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

Rebooting film franchises can be a tough journey for filmmakers because of the repetitive nature of reworking an original storyline.  Recent reboots have been decent and Rise of the Planet of the Apes is no exception.  Admittedly, I have not seen any of the original Planet of the Apes films.  Yet, I feel as though the premise is well-explained in the first installment of the new trilogy.  When I saw this film the year it was released, I thought that it was slow and at times boring.  However upon re-watching the film, I realize that the dull moments are still necessary for the future of the franchise.

Many of James Franco's (127 Hours, Spider-Man, This Is the End) acting roles before this film were cheesy and hard to take seriously.  Coming off of the disappointing end to the Spider-Man trilogy, Franco re-establishes himself as a serious actor in Rise of the Planet of the Apes.  Franco's depiction of Will Rodman stands out as an emotional portrayal of a moral human, which is hard to come by in this franchise.  Rupert Wyatt (The Escapist) cleverly sets up two warring parties, often times making the audience question if human actions are good or bad.  The film made me cringe and PETA might take issues with the realistic abuse of CGI animals.

The greatest moments of this film occur whenever Caeser walks across the screen.  The CGI looks extremely realistic, bringing the audience into the center of the storyline.  As a master of performance capture, Andy Serkis (​The Lord of the Rings) once again brings a computer generated image to life.  It is impossible to tell that the apes are not real.  Clearly, this is not a man dressed as an ape.  Overall, the special effects are jaw-dropping and as the franchise continues, the effects keep getting better and better.  Although there are only a few action sequences throughout the film, they are perfected and never overdone.  

The Bottom Line:  While Rise of the Planet of the Apes is not the explosive blockbuster that audiences may have hoped for, it does set the franchise up for successful future installments.

Score: 7/10  

Image credit: ​By Partha Sarathi Nath - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49728224

Before I went into this movie, I had a basic idea of the tone that Brett Haley would be going for.  The audience around me was older, which is seemingly Haley's target audience.  Based on my previous viewing of I'll See You In My Dreams at SIFF 2015, I expected something similar.  Just as I'll See You In My Dreams nearly invoked me into a trance, The Hero is an equally draggy and inactive film.  This film would play better in a nursing home than it would on the big screen.

The film has a star-studded cast, but never takes off.  The only exciting part of this film is the pleasure of listening to Sam Elliott's (Hulk, Up in the Air) voice for an hour and a half.  The cast is not bad, but the writing is just so-so.  There are a few chuckles here and there, but nothing too clever pops up.  The subject matter is deep and clearly relatable for older actors, but I never felt the connection to Elliott's character that I should have.  There is only one or two emotional scenes in the film, which had the potential of being a tearjerker.  Krysten Ritter (Jessica Jones, Breaking Bad), Laura Prepon (The Girl on the Train, Orange is the New Black), and Nick Offerman (Parks and Recreation, The Founder​) do a decent job in their respective roles, but feel interchangeable.  Any actors in similar age groups could have portrayed these characters.

Another problem that I had with the film was the dull color palette.  Haley basically replicates the palette from his previous work, sacrificing creativity for reality.  If the color palette were a bit more exciting, my eyelids wouldn't have felt so heavy.  At times, flashbacks try to bring the audience into the perspective of Elliott's character.  Yet, these deeply symbolic flashbacks are vague and uninteresting.  The symbolism is easy to figure out, mostly involving aging and death.  It feels as if this film has been made too many times before.

The Bottom Line:  The film subject and slow story drags down the acting abilities that Sam Elliott fans have become accustomed to.

Score: 6/10 

Bong Joon-ho (Snowpiercer, The Host) has built a vastly successful filmography for himself, and this film is no exception.  The first film that I watched by him was The Host, which turned out to be an interesting thriller/horror.  Yet, Joon-ho never fails to add comedy to his films, creating a wholly original tone.  He has created his own genre, which meshes a whole bunch of different genres into one.  Unfortunately, I thought that this detracted a bit from Okja because it was too slapsticky.

Joon-ho's film tone is so odd that it often catches me off-guard, making me fall out of the film's message.  If there was not any comedy in Okja, I would value the message a lot more.  While most of the acting is fantastic, I am still pondering what Joon-ho was doing with Jake Gyllenhaal's (Donnie Darko, Nightcrawler) character.  As Johnny Wilcox, Gyllenhaal goes way overboard with his voice and eccentric attitude.  This is one of the worst roles I have seen in a Joon-ho film.  Clearly, Joon-ho wanted Gyllenhaal to be a comic relief for the dark subject matter, but he really is too much.

Luckily, the rest of the acting is more serious and deserving of praise.  I loved Paul Dano's role as a vegetarian rebel leader.  Dano seems to have struck gold with his recent successes in diverse roles ranging from Prisoners to Swiss Army Man.  Tilda Swinton's (Adaptation., Doctor Strange)  character is similar to her character in Snowpiercer, which is fun to watch but really odd at the same time.  My favorite casting choice for the film would have to be Seo-Hyun Ahn (The Housemaid​) as Mija.  Mija is a stubborn, but also innocent character which Ahn portrays perfectly.  I'm glad that less familiar foreign actors and actresses are finally making their way to American audiences! 

With the quirkiness of the characters and subject matter, the cinematography and CGI effects are still beautiful.  The first quarter of the film is a broad image of a Korean countryside where Okja and Mija live.  The shots are epic and open space fills the screen with natural beauty.  When we move into the city, Joon-ho maintains his grand film scale.  The action sequences are fluid and every shot is worthwhile.  Of course, Okja has no noticeable flaws.  The super pig graces the screen as if it is an actual giant pig.

The Bottom Line:  Although the tone is a bit quirkier than usual, Bong Joon-ho maintains his filmography with another pressing subject.

Score: 6.5/10

Image credit: ​By Georges Biard, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=59614492

After hearing about the success of this film in the festival circuit, I had to check it out myself.  I, Daniel Blake is a story about friendship and love.  The film is predictable and familiar, but still intriguing with a good storyline.  The titular character is a sad image for audiences that can connect with the complex topic.  Daniel Blake struggles to receive state welfare after obtaining an injury from a previous job.  The main reason why he cannot get what he needs is because of regulations towards the welfare state.  Without going into too much detail, watching Blake's struggle with money starts off as a depressingly bleak look at current economic policies.  Luckily, we get to watch Blake connect with other characters to share his optimistic outlook on life.

Dave Johns (Daniel Blake) and Hayley Squires (Katie) are a great duo, constantly bringing emotion into their roles.  There is a scene in this film that reminds me of the emotion brought up in the argument between Casey Affleck and Michelle Williams in Manchester By The Sea.  If you don't like slow character development, then this movie might not be for you.  There is not a lot of action and crazy things rushing around the screen, but there is the subtlety of emotion provided by the cast.  I had not seen a film from Ken Loach (The Wind That Shakes the Barley) before this one, and I'm interested in watching more of his works now. 

The film is very heavily British and sometimes hard to understand because of its foreignness to American audiences.  I would recommend seeing it with subtitles because I would have missed a lot of dialogue without them.  Some research on the British healthcare system might also work in the viewer's favor, but it is not necessary if you have a basic understanding of the welfare system.  Furthermore, a general outline of the film is predictable for this genre.  There are no real twists in the film, with the typical dramatic themes that Paul Laverty (The Wind That Shakes the Barley​) chooses to follow. 

The Bottom Line:  While this film is well-acted and quite emotional, it is predictable to viewers that are familiar with the genre and style of this filmmaking.

Score: 7/10

James Ponsoldt (The Spectacular Now, The End of the Tour) returns with this new film about the evolution of the digital age.  Ponsoldt's previous films were more focused on life itself, but now he has taken his turn at displaying the influence of modern technology.  The topic has been dealt with many times in the past few years, so The Circle halts to contain a wholly original storyline.  However, I was still shocked by a lot of the content and situations that the main characters witness.  For a generation that is constantly plugged in, the conglomeration of camera footage invading privacy does not seem too far off.  After all, data mining is already occurring and gaining more transparency.

While the film delves into this deep subject, audiences get to enjoy the performances of professional actors.  Emma Watson (Harry Potter) is authentic even after the release of her giant Disney blockbuster.  She is vastly different in this role, showing that she is capable of taking on diverse parts.  It is nice to see smaller actors such as John Boyega (Star Wars: The Force Awakens) and Ellar Coltrane (Boyhood) also involved in this project.  Both Boyega and Coltrane bring genuine characters to the screen.

Of course, the big names in this cast created the early buzz for the film.  Patton Oswalt (Ratatouille, Young Adult) and Tom Hanks (Saving Private Ryan, Forrest Gump) act well in their roles, but unfortunately there is not enough screen time for either of them.  To me, their characters were the most interesting aside from Watson's.  Hanks plays a big business CEO who at first seems like a morally inspiring character, but later turns into something else.  As always, his dialogue keeps my ears attentive and the words roll right off of his tongue.  He is one of the greatest actors ever, but was wasted a bit in this film.

Another issue I had with The Circle has to do with the timing of events.  Everything moves too quickly without a lot of time for the audience to understand what is going on.  The overall concept for the film is simplistic, but the nitty gritty details could have made the subject matter more interesting and different from previous takes on privacy and modern technology.  All of the build-up continues until the very end, where we are left with an unsatisfying finish.  It's as if Ponsoldt never really finished the film.  At the end, the credits start to roll and the audience has no idea what happens.  Often times I can live with that, but this just felt unfinished and sloppy.

The Bottom Line:  Overall The Circle includes good acting and an interesting subject, but several filmmaking choices leave room for perfection.

Score: 6.5/10

Image credit: ​By Georges Biard, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=21288731