Sinister (USA, 2012)

Nine Things About the Movie Sinister

1. This is one of those "a family moves into a house where a murder occurred and they live to regret it" movies.

2. It's about a true-crime writer that finds a box of home movies in his new attic. The home movies are actually snuff films.

3. The beginning title scene is one of the creepiest movie openings I've ever seen.

4. The movie is pretty predictable, but it's not boring. It goes from one creepy scene to the next without many breaks.

5. The tension is broken because it gets a little silly at times. The dad follows horror-movie logic. However, there are attempts to logically explain why he does what he does. It doesn't always work, but it's nice to see.

6. Given the rather upsetting subject matter of the film, there isn't much actual blood or gore.

7. The home movies are the most disturbing parts of the film. The "Lawn Work" home movie shows the least, but upset me the most.

8. The movie uses the regular ripoffs of "Poltergeist", "The Amityville Horror" and "The Shining". But it gives everything a fresh coat of paint.

9. The soundtrack and sound effects are really well done. The movie provides a great case study for people who pay attention to sound design.

Ex Machina (Britain, 2015)

Nine Things About the Movie Ex Machina

1. This is a strange and satisfying science fiction/mystery/thriller/philosophy film.

2. Screenwriter Alex Garland wrote the scripts for 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later, which introduced the modern idea of zombies as rage-filled, fast-running, eating machines. He also wrote the under-appreciated Sunshine. Garland not only wrote Ex Machina, he directed it as well.

3.  It's about a computer programmer named Caleb who wins a lottery at work and is flown to the private compound of billionaire genius Nathan. Caleb is going to spend a week trying to help Nathan decide if Nathan's new robot, Ava, can pass as human.

4. This is not an action film. Not in the slightest. Most of the movie consists of just Caleb, Nathan, and Ava talking to each other. But the movie gets darker and creepier as it goes along, and Caleb begins to suspect he's being played - but he's not sure how, or by whom.

5. There are a few annoying plot holes; however, Garland is a smart enough writer that I'm sure he knew about them, and just had to accept them in order for his story to work.

6. The acting is great all around. Oscar Isaac (from Inside Llewyn Davis and A Most Violent Year) was especially excellent as Nathan - from the moment he appears on the screen, you know something is wrong with him, even though you can't quite figure out what.

7. Using the idea of artificial intelligence as a cover, the movie explores some deeply philosophical issues of identity, humanity, and existence.

8. Visually, the movie is full of glass and deceptively reflective surfaces, which effectively symbolize the intellectual maze that Caleb finds himself in. The ambient soundtrack is an excellent example of how sound can enhance a scene and manipulate a mood without being overly obvious.

9. If you're looking for a blockbuster science fiction movie about robots, then stay away from this one. But for more introspective and thoughtful viewers, this is a philosophical tangle of yarn that is ready for you to unravel.

Tree of Life (USA, 2011)

Nine Things About the Movie Tree of Life

1. This is a Terrence Malik movie. Those that know who Terrence Malik are know what I'm talking about. In fact, this is probably the most Terrence Malick-y of all his movies.

2. The characters speak cryptically and in whispers. Make sure you have your subtitles on.

3. If you miss the beginning lines of what the nuns taught, you miss one of the main themes of the movie.

4. The movie blurs the line between parents and God -  they can all be glorious, hypocritical, and abusive.

5. There is a suggestion at the beginning of the DVD to turn the volume up loud. Take that advice.

6.  Some people say they don't understand the movie. But there comes a time in everyone's life (which may be a different time for everybody) where if you don't understand this movie, then you're either not paying attention, or you're lying to yourself.

7. Much of the movie is narrated in the first person. Malick once stated that he hoped that the viewer is able to understand that the story is their own - not that of the character in the movie.

8. The movie is about childhood, in all it's horrific glory. And it's about God, in all It's glorified horror.

9. This movie is a work of art from the opening frame to the ending frame. It's one of  the most intimately epic movies ever made. You just might hate it.

Short Term 12 (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Short Term 12


1. This movie hit me right in the feels. It was one of the most overlooked films of 2014.

2. It's about a group of 20-something adults working in a group home for troubled teenagers. One of the workers, Grace, bonds with a new girl, Jayden. Their relationship triggers problems in Grace's past, and she has trouble maintaining the boundaries between Jayden's situation and her own.

3.  It was written and directed by Destin Daniel Cretton, who based it on his own experiences working in a group home.

4. It's a very authentic movie (mostly), and does an excellent job of showing what it's like to work with kids who have slipped between society's cracks, or who have been dealt a terrible situation in life.

5.  While the major focus is on Grace, it is really kind of an ensemble story. The movie follows three adult workers, and several kids. They all are connected in different ways, and the movie does a good job of showing how an incident in one life can reverberate among the others.

6. The acting is superb all around. The characters are believable, realistic, and illustrate life's tragedies without becoming melodramatic. Brie Larson is absolutely amazing as Grace, the adult that's just as traumatized as the kids she works with. She should have won an Academy Award.

7. There is technically a main climax to the movie; but since the story involves several kids in various situations, there are several "mini-climaxes" spread throughout the film as we follow their subplots. The movie swings your emotions from hope to heartbreak several times.

8. This is one of the best illustrations I've ever seen of the difficulty of maintaining a professional perspective in highly emotional situations. It also helps explain why some people are attracted to such a difficult job.

9. Without giving any major spoilers away, I HATED the ending. It betrayed all the realism of the rest of the movie, and it's disrespectful to the troubled kids stuck in the system. The last five minutes should not have been filmed.

Fifty Shades of Grey (USA, 2015)

Nine Things About the Movie Fifty Shades of Grey

1. Screenwriter Kelly Marcel and director Samantha Taylor-Johnson have taken the infamous, almost unreadably bad novel and turned it into a surprisingly watchable movie. The main problem with it is that it tries to be two movies at the same time.

2. The film is structured as a dumb romantic fantasy, with high levels of melodrama and low levels of logic. A pretty but frumpy college senior named Ana interviews a mega-billionaire named Christian, and falls in love. Christian's unusual sexual outlook awakens something in Ana, and they both struggle with what it all means.

3. But crammed into that juvenile story structure is a different movie, one that tries to make some actual statements about women, power, and sex. Unfortunately, those statements don't quite work in the context of the actual plot, so the movie ends up sabotaging itself.

4. I need to make this clear: People that criticize the movie as promoting non-consensual sex or violence against women have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. They either haven't seen it, or their perspective is warped because of their own sexual or gender-role hangups. The entire theme of the movie is about consent and different ways of negotiating a sexual relationship. There is never any doubt who is actually in control in this movie, or who gets the most pleasure. And it's not the man.

5. The movie gets the dominant/submissive thing kind of right, both physically and psychologically. Better than the book does, anyway. However, it's unfortunate that Christian is coming at the BDSM lifestyle for the wrong reasons.

6. There is a sense of humor and playfulness in the movie that is drowned out in the book.

7. Dakota Johnson gives a good, brave performance as Ana. Jamie Dornan wasn't as good as Christian. He was supposed to be brooding and intense, but came off looking mostly constipated.

8. A huge part of the success of this kind of movie depends on the sexual chemistry between the two lead actors. There is about as much sexual chemistry between Johnson and Dornan as there is between a rock and a piece of wood.

9. Like it or not, this movie is a milestone in popular media's depiction of women as full-blooded sexual beings. It describes a new form of female empowerment that clearly hits a nerve in society... and makes many people uncomfortable. There are a lot of important ideas here. I just wish those ideas were expressed in a story that could be taken seriously.

Jupiter Ascending (USA, 2015)

Nine Things About the Movie Jupiter Ascending

1. This movie is a glorious, epic mess. Which is not necessarily a bad thing.

2. It was made by the Wachowskis, who are most famous for the "Matrix" movies. [They are no longer known as the Wachowski Brothers, Larry and Andy, because Larry has transitioned to a female and is now Lana, so they are brother and sister].

3. It's a mish-mash of pieces of lots of other movies. You can find ingredients from "The Matrix", "Cinderella", "The Wizard of Oz", "Dune", "The Fifth Element", and "Brazil" all mixed into this absurd stew.

4. The plot is about a girl named Jupiter who desperately wants a telescope. She discovers she owns the Earth when bees refuse to sting her because they don't harm royalty. She is thrown into a three-way battle between siblings who have divided the universe up among themselves and are fighting for territory.

5. The movie bounces back and forth between amazing action scenes and then plot-driven scenes that throw as much of the story in quick as they can before another action scene happens.

6. There is a lot of back-story and side-story that is never explained, so you need to figure some of the plot out yourself, if you care enough to. This should have been made as two or three movies, not one. Packing six hours of material into two hours means it's going to be kind of confusing, it's going to have some dumb story connections, and some plot holes the size of galactic vortexes.

7. The special effects are spectacular. The set pieces, design, and cinematography are stunning. And there is a greater diversity of intergalactic characters than I've ever seen in one movie. The movie was supposed to have been released in the summer of 2014 but was delayed in order to complete all the computer effects.

8. There are interesting philosophical topics that are opened, but there isn't enough time to explore them. And the idea of expanding a corporation to the scale of the universe opens rich opportunities for social commentary, which is never really made.

9. As an actual story, the movie is not impressive. Especially the ending, which is one of the stupidest conclusions I've ever seen.
But as an epic space opera fantasy adventure, this is the most kick-ass, visually stunning and kinetic film I've seen in years.

Blackhat (USA, 2015)

Nine Things About the Movie Blackhat

1. This was directed by Michael Mann, who is probably most famous for his 1995 crime classic "Heat". And "Blackhat" definitely has Mann's trademark cool look and feel. But something went very wrong somewhere. The movie seems like it was made by someone pretending to be Michael Mann.

2.  It's about a mysterious computer hacker attacking various places around the world for unknown reasons. The Chinese and American governments get together to catch the bad guy. In order to do that, they must release a buff, hunky computer hacker named Nicholas Hathaway from jail,

3. This film is great proof that a movie can be complicated without actually being smart.

4. There is a lot of cyber-jargon used in this movie. Computer experts say it's pretty accurate. They're the only ones that will know, because the movie doesn't really try to explain anything.

5. Every 20 minutes or so, the movie slows down because the heroes have run out of leads.  So Hathaway will look confused for a minute, get the "light bulb" look, and then tell everybody of an idea he just had that will lead the heroes down a new path. This path will last for about 20 more minutes. Repeat this step for about two hours, and the movie is over.

6. There's also a completely predictable and unnecessary romance that develops between Hathaway and a teammate. It's supposed to add some emotional tension to the group, but all it really does is bring the movie to a grinding stop, wasting any momentum that the movie had built up.

7. As the movie progresses, it gets more action-packed but less believable. And for an MIT computer hacker spending years in jail, Hathaway is surprisingly good in gunfights and knife battles.

8. This movie was not only the first box-office flop of 2015, it's one of the biggest box-office flops in history. A week after being released in US theaters, its scheduled release in Australia was canceled - which is where the star, Chris Hemsworth, is from.

9. This could have been a good movie. I don't know what happened. But in the end, it's just a way to give computer geeks to a fantasy where they get to be an action hero, and also get a girlfriend.

Foxcatcher (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Foxcatcher

[NOTE: I tried very hard not to give away spoilers in this review. If you want to see this movie, see it before you learn the actual story.]

1. Most people (including myself) thought the trailer to this film was kind of vague and hard to remember; you couldn't really tell what it was about. People would say, "'Foxcatcher'? That's that weird movie about wrestling, right? And Steve Carell sure looks strange." But now I understand why. It's almost impossible to summarize the movie.

2. The actual plot is easy to explain - two brothers, Dave and Mark Schultz, are Olympic gold medalists in wrestling. The younger one, Mark, is trying to get out of his brother's shadow and become his own person. Mark meets this really strange millionaire, John du Pont, who invites Mark to start a wrestling team on his ranch, and train for the next Olympics. Things don't go as planned.

3. The plot is not what the movie is actually about, though. This is a subtle movie where some key points are shown through long, non-verbal scenes, or through short, almost throw-away lines of dialogue. Some people think this movie is too long, quiet, and boring. This means they have not been paying attention, and missed all the important stuff.

4. The plot of the movie is basically a true story, but they changed quite a few things to make it fit, and to make the story more complex (there is a lot of controversy over some of the points in the film). The real Mark Schultz has a cameo, as a wrestling official weighing in the movie version of himself.

5. I have only one thing to say about Steve Carell. He deserves Best Actor of the Year. And Mark Ruffalo deserves his Oscar nomination as Best Supporting Actor.

6. Now let me say something about Channing Tatum. The fact that he was not nominated for an Oscar is one of the most mysterious and outrageous snubs I've ever seen. Tatum gives a performance that rivals Carell's. He inhabits his character physically and emotionally. Together, Tatum and Carell turn what could have been a weird little melodrama into a genuine piece of American tragedy.

7. There is a constant thread of awkwardness and pain through the movie. It's perfectly matched with the muted, sorrowful colors of the film, the minimalist soundtrack, and the cinematography.

8. The movie also sets up a constant, vague sense of unease. You get a feeling in the pit of your stomach that something is going to go very wrong, but you don't know what or when.

9. This movie is a quiet, peaceful, psychological car crash, where morals clash with money, "yes" clashes with "no", family will both support and destroy you, and crushed dreams are painted onto other people. It's open to more than one interpretation, and I don't guarantee that you will like this movie. But I do guarantee that if you can stick with it, it will stick with you.

American Sniper (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie American Sniper

1. This movie knocked me speechless.

2. Directed by 84-year-old Clint Eastwood, it's based (kind of) on the autobiography of Chris Kyle, who has the reputation of being the deadliest sniper in U.S. military history. In the book, Kyle portrays himself as a stone-cold badass killer. The movie softens that up a great deal. In fact, after the first 30 minutes, the movie has very little to do with the real Chris Kyle. He's a convenient symbol from which Eastwood constructs a rather complicated metaphor, to show that war is both necessary and self-defeating.

3. The movie starts by setting up Kyle's simple, patriotic, God-country-family loyalty. It's a world of black and white, good and evil. Kyle becomes a Navy SEAL to fight evil. But as the movie progresses, Kyle starts to be confronted with situations and ideas that don't mesh with his view of reality. This makes him angry and confused, and he deals with it by suppressing it and focusing on his job of defending America against evil; he returns to Iraq again and again.

4. Kyle does four tours in Iraq, separated by periods back at home with his family. The random violence and constant paranoia in Kyle's military life suddenly switches to the carefree American oblivious family life. This is somewhat disorienting, which helps you to understand what Kyle is experiencing. The movie is an excellent depiction of the development of PTSD without ever mentioning that term.

5. Bradley Cooper is astounding in his portrayal of Kyle. You can tell a great actor by what he does when he's not talking. Cooper nails the body language of a man who feels at home while he's at war, and at war while he's at home. It's not only in his body, it's even in his eyes.

6. A LOT of people miss the entire point of the movie because they immediately move into their respective corners and watch it only through their lens. The hyper patriots that expect the movie to call him a saint are just as lost as the ones that expect the movie to call him a racist sociopath.

7. The movie is pretty violent. And since it is almost entirely urban combat, the violence is more intimate, more intense, than in conventional war movies. There are no epic battle scenes. Every shot, every killed soldier, is shown individually.

8. There is an unwritten rule of filmmaking that if you are going to torture or kill a child, you don't actually show it; the act is committed offscreen. This movie breaks that rule. Twice.

9. The movie embraces the paradoxes of war by showing them through the eyes of a man that doesn't understand paradox. What makes the movie so polarizing (and so impressive to me) is the fact that Clint Eastwood turned the movie itself into a bullet, shooting straight for a deep nerve in American culture. Love it or loathe it, this is something we need to pay attention to.

Selma (USA, 2014)

                Nine Things About the Movie Selma

1. This movie is called "Selma", not "King". While Dr. Martin Luther King is the main character in this movie, it's really about the 1965 protest march to overcome restrictions on allowing blacks to vote. So it covers a lot more than just him.

2. I'm not an expert on this area of history; but from what I do know, the movie stays fairly close to the facts. The biggest problem with historical accuracy is the movie's negative portrayal of President Johnson. He wasn't obstructing King's movement, and he didn't assign the FBI to spy on MLK (the previous president did that). They got along a lot better than the movie claims.

3. In 2009, the King estate sold the rights to MLK's speeches to another Hollywood studio for a movie to be made by Steven Spielberg. So this movie wasn't allowed to use MLK's actual speeches. They had to invent new ones that said basically the same things, but without violating copyright.

4. Reportedly, some white people hired as extras in the movie found out that they were supposed to play racists. They politely asked to switch roles, and were changed to marchers.

5. The movie does a great job of showing the nuances of the situation - the black civil rights movement was not a unified front. There were turf issues, competing tactics, and even disagreement on exactly what they were trying to accomplish. It's also honest enough to show the sometimes cynical side of activism - the cold calculations of how and when to do things, in order to maximize media coverage and sympathy from other people.

6. There are a few scenes that are overly dramatic and sanctimonious, but that's to be expected in a movie like this. And they really didn't distract from the bigger picture.

7. It's ironic that in this film of such an iconic piece of American history, the roles of Dr. King, his wife, the president, and governor George Wallace are all played by British actors.

8. If you think this movie makes white people look bad, or if it makes you angry at white people, you have missed the point. And you also aren't really paying attention.

9. As far as historical dramas go, this one is better than most. It's smart, interesting, confrontational when it needs to be, and much more nuanced than you might expect. It's a great addition to cinematic portrayals of American history and the struggle for justice.

"A Million Ways To Die in the West" (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie A Million Ways To Die in the West

1. This movie could have been called "A Million Jokes Die in this Movie".

2.  It's proof that having an all-star cast cannot save a bad script.

3. The plot is cobbled together from other old westerns; an awkward sheep herder named Albert is dumped by his girlfriend. Albert falls in love with a new girl who is secretly married to a gold bandit. They help each other out. The end.

4. This movie is mostly a succession of jokes, with a few serious scenes thrown in. Some of the jokes are funny, and some of the characters are funny. A lot of the jokes and characters are not.

5. Seth MacFarlane is mostly known for creating the TV show "Family Guy". This movie was written and produced by Seth MacFarlane, directed by Seth MacFarlane, and stars Seth MacFarlane. It's his first-ever on-screen acting role.

6. Seth MacFarlane is a terrible actor, especially in his scenes with Charlize Theron. There is nothing remotely believable about his character. He just wanders around being Seth MacFarlane, making jokes.

7. Casting Gilbert Gottfried as Abraham Lincoln was one of the worst cinematic decisions of the year.

8. The best joke was set up halfway through movie, but is pretty offensive without the punchline... which doesn't come until the credits start (with another small joke after the credits).

9.  This movie is a mess, full of non-sequiturs and random sex and poop jokes. It does have a few really good moments, but on the whole, I felt embarrassed for the actors who agreed to be in the movie.

The Interview (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie The Interview

1. This movie was written and directed by Seth Rogan and Evan Goldberg, and also stars James Franco. These three also made "This is the End" together in 2013.  If you've seen that movie, you already know this one is going to be kind of bizarre, and full of tasteless and weird humor.

2. Franco plays Dave Skylark, a dumbly charming host of a Hollywood trashy gossip show. Rogan  plays Aaron Rapoport, the show's producer. They discover that North Korean dictator Kim Jung-Un is a fan of the show and wants to be interviewed by them. The CIA intervenes and wants the pair to assassinate Kim Jung-Un while they are there.

3. Goldberg and Rogan knew their absurd plot was made more realistic after Dennis Rodman visited Kim Jung-Un and fell for the propaganda.

4. The movie was originally supposed to be released in October 2014, but North Korea threatened "merciless" action against the U.S. So the movie was pushed back to Christmas 2014 and supposedly edited to make it more acceptable to North Korea. I have no idea what editing they did, but there is absolutely no way that Kim Jung-Un would ever be OK with this movie. The ending isn't even the worst part - Kim is mercilessly mocked throughout the movie. Goldberg and Rogan had to know they were hitting a very sensitive nerve.

5. Randall Park (whose parents are South Korean) plays Kim Jung-Un. Hopefully he's in some sort of witness protection program, because I wouldn't be surprised if North Korea has taken a hit out on him.

6. There is a certain amount of political satire in the movie, but there's more dumb humor and butt jokes. It makes for a weird combination. There is also a surprising amount of bloody violence for what is essentially a buddy comedy.

7. Apparently, North Korean citizens really want to see this movie, even though being caught with it could cause them to be executed. So human rights organizations are actually balloon-dropping copies of the movie into the country.

8. This movie will probably be counted one of the most memorable moments of Katy Perry's career (even though the slow version of "Fireworks" played at the climax isn't really Katy Perry - it's a cover by a singer named Jenny Lane).

9. This isn't the best movie of the year, but it's certainly not the worst. It's dumber than it could be, but smarter than it looks. The humor will not be to everyone's taste, but it's one of the funniest movies I've seen this year.

Unbroken (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Unbroken

1. This movie is based on the true story of Louis Zamperini, a troubled kid that became an Olympic runner, and then fought in World War II, spent 47 days on a life-raft, and over 2 years in a Japanese POW camp.

2.  If you've seen the trailer to this movie, you've basically seen the whole movie, except for the violence.

3.  I know it's supposed to be inspirational, but this movie is my pick for the most feel-bad movie of 2014.

4.  The best scene of the movie is the first one, when we get to see a crew of American bombers in a sky battle. After that, nothing really happens except a guy goes through hell and is still alive at the end.

5.  A pretty big chunk of the movie shows the guys just floating along in a life raft, slowly dying. The POW camp doesn't come along until somewhere in the last half of the movie.

6.  The movie gets more brutal and violent as it goes along. I don't know how it got released with a PG-13 rating.

7.  As a break from scenes of helplessness, humiliation, and torture, we are sometimes treated to inspirational quotes such as:
   "The light always follows the darkness."
   "If you can take it, you can make it."
   "A moment of pain is worth a lifetime of glory."
  I think those quotes were really for the audience, to encourage them to keep watching this movie.

8. The main Japanese character, Watanabe, was actually wanted for war crimes, so this movie runs with it and makes the Japanese look really evil. Some Japanese citizens are asking their government to not show the movie in Japan.

9. It's not a terrible movie, but it is so dramatic that it sometimes backfires.  And you should only go see it if you are interested in watching people survive a series of increasingly dehumanizing events. Otherwise, despite what the title of the movie is, you may finish the movie feeling kind of broken yourself.


 

Annie (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Annie (2014)

1. Growing up in the 1980's, "Annie" was a childhood touchstone for me. So when I heard it was being remade, I was ready to hate. But he filmmakers knew that this version would be compared to the original, so they brilliantly put a stop to that right away. The first 30 seconds of the movie make it obvious that they are not trying to replace the other version. Annie's teacher even calls her "Annie B".

2. This movie, produced by Will Smith and Jay-Z, is a thoroughly revised and updated version of the 1982 classic that is specifically targeted to a 2014 audience.  It is also a commentary on classism, and what it means to be poor, but told in a way that makes it accessible to kids.

3.  This Annie is no starry-eyed, cheerful orphan. She is a street-wise foster child always on the hustle. Quvenzhane Wallis plays Annie; after her blistering, preternatural performance in "Beasts of the Southern Wild", I was afraid she would turn into one of those child actors that would never star in anything again. I'm glad to see her in this role - she turns Annie into a real person.

4. Let me just get this out of the way. As far as bitter, alcoholic orphanage supervisors go, Carol Burnett is the only Agatha Hannigan.
However.
As far as bitter, alcoholic foster moms go, Cameron Diaz does great as Colleen Hannigan. Diaz doesn't even attempt to fill Burnett's shoes (even Hannigan's first name is different). Diaz takes what's in the script and makes her own character with it.

5. Jamie Foxx does well with the Daddy Warbucks character - but here his name is William Stacks (Get it? Bill Stacks?). He's a cell phone mogul running for mayor that wants to use Annie to win the sympathy vote. Besides being the rich guy, Stacks is also the symbol of corporate America. As one of his employees says, "Most people are afraid of the government watching them. They should be worried about cell phone companies instead."

6. Many of the original songs are in this movie, but they have also been revised and updated. "Tomorrow" is no longer a bursting, irrepressible ode to optimism, but a bittersweet attempt by a defeated girl to keep herself going. Similarly, "Little Girls" is no longer a booze-addled, comedic complaint, but a cynical rock anthem about missed opportunities.

7. While this is a family movie, there is an adult, sarcastic, self-mocking vibe to it that goes completely over kids' heads and is aimed squarely at the generation of adults who grew up with the original version. There are inside cultural jokes and cameos that would make the adults in the theater laugh, while the kids seemed kind of puzzled. And there are a few hidden references to the original movie scattered in here, for the hardcore fans.

8. It is very rare to have a wide-release family movie where the main character is a black girl, and where the most powerful man in New York City is also black (of course, the casual racism of the 1982 version is gone, too). But the movie seems content with letting that speak for itself - race isn't really a thing here. It's a quietly integrated, fully interracial movie, that doesn't call attention to that fact.

9. This is still "Annie", so it has sentimental moments and messages that don't quite mesh with the underlying social commentary. But all in all, this is a surprisingly sharp, relevant, cool musical with some brilliant and wicked moments. It's trying to attract a new generation of fans without dismissing the original. The two versions of "Annie" are not competing, but complementary. It's OK to like both.

The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies

1. This is the third movie in the series of one children's book.

2. Being the sixth movie about Middle-Earth, it's not really worth describing the plot. You know what's going on, or you don't. But for those that don't know the story, and think this movie is really all about the dragon, you will be disappointed. If you notice, Smaug isn't even in the title of this film.

3. Being the last movie, everything is bigger in this one. The epic-ness is more epic. The melodrama is more melodramatic, and the corny humor is even cornier.

4. Orlando Bloom has either become almost completely computer generated, or has had way too much plastic surgery done. He doesn't look real. He actually looks like a plastic action figure.

5. Some of the battle scenes (and there are quite a few of them) are great, and almost awe-inspiring. Some of them look like amateur rip-offs of "300". And speaking of battle scenes, the orcs like to proclaim that "the fields will run with blood". But the only blood in the movie come from a few light scratches on cheeks. Nobody bleeds on the battlefield, even if their heads are cut off.

6. I thought I was on acid when I was watching Galadriel banish Sauron.

7. Note to self: If I want to win a war, I need to have the giant bear ride the giant eagles at the beginning of the battle, not the end.

8. For better or worse, Peter Jackson has re-invented Middle Earth, and strayed pretty far from the original book. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but people will forever think this was Tolkien's vision, when it was more Jackson's.

9. There's enough fan service in this movie that Middle-Earth addicts will probably proclaim this is the Best Movie Of The Year. But there are enough problems with it that haters will be justified in hating it even more. Most of the rest of us will just shrug our shoulders and say, "Meh. It was fine."

Under the Skin (United Kingdom, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Under the Skin


1. This is surely the strangest, most beautifully baffling film of 2014. It's visually poetic, existentially stunning, and impossible to describe.  I think it's brilliant and scary, though I don't know why. This is art that cuts below conscious thought and messes around inside you on the human level. It either speaks to you, or it doesn't; it has nothing to do with your intelligence.

2. It kind of has a plot. Scarlett Johansson plays a woman with the personality of an insect who wanders around Scotland, picking up solo men, and... makes things happen to them.

3. The movie is so abstract that it can be interpreted in multiple ways. I think it's supposed to be about some kind of inter-dimensional vampire alien thing. But this is not an action science fiction movie.

4. The movie could also be about a primitive force of nature that both distracts and consumes humanity.

5. Or it could be about the predatory nature of humans, and how men differ from women in what they're after.

6. There's relatively little dialogue in the movie - most of it is visual.  None of the characters even have names. Most of the characters were played by non-actors, and when they do talk, it was mostly unscripted.

7. The scene with Adam Pearson, the guy with neurofibromatosis in real life, stops you cold with its depiction of the unutterable, lonely intimacy of human relations.

8. This is a complete, perfect package of a film. From the surreal acting to the entrancing visuals, and the hauntingly unnerving soundtrack, you either take the whole thing or reject the whole thing.

9. I'm still not sure if the ending is happy or sad. Or if it even matters.

Into the Storm (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Into the Storm


1. This movie has some pretty spectacular storm effects. It's probably the best disaster porn I've ever seen.

2. The rest of the movie is one of the worst films of 2014.
    And if you combine these two things together, you get absolute magic.

3. For some reason, they decided to make this a "found footage" film. All the characters run around filming everything. It's kind of like "Paranormal Activity", but they see tornadoes instead of ghosts.

4. There are three separate mini-plots in the film, and the movie jumps from camera to camera, plot to plot. And sometimes it turns into a regular movie. But you can't tell really when that is, because all the cameras in the town are the same quality, whether they are high-end professional equipment, or cell phones.

5. I love the scene when the dad is standing in torrential winds and rain, looking in horror at something, but his hair and clothes are perfectly dry and still, like there was one spot of clear weather right above his head.

6. I also love the emotional, melodramatic scene where two teenagers are about to die so they film a goodbye to their parents. The girl tells her parents that she's dying next to a sweet boy that she hardly knows, "so it's kind of OK". And the boy tells his brother to stay awesome. And then the boy and girl hug each other, and I noticed that neither one of them is holding a camera.

7. But my favorite scene is about the amateur storm chaser. He's terrified of bad weather, and keeps wanting to go home. But when he sees a tornado made of fire, he grabs the camera and basically runs right into it.

8. Oh man, I can't even talk about the white-trash rednecks.

9. The script is clumsy, the dialogue is awkward and sometimes nonsensical. The "suspense" is built on laughable situations. And the only real purpose of the movie is to watch the destruction of a town that's so small it has one high school, but also has a big airport.
So what I'm saying is, this is a pretty great bad movie. I'm gonna be buying this one.

Exodus: Gods and Kings (USA, United Kingdom, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Exodus: Gods and Kings

1. This is a 3-hour epic that is kind of based on the famous Bible story of Moses rescuing the Jews after 430 years of slavery in Egypt. It takes the broad plot outline from the Bible, but makes its own story. To put it another way, I heard two people complaining behind me that it wasn't "historically accurate".

2. Christian Bale plays Moses, adopted son of the Pharaoh. He is an atheist, and serves as a general in the Egyptian army with the Pharaoh's real son, Ramses (who was actually born 300 years after the events of the movie, but whatever). Moses helps to keep the Jewish slaves in line. But when he finds out he is actually Jewish, his mind is blown. He does some things that get him exiled, so he goes off and gets married and has a son.

3. About halfway through the movie, Moses gets hit on the head with a rock and then sees God. After that, the personality of Moses completely transforms; you could interpret this new Moses as either a man who has found faith, or a religious extremist with possible schizophrenia.

4. The movie rides a very thin line on the God topic. If you want to believe that the story is basically true, then you are free to believe that. But if you don't think the story is actual history, you are free to believe that, too. The movie provides a possible interpretation of the plagues as a chain-reaction of rare natural disasters that had nothing to do with God, but that fed Moses' religious mania.

5.  Most of the famous plagues appear in the movie, but they go by very quickly. However, we do get a bonus scene of gigantic cannibal crocodiles. And I must admit, the climax at the Red Sea was pretty epic.

6.  For a movie about God's wrath, there sure was a lot of politics, intrigue, and talking in it.

7. The God of this movie is very much the God of the Old Testament. He is inscrutable, sadistic, bloodthirsty, and vengeful. God is definitely not Love in this movie. Ramses even directly asks Moses the Big Question: if your god is real, is such a god worthy of worship?

8. The casting of the movie is just... confusing. It's about people in the Middle East, but all the main characters are white with a vague British/American accent. Sigourney Weaver is in the movie, but she has about six lines. And whoever thought of hiring John Turturro to play the pharaoh, well, there must be a special strain of weed for that.

9. This is a very conflicted movie. And I'm conflicted about it. Visually it's spectacular. There are some amazing set pieces, fascinating scenes, and some great acting. But it does too much. It's a look at society, revolution, and the difference between leadership and slave-driver. Religiously, it tries so hard to include all perspectives that it ends up feeling hollow.
The movie can't commit to anything, so it ends up meaning nothing.

The Theory of Everything (Britain, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie The Theory of Everything.

1. This piece of obvious Oscar-bait is about the life of famous physicist Stephen Hawking. And I feel really conflicted about it.

2. There are some great individual things about this movie - some terrific cinematic sequences and emotional moments. The soundtrack is lush and beautiful.

3. But it's mostly a love story. A fake one.

4.  The movie tries to give the audience a taste of what Hawking did to physics. But it ends up feeling very vague, and if you don't already know his theories, then you just end up with the idea that he was really smart. You don't understand how revolutionary he actually was.

5. It's also a "greatest moments" look at the development of his motor-neuron disease, and how he went from a healthy 21-year-old to the famously wheelbound man with a wrecked body and robotic voice.

6. The rest of the movie is a tired, by-the-numbers romance about a woman who stands by her man and together they overcome all odds. A lot of the relationship depicted in the movie never happened in real life, including how it began and ended. Not even close. The film just invents a new relationship for them.

7.  I admit, I couldn't help but spend part of the movie trying to figure out which actors played which characters in the "Harry Potter" movies. It was kind of distracting.

8.  Eddie Redmayne (who isn't very well known in America) plays Hawking. It's easily the best acting I've seen in 2014. The way he slowly contorts his body as the disease progresses is one of the best physical performances I've ever seen in my life. It should be illegal for him not to win some acting awards. He almost single-handedly makes the movie worth seeing.

9.  As a showcase for some cinematography and acting, the movie is great.
 As an inspirational love story, this movie is melodramatic and saccharine. You know, the usual.
As a scientific biography, this movie is terrible, and almost insulting.
If you watch this movie, make sure you know what you're getting.

Birdman (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Birdman

1. I admit I almost skipped this movie, because I couldn't figure out from the marketing what I was supposed to be going to see. So the biggest reason I went to see it is because of the director, Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu. I've followed his career ever since Amores Perros.

2.  I'm very glad I took the chance with this movie. This is an acidic, melancholy comedy that takes on serious universal themes, while set almost entirely in a Broadway theater.

3. Michael Keaton stars as Riggan Thomson, a has-been Hollywood actor who, in a kind of pathetic attempt to make himself relevant again, decides to create a Broadway show. As the show gets closer to opening night, his mental stability deteriorates, and everything starts coming unhinged. People around him are forced to face their own insecurities and fears.

4. The movie is very cleverly edited so that it seems like most of it is filmed in one long, continuous camera shot.

5. While the entire cast is great, this might be Michael Keaton's best performance ever. He plays Riggan with just the right mixture of exhaustion, hope, cynicism and defeat.

6. There is a dash of magical realism that pops up from time to time, which may confuse some audience members. And I'm still not sure what to do with the ending.

7.  One of the themes of the movie is coming to the realization that in the grand scheme of things, you don't matter very much, if at all. Even if you do achieve some fame in this world, it's temporary and pointless anyway.

8.  Another theme of the movie is the eternal battle about creativity. Specifically, it illustrates the way that the Hollywood movie culture and the New York theater culture resent each other for having differing ideas about art and importance and relevance.

9. This is a very quirky, dark-hearted comedy that takes stabs all kinds of people. celebrities, and situations. And it's exactly that sharpness, as it slices up the characters, that lets the audience see that inside, we're all pretty much the same.