Arrival (2016)

*major spoilers lie ahead

Denis Villeneuve, the bright director who brought us "Sicario" and "Prisoners," now delivers a mysterious alien visitation movie. He has a brilliant way of bringing a new twist to an old genre and "Arrival" is no exception.

One day on our blessed Planet Earth, 12 daunting spacecrafts appear out of thin air at 12 different cities. The lens-like obelisks just float there, taunting their viewers with the big questions: What do they want? Why are they here? Where did they come from?

The U.S. Military recruits linguistics expert Louise Banks (Amy Adams) and theoretical physicist Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner) to investigate and determine the giant squid-aliens' intentions. Through a series of charades and drawings, they begin to learn the beautiful loopty loop language that seemingly inks into the air as though it came out of a wizard wand. Louise explains to those who employed her (and the audience) how teaching and understanding the basics of language - things like pronouns and requests - they will eventually get to the bottom line: what's their deal.

The big story is interspersed with flashes of Banks' memories of her dying child, and a husband who left her. We are drawn in to her story and just as mystified by what haunts her. She performs her work with an air of sadness and burden but effectively connects with the aliens.

In the middle, things get chaotic. A message from the aliens is possibly misinterpreted as an attack and suddenly things start ~happening. Decisions are being made by people that are somehow important, communications are stopped (why?) and some rogue soldiers try to blow up the alien spacecraft that defies physics with a little bit of C4? A lot happens at once and I'll admit I was losing it a little then.

While everyone is running around like chickens with their heads cut off, Louise has a chat with our squid friends. Now, it isn't often that I am blown away by a plot twist, and maybe it's embarrassing how I didn't see it coming? But my whole opinion changed with the reveal.

Just like that, the past is the future, the present is the past, and the future is in her hands. With everything in perspective she is given the great gift of understanding and experiences the full breadth of her life in a single moment. Not only does she take charge of the alien situation at hand, but she makes decisions about herself. She chooses a life where she knows her daughter would die and somehow that's just amazing to me. She chooses the tragic, because she knew sweet moments would accompany it. How is that not empowering?

In one scene, she explains to her daughter that her name, Hannah, is a palindrome. This is also the key to the film structure. At the beginning, what we think is the past, is also the ending. It's a paradox and also very confusing but very powerful.

The acting lacked in some areas. Jeremy Renner didn't do much for me. I have never found him a very versatile or empathetic actor and he doesn't stand out in any way in this film either. He's a physicist but doesn't seem to do any physics or contribute anything at all. Forrest Whitaker also had a supporting role and seemed nothing more than a stereotype to fit.

None of that bothered me, though, with how fantastic Amy Adams was. She is a wonderfully diverse actress and this subtle, empathetic performance is one of her best. In many ways, this movie is all her. There are more close ups of her face than close examinations of the extra terrestrials; her reactions and wide eyes provide the insights we need to these other worldly visitors. The Academy sorely missed a nomination for her.

The best science fiction movies are deeply human at their core. This is a movie that gives its main character a powerful sense of free will and love and though "Arrival" struggles with some confusion in the second act the rest is so intriguing and mystifying that it doesn't matter. 8/10

Vantage Point (2008)

I consider myself to be a “film person.”  I mean, more so than TV.  I never watched much TV growing up and there are few shows that I watch regularly.  My heart lies with movies.  But I will say this: if the series is good, I’m there, and I’m there to stay.  Some of my favorite TV shows include Lost, The Mary Tyler Moore Show, Monk, The Office, The West Wing, and ER. There’s something about spending that many hours with the same characters (we all know I’m a character person).  I feel so attached to Mary Richards, Mark Greene, President Bartlet, and Monk.  They’re my friends.  So, you see, my small but firm attachment to TV improves my film experience.  If ER‘s Juliana Margulies is in anything – I’m there.  Same goes for John Krasinski, Ed Asner, Rob Lowe, and certainly George Clooney.  So, even though I’d heard mixed reviews for Vantage Point – I was totally going to see it because of Matthew Fox, our lead Lostie.

And you know, I liked it!  To a point, that is.  Essentially, it’s nothing more than a glorified 23 minute assassination.  We figure out the whodunnit and whole story by viewing multiple vantage points of the various characters.  It’s like putting a puzzle together – with each “rewind” more pieces come together.  It’s a great concept with mediocre execution, though it is stylish.  The story itself is extremely implausible (and I mean extreme), but a lot of fun.

It’s got a good cast – William Hurt, Dennis Quaid, Forest Whitaker, Sigourney Weaver, and Fox.  Two thumbs up for the short running time.  Great action sequences.  I’m not sure what the moral is nor what *certain characters* motives were.  Also, the ending felt abrupt – as if the big build up throughout the movie led to no where.  And, frankly, this is not Dennis Quaid’s best movie ever.

So really, the more I intelligently think about it the worse it gets – I no longer fear being hit by a car since, obviously, I will never die nor be injured despite being smooshed by a semi.  I’m also now pretty confident that I can single-handedly take out the secret service and waltz into the residence to kidnap the President. …But I can’t deny that I was pretty into it.  Suspending my disbelief is rarely this fun. 6/10

Where the Wild Things Are (2009)

It’s movies like this that remind me how great it is sometimes to be stuck and secluded on a tropical island.  I talked with several people who disliked Where the Wild Things Are because of all the “hipster-hype” – skinny-jeaned, indie music-lovin’ people obsessing over a film that they could “identify” with.  (Frankly, I’m a nerdy, indie-music lovin’, skinny jeaned person myself but seeing as, again, I’m one in a million on this island with such characteristics, that has nothing to do with it).  All that to say, I’m really gonna miss watching a popular movie without that added over-eager endorsement from peers at school or work.  The luxury of being able to objectively watch something will be sorely missed.

The movie is an adaptation of Maurice Sendak’s Caldecott Award-winning children’s book of the same name about a boy named Max who is sent to his room without supper, travels to “where the wild things are” through his imagination and becomes their king. I grew up on this story and have always loved the illustrations and creativity.

As far as the film goes… my objectivity served me well – I loved it.  In many ways I hardly know why I loved it.  Spike Jonze’s creation is nothing like I was expecting but I was fascinated with what I saw nonetheless.  I felt real child-like emotion and true earnestness.  What truly amazed me was the spontaneity protrayed through the creatures and Max.  They yell and fight and play and cry and are happy, then sad and don’t want to share and throw tantrums – all in five minutes.  Is that not like every child between the ages of 6 and 10?  The extremes may seem exaggerated but in all honesty its exaggeration was nothing but realistic.  The monsters were surprisingly complex (“Will you keep out the sadness?”) and had an honest feel to them.  I love the fresh feel of the Jim Henson-style puppet creations (Labyrinth!), rather than the usual overdose of CGI junk.

Many spoke of the feeling of hopelessness and sadness.  I agree to an extent though this didn’t bother me until several hours later.  While watching the movie I was nothing but entranced, fascinated, emotionally invested, and in awe of the visually stunning creation I was viewing.  The music also added immensely to the tone, and brought life to the story – plus I’m a Yeah Yeah Yeah’s fan.

If I could change one thing, I would change the ending.  In the book, Max returns from his adventure to find his supper waiting for him, as though everything were better.  The film ends differently, and I find it a shame.  I think that ending it the same way the book did would eliminate any remaining feeling of depression.  My opinion.

I should also credit Max Records.  He was excellent and terribly imaginative, as was the supporting cast (Catherine Keener, James Gandolfini, Catherine O’Hara, Forest Whitaker, and even Mark Ruffalo).  But this review has gone on long enough, however, the best part about this WHOLE ordeal is the trailer.  The Arcade Fire music rocks.  So, here’s the trailer in case you missed it:

In the words of KW “I could eat it up, I love it so.” 8/10