'The Hobbit' proves just because you can, doesn't mean you should - REVIEW

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Action Fantasy, 2014
2 hours, 24 minutes
Adapted and Directed by Peter Jackson
Based on The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien
Rated PG-13 for "extended scenes of intense fantasy action violence and frightening images"

Starring
Martin Freeman
Ian McKellen
Luke Evans
Richard Armitage
Evangeline Lily
Lee Pace
Orlando Bloom
Ken Scott
Aidan Turner


"You've won the Mountain. Is that not enough?"

SPOILERS AHEAD. YOU'VE BEEN WARNED. 

I'm gonna keep this one short and sweet.
I love the LOTR film trilogy. I love The Hobbit as a book and as a story. But I don't like it when Peter Jackson turns a children's story into a sprawling epic that tries so hard to be as wide in scope as the original films that put Jackson's name on the map. It's too messy and straight up does not work.

I don't know where to start. For one, the events set in motion by the first two films seem to just kinda END after the first 15 minutes, leaving the set up from the second film seem wasteful. A bunch of subplots wrap up quickly and then some new shit starts happening. It's kind of a weird transition, like the first 15 minutes of the film could have come at the end of the second one, but then, OH WAIT, THAT'S RIGHT, there would be no third movie. Welp, ya got another ticket out of us, Peter. Hope you're happy.

The writing is LAUGHABLY awful. Like, the kind of awful in which I literally laughed out loud. Some bullshit romance subplot (which doesn't exist in the book) with a dwarf and an elf (the elf in question doesn't even exist in the fucking book) and then Legolas (also NOT IN THE FUCKING BOOK) says something hilarious about his father does not control his heart or whatever the fuck. Then, at the end of the film, the girl says some bullshit like, "If this is what love feels like, I don't want it!" And that's AFTER her dwarf boyfriend dies. Because they just had to kill off two of the most characterized dwarves in the film (because that TOTALLY happens in the book... okay, Thorin dies, but I don't think the other one does. It's been a while since I've read the books...). The whole movie is full of awfully generic dialogue to the point where I am stunned that this is even a thing. Not all bad dialogue is noticeable. In this case, it is to a fault.

The visual effects are all over the place. The movie looks fine from a distance. Literally. Sweeping pans of the vast Middle Earth landscapes look phenomenal, as they did in the original trilogy. But close up? Not so much. Everything is bogged down by CGI that is far too heavy for its own good. As a result, it looks like a typical blockbuster. There's even a moment when Legolas does something so fucking ridiculous and the CGI looks so bad that the audience laughed. Hell, that happened quite a bit, come to think of it.

I could go on, but I'll put it like this: if your film looks more fake than something that came out over 10 years ago, you have a problem. Especially with such a monstrous budget.

So what's good about the movie? Not much. The performances are pretty good, Martin Freeman in particular. Ian McKellen is obviously amazing as he has ever been as Gandalf, and Luke Evans is great as Bard the Bowman. The rest of the dwarves are fine. Everyone else is... just fine...

I really can't recommend this movie. It's not good, guys. It's just two and a half hours of non-stop fantasy action that is disgraceful to Tolkien's book. I wanted to enjoy it, but this is really just generic Hollywood fanfare at it's finest.

5/10

INHERENT VICE - Review

It sure feels good to be home. My semester is all wrapped up, which includes the conclusion of my first full semester as the film critic for The Columbia Chronicle.

It's been ages since I've written a review here. My last one was for Guardians of the Galaxy, which came out all the way back in early August. That was my #2 most anticipated movie of the year, so I'm happy to return to the blog to talk about my #1 most anticipated movie of the year, Paul Thomas Anderson's Inherent Vice. 

I certainly hope you enjoy my back-to-basics approach of first-person writing and the lack of proofreading. Because it's a casual blog and I have other things to do, you know?

=======================================================================

Inherent Vice

Crime/Mystery/Comedy, 2014
2 hours, 28 minutes
Written and Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson
Adapted from the novel Inherent Vice by Thomas Pynchon
Rated R for "drug use throughout, sexual content, graphic nudity, language and some violence"

Starring
Joaquin Phoenix
Josh Brolin
Katherine Waterson
Owen Wilson
Reese Witherspoon
Hong Chau
Benicio del Toro
Martin Short


"I need your help, Doc."



Hazy.

That's the one word I can use to accurately sum up Paul Thomas Anderson's latest film Inherent Vice. It is one hazy-ass movie. You're probably wondering what exactly about the movie is hazy. Quite frankly, it's... it's everything. The characters, visual style, plot, you name it and it has got the word haze written all over it. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. If anything, it makes the movie all the more special. I can safely say that Inherent Vice is another excellent addition to Paul Thomas Anderson's filmography. This is his seventh film, and thankfully, he's still going strong.

Things kick off when private eye Doc Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) is visited by his ex girlfriend Shasta (Katherine Waterson), who needs help after the disappearance of her wealthy boyfriend, Mickey Wolfmann (Eric Roberts). Reluctant at first, Doc accepts the case and finds himself facing more than he bargained for in the form of an international drug syndicate called The Golden Fang. From there, Doc squares off against Nazis, the FBI, lawyers, dentists, dopers, baseball bats, PCP, and spontaneous cunnilingus.

Inherent Vice brings back the neo-noir in such a way that has not been seen since The Big Lebowski. Yet instead of being a comedy with crime elements, Inherent Vice lays on the mystery pretty thick and keeps the laughs reserved. That doesn't mean it's hilarious, just that the humor takes a back seat. This can be a double-edged sword. Many scenes drag on for more than a few minutes in which Doc just asks a lot of questions and gets a lot of answers.

What makes the film so funny is the diverse cast of characters. Everyone has a distinctive personality and Joaquin Phoenix plays well off of the other cast members, Josh Brolin in particular. The back-and-forth between nearly everyone is stellar as well, thanks to Anderson's sharp writing. And, much like in the case of The Dude, much of the film's humor is at the expense of the drug-fueled central character.

Amidst the high profile leading cast, it is the supporting members that make the film shine. Newcomer Katherine Waterson, who plays Doc's ex-girlfriend Shasta, is easily one of the highlights. Although she only appears in three key scenes (two of which happen to be rather lengthy), Shasta is one of the most memorable characters. She's a modern day femme fatale, and hopefully Waterson will become an Anderson regular as well as receive an Oscar nomination for the part.

As great as Waterson and the rest of the supporting cast are, a majority of them are underused. Martin Short makes a highly memorable appearance, but only for a single scene. It's a shame to waste such a talented cast, especially when many of the actors have received top billing. At least the supporting players have noteworthy roles that enhance the pacing, story, and Phoenix's performance.

The crime and mystery itself is just as intricate as one would expect from a Los Angeles based noir. It all begins with Mickey Wolfman and then the disappearance of Shasta. Doc's interest in the case grows as he is repeatedly led back to it by other parties. Early on, Shasta recommends Doc to a friend of her's. The woman's case seems rather ordinary, but it is quickly revealed that her case is connected to the Wolfman disappearance. Each and every case intertwines with the central mystery, which makes every scene feel necessary. However, because of its impressive size, some of the threads get lost in the clutter. Repeat viewings ought to help fix the problem.

The evolution in Paul Thomas Anderson's work is been fascinating. His early work consisted of films like Boogie Nights, and Magnolia, which contained fast paced filmmaking with huge ensemble casts. Things slowed a bit with Punch-Drunk Love and then considerably with his highly acclaimed There Will Be Blood, the latter of which was a considerable change in pace for the director. He kept that slow and more focused momentum going with The Master, and now we have arrived at Inherent Vice. It is a wonderful culmination of the new and old Anderson. The slower and centralized plot is bolstered by a strong, supporting ensemble cast. It is Anderson returning to his roots while staying true to his new form, and longtime fans of his work will be sure to appreciate its value. It acts a companion piece to both Boogie Nights and The Master in vastly different ways, one for the storytelling and the other for style.

In a world full of disappointments, Paul Thomas Anderson has not let me down yet. I'm so thrilled that Inherent Vice turned out to be another amazing addition to his filmography. It's definitely worth seeing more than once to get the full scope of the mystery, as some of the details may get lost in the rather large mix. It's a shame is that the supporting cast is not used as effectively as they could have been, even if the characters and dialogue are strong. It may rank somewhere in the middle of his work, but even that is good considering all of his movies are fucking amazeballs.

9.4/10