Gone Girl (2014)

Gillian Flynn's 2012 mystery novel is masterfully intricate and deeply layered. It turns out Flynn is just as talented at writing for the screen as she is writing novels and she and director David Fincher (both with an apparent predilection for dark mysteries) team up to create this delightfully haunting adaption. Similarly to my experience with previous Fincher films, I was floored. And really concerned for my safety on my drive home. And had me rethinking my life plan to ever get married.

On the day of his fifth wedding anniversary, Nick Dunne's wife Amy (Ben Affleck & Rosamund Pike) goes missing. Her disappearance triggers a lot of press coverage and the further the police investigate the more suspicious details are uncovered. Police investigators (lead by the beautifully understated Kim Dickens) try to remain objective but soon the evidence all seems to point to Nick. His awkward camera behavior doesn't help his image and soon enough the public as well as the police are turned against him. This creates an interesting view into how the public's perception of a story can influence the way it unfolds. No one ever openly suggests that Nick has any hand in her disappearance until the pressure amounts to such that Nick counters, "I did not kill my wife." Whatever reserved suspicion I had at the beginning of the movie towards Nick turns up to full capacity with that quip. But ultimately his conduct - though shady - is not what garners the audience's suspicion, but the way the press perceives and interprets his conduct.

Amy is still a recurring presence throughout the movie as the narrative of the investigation is juxtaposed with flashbacks via Amy's diary entries. Amy narrates us through significant milestones in their romance and the beginnings of an unraveling marriage. For a character who is supposed to be missing, Amy is still very much a part of this story. It's her story that she is passive-aggressively orchestrating. With every new flash back, this dark and sexy mystery gets even more complicated. It's a storybook romance (complete with sugar-kisses) that crashes and burns and gets crazy in the worst possible way. Happily ever after turns sinister when *spoilers* "Amazing Amy" goes from doe-eyed princess to a manipulative sociopath.

I've got to say that I have never thought much of Rosamund Pike in the past, but she is absolutely phenomenal in this role. "Gone Girl" is so fun because it's full of surprises. I'll talk about Fincher's hand in this later, but Amy's character arc is the main feature on this crazy ride. Pike embodies this fascinating and jawdropping-ly manipulative character with a commanding and powerful air. Her eyes tell the story, but even her eyes conceal some amount of the truth. Nothing she says can be taken at face value and you don't realize it until she's driving down the highway tossing pens out the window. Her conduct is appalling, unbelievable and unpredictable in the most unsettling way. This type of erratic behavior is hard to capture on screen but Pike does so without flaw and with a disturbing realism. It's not very often where I don't spot a twist that significant coming, and Pike certainly deserves an Oscar nom for her sick manipulation of the characters and the audience.

Of course, this is no unfamiliar territory to the director of "Fight Club," "Zodiac" and "The Girl with a Dragon Tattoo." When I go into a Fincher movie I have come to expect to walk out feeling like I have just been on a roller coaster ride. I mean this mentally and emotionally but also physically. "Gone Girl" pushed this idea to new extremes as I exited the theater feeling actually nauseous - it was that unsettling. Part of this comes from my already building fear of marriage and I would be lying if I said it didn't totally freak me out that you could know someone for over 5 years and still not know that they are psychotic. But it's not just the idea that is creepy, it's the tone, the dark cinematography and the unnerving music that chilled me to the very core.

On another note, the casting choices were impeccable. Though Rosamund Pike's performance is the stand out, every other pick was spot on. This is by far my favorite Ben Affleck role and he delivers in such a way as to invoke both suspicion and sympathy. His careful, subdued performance is a good complement for Pike. Other stand out performances include Carrie Coon as Nick's loyal sister, Neil Patrick Harris as Amy's stalker ex Desi (should have taken Barney Stinson's advice on the crazy/hot scale) and Tyler Perry as Nick's lawyer. Perry is certainly the most surprising casting choice, but he is a treat to watch.

Just when you think the craziness must be over, the end throws you for a final loop (again with the nausea thing - and really it feels like our roller coaster ride reached an unfinished track and we were jettisoned off the side to crash). As unhappy as the end is, and though the catharsis seems little and dissatisfying, I can't picture it ending any differently. "Gone Girl" gave me what I expected and more, with every scene and every new character introduced I was thrown for a loop and I couldn't help but think that Fincher was having the time of his life keeping us guessing. I cannot remember a time where I have finished a movie feeling so disturbed - yet I still wanted more. And there's something to be said for that. 9/10

The Adjustment Bureau (2011)

The greatest disappointment was the gross lack of Chuck Norris jokes…

David Norris (see what I mean? oh, and Matt Damon), with the charming smile in one pocket and a sketchy past in the other, rises from his grungy upbringing to run for Senator of New York.  Elise Sellas (Emily Blunt) is a professional ballet dancer, spunky and sassy.  After Norris is slaughtered in the election, he stumbles upon Elise in the men’s room (oh, it’s cool, she’s just hiding from security after crashing a wedding).  Their chemistry is fizzling instantly, and their spontaneous kiss is magical.  Her fire and spirit inspire David to give the best speech of his career – catapulting him to a lead in the next election.

The next day, after failing to spill his coffee according to some agenda that a fairly attractive, skinny black man in a hat (Anthony Mackle) is in charge of, he runs into Elise again.  But that wasn’t supposed to happen.  He was never supposed to see her again.  He was never supposed to arrive at work when he did.

More men in hats confront David.  They explain some religious hoo-dah about “men upstairs,” “the chairman,” life-plans that keep the universe in check, human-beings can’t make decisions… stuff like that.  They swear David to secrecy about their existence, otherwise he gets some serious “reset” lobotomy, oh, and he can never have Elise.

Even three years later when chance takes over and he bumps into her again.  It’s not according to plan.  But then this Thompson dude (Terence Stamp) ups the ante.  If they get together, David will never be president, and Elise will never have the dance career that she would have had.  And he decides to show his omnipotence by forcing a sprained ankle on Elise.  David is faced with following his heart vs. following destiny.

Superb premise.  Once things got cooking in the bathroom I was hooked.  Men with hats observing from above, stalking a potential presidential candidate.  The whole thing with the coffee spilling at 7:05 or the world keels over is pretty awesome.  My first question (of many): are we all observed?  The entire bureau seems to focus all efforts on these TWO people.  I mean, that’s cool, that’s a movie, but they barely put forth the effort to make it look like they observed anyone else at all.  The “big reveal” or whatever missed the opportunity to make this look like a universal organization, encompassing every human being who missteps.  Oh well.

Free agency vs. pre-determined destiny.  Being religious myself, these underlying themes are fascinating.  While many believe “the chairman” to be God as we know him, I think of this chairman dude as being a lot more like the devil.  Obviously this isn’t the real world, and in this real world I do choose to believe that God is watching over upstairs.  But he doesn’t intervene in our affairs like those in The Adjustment Bureau do, he gave us choice.  Satan, the devil, or whatever, wouldn’t give us that choice.  And that makes us slaves to him.  This is a dystopian society, and things AREN’T supposed to be like that.

Which is where my main problem comes from.  (Sorry for the religious rant in there, bee-tee-dubs.  I couldn’t help it).  Spoilers.  After all their cat and dog antics, David determines his decision.  He wants to be with Elise no matter the cost.  His decision is made and no “chairman” is going to tell him what to do.  So, in an escapade of brilliance, he and Elise depart hand in hand to confront the man who writes the plans, since no one else seems to know why they can’t be together.

Call me a realist, but I wanted there to be a face to the responsibility.  I’m so pleased that this dude came to his humane side and changed the plan just for them to be together.  He’s a real sweetheart.  But, as anticlimactic as it is, I wanted some kind of confrontation between the good guys and the messed-in-the-heads.  Some big speech about letting us choose our destiny, no one can force us to do anything blabbity blah.  But instead, we get some immediate resolution between Elise and David’s story… and nothing for the bigger picture.  What happens to the next person who unknowingly never meets the person of their dreams?  The future remains sadly unaffected and I guess I had a problem with that.

Anyways.

Matt Damon and Emily Blunt are a fantastic duo, and I knew that would be so two years ago when I first HEARD about this movie.  I’m not even going to attempt to deny my girl-crush on Emily Blunt, she’s a terribly versatile actress and I’ll bank on any film of hers nowadays.  And, well, who doesn’t love everybody’s man Matt Damon.

The theme and mood of the film is a perfect balance between drama and adventurous excitement.  The music is a wonderful accompaniment to the mood, Thomas Newman is a stud.  The pace too was captivating the entire way (though perhaps with one too many jumps to the future), and I was intrigued until the end with its outcome.  It’s a thinker, and everyone knows that I dig that kind thing.

And again, the plot itself was original and fantastically enthralling.  Walking through doors, super hats, men in suits nonchalantly controlling everything.  Though it perhaps didn’t achieve its potential, it is still worth the watch and an exciting ride.  7/10

Insomnia (2002)

So yeah, I’m doing a Liz Taylor marathon of sorts… but I’m also kinda going through some Chris Nolan movies.  Cuz he’s the mannnn.  After I saw Following I just had to watch Insomnia because I didn’t really remember it and it too was on Netflix.

So Insomnia is probably my least favorite of the Nolan flicks, but that doesn’t mean that I don’t like it or that it’s by any means a bad movie.  (We’re comparing this to Inception, Dark Knight, and Memento here…) It’s got a great cast (Al freaking Pacino is in it for heaven’s sake… along with Hilary Swank and Robin Williams, all Oscar winners) and still some epic Nolan-esque qualities (who freaking well NEEDS an Oscar).

Pacino plays Will Dormer, an acclaimed detective who hops it over with his partner Hap Eckhart (Martin Donovan) to Alaska to aid in an investigation of a murdered girl.  Dormer isn’t so squeaky clean – there’s an Internal Affairs investigation taking place in Los Angeles over one of his cases for potentially falsified evidence.  He ain’t afraid to use any method possible to find out what he wants or to win.  He and his partner aren’t exactly peachy-keen with each other, they argue over methods and Eckhart might even testify against Dormer.

Then there’s Ellie Burr (Swank), a young over-eager police officer fresh from the academy, and Dormer’s biggest fan.  She’s initially assigned to work with Dormer on the Kay Connell case.  Ya know, I like Hilary Swank.  I like girls that actually look fit and healthy rather than anorexically skinny (You know, The Next Karate Kid, Million Dollar Baby type girl).  She’s also a talented actress and I think she gives a pretty great performance in this.  She creates a character who subtly grows from her naïveté, it seems as natural as a real human being.

Alaska in the summer=the land of perpetual daylight.  It drives Dormer insane, how could anyone sleep in the daytime?  Oh wait it’s midnight already…  Have you ever had insomnia?  It’s awful.  I grew up having extreme difficulty falling asleep at night.  It was the worst in high school.  I’d just be there… on the bed… staring at the ceiling… I’d read a book for a few minutes, listen to music, or not listen to music, open the window, turn up the A/C, get a softer blanket, play a game on my phone, whatever.  It SUCKS.  Luckily I can survive with little sleep, and luckily I’d still manage to average around 5 hours.  Better than going straight through, like Dormer.  And I didn’t have a murder investigation on my mind…

Dormer goes crazy.  Light flashes, confusing memories, fuzzy vision, all that good stuff.  He’s also dealing with some heavy anxiety (murder and stuff tend to do that to ya).  He’s blinking away the fatigue whenever you look at him, willing his eyes to breath.  Al Pacino’s a beast.  He’s good in everything.  I don’t know how a man like that can stand to be so good at what he does, seriously.  But like I said, I know how insomnia goes and Al’s got it down.

It should also be noted that Robin Williams might give the best performance of the bunch, if you can believe it.  I won’t say much more about him, he’s a character best discovered by watching the movie.  I ain’t in the business of giving away too much.

But all I’ve really got to say about this movie is that, *cough cough* it’s Christopher Nolan.  Now here’s the real question – how can a guy like NOLAN survive knowing that he has a repertoire of pure genius sans exception.  What would it be like to be that legit?

Insomnia explores some crazy psychological deals.  Right and wrong, guilt, anxiety.  It’s also a good mystery.  Who killed Kay Connell, what’s Dormer’s deal, who’s the crazy guy that keeps calling Dormer (Robin Williams – no, that’s not the answer), etc.  It’s a thriller, not your standard thriller, but a thriller of the mind nonetheless.  It’s claustrophobic, he’s just sooooo tireddddd. I’d love to watch the original Norwegian version – it sounds a little more hardcore than this.  But by its own merits, Insomnia is great.  Another 50 points for team Nolan.  8/10

Following (1998)

So I think by this point everybody’s on board that Christopher Nolan is the bad ass of the times.  The best of the best, the leader of the pack, a movie-lover’s dream.  This is everybody’s man’s debut film.  Following is probably the most similar to Memento of any of his other movies, but it is also completely different in its own right.  It’s almost Hitchcock-esque.  Not quite so trippy as Inception, but still as gripping.  It’s a low-budget gem.

Following is, initially, about a man named Bill who follows people to pass the time.  He’s a writer, but has no current job, and wants to learn about human nature from his followees.  He had to set rules for himself though, so as not to become too obsessive or, like, perverted, and his most important rule of all was never to follow the same person twice.  But why set rules unless you can break them, eh?

He follows a man named Cobb.  (More than once).  But this mysterious, handsome man in a dark suit knows that our guy’s up to something and confronts him.  They talk, and share their stories.  Turns out Cobb’s a serial burglar, and he invites our man to go on some jobs with him.  These ain’t your run-of-the-mill-steal-the-jewelry-burglars, though.  Cobb’s more interested in the personal items of their victims.  ”Everyone has a box.”  He drinks their wine, rummages through photos, takes a few things here and there.  His intention is that “you take it away, show them what they had.”

They become partners, and Cobb shows the young man what’s up.  The young man starts some burglary projects of his own, changes his appearance, starts a relationship with a blonde femme-fatale.  Things spin out of control soon enough however.  Never follow someone twice, kids.

The chronology is similar to Memento.  Awesome.  It’s not as systematic as that, however (color real-time scenes, black & white backwards scenes, etc.)  But it’s still out of order, and possibly even awesome-r in this modern film noir.  Who would have thought that this method of storytelling would be so epic?  It can so effectively reveal the "what's-up" of a mystery.  This remains true for Following.  The big end wouldn’t be half as cool were it not for the messed up timeline.  Hats off to you, Chris.

Its length (just over an hour) and detached feel are strengths as well.  The only character credited with a name is Cobb.  This also felt like something Hitchcock would do (and did).  It’s very straightforward, and lacks strong emotion.  You learn the facts about the characters, you learn about the victims.  You can’t always feel what the young man is feeling, however.  It’s hard to describe, because it’s a character story, or study rather, but it still has this edgy, detached feel.

The incomprehensible small budget of just $6,000 is put to perfect use in the gritty underbelly of London.  Everything feels dirty, creepy, and mysterious.  The excellent photography combined with the scenery contributes to the suspense and ambiance.  The no-name cast is also excellent, Jeremy Theobald, Alex Haw, and Lucy Russell.  It’s a surprise to me that they did nothing else, they’re quite good in this – especially Alex Haw as Cobb.. and he doesn’t even have a Wikipedia page!

If you’re just hopping on the Chris Nolan bandwagon, I’d check this one out.  If you loved Memento, this is his father.  Following is another excellent film that credits Nolan as good as any other mainstream effort of his. 9/10

Family Plot (1976)

So there are worse movies that director Alfred Hitchcock could end his career on.  Family Plot is no Psycho, but it’s entertaining.

We’ve got two plot lines goin’ on: 1) A phony psychic/spiritualist lady, Madame Blanche Tyler (Barbara Harris), and her boyfriend George Lumley (Bruce Dern) are our main duo.  After a séance with an elderly millionaire, she offers Madame Blanche $10,000 to find a certain Edward Shoebridge, her long-lost nephew.

2) Eddie Shoebridge!  Or rather, Arthur Adamson (William Devane) and his girlfriend Fran (Karen Black).  They’re the kidnappin’, jewel-collecting, wanted couple. It starts getting interesting when the two paths begin to intersect through George’s investigation of the mysterious (and seemingly dead) Shoebridge.

From an historical standpoint, this movie is very interesting.  Hitchcock has created something with a much more modern edge when comparing it with his earlier classics – I’d go so far as to say that it doesn’t age as well.  The expletives give it a real 70′s feel though they still seem rather risque for Hitch and dare I say out of place.

There’s gotta be a word for this movie, and the word that comes to mind is… kooky.  Kooky characters, kooky grave yards, kooky plot, kooky psychics, kooky car chases… it’s just kooky!  But that isn’t a bad thing,  it still has many Hitchcockian qualities that raise it a level above mediocre.  There are some well crafted scenes, my favorite being the garage scene at the end though man, did you get a hold of that car chase?  It’s a lighthearted mystery much like his The Trouble With Harry.  If you’re a die hard Hitchcock fan, you should definitely see this.  I may even like it better than something like Foreign Correspondent and it’s definitely better than Topaz.  If you like plain ol’ 70′s movies, you might enjoy it as well.  If you don’t fall into either of these categories… I recommend this with reserves.

But really, it’s a riot.   A fine and satisfactory end to a magnificent career. 6/10

Stage Fright (1950)

Here be spoilers.  Yes, I did take that from IMDb.

As another lesser known Hitchcock, this movie is less suspense and more mystery.  We know that there’s something missing but we don’t know what.  Aspiring actress Eve Gill (Jane Wyman) is hopelessly in love with the undeserving Jon Cooper (Richard Todd), who is hopelessly in love with Charlotte Inwood, (Marlene Dietrich).  The movie opens with Eve driving Jon in what appears to be a “getaway car.”  Jon then gives Eve the lowdown, and the audience views his flashback.  Long story short, Charlotte killed her husband.  She comes to Jon for help with blood on her dress.  Jon is now the police’s lead suspect.  Eve brings Jon to her father’s house to hide out for the time being.  Her father suspects foul play on Charlotte’s part, insisting that the blood was deliberately placed on her dress (Jon still had it with him).  Eve decides to investigate.

For the sake of brevity, I’ll speed up the pace here.  Eve worms her way into working as Charlotte’s temporary maid hoping to squeeze a confession out of her to clear Jon’s name.  She becomes confused when she begins to have feelings for Investigator Wilfred “Ordinary” Smith (Michael Wilding).  There are some entertaining middle scenes, but Marlene Dietrich is the selling point.  The word that comes to mind when thinking of Dietrich is presence.  You could be in a room full of hundreds of people and Marlene Dietrich would stand out like red on white.  The instant she comes on screen the mood shifts – it’s all about her now.  She commands your attention without saying a word.

I can’t write this review without spoilers.  It’s nothing but an ordinary Hitch until the end.  You could say it’s an atypical Hitch because we don’t know the end… until the end!  For its time it’s fantastic.  Flashbacks are supposed to be gospel!  He cheated!  I have to admit, even I was surprised the first time.  Turns out the Jon did indeed kill Charlotte’s husband… what we saw was a lie.  Many were upset by this at its release, but I think it’s awesome.  What started as nothing more than a good story with good acting turned into something unique.  Hitchcock has no boundaries, and I love it.

The other elements of this movie pale in comparison to its twist ending, but they are commendable nonetheless.  The entire cast gives good performances.  The dialogue is entertaining, and Hitchcock’s staple humor adds fun color to the mystery.  I have to laugh at Patricia Hitchcock’s cameo – who would place their daughter in their film and name her “Chubby?”  Sad, sad days…

Much like I Confess, this lesser known should get more attention. 8/10