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.

Furious 7 [USA, 2015]

Nine Things About the Film Furious 7

1. It's kinda cool to see our fast and furious gang back again. But the series now needs to fit in the category of "fantasy", because everybody has become magical, indestructible superheroes, and the plot has absolutely nothing to do with reality. And I understand why the title was shortened to "Furious 7". The movie is kind of slow until the last 45 minutes.

2. For some reason, James Wan directed this movie. Up to now, he has only directed horror movies (he's most famous for Saw).

3. There are actually two plots in the film. The first is a continuation of part 6. Jason Statham plays Deckard, the brother of the bad guy in the last film. Statham is probably best known as the guy in The Transporter, and he plays basically the same character in this film. I suspect that Deckard really is the Transporter, and this is what he does between jobs.

4. The second plot is about a secret organization in the government that is looking for a hacker. Even though they have all the resources, computer experts, and hundreds of agents, they can't get the hacker. So they hire these six renegade car racers to do it.

5. The technology in the film is very interesting. It turns out that if you put a bomb on the front porch of a house, the house will explode from the inside. Also, there is now a little computer chip that allows you to look at every camera, computer, and cell phone in the world, at the same time.  Oh yeah, and if you want to override the security system of one of the richest men in the world, all you have to do is open the phone outlet and cut the orange wire.

6.  Paul Walker died halfway through filming, so the script had to be rewritten, and Walker's brothers were used as stand-ins for him. Computer effects were added onto the brothers to make them look like Paul. Yes, Paul Walker has become computer-generated.

7.  Lucas Black, the star of the 3rd "Fast and Furious" film, has a cameo in this movie. He has signed on to be in part 8 and 9.

8. The film came up with a classy way to write Paul Walker out of the story, while guaranteeing that the series will continue. And the best part of the movie is the very end, which is a tribute to Paul.

9. This movie is dumb, loud, and ridiculous. But if you know what you're getting into (and you should, considering this is the 7th movie), it's not terrible.

It Follows [USA, 2015]

Nine Things About the Movie It Follows

1. Don't let the basic plot of the movie fool you: this movie is a surprisingly effective piece of low budget, slow-burn horror.

2. It's about a girl that has sex with a guy, and is then stalked by a mysterious entity that wants to kill her. Yeah, it sounds absurd, and maybe it is, but just go with it.

3. The movie isn't really about the surface plot. It is an ode to childhood innocence, as well as an assault on childhood innocence.

4. There are a few inventive and effective jump scares, and the movie continually cranks up the paranoia and dread. Very few movies have given me as much anxiety as this one.

5. It's hard to set the film in an exact time and space - it's full of anachronistic details. Like, there are modern things like cell phones in the movie, but nobody ever seems to watch anything modern on TV. The clothes worn by the characters are a mishmash of styles and decades. Combine all that with a strangely beautiful synth soundtrack, and the events occur in a very dream-like atmosphere.

6. There are tantalizing cultural and psychological tidbits riddled throughout the movie like machine gun holes. The most obvious is the character who keeps pulling out her e-book reader disguised as a pink makeup holder, from which she reads aloud Dostoyevsky's bleak classic, "The Idiot".

7. This is the second film by director David Robert Mitchell. I don't think he had enough money to make all the effects look like they were supposed to, but he is earning a well-deserved reputation as a visual stylist.

8. Some people think the movie is literally about a demon. Others think it's a metaphor for the dangers of sex or intimacy. I don't think those interpretations are wrong, but they are really superficial. People with those interpretations missed most of the film. The real horror is not from the relentlessly stalking killer. Nor is it from symbolized, interpersonal trust issues. The real horror of the film is existential.

9. After the movie ended, I left the theater and started back to my car. And walking down the sidewalk, in public, the final piece of the movie's puzzle swung into place for me. I understood it on a deep level (perhaps deeper than Mitchell intended) and I just wanted to go home and curl up into a ball. Just like the girl in the movie did.

Spring [USA,2015]

Nine Things About the Movie Spring

1. This is a gutsy, intelligent, and intriguing indie film that doesn't really fit into any genre, though it's usually given the awkward category "romantic horror".

2. It's structured very much like Richard Linklater's "Before" trilogy: a young man named Evan travels to Italy and meets a woman named Louise. They spend a week walking around, talking, and falling in love. However, in between the conversations, Louise has some pretty serious problems developing. Horrific moments start poking through the leisurely romantic development.

3. The movie plays with the viewers' expectations of horror movies, giving some clues as to what's going on, but changing them later. The real clues to the movie (including the film's title) are hidden in plain sight throughout the film, but aren't really appreciated until close to the end.

4. Given what this movie is trying to do, the script is very well-written. The budding romance is realistic and believable, but there is also a mounting sense of dread that starts to soak through everything.

5. The movie gets dangerously close to becoming absurd and silly. But at several crucial moments, it just doubles down and forces you to keep with it.

6. Everybody knows the trite saying, "The journey is more important than the destination". This movie plays with that concept on a few different levels.

7. In the end, I don't think this is a romance or a horror movie. It's a unique philosophical meditation on several themes - the nature of love, the fear of commitment, unequal sacrifices between partners, secrets and insecurities. Oh, and the difference between science and the supernatural.

8. The ending is controversial, and your reaction will depend on how you interpret the rest of the movie. I thought it was very smart and satisfying; I actually think that's the only way it could have ended. But others will find the ending to be frustratingly incomplete. It depends on what you think the movie is really about and how literally you take the story.

9. This is an an oddball film that will not be to everyone's taste, and will probably not be seen by very many people. But it's one of the most intriguing and intelligent films I've seen so far this year.

The Lazarus Effect (USA, 2015)

Nine Things About the Movie The Lazarus Effect

1. Wow, this movie is dumb.

2.  It's about a group of college students working on a serum to help coma patients. For some reason they use it to resurrect a dead dog. Things go wrong for the group, and of course they have to try the serum on one of their own members.

3. The first ten minutes are kind of intriguing. But once a couple of the college students bring the undead dog home with them, you can stop watching. You've seen the best part of the movie.

4. The film uses a lot of pseudo-scientific vocabulary words in quick conversations, to cover up the fact that what they are saying makes no sense whatsoever. It even uses the stupid "we only use 10% of our brain" myth, and I don't know why. It's not like the movie makes more sense by utilizing that concept.

5. I suspect the script was written a couple of stoned college freshmen, who threw in a bunch of random, disconnected ideas that they thought were cool and "deep". I can't even really explain what the movie was doing. It goes from being "scientific" to demonic with the flip of a switch.

6. This is one of the bigger movie roles so far for Donald Glover (aka Childish Gambino). He's probably the best actor in the movie. I felt bad for him; he deserves better than this.

7. There are some interesting individual scenes and surreal moments. This could have been a decent movie, if somebody connected with the film actually knew what they were doing.

8. You know how in slasher movies, when the killer is chasing the people and they always make dumb decisions? This movie is like that, except the people make dumb decisions for the whole movie, whether somebody is chasing them or not.

9. As a movie belonging to the "re-animation" subgenre of horror, I think this movie should have stayed dead.

Clown (USA, 2014)

Nine Things About the Movie Clown

1. In 2010, a couple of friends, Jon Watts and Christopher Ford, made a fake movie trailer about a guy that turns into a killer clown. The trailer said it was directed by Eli Roth (known for Cabin Fever and the Hostel movies).

2. Eli Roth saw the fake trailer, loved it, and decided to put up the money for the two friends to actually make the movie.

3. Even though it's an American movie, it has only been released in Europe, and is already on DVD there.

4. The plot of the movie is simple and direct - a father finds a strange clown suit and puts it on for his son's birthday party, calling himself  Dummo. But after the party he discovers that he can't take the costume off. After a little detective work he discovers that clowns are a modern representation of an old European demon... and there's only one way he can clear himself of his troubles.

5. The movie starts out kind of silly, but as the father's problem gets worse, it gets really serious and grim.

6. The movie follows basic horror conventions and doesn't go to much trouble explaining why certain things happen - you just go with it. The movie is too absurd to be really scary, but it's also too bizarre to be funny. It exists in a unique place among horror movies.

7. When it comes to scary clowns, Dummo is up there with Pennywise. And the doll from Poltergeist, of course.

8. People that are really coulrophobic (which means "afraid of clowns") should probably not watch this movie. People that are sensitive about seeing children in danger should also probably not watch this movie.

9. Even though it's not super scary, this is a creepy movie with some genuinely unsettling scenes. If you go into this movie with no expectations, this is a gutsy and fairly impressive little gem.



>

Chappie (USA, 2015)

Nine Things About the Movie Chappie

1. This is the third film from South-African/Canadian director Neill Blomkamp. It's also his least cohesive.

2. Blomkamp's first film, District 9, used a science fiction story to discuss issues like apartheid and racism. His second film, Elysium, used a science fiction story to discuss issues like classism, immigration, and health care. Chappie uses a science fiction story to discuss... too many things.

3. The science fiction story is great. Sort of a philosophical successor to Robocop, it follows two employees of a weapons manufacturer. One employee wants to make robot police that can decide things for themselves. The other employee wants to make robot police that can only be controlled by humans. When a computer code is made to create actual artificial intelligence, it is tested in a robot that gets plunged into a very chaotic environment.

4. The movie introduces ideas such as God, consciousness, the soul, ethics, morality, and education. Unfortunately, those issues are too varied and too deep to explore in a two-hour movie, especially when you need to put in a lot of action scenes.

5. What could have been one of the most compelling themes, the development of morality, is turned into comic relief, as Chappie is taught how to be a thug. And another really interesting idea, about the transfer of consciousness, is only introduced at the very end of the movie.

6.  Visually, the movie is edgy and cool. The visual effects are impressive. Some of the action scenes are borderline epic.

7. The movie was partially financed by Sony, so of course the laptops in the movie are Vaios. And while I know the Playstation is a powerful gaming system, I have serious doubts that stringing a few of them together would be able to upload consciousness onto the internet.

8. Any movie about artificial intelligence requires a certain suspension of disbelief; you just accept the premise of the movie and go with it. But this movie requires too much of that. By the climax of the film, you have to throw science and reality out the window.

9. If you are looking for an action movie starring a cute wannabe gangster robot, this is a good time. Just ignore all the things that try to make you think. They will lead you nowhere.

Focus (USA, 2015)

Nine Things About the Movie Focus

1. For a movie that's supposed to be about focus, it sure doesn't have much.

2. The movie starts out promising - Will Smith plays Nicky, who leads a small group of con artists. Nicky meets a small-time wannabe named Jess, and he shows her how their world works.

3. What begins as a fun caper movie loses steam - and becomes predictable - as soon as Nicky and Jess start falling in love. Shortly after that (the football scene, to be specific), it comes completely off the rails. The movie gets increasingly ridiculous and unbelievable; by the end, I was laughing at all the wrong parts.

4. The movie itself doesn't suck. There are some nice scenes, good performances, and the camera work is great. The story sucks, though.

5. It's strange to see Will Smith play a dramatic and romantic leading man, but he pulls it off. His charisma carries the whole movie.

6. Jess is the only female character in the movie. She flip-flops between being a strong female and a sexist stereotype.

7. This movie has one of the longest and most pointless "I'm tied to a chair while the bad guy makes speeches" scenes I've watched in awhile.

8. This movie wants to keep you guessing who is on what side. But the story is so full of nonsense and holes that I stopped caring.

9. I know the movie's message is supposed to be how you can lose your focus and then find a new and better one. But the movie loses track of itself so completely that the message doesn't just get blurry, it disappears.