Oldie but Goodie: Monty Python's Life of Brian

Directed by Terry Jones and starring the MP crew of Jones, Graham Chapman, Michael Palin, Eric Idle, John Cleese and Terry Gilliam, the film follows the comical story of Brian, a guy who lived two thousand years ago and never reached full Messiah status, probably because three wise men entered the wrong manger -- his. He participates in many comical situations, and even his crucifixion isn't exempt from humor. The film works mainly because the ensemble cast is brilliant, and, playing multiple parts each, are able to write and act a smart, geniously satirical. I love a good religious mocking, so this film hit the right spots for me. As with Holy Grail, there are sketches that are funnier than others, with some being overly silly for my taste. However, overall, Life of Brian is an intelligent, relevant option for when you feel like having some laughs.

Should you see it: Yes
Grade: A-

Film Review -- Bad Words

Jason Bateman directs and stars in this black comedy also featuring Kathryn Hahn, Allison Janney, and Rohan Chand. Guy Trilby (Bateman) is forty years old, foul-mouthed, and....a spelling bee contestant? That's what happens when he finds a loophole in the rules of the Golden Quill Spelling Bee, and all of a sudden hard-working eleven-year -olds find themselves competing with a ruthless Trilby. But why is he so bent on carrying out this stunt and crushing the dreams of many children? That's what reporter Jenny Widgeon (Hahn) wants to find out. But these plans take an unexpected turn when quick-witted contestant Chaitanyia (Chand) befriends a reluctant Guy. First, the premise of the film is outrageously silly, and most of the film's laughs come from equally ridiculous situations. However, the film is charming enough to justify the cheap laughs. While the plot is underwhelming, you but have to admire its simplicity. This keeps the focus predominantly on the comedy. The actors also do a fine job, with so much relying on the comedic timing of their dialogue. Especially enjoyable is talented young actor Rohan Chand, who is completely adorable as Guy's unlikely pint-sized sidekick. In all, Bad Words is a mostly enjoyable comedy with a few good laughs. It's worth a look.

Should you see it: Yes
Grade: B-

Oldie but Goodie -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail

This 1975 cult classic is directed by Terry Jones and Terry Gilliam and stars Jones, Gilliam, John Cleese, Graham Chapman, Eric Idle, and Michael Palin. King Arthur (Chapman), along with his not-so-noble knights, set out on a God-given quest to find the Holy Grail. Along the way, they face many silly obstacles, such as the swallow-savvy castle keepers, the limbless knight, a prince who just wants to sing, the knights who say Ni!, and a riddle-loving bridge keeper. It's obvious that this film doesn't try or pretend to be anything else other than an outrageously silly, historically inaccurate adventure from one of Britain's most famous comedy groups. In fact, the entire film plays out as one long sketch show, with each obstacle being its own separate sketch. I enjoyed many of them -- the opening credits are laugh-out-loud, can't-breathe hilarious. The swallow-savvy castle keepers are also very funny, as are the Knights who say Ni! and the riddle-loving bridge keeper, among others. There are a few sketches, however, that were just too silly for me. But I can very much appreciate the amount of imagination and creativity that it takes to make a film like this -- I know I could never do it. Even though the film is extremely low-budget (a fact even worked into the film's plot, in the form of an absolutely hysterical coconut sequence), the actors are all so brilliant that they are more than able to achieve their goal of making an uproarious comical romp.

Should you see it: Yes
Grade: A

Film Review -- The Fifth Estate

Directed by Bill Condon, this 2013 film stars Benedict Cumberbatch, Daniel Bruhl, Laura Linney, and Stanley Tucci. It tells the story of the early stages of one of the biggest whistle-blowing organizations ever, Wikileaks, and its founder, Julian Assange (Cumberbatch), through the point-of-view of his business partner, Daniel Berg (Bruhl). The film itself is not great; its much too long, the script is weak, and the directing is too slow to make it a legitimate thriller. Because it is based on the book of a disgruntled ex-Wikileaks employee, the film is also frustratingly one-sided. I'm sure it would be a monumental task to make an objective film about one of the most controversial organizations and people in the world, but this film makes Assange out as way too one-dimensional and detestable. The performances are pretty good, but they're not enough to save a film that does not accurately depict Wikileak's beginnings, or its merits.

Should you see it: With fair warning
Grade: C+

Oldie but Goodie -- Bullets over Broadway

Woody Allen's 1994 film stars John Cusack, Dianne Wiest, and Jennifer Tilly. Proud and stubborn playwright David Shayne (Cusack) wants to produce and direct his new play on Broadway, but the only person willing to finance it is mobster Nick Valenti (Joe Viterelli). The catch, though, is that Shayne must cast Valenti's ditzy and talentless girlfriend Olive (Tilly) in a crucial role. Additionally, Shayne must deal with the demands of veteran theatre actress Helen Sinclair (Wiest) and Olive's bodyguard, Cheech (Chazz Palminteri), who might even be a better playwright that Shayne. How Woody Allen manages to churn out a film a year I will never understand because, somehow, they all manage to be pretty good. This was one of my favorites. Very creative and wildly funny, the screenplay (by Allen and Douglas McGrath) and acting (especially from Tilly and Wiest -- who won an Oscar) are excellent. Short and sweet, this film is a must-see.

Should you see it: Yes
Grade: A

Film Review -- The Great Beauty

The Italian film, winner of this year's Best Foreign Language Film Oscar, is directed by Paolo Sorrentino and stars Toni Servillo. Jep Gambardella (Servillo) is an aging writer who, after his sixty-fifth birthday, has only written a single, bestselling novel. He spends his time immersed in the parties and nightlife of Rome, but when news of the death of someone in his past reaches him, he reflects on the choices he's made in life, and the meaning of life itself. I watched this film before the Oscars, but honestly forgot to write a review for it. The reason? I was sorely unimpressed. The director, influenced by Fellini, wanted to make a film that was an ode to his work, but his film simply comes across as a poor man's Fellini. Not even the great Italian filmmaker can always pull off that eccentricity, much less can Sorrentino. I expected the film, with a 2-hour, 20-minute running time, to be chock-full of character insight and reflection, but instead all I got was a shallow narrative seemingly about absolutely nothing. While one can appreciate this Italian approach to filmmaking, which is wildly different from non-Latin filmmaking, this film did not work for me. I'm positive that another film deserved the Foreign Language Oscar more than The Great Beauty.

Should you see it: At your own risk
Grade: C+

My Oscar Reactions and Analysis

2013 was a phenomenal year for movies -- the best in recent memory. The 2014 awards season came to a close on Sunday night when the Academy Awards were handed out. There were many worthy nominees, and while the Academy got it right some of the time, it also left lots of deserving people winless. But that's how it usually goes.
 Here are my thoughts on the ceremony:

• Host Ellen DeGeneres was disappointing overall. Although she had some good skits, such as the pizza and the selfie -- which are being widely talked, about so she certainly succeeded in that regard -- her general performance wasn't nearly as funny as I had hoped it would be. Perhaps the Oscars should take a page out of the Golden Globes handbook and hire the dynamic duo of Tina Fey and Amy Poehler? 
• The insistence of having a "theme" to the Oscars is unnecessary. The honoring of "heroes" at this year's ceremony seemed very random and out of place. The show is long enough as it is; we shouldn't have to sit through needless montages and musical performances as well.
• 12 Years a Slave deservedly won the top prize of Best Picture. While pundits had been deeming this race as "too close to call" all awards season, there was never any doubt in my mind that this brilliant film would come out on top. 
• Matthew McConaughey won Best Actor for Dallas Buyers Club. I thought that Chiwetel Ejiofor deserved this for his masterful and heartbreaking portrayal of a free man sold into slavery, but McConaughey has been bringing in the big bucks for Hollywood for some years now, so I guess he was due this honor. Not that he wasn't excellent; he certainly was, but he wasn't the most deserving. He is absolutely amazing, though, in HBO's True Detective, so maybe some of that love propelled him here. It's unfortunate, though, that he diminished his win with that RIDICULOUS acceptance speech.
• Cate Blanchett won Best Actress for Blue Jasmine, as expected. She was phenomenal in the film, and is long-overdue an Oscar for a leading role, so no complaints here. Deep inside, though, I wish that she and Judi Dench had tied. I have such a soft spot for the latter and her touching performance in Philomena.
• Jared Leto won Best Supporting Actor for Dallas Buyers Club. I feel the same way about his win as I do about his costar's: while Leto gave a great performance, I don't feel like he was the most deserving; that would be Michael Fassbender, who was utterly horrific in 12 Years a Slave. I haven't disliked a character like I did this one in a very long time, which says a lot about his performance. I enjoyed his speech, though, and he seems to be a nice guy, so I'm not too upset.
• YES! Lupita Nyong'o WON Best Supporting Actress for 12 Years a Slave! I can't tell you how happy I am about this. Anyone who's watched the film knows what a stunning performance Nyong'o gives in her feature film debut as abused slave Patsey. All awards season long, I was irked at those comparing Jennifer Lawrence's performance in American Hustle with Lupita's, and some even alleged that the former's was superior. I'm sorry, I think Lawrence is a fine actress, but two Oscars in two years for essentially the same role? Give me a break. Thank goodness justice prevailed and the Academy chose the deserving winner. 
• Alfonso Cuarón won Best Director for Gravity, in recognition of his accomplishments in helming a film that relies on never-before-used technology. However, much like the Academy honored Kathryn Bigelow for the small, but brilliantly made film The Hurt Locker over James Cameron for the technological marvel that is Avatar a few years back, I felt that the Oscar should have gone to Steve McQueen for 12 Years a Slave. While Cuarón certainly made an inspiring film, McQueen was able to make a practically perfect film with a limited budget and limited resources That is a testament to a gifted filmmaker, and this feat is perhaps even more impressive than achievements made with unlimited technology. So, the award should have gone to Steve.
• John Ridley and Spike Jonze won the Adapted and Original Screenplay Awards for 12 Years a Slave and Her, respectively. I'm thrilled for Ridley (but also would have loved to see a tie with Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope for Philomena). In regards to Jonze, I made my feelings about Her very clear in my review of the film, so it's needless to say that I thought this award should have gone to someone else. I can't knock him for being original, though, so I guess that's what the voters went for.
• Frozen won the Oscar for Animated Feature as well as Original Song for the infectious "Let it Go." It's been stuck in my head since the film came out, so no complaints here!
• As expected, Gravity took home most of the technical awards. The film is a visual wonder, and unlike in the Best Director category, absolutely deserved every technical win. 

So there it is, my brief reflection on the Oscars ceremony and winners. Looking forward to seeing what great films come out in 2014!