movie he'd seen all year. And although I don't take much stock in what critics say; they seemed to adore it as well. I thought the movie looked great but I ended up being a tad disappointed by it. It's not that it's a bad movie. It's just that it's a pretty mediocre one, elevated by truly great performances by everyone in the cast.

Prisoners is basically about two young girls who disappear from their neighborhood on Thanksgiving day and the grief their families experience, and the lengths some of them will go to to exact revenge. Hugh Jackman plays Keller, the father of one of the girls, who is a Christian survivalist who always hopes for the best but plans for the worst. Somehow, the movie doesn't make a big enough deal about his Christianity, because I think the things he does in this movie are a little more interesting when you consider that he is a devout man. His wife is Maria Bello, who mostly gets resigned to grief stricken mother who can't get out of bed. But, you know what? She nails it. Their friends from down the street whose daughter also goes missing are the peaceful and sweet Terrence Howard and his tough as nails, turn a blind eye wife played by Viola Davis. Once the girls are missing, Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal) shows up and begins to investigate. His investigation quickly leads to a mentally stunted strange young man named Alex (Paul Dano), who they quickly arrest but must let go because of lack of evidence. And while Loki continues his investigation which leads him all over the damn city, Keller hones in on Alex, convinced of his guilt. He stakes out the home he shares with his aunt (Melissa Leo), and eventually kidnaps him and holds him prisoner, where in he decides to torture him until he talks. Meanwhile, the audience is assured of his innocence with every passing moment. This movie is designed less as a whodunit, than it is more a revenge thriller, and I think the paradox of trying to please both of those genres sort of strains the script, which seems manic and unrestrained. The whodunit section is interesting but overly long, leading us to one red herring after another. The revenge part is much more interesting but almost seems to take a back seat. Plus, I invented a much better and more effective ending in my head before seeing this movie, so I was pretty disappointed with the road they chose to take.

Speaking of the ending, I won't spoil anything, but it is a tad disappointing. First of all, it's fairly predictable, at least to anyone who has ever seen an episode of Criminal Minds or Law and Order. Second of all, this two and a half hour movie is over long by at least forty minutes. There is one story line especially which irks me. It serves almost no purpose except to throw the audience off the trail one last time. It's very confusing and more or less is unnecessary. It could have been cut completely or at least scaled down a great deal. This could have easily cut thirty minutes from the running time. I love a good long movie, but this movie definitely felt like it was two plus hours long. Good long movies never feel like they are overly long. I keep comparing this movie to Zodiac in my mind (same star, both whodunits), which is a great long movie. It's about three hours long, but it never feels like it. Zodiac is a movie that uses every single moment of its running time, it doesn't waste a second. The same can't be said for Prisoners.

All of this being said, I didn't hate this movie. In fact, I sort of liked it while watching it, except for the fact that Detective Loki, the big hot shot detective who has never lost a case, didn't really seem like a very good detective. I was picking up on things that he didn't notice until a good 45 minutes later. However, after watching it, all the flaws seemed to stick with me and that is definitely a sign for me. If I can forgive a movie its flaws, if they don't bother me the way this movie did, then the movie did something right. I think Prisoners does a lot wrong. However, it's saving grace is the cast. This cast is all so great, individually and collectively, that it easily elevates this movie to something worth talking about. Sometimes when you have a cast full of great actors and famous people, you wonder why they are all a part of the ensemble when only one or two have a really great scene. But each actor here is blessed with at least one or two really great meaty scenes that let them shine individually. They also shine as a collective unit, working off each other with ease, helping to make each other's performances better.

While all the performances are great, two particularly stand out. And, despite what the media will tell you, it's not Hugh Jackman. Yes, he is good. Yes, he is intense. Yes, this movie mostly rides on his able shoulders. But, he's also a little over the top at times. The two stand outs, for me, are Paul Dano and Jake Gyllenhaal. Dano has been one of my favorite actors for quite some time. He's terribly underrated, I think, but also the only actor on the planet who can hold his own against Daniel Day-Lewis (See: There Will Be Blood). This is his second performance where he barely says a word of dialogue but somehow manages to steal just about every scene he is a part of. (The first was Little Miss Sunshine). Then there is Jake Gyllenhaal. Long gone is the puppy-dog eyed sad, little boy from movies like Bubble Boy and October Sky. His Detective Loki is all nervous ticks and anger and aggression behind the eyes. This is his single best performance to date, even better than his Oscar nominated performance for Brokeback Mountain.

So, for me, the best thing about Prisoners is the performances. The rest of it is just sort of cliche and mediocre. The only thing it really inspired in me is a desire to watch Zodiac again. So, I guess there's that.

Grade: B-

Away From Her, The Brave One

Away From Her - There's quite a few female performances that I've loved this year so far: Christina Ricci's fearless work in Black Snake Moan, Keri Russell's adorable/hilarious acting in Waitress, and Ashley Judd's perfection of a performance in Bug. But, I think the one performance that might actually get nominated for an Oscar is Julie Christie in Away From Her. She plays an Alzheimer's patient with such ravishing beauty and emotion. The fim follows her and husband Grant (Gordon Pinsent - more about him in a minute) of 44 years as they struggle with this sudden disease and how it affects their life together. This movie was written and directed by actress Sarah Polley and all I can say is, wow, what an emotional impact of a film coming from someone so young and so inexperienced as a director. This movie is actually quite surprising. The direction is simple and confident. The pace is slow and purposeful. We get to know and love these characters. At the core of the film is the tragic and powerful love story between Grant and Christie's Fiona. They've dealt with Grant's infidelity 20 years earlier and now are dealing with Fiona's dimentia. We watch Grant become the man he always wanted to be as Fiona slips farther and farther away from him. We also watch the fine line he walks as he realizes there are certain things that he must do to make her feel better that will just rip his heart into a million pieces. It's actually sort of a shame that Christie will probably be the one to the get the Oscar nomination come January. Not really a shame I guess, because Christie is just breathtaking to watch. But, really, Pinsent' portrayal of Grant is sterling as well. Pinsent is loving and adoring but also bewildered, stubborn and hopeful. Despite his frustration, he is constantly searching for understanding and resolve for the memories he has difficulty letting go of. It's all in his eyes. He's simply marvelous. And then there is Olympia Dukakis who has a small but crucial role as Marian. She's tough and smart, the wife of a man suffering from Alzheimers, who has accepted the fact that she really needs to just be happy. She should get nominated as well! Really, the film is just wonderful and one that will not easily be forgotten. Sarah Polley shows wonderful restraint and promise as a director. This film is a little bit tragic, a lot heartbreaking, but ultimately beautiful.

Grade: B+

The Brave One - Away From Her and The Brave One have only one thing in common: come February, the stars of these movies will probably be frontrunners for Best Actress at the Oscars. While Julie Christie and Jodie Foster might be battling it out then, the movies couldn't be more different. And choosing a better movie between these two is simple. Away From Her has more soul, emotion, heartache and beauty in 5 minutes than The Brave One has in the whole two hours. The Brave One doesn't exactly start out badly. In fact, the beginning is pretty damn good. But it progressively gets worse and worse until, at the end, it just completely falls apart into a pile of crap. As I said, The Brave One stars Jodie Foster as Erica Bane, a New York City DJ who, at the beginning, is happy and in love with her fiancee David, played by Lost star Naveen Andrews. But a random act of violence cuts their happy life together far too short when the lovers are beaten by some punks in Central Park. David dies. Erica lives... but her life is changed forever. Her life is overtaken by a fear of absolutley everything. She's afraid to leave the house. She's afraid of the footsteps she hears behind her. She's afraid of shadows and noises and just everything. So what does she do? Buys a gun. But she doesn't immediately seek revenge on the men who beat her fiancee to death. Instead, she turns vigalante and starts shooting people who are doing bad things in the city: murdering and robbing and raping. Some people think the Vigalante Killer is a blessing in disguise. Cops Terrence Howard and Nicky Katt disagree. Erica herself is torn up inside. After she kills for the first time, she walks with a new kind of swagger, cockiness and confidence. But, soon after she kills again she is throwing up in a bar bathroom and crying and wanting to turn herself in. It's Foster's relentless and fearless performance that keeps this movie alive. She's amazing to watch. She always has been and she always will be. She's got those beautiful blue eyes that just turn to steel when she needs them to. She's tough and she's icy, but completely vulnerable all at the same time. And she makes it look easy. She makes it look easier than easy. Her performance here will be nominated for an Oscar, for sure. There is no doubt in my mind. And she deserves it. It's just a shame that the movie around here couldn't be as good as she is. It's almost as if the screenwriter knew he had a solid first act and decided to sleepwalk his way through the rest of the script. The dialogue just becomes laughable. Howard holds his own with Foster and Katt breathes some much needed comedy into the whole thing but all of the other supporting actors just aren't up to par. By the time the ending comes around, you're tired and you're bored and you know what's going to happen. It's no surprise. And worst of all, the ending isn't even done well! It's a shame because Jodie really does deserve a better movie around her.

Grade: D+