In honor of Liam Neeson's (Schindler's List, The A-Team) birthday yesterday, I decided to watch his most recent film.  From director, Jaume Collet-Sera (The Shallows, Unknown, Orphan, House of Wax), comes another thriller starring Neeson in a lead role.  Collet-Sera's past collaborations with Neeson have been fun to watch and well-made.  Unfortunately, The Commuter falls short of the previous collaborations.  While the cinematography and filming techniques are exciting, the storyline drags down the film and often reduces the weight of the superbly acted roles.  

Of course, Neeson brings gravitas to his role.  Ever since the release of Taken, Neeson has become an amazingly realistic hero for the common people.  From saving his daughter to saving a whole airplane full of passengers, Neeson has perfected the role of action hero.  Once again, his acting stands out in The Commuter and he is surrounded by other good performances.  Vera Farmiga (Up in the Air, The Departed), Patrick Wilson (The Phantom of the Opera), Jonathan Banks (Mudbound, Gremlins), and Sam Neill (Hunt for the Wilderpeople, Jurassic Park​) round out the cast.  Every character is unique and important to the story as it progresses.

While the acting performances are good, the writing for the film struggles to create an impact for viewers.  At first, I was entranced with the plot as it started to unravel.  However, after the first half of the film there are major plot holes that open up.  We never get any sort of background for the main character because development is sacrificed for more action at the end of the film.  We are thrown into a situation without much meaning behind the actions that occur.  This leads to a final act that is merely disorganized and lackluster.  There are certain lines in the final act that are extremely cliche of past action thrillers.  The film becomes more of a cheesy blockbuster and less of an impactful story by the end of the screening.

The Bottom Line:  The Commuter tends to sacrifice a meaningful and organized plotline for more action towards the end of the film.  Liam Neeson once again acts the part, but the story holds very little weight for his character.

Score: 5.5/10

Image credit: ​By Karen Seto / ???? from Toronto, Canada - Toronto, Ontario, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5108817

If you like Spielberg's (Jurassic Park​) filmography, than I am certain that you will enjoy The Post.  The Post is a superb retelling of the struggle between the government and the press during the Vietnam War.  As a period piece set in the 70s, the setting is well-crafted and the costumes are fitting.  While the film isn't set in a time period too long ago, it is still clear that Spielberg's attention to detail forced him to use certain props and dialogues.  Every time we get to see the newspapers being printed, we get lost in the maze of the publishing facilities.  As someone who has never seen a newspaper company up close, I was astonished by the vastness of the Washington Post's offices.

As always, Spielberg brings us an all-star cast including Meryl Streep (August: Osage County, The Devil Wears Prada, Into the Woods), Tom Hanks (Forrest Gump, Saving Private Ryan), Bob Odenkirk (Nebraska), Bruce Greenwood (Star Trek), Sarah Paulson (12 Years a Slave, Carol), and countless other names.  Streep and Hanks are perfect in every scene and the other actors also seem to fit in their respective roles at all times.  Nothing seemed to stand out overwhelmingly, but it is hard to get a real standout performance from a lot of these actors because they are always great.

Throughout the first half of the film, everything flows and the script is clever.  Unfortunately, the final portion of the film runs dry because of the built-in applaud pauses.  When I saw the film, there were certain points where the audience applauded.  Depending on the moment I am usually okay with some applauding during a film, but these moments felt too formulaic.  They were preachy and at times I felt as though I was being converted into the Church of Spielberg.  Clearly, the film wanted to connect the past events with present events.  However, it is easy to make this connection without Spielberg choosing to spell it out in the last quarter of the film.

The Bottom Line: Spielberg brings another impactful past event to the big screen and capably connects it to current politics through an all-star cast.

Score: 7.5/10

From the visionary director that brought us Pan's Labyrinth comes another creepy and yet heartwarming film.  The Shape of Water is a lovely portrayal of a forbidden love between a creature and a human.  The plotline is spectacular, balancing the heavy-hitting politics of communist Russia and the United States in the 1960s and the science-fiction creature that drives the love story forward.  The tone is classy, with a jazz-inspired score that brings the audience back to the 60s.  The story is relatable to any time period, but the 60s backdrop makes it even more interesting.

Guillermo del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth, Hellboy, Pacific Rim) never ceases to create beautiful effects for his visionary films.  The imagery throughout The Shape of Water is consistently fluid and spectacular.  There is one scene where we get to see two raindrops dance around on a bus window, acting as a metaphor for the story unfolding on screen.  There is blood and gore involved, but only the necessary amount for us to enter the world that the screenwriters have created.  This is not a film for children, but for a mature audience that can handle the darkness of a spy thriller and the nudity that comes with a full love story.  To gently push the audience through the film, Alexandre Desplat (The King's Speech, Argo, The Queen, Philomena) contributes a smooth score that juggles between intensity and charm.  The orchestral score fits with every single scene, settling and unsettling the audience at certain times.

I would go amiss without acknowledging the cast members that bring the story to life.  Sally Hawkins (Blue Jasmine) easily gives the best performance of the year with her portrayal of a mute janitor.  While she cannot talk, there is emotion behind every sign that she gives.  Alongside Hawkins, Doug Jones (Hellboy, Pan's Labyrinth) plays a fantastic sea monster.  Rounding out the cast, Michael Shannon (Midnight Special) is a scarily bigoted villain.  This is the big bad role that Shannon has perfected throughout his career.  Finally, the support for the main roles are brought to the screen by three well-seasoned actors.  Octavia Spencer (Fruitvale Station), Richard Jenkins (Step Brothers), and Michael Stuhlbarg (Call Me by Your Name​) are all great additions to the film.  Overall, this is a top-notch cast brought together to create a top-notch film.

The Bottom Line: The Shape of Water certainly deserves all of the Oscar-buzz that it is receiving because of its tender and yet unsettling approach at a love story.

Score: 9.7/10

Image credit: ​By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=54631984

Call Me by Your Name is a slow-burning coming-of-age story with bold direction and stunning performances.  Luca Guadagnino (I Am Love) brings out the best of Armie Hammer (The Social Network) and Timothee Chalamet (Interstellar, Lady Bird), with this realistic and yet unique love story.  The first half of the film flies by with a clever script that plays Oliver and Elio off of each other perfectly.  These two intelligent characters are fun to watch when they are alone and together.  As they often try to outsmart each other, they notice their similarities.  There is a purity in their relationship that is hard to describe on paper, but Hammer and Chalamet create the relationship with gravitas.

Focusing on passion, the film also uses an interesting soundtrack to progress the storyline.  A blend of classical music and modern indie tunes composed by Sufjan Stevens tie character thoughts to the audience perspectives. The characters are deeply intellectual and the music brings us into their world at certain instances.  The soundtrack also gives us sweet and haunting melodies to portray the romance that unravels over time.

While I enjoyed this movie, I think that there is a drop-off point between the first and second half.  The first half has a fun script that kept me engaged with the characters during my first viewing of the film.  However, the second half slows down to focus more on the intimate relationship between Oliver and Elio.  We no longer get a good amount of the crisp and engaging commentary from Elio and Oliver, which is what really built their relationship.  There is one scene towards the end between Chalamet and Michael Stuhlbarg (A Serious Man​) that is powerfully written, but aside from that there is a dramatic change in tone for the second half.  Yet, there is plenty to enjoy with these characters and I look forward to the Oscar nominations that the film will clinch.

The Bottom Line: Call Me by Your Name is a pure film filled with intimate detail and engaging characters.

Score: 9.3/10

Image credit: ​By Franz Richter (User:FRZ) - Own work (taken with Nikon D60 SLR), CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=56267295

The Age of Shadows is a simple cat-and-mouse chase film with a lot of details that become confusing at times.  As a whole, the film is very enjoyable and extremely well-shot.  From acclaimed Korean director, Jee-woon Kim (The Good the Bad the Weird), comes this thrilling and constantly progressing story involving cops, a resistance group, and untrustworthy spies.  These three elements make for an intriguing story full of twists and turns.  At a runtime of two hours and twenty minutes, the film never gets muddled down or boring.  The directing and shot choices keep every scene fresh and vibrant, forcing our eyes to never look away from the screen.

While the shots are clear and concise, there are certain pacing choices that could have been better executed.  At times, the setting jumps from one place to another in an instant.  Because of the constant setting changes, I found myself lost on occasion and was left trying to figure out what happened between the filming locations.  There is one scene that occurs at a nunnery, but it is hard to figure out who is at the nunnery at the time and how they leave the nunnery.  The transitions are fluid, but not detailed enough to explain what is occurring between scenes.  

The main plotline was easy to follow, with corruption and two-faced protagonists leading the charge.  Yet, there are a few subplots that are harder to comprehend and might require a second screening of the film to completely understand.  Yoo Gong (Train to Busan), Kang-ho Song (The Host, Snowpiercer), and Byung-hun Lee (A Bittersweet Life​) are all brilliant in their respective roles.  It is often hard to figure out their characters's allegiances, but that is a huge part of the storyline.  Often times Korean films include overly cheesy characters, creating comic relief for the story.  Yet, I usually find that these characters detract from the seriousness of the genre.  Luckily, there are no such characters in this award-level film.

The Bottom Line: The Age of Shadows is an enjoyable Korean cat-and-mouse chase story, filled with untrustable characters and exciting camera shots.

Score: 9.4/10

Image credit: ​By wasabcon - http://wasabcon.tistory.com/621, CC BY 2.0 kr, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31364107

Your Name is one of the most beautiful movies I have seen in quite some time.  The story is touching, the visuals are awe-inspiring, and the music is catchy as heck.  Upon a first viewing, I understand the main idea without being able to fully place all of the details.  Your Name is a film that takes multiple viewings to comprehend the complexity of the storyline.  Without going into too much detail, the timeline is hard to follow right off the bat, but I am sure that there are very few flaws (if any) in this film.  There is a lot going on all at once, but the main storyline leaves room for discussion after viewing.  Every good film should leave room for discussion after the story is resolved, and Your Name leaves plenty of ideas hanging around in our minds.

Makoto Shinkai's (5 Centimeters Per Second) direction brings us beautiful visuals to guide us along the story's journey.  Every line drawn is thoughtful and concise.  The precision of animation in this film is reminiscent of Miyazaki's (Spirited Away) works.  In fact, Shinkai might be the next Miyazaki.  As someone who knows almost nothing about animation, it is still clear to me that the team behind this film spent long hours in its creation.  While there are plenty of Pixar and Disney films with good animation, nothing that I have seen from American studios can compare to this form.

I would go completely amiss without discussing the soundtrack for this film as well.  RADWIMPS's indie rock soundtrack brings the viewer back to their childhood with a punk edge added in.  Often times, the beauty of the film is complimented by the soundtrack's sweetness.  Some of the lyrics do not translate well into the subtitles, but I'll be damned if the sounds are not a perfect match to the visuals.  I have been waiting a long time to view this film after it's release because I missed it in theaters.  While I waited, I had to check out the soundtrack that all of my friends have been raving about.  At the very least, listen to the soundtrack as it pulls you into a foreign world, full of jaw-dropping inspiration and beauty.  For starters check out the song, "Sparkle".

The Bottom Line:  Shinkai's animated masterpiece will be cherished for a long time because of it's beauty and complexity.

Score: 10/10 (This is my first 10/10 since Swiss Army Man)

This film is truly special and unique to Martin McDonagh's (In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths) well-crafted genre.  McDonagh's films are hard to compare with others because they come with a full serving of drama and a good amount of comedic sides.  While it might be hard to digest everything going on upon a single screening of Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, there is plenty left for our cinematic tastebuds to indulge in this film many more times.

It takes really smart writing to create such deeply dumb and interesting characters.  The trio of McDormand (Fargo, Almost Famous), Harrelson (No Country for Old Men, Zombieland), and Rockwell (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Green Mile) brings acting perfection with some of the most underrated actors of our time.  After Fargo, it seems as though McDormand had been forgotten for a while.  Yet, her portrayal of Mildred is spot-on with the dark tone of McDonagh's direction.  After the death of her daughter, Mildred has a hardened heart and is looking for her own definition of justice.  One of her targets is the police chief of the town, played by Woody Harrelson.  Harrelson brings the only respectable character to life with twists and turns that will surprise first-time McDonagh-ers.

While Harrelson and McDormand are great in their roles, my favorite part of the movie would have to be Officer Dixon (played by Sam Rockwell).  Rockwell is fantastic in his role as the dumb and conflicted officer.  His character is relevant to modern news stories, and is a portrait of many issues with America's police force.  Without going into too much detail, I will say that there are a lot of interesting aspects on this character's journey.

Of course, it wouldn't be a McDonagh movie without a thin balance between darkness and comedy.  While the script-writing is not quite as solid as In Bruges, it is damn-near close.  One-liners often dominate the film, creating an uncomfortable awkwardness in the theater.  Personally, I love when directors drag audiences into an uncomfortable tone.  Good filmmaking does not have to be happy and joyous, as long as the audience is able to ponder what they are watching and the message being sent through the medium.  

The Bottom Line:  So far, this is my favorite film of 2017 because of the solid screenwriting and intriguing tone portrayed by every single character.

Score: 9.8/10

Image credit: ​By Dixiekin - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49330101

Tom Cruise (Top Gun) breaks away from his Mission Impossible franchise to bring us a film that probably didn't require the dangerous stunts that his fans are used to.  Even without him hanging off of the side of a plane, fans can enjoy this brisk-paced action/drama flick.  From the very get-go, this film flies by without any stop in the action.  The opening credits prepare us for the winding journey that we are about to take with Barry Seal.  I was completely unfamiliar with this story going in and found every twist and turn to be surprising and, for the most part, unpredictable.

Something even more unpredictable about this flick is Doug Liman's (The Bourne Identity, Edge of Tomorrow) superb directing.  Liman's past filmography is wishy-washy, and mostly includes shallow action films.  Liman's creativity behind the camera helps to progress this story, with varying shots and photography.  The film goes from extreme close-ups to landscape shots in an instant, never ceasing to bring a spectacular image to the viewer.  Found footage brings unfamiliar viewers (such as myself) into the past time period.  So far, this is my favorite of Liman's films because the direction clearly leads the storyline.  While we are constantly thrown forward in years, it's hard to get lost or confused about the plot.

In terms of acting, Tom Cruise and Domhnall Gleeson (Ex Machina, The Revenant, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2) give bring the energy to their respective roles.  Cruise may be typecast as this point, but I'll be damned if he doesn't play the action hero part well.  Even without huge stunt productions, it's hard to avert your eyes from Cruise piloting a plane.  I will admit that it is still hard for me to take Domhnall Gleeson completely seriously because of that one big franchise he was in as a child, but he is definitely maturing into more serious roles.  I foresee more big roles being thrown Gleeson's way after his success this year.

The Bottom Line: Liman brings on the action at a fast pace and a time period that many moviegoers weren't alive to witness.

Score: 9.3/10

Once again, Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Inception, Interstellar) reminds us that war is a very scary thing with his new feature film.  Of course, it would not be a Nolan film without a few twists and turns in the storytelling method.  Rather than focusing on a perfectly linear storyline, Nolan chooses to give the audience bits and pieces of multiple events that are going on at roughly the same time.  While his method is effective in creating the chaos that war ensures, the film often feels cluttered and somewhat hard to follow.

Each character has a role in the war, but we are never given much development or background for any of them.  There are quite a few notable actors that are capable of grand performances, but the script seems to hold them back at times.  Kenneth Branagh (Valkyrie), Cillian Murphy (Inception, The Dark Knight), Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies, The Other Boleyn Girl), and Tom Hardy (Mad Max: Fury Road, Inception, The Dark Knight Rises, The Revenant) round out the star-studded cast.  Former One Direction member, Harry Styles, also joins the acting realm in Dunkirk​.  However, none of them give a jaw-dropping performance for audiences to connect with.    It seems as though Nolan really wanted to focus on the action, rather than the characters.  I can understand his direction in terms of creating a war film, yet it feels weaker than most (if not all) of Nolan's past films.

Technically, this film is a fantastic addition to Nolan's filmography.  The action is intense, with unpredictable war sequences and constantly evolving events.  While I have never been through a war, I imagine that this film portrays what it would be like very effectively.  To add to the intensity, Hans Zimmer (Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, The Dark Knight, The Lion King, Inception​) creates another score for Nolan.  Similarly to the score of Inception, Zimmer cleverly meters his score so that it swells with the action.  The pomp and circumstance of the score also reminds us of where the events are taking place.  This is a truly symphonic composition that fits into a classical film score genre.  Surely, we will be seeing an Oscar nomination for the constantly running film score. 

The Bottom Line:  As a war film, Dunkirk is a masterpiece for the eyes and ears.  Although, it does lack the intriguing character development that previous Christopher Nolan films have.

Score: 9.4/10

Image credit: ​By Photograph by Richard Goldschmidt, www.piqtured.comDerivative by Keraunoscopia - Derived from File:Christopher Nolan, London, 2013.jpg, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=26638525

Matt Reeves (Let Me In) concludes the Planet of the Apes reboot trilogy with a long-winded and riveting piece of blockbuster-cinema.  War for the Planet of the Apes does what a lot of trilogies cannot, which is end on a high note.  All three of the films in the franchise are good, but War for the Planet of the Apes is easily the best installment.  Andy Serkis (The Lord of the Rings) clearly worked hard on his portrayal of the lead-ape, Caeser.  The trilogy centered around his character and audiences can relate to him more than they can relate to their own species.  

The linear storytelling that War for the Planet of the Apes uses works well for the blockbuster.  The story never dulls or slows down.  Rather, it constantly progresses with new revelations about certain characters.  Every character in the film has a background that is relevant to the story.  Caeser, Maurice, Rocket, and Luca return with new developments in their storylines.  However, we also get a lot of fresh characters to connect with.  Bad Ape, Nova, and The Colonel add different ideas and backgrounds to create an original story.  

As Caeser, Andy Serkis once again stuns audiences with his performance capture.  There is nobody better at performance capture than Serkis.  Every movement he makes is authentic and believable.  These are not the sub-par effects that partially ruined the Star Wars prequels.  As one of the few human characters at the center of the story, Woody Harrelson's (No Country for Old Men, Zombieland) performance is also fantastic.  This is a fitting role for him to portray as a villain with a deeper background than the surface shows.  Throughout the film, he gives chilling speeches that remind us of current human ideologies.

As a whole, the story is unique to the rebooted series.  Of course, there is a war going on between humans and apes.  Yet, there are other things going on as well.  The movie is not as simple as the title makes it seem.  Matt Reeves and his writing crew clearly did not want this film to be a summer blockbuster with meaningless explosions and shallow characters.  The conclusion of the film is emotional because of how well-built the characters are.  I would love to go on another adventure with these characters and hope that Serkis can find the time to advocate for another installment.

The Bottom Line:  War for the Planet of the Apes is a thoroughly-crafted blockbuster conclusion to the new Planet of the Apes trilogy.

Score: 9.5/10

Image credit: ​By Gerald Geronimo, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15934608