On the Waterfront - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"Isn't it simple as one, two, three? One: The working conditions are bad. Two: They're bad because the mob does the hiring. And three: The only way we can break the mob is to stop letting them get away with murder."

The late Marlon Brando is widely regarded as the greatest actor of all time, but until very recently, The Godfather was the only movie of his that I had watched. That being said, I wanted my new classic movie segment to start out with a bang, so what better choice than the greatest actor of all time's most  critically acclaimed movie was there? I saw At The Waterfront yesterday, and from the very beginning of the movie, I knew that I was in for treat. I knew the movie was gonna be a lot different from the movies I usually watch, seeing as it's almost 60 years old and all, but I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised at how powerful it actually is. As stated in my latest update post, I personally have a hard time getting out of my comfort zone and give older movies a shot, even though I'm well aware that these movies often are some of the more incredible and memorable ones. If you're one of these people as well, please, for the love of God, go watch On the Waterfront or any other old classic for that matter. Give it a chance, and I promise you that your view will change, and a whole new world of fantastic movies will open up for you. 

On the Waterfront came out in 1954 and immediately received wide critical acclaim, which also showed at that year's academy awards. Marlon Brando won his first oscar for his portrayal of Terry Malloy, a tough, mistreated but goodhearted longshoreman, and the movie was also rewarded with awards such as best picture, best screenplay and best director. Brando's character is a young dock worker who works at the waterfront in New Your City, a business that was completely dominated by the mob at that time, and like everyone else, he does whatever his bosses tell him to. Even though the working conditions were horrible and the pay was extremely low, the workers had no other choice than to do what they were told, if they didn't want to end up dead in a back alley. An eyeopening experience, a determined catholic priest and a lovely young woman eventually make Terry question whether or not he's capable of withstanding the mistreatment, the dominance and the corruption of the mob any longer, and as the movie gets going, our main character realises that the only way to make things better for him and his colleagues is to do something about the problem himself. 

This movie definitely is an "oscar worthy"-kind of movie, in the sense that it has a great message about the society of the 1950's and the people who lived in it to tell. Even though that kind of movie often tend to bore the regular movie goer, On the Waterfront did an good job of staying interesting and captivating throughout it's entire run time, which in my opinion largely is because of the way it's put together. Even though the commonly used Hollywood-model of "character introduction first, escalation of the main issue second, grand finale last" that the movie follows is extremely cliché'd, there's something very pleasing about the way everything that happens makes sense. All the scenes somehow seem to connect and mean something more to each other than they usually do, and all the little hints, details and character specific trademarks are followed up upon and used later in the movie to really emphasise something else. As a result, everything that happens in this movie seems important and well thought out, as if nothing happened by chance. It's a solid, well created movie that probably deserved to win the oscar for best picture, but more importantly, for best editing as well. 

Another very important part of this movie is the message it tells and the themes that it uses to do so. Terry is faced with several moral dilemmas throughout the movie, and the way he struggles to determine whether or not he should act on his own behalf or do what he knows in his heart is the right thing to do, is a joy to watch most of the time. Father Berry (played by Karl Malden) is crucial to this element of right vs. wrong, and he's the only person who tries to stand up to the mob to begin with. He has several scenes in which he tries to convince the workers On the Waterfront that the only way they can improve their situation is to stand up against the mob and witness against them in court, even though he knows it'll endanger their lives. This leads into another one the issues that the movie raises about society, which is the question of whether it's okay to be a "rat", someone who passes information on to the police. These moral dilemmas between choosing to do what is best for one self or what is best for the people around you is the core theme of On the Waterfront. I personally think that it was an alright plot, but then again, it wasn't nearly as interesting as some of the other elements of the movie. It felt a little too educational and a bit too shoehorned into the movie as well. 

One of the things about this movie that surprised me the most, is how quickly I bought the eventual romance between Terry Malloy (Brando) and Edie Doyle (played by Eva Marie Saint). It didn't take nearly as long before I got on board with their relationship and started caring about what was going to happen to them as it usually does, and I'm honestly not sure why. Both actors won academy awards for their performances in this movie, but honestly, I've seen romances before that were just as well acted as this one, but were as interesting to me as George Clooney's batnipples in Batman and Robin are. (weird, my computer doesn't recognise the word "batnipple".) What I do know is that the relationship between these two characters was the thing I liked the most about the whole movie, because it was incredibly important to me that they were gonna be alright and and figure things out. Marlon Brando's performance in On the Waterfront, which I'd heard basically in itself is what makes this movie a classic, was, as predicted, completely off the chain. Brando's way of becoming the character which he portrays is incomparable to anything I've seen in a long time, and his addition to this movie undoubtedly is one of it's biggest draws.

Watching On the Waterfront was a very pleasant and eye opening experience for me, because it made me realise that older movies can be just as enjoyable as newer ones. My favourite parts were Marlon Brando's acting and his and Eva Marie Saint's relationship, and the way the movie was put together and told through great editing, phasing and cinematography is truly admirable. My only real problem with the movie is that I felt as though the main plot was more interesting than entertaining, which in turn meant that I had to stay completely focused whilst watching and movie, in fear of loosing interest in what it was trying to say. The script definitely is oscar worthy for the reasons I talked about earlier, it just wasn't as entertaining and captivating to me as other parts of the movie were. For this reason, On the Waterfront, the all time classic, "only" gets my seal of approval, which of cause still is a good rating. (4/6)

On the Waterfront IMDb page here

On the Waterfront trailer link here

Update #4 - Classic Movies and Comfort Zones

Even though I've done over twenty reviews since I started blogging, none of them has been about a movie that's more than 20 years old. Se7eN came out in 1995 (18 years ago as of today), and to this date it's still the oldest movie that I've ever written about. The reason for this lack of older movie reviews is quite simple; For some reason, I just don't watch old movies. I used to consider myself a movie enthusiast, but honestly, how can I, when all I watch and write about is movies that are younger than myself? I'm well aware that there are hundreds of classics from before the sixties that are just waiting for me to see them, and I know that a lot of them are considered must see for anyone who sees themselves as movie fans. So, why is it I've never just gone ahead and seen a classic film? It's simple really; I'm afraid of leaving my comfort zone. 

Doing new stuff is something I've always been very sceptical about. Whether it's talking to new people, trying out new sports, listening to music I've never heard of before or watching movies that aren't like the ones I'm sure I'll enjoy, testing unknown waters is something I've never been good at. Sure, I'd like to be that guy who's just able to open himself up to new people and new impressions, I'm sure that's a heck of a lot funnier than doing what I do, but that's just not the kind of person I am. Trusting people and and really letting them get to know me isn't something that happens very often, and unlike most 18-year-old guys, I only have about 5-6 friends that I'd describe myself as being really close to and open with. I don't mean to make it sound as if befriending The Andrew Lawrence is some prestigious honor, I'm just trying to explain my situation as best as possible. 

So how does this apply to movies and blogging you ask? Simply put; I don't watch a lot of movies from the 80's and 70's, and none from before that. Sure, I've seen a few all time greats like Taxi Driver, A Clockwork Orange, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Deer Hunter and 2001: A Space Odyssey, but really old classics like Citizen Cane, Casablanca, 12 Angry Men, Vertigo and Rear Window, I have not. Seeing as I'm well aware that these are all highly praised and respected movies that any movie enthusiast with the slightest amount of self respect have seen, confessing that I haven't done so myself is something I'm not very proud of. 

It's never too late to make a change though. Yesterday I accidentally came across a YouTube review of an old Charlie Chaplin movie, and there was just something special about the deeply passionate way that this guy was talking about a movie that came out all the way back in 1940, that made me realise just how much enjoyment I've been missing out on. In that moment I decided that I had had enough of Bruce Willis, Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt, and I sat myself down and watched my first 50's movie in God knows how long. Needless to say I had a great time, and I don't know how I've let myself miss out on movies like the one I saw for so long. I've always known that this is how I'd end up feeling about it, but sticking with newer movies was just so much easier to do, rather than trying out something new. Or old. You get what I' trying to say. 

I plan on creating a new segment on my blog called Classic Movie Reviews, and the first installment of that series will be coming out later today. My plan is to make one classic review for every two or three of the regular reviews, since I don't intent to stop watching new movies completely. It'll be a nice, balanced mix of new and old, and I believe I'm going to enjoy this new approach greatly. 

/Andrew

Pretty Much It YouTube channel link here

(these are the guys who made the Chaplin movie review I talked about)

Up in the Air - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"The stars will wheel forth from their daytime hiding places; and one of those lights, slightly brighter than the rest, will be my wingtip passing over."

Up in the Air is a movie about Ryan Bingham (played by George Cloonery), whose job consists of travelling all around America firing people. He's on the road almost 300 days every year which means that airports, planes and hotels have become a part of his daily routine, and they're basically the closest thing to a home that he has. Ryan enjoys this lifestyle immensely, because he doesn't believe in things like having children, getting married, settling down and bonding too much with other people. When his company eventually decides to modernise their business and plan to begin firing people using video conversations over the Internet instead of face to face, our main character's only passion is threatened to be taken from him, which causes him to reconsider the choices he's made in his life. As he sets out on his final business trip, Ryan is joined by Natalie Keener (played by Anna Kendrick), the young hotshot who came up with the video conversation idea. These two character's radically different ideas and philosophies of life, and more importantly how they clash and lay the foundation for some very interesting conversations, are the main themes of this movie.

I went on IMDb to check out Up in the Air Air before I got a chance to see it, and it's description reminded me a lot of Sofia Coppola's Lost in Translation, one of my favourite movies of all time. This automatically raised the bar for this movie extremely high, and sure enough, they do have a lot of things in common, but there's at least just as many things that are unique to each movie. One of the things they have in common is the way they deal with themes like loneliness and the purpose of life, and even though Up in the Airnever really gets close to being as spellbinding and emotionally affecting as Lost In Translation is, it's still a very good movie that kept me interested from start to finish. George Clooney's character Ryan Bingham and his way of living is the most important thing in this film, mainly because of the way it changes as the story goes on, and because of what this means to the over all theme and message of the film. 

To begin with, Ryan enjoys being alone and on the move all the time, never staying in one place for more than a few days. When he gets introduced to Kendric's character and strikes up a casual relationship with Alex Goran (played by Vera Farminga) however, the conversations and banter between the three of them begin to affect Ryan more than he'd like to admit. All three characters have different ways of approaching life and things like partnership, family, age and dreams, and the interaction between the three of them is one of this movie's most important elements. Seeing as this is the case, Up in the Air is a dialogue driven movie in every sense of the word, which means that it relies heavily Clooney's, Farminga's and Kendrick's abilities to deliver their lines and connect with each other in a believable and professional manner. Luckily all three actors are on the top of their game in this movie (all of them earned oscar nominations for their performances), and to me, the above average chemistry that these three actors share in this movie is it's strongest selling point by far. 

One of the things I noted very early on when watching Up in the Air, is the fact that it's filmed and edited in a way that you normally wouldn't see in a Hollywood film. Sometimes it seems as though the camera is being hand held, an element that served to make the movie seem more realistic and authentic, and the way all the people that Clooney has fired talk to the camera as if they're being interviewed is quite remarkable because it emphasises the "realistic documentary feel" of the movie. As a result of this, the occurrences in this movie are strangely relatable and therefore much more believable than they otherwise would have been.

Realistic editing and great acting aside, the most important part of this movie, by far, is the different human emotions and choices that Clooney's character struggle to understand and deal with. I feel like the director's main objective when creating this movie was to make the viewer think about things like trust, love, happiness and family, and to make you reevaluate whether or not you're doing what makes you and the people around you happy. Ryan Bingham has several revelations throughout the movie that I think almost everyone who watches the movie somehow can relate to, and it's kinda remarkable to me how precisely this movie dealt with a lot of the same things that I put a lot of thought into myself. This is probably exactly what Up in the Airs director Jason Reitman had in mind when creating the movie, and I applaud him for creating a picture that isn't as much a tool to make money as it is an attempt at telling a story that'll make the audience think about their lives and the choices they've made. This element is another one of those things I believe Lost In Translation and Up in the Air has in common.

Whilst watching this movie, I was pleasantly surprised at how funny it actually is. Particularly Anna Kendrick's character cracked me up several times, and it was nice to see that the movie wasn't too proud of itself to incorporate some humour into the script, which honestly would have been a little boring otherwise. The writers found a great balance between the serious and the comedic dialogue, which ultimately made the movie more enjoyable that it would have been if one of the two elements would have been dominant over the other. That being said, the movie did loose me a couple of times, especially when it drifted more towards being a romantic comedy than a drama with comedic and romantic elements. When everything is said and done though, Up in the Air is a sweet, clever, funny and though provoking movie that I enjoyed watching, mainly because of the acting, the writing and the directing. You shouldn't expect anything mind blowing and emotionally extraordinary from Up in the Air, but it is a good time nonetheless, good enough to have earned my seal of approval. (4/6)

Up in the Air IMDb page here

Up in the Air trailer here

Arbitrage - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"How much money do we need? Do you want to be the richest guy in the cemetery?"

In Arbitrage, Richard Gere plays a successful business man from New York, who seems to have everything under control. He's a rich and loving father, a husband and a humanitarian; everything required to be considered a successful human being by most standards. However, as our movie gets going, it becomes apparent that this success is just a facade. Underneath a neat and well organised surface, Robert Miller's life is full of lies, fraud and deceit, and when he eventually makes a gruesome mistake, it suddenly seems very likely that this tainted part of his life is going to be revealed. Miller knows that he'll loose everything and go to jail if his secrets were to be found out, and he therefore does everything in his power to contain the situation and protect the people he cares about.

Right off the bat, the most important part of Arbitrage, the one that had to be done right in order for it to be a success, is the element of having a secret  that only the main character and the audience knows about. If the audience doesn't feel connected to the character and if it doesn't care about whether or not he gets caught, the wole premise of the story falls flat. The TV show Dexter got this element right, at least in the first four seasons, and Arbitrage luckily does as well. Just like Michael C. Halls' character from Dexter, Robert Miller is a criminal that by all rights should go to jail, but the way he's portrayed makes you wish that he won't. Gere's acting and his very well written monologue made me care about the character, so much so that I though of him as the good guy of Tim Roth as the bad, even though it actually was the other way around. Arbitrage hit the nail on the anti hero element perfectly, and had it not, the movie would not have been nearly as good as it.

Also, after having watched this movie, I couldn't help wondering who the guy that decides which performances are worthy of being nominated for awards such as the oscars and the golden globes is, and how much he gets paid. Everyone who's seen it will agree that Richard Gere did a fantastic job in Arbitrage, and most will also agree that he should have been nominated for both of the previously mentioned awards. Richard Gere's efforts are not the only great thing about this movie though, let alone the only great performance, but he undoubtedly did bring the movie to a level that it wouldn't have reached without him. Even though the entire cast did great in general, Tim Roth's and Nate Parker's performances stood out to me, especially Roth's. I have a weakness for this guy and the way he always seems to make his characters seem a bit quirky and a bit off, and his performance as the sleazy and opinionated cop who'll do anything to catch his man adds a lot of good stuff to this movie.

When watching Arbitrage for the first time, it's important to keep in mind that it's a business based thriller about lies and deception, and thus most of the action is in the dialogue. The movie almost feels indi-noir'ish, which definitely is a good thing in my opinion, but the truth is that a lot of people are gonna be bored from the lack of explosions and hot babes in bikinis that this film "suffers" from. My guess is that this is why the movie never saw a huge release anywhere in the world, which is a damn shame, because it truly is a very effective and riveting thriller that a huge audience would have enjoyed, if they had just the had the chance.

One of the reasons why I enjoyed most parts of Arbitrage as much as I did and think that a lot of other people would as well, is the fact that it's an easy movie to watch and enjoy. Yes, it does throw some convoluted businessman/lawyer-lingo around a few times, but  as a whole, it's a fairly short and straight to the point movie that you're able to sit down and watch without having to invest yourself too much in the story. Seeing as my personal favourite movies tend to be deep, dark, mysterious and sometimes even existentialistic dramas such as Fight Club, Magnolia and The Shining, I was kind of taken aback when I realised how much I actually was enjoying this movies simplicity. To be honest though, I actually don't think that being easy to digest and fairly straight to the point was the directors and the writers ultimate vision for this movie. 

What I mean by this is that there are a few things that happen during the movie that hints towards a bigger and more grand message about society, corporations, money, greed and power, and most of the time I wasn't really sure where this was going. This subplot felt a little underdeveloped in my opinion, and it was only in the very end that the director went all in on this idea. Normally I don't mind at all when a movie waits until the last few minutes before dropping it's big message and ending it at that, but in the case of Arbitrage, it felt as though the ending tried to be something that the rest of the movie was not. It went from being a simple story about a businessman with a dark side who tries to cover up his tracks, into trying to say something clever about society and what's wrong with it. No matter how gorgeously this last scene is filmed and presented, it didn't fit the tone of the rest of the movie. 

In the end, I will say that Arbitrage is a very entertaining and easy to watch movie that will keep most audiences entertained and engrossed from start to finish. Apart from the amazing acting, the movie did everything it tried to do just fine. It's nothing amazing or completely original or anything like that, but it's good enough for me to wanna recommend it to anyone that enjoys a good thriller. Most people are not gonna notice the few flaws that I think the movie does have, and even if you do, you'll still have a good time watching Richard Gere look better at 60 than 99 % of other men do at 30. If that's not seal of approval worthy, I don't know what is. (4/6)

Arbitrage IMDb page here

Arbitrage trailer link here

Magnolia - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"And the book says: "We might be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us."

It's been a while since I reviewed one of my all time favourite movies, and for good reason. I think everyone that enjoys writing, drawing, painting or any other form of creative activity will agree that you always look back on your early work and cringe at what you see, and even though I've only been doing this for less than six months, I'm a victim of this phenomenon as well. I find my very first blog posts rather horrible, mainly because I was a lot worse at writing back then, but also because I started out writing about all my favourite movies all at once. I honestly think those reviews are repetitive and a little boring to say the least, and when I came to this realisation sometime during February, I decided to wait a good while before writing about another favourite. I rewatched Paul Thomas Anderson's Magnolia a couple of days ago though, and decided it was about time I immortalised my thoughts about it on the interwebs, when I found myself tearing up just 10 minutes into the movie.

Magnolia is one of those movies that has a huge array of different characters that are all somehow connected to each other, in this case by a quiz show on TV, and these characters each take part in one or several of six plot lines/stories that affect and influence each other in some way or another. The events of the movie take place in a medium size town somewhere in California over a period of about 24 hours, and it becomes apparent right from the beginning that all of the main characters are dealing with some sort of inner struggle. Each of the characters and their problems are depicted in very specific detail, and for it to make sense, writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson had to make the movie three hours and eight minutes long. This is a hell of a long movie, but, if you have the patience that is required and are a fan of fantastic film making, I guarantee that Magnolia will keep you immensely entertained from start to finish. 

After my first viewing of this movie, the only thing I really found memorable about it was it's music. Of cause, I've come to love a bunch of other things about about it after several additional viewings, but there's still something about this music that just gets me every time. Aimee Mann composed and wrote eleven original songs for this movie, and although Hans Zimmer's Now We Are Free from Gladiator is still my favourite movie song, Mann's One, Save Me and Wise Up, all from Magnolia, are very close contenders to the number one spot. These songs fit the situations in which they are played absolutely perfectly, and they serve as a brilliant tool to amplify the desired effects of the specific scenes. The most memorable example is the utilisation of the song Wise Up, which takes place about two thirds into the movie. I won't spoil it, but I promise that it's one of the more memorable and unique experiences you'll ever have watching a movie. I know that talking a bunch about the music of a movie as one the very first things might not seem logical, but I really mean it when I say that it's one of the most important things about the whole movie. Listen to it on Spotify or on YouTube trough the provided links, you'll understand what i mean. 

Aimee Mann sure did an amazing job, but of cause, there's still a bunch of things about Magnolia that are just as fantastic. The cast immediately comes to mind, and oh man, what a brilliant fucking cast it is. Julian Moore, William H. Macy, John C. Riley, Tom Freaking Cruise, Philip Seymour Hoffmann, Philip Baker Hall, Jason Robards and Melora Walters, all cream of the crop actors that bring their absolute a-game in this film. It's a huge cast, and the fact that all of their characters are equally important and vital to the story, none of them getting boring, disposable or forgetable for even a minute, is a testimony to just how gifted Paul Thomas Anderson is at creating and developing characters in his movies. Julian Moore's character is my personal favourite, partly because she's my favourite actress of all time, but mostly because her character seems so real. She doesn't use any sort of sophisticated Hollywoodishly fake and inhumane poetrylike dialogue to express how miserable she is, instead, she slaps people around, acts like a bitch, and curses three times in every sentence. Her way of dealing with what's going on and what she's done in her past is realistic and believable, and one of my favourite things about the whole movie. 

Writing about all the remaining characters would take way too long, but I have to express my thoughts on at least a few more of them. Quiz Kid Donnie smith, played by William H. Macy, is the only character that almost never gets into contact with any of the other principle characters. This is done to emphasize how lonely the character is, and the way William Macy portrays this is simply amazing. He always does a good job at playing weak, lonely, sad and helpless characters, just look at my movie review of Fargo. In Magnolia he's absolutely heart wrenching, and one of my favorite characters for sure. I almost made his quote "I really do have love to give, I just don't know where to put it!" the tag line of this review, for the simple reason that it summarises his character perfectly. The one you see up there now, also spoken by Quiz Kid Donnie Smith by the way, fits the movie better as a whole tough. It was either that or "respect the cock!".

Some people believe that Tom Cruise gives his best performance of all time in this movie, and although I do agree that he is very convincing as Frank T.J. Mackey, a sexist, bitter and traumatised "ladies man", I think he was a little better in both Minority Report and Collateral. That doesn't mean he's not freaking great in this movie though, and his character is the one that experiences the biggest personal transformation of them all. John C. Riley and Melora Walters have some great chemistry in their shared scenes, Riley giving what i believe is his best personal performance, and Philip Seymour Hoffmann was terrific at playing a male nurse, however ridiculous that may sound. It was funny to see him work with Tom Cruise in such a peaceful manner, considering how they would go on to try and kill each other several times in Mission Impossible III seven years later. To sum it up; all Paul Thomas Anderson's films are centered around characters. Just look at the The Master and There Will Be Blood for an example; both movies have several shining examples of amazing character development. In Magnolia, there's nine. 

"And the book says: "We might be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us."" There's a good reason why I chose this quote as the tag line for this review. All the principle characters in Magnolia are struggling with inner demons that have tight grips on their individual pasts, and they're stuck in a miserable an enjoyable present because of this. The over all theme and message of the movie is that you don't necessarily have let go of the past in order go move on, but instead look the devil in the eye, confront your fears, and accept and forgive yourself for being who you are. Cruise's character is the one that has the hardest time doing this, and as a result, he's the one that reacts the heaviest when things start to go awry. At one point near the ending of the movie, when everyone is doing the exact opposite of what Paul Thomas Anderson is trying to teach the audience about forgiving yourself, something completely unexpected and surreal, almost divine, happens. An unimaginative and close minded audience member might consider this incident unrealistic and anti climatic, but if you have been payed attention to the development of the story and the characters and have a bit of biblical knowledge, your jaw is gonna drop like the base would in a night club. D-d-d-d-drop the jaw. I was completely swept away by this twist the first time I saw it, and it's one of my favourite things that has ever happened in any movie ever. EVER. 

Being the movie magician that he is, Paul Thomas Anderson wrote and directed Magnolia as close to perfectly as humanly possible. I've only watched three of his movies, but there's no doubt in my mind that he's my favourite director of all time, simply because he understands character development and the interaction between actor, script and camera down to a science. Everything about Magnolia is perfect in my opinion, from the editing to the music, the acting, the dialogue, the character development, the phasing, the cinematography; it's spellbindingly good. This 1999 masterpiece almost makes me tear up several times, it's my favourite Paul Thomas Anderson movie, one of my favourite movies of all time, and 110% worthy of my highest rating. In other words: There's no two ways about it. Magnolia is Movie Magic at its finest. (6/6)

Magnolia IMDb page here

Magnolia movie trailer here

500 Days of Summer - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"Most days of the year are unremarkable. They begin, and they end, with no lasting memories made in between. Most days have no impact on the course of a life. May 23rd was a Wednesday."

I've never been a huge fan of romantic movies, and no matter how convincingly a friend or family member of mine will try to persuade me into watching one, I hardly ever take their suggestion to heart and actually watch the movie. Maybe it's because I'm a guy and find the genre boring, maybe it's because I find it too girlish, or it could just be because there are so many other genres that are more satisfying to me, I don't know. Being in this position, having to ride a train for two hours with my little sister every now and again in order to see my dad comes in handy. I often get a chance to see some movies I wouldn't have chosen to see otherwise on these trips, seeing as I often let my sister pick which movie to watch whilst we travel. Today she picked 500 Days of Summer, and I'm happy she did.

In 500 Days of Summer, Tom, a young and semi depressed postcard designer meets and falls in love with Summer, an opinionated young woman who doesn't believe that true love exists. The two of them eventually hook up, and thus we have our movie. 500 Days' main focus is to depict the ups and downs that all couples experience, and although this sounds like a really cliched plotline, the movie goes a long to way to tell its' story in a way that leaves the audience feeling like they just witnessed something different from the old ordinary romantic comedy. The editing is a huge part of this sense of originality in my opinion, as is the choice of the main character and his point of view, but most importantly, I believed that the things I saw on the screen could actually take place in real life, and I found that I had to remind myself several times that I was watching a movie and not a documentary. I recently watched The Deer Hunter for the first time, and no matter how great that movie is, I couldn't help thinking about stuff like "how did they film that shot?" or "wow, that scene was really well acted" whilst watching it. This might not sound like a bad thing, but the fact that I was more intrigued about the technical stuff that went into creating the film than by the actual story and the character development, ultimately drags it down a lot. 500 Days never did that. I was completely intrigued in the plot from start to finish, thanks to it's originality.

500 Days Of Summer is music video director marc Webb's first attempt at directing a full scale picture, and he did a fantastic job in my opinion. The attention to detail and the superb way all the different scenes fit together is impressive to say the least, the phasing of the movie is just right, and the plot never feels too drawn out or too rushed. The story is told in a non-linear fashion, with bits and pieces from different situations spread out across 500 days being mixed together in a surprisingly cohesive and smooth manner, and the way Webb handles the transitions between two bits of story is really good looking and well thought up. The whole movie kind of feels like a scrap book, and I have to say that I really enjoyed the way the director and the editors put it together. The actors did a great job as well; Joseph Gordon-Levitt is always a joy to watch, and Zooey Deschanel was really cute and likeable as Summer. The two had some great chemistry throughout the movie, which in it self was really funny most of the time, but really sad at other times as well. To sum it up: All the technical aspects that went into creating 500 Days Of Summer were top notch, the directing, the editing and the writing in particular.

500 Days is one of very few "boy meets girl" stories where the guy's point of view is the most important one. Tom is a really likeable and surprisingly relatable guy, and having him be the main character of the movie worked out nicely. Seeing a romantic movie from the dude's point of view was refreshing to say the least, and it made the movie feel very honest, because it showed that not all guys are egoistic idiots, and that not all girls are innocent and sweet when it comes to relationships. Sometimes girls screw over guys, and that's a fact! Another thing about Marc Webb's first feature film that I enjoyed a lot, is the choice of music that went into it. The Temper Trap's Sweet Disposition is the main theme, and it's a really great song that makes me want to get more involved with music. I used to listen to a lot of music when I was like 15-16 years old, and 500 Days of Summer has made me want to start doing so again.

As mentioned, 500 Days Of Summer is a surprisingly refreshing take on the done to death "boy meets girl" cliche storyline. The narrator of the movie states that "this isn't a love story, but a story about love", which is absolutely true, and this one line summarises the movie perfectly. I consider 500 Days refreshing because it's a very realistic depiction of how things work out when two people fall in love, one that Isn't hollywood'ised and unbelievable, and as a result, this movie left me feeling like I had just witnessed something fresh and out of the ordinary. It sort of lit a fire underneath me, and it made me realise that movies still have the ability to surprise people and reinvent themselves, something I find very satisfying to think about. Watching this movie has gotten me all exited about what the future will bring in terms om films and cinema, simply because it is as different and alternative as it is. Thank you 500 Days Of Summer, thank you.

I mentioned earlier that I'm not a big sucker for RomComs. My favourite movie genre is dark dramas with deep and exciting character development, which basically is the exact opposite of the generic chick flick love movie. I'm always open to surprises and suggestion though, and 500 Days did to me for romantic comedies what Se7eN and Black Swan did for horrors. For what it is, 500 Days is a very satisfying movie in terms of storytelling and realism, so much so that I'd say it's worth buying on BluRay. It's not my favourite movie about love, Brokeback Mountain gets to keep that title for now, but 500 Days of Summer sure is up there. (5/6)

500 Days of Summer IMDb page here

500 Days of Summer trailer here

Take Shelter - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"You think I'm crazy? Well, listen up, there's a storm coming like nothing you've ever seen, and not a one of you is prepared for it."

Take Shelter is a small budget movie that is written and directed by Jeff Nichols, starring Michael Shannon and Jessica Chastain. Curtis (Shannon) is a hard working husband and father, who one night has a very unsettling dream about a terrible storm that tears his house and family apart, and when this dream continues to reappear, Curtis decides to build a storm shelter in his back garden. As his dreams continue to get more disturbing, Curtis becomes more and more convinced that an actual storm of terrible proportions is actually coming, which leads him down a path that his family, friends and colleagues find hard to write off as being completely normal. People start to think Curtis is going crazy, and as a viewer, you begin to wonder the same thing. The question of whether Curtis is mentally ill or whether his concerns are legitimate is the main plot of this movie, and if you enjoy these kinds of mysterious character driven dramas, Take Shelter is sure to keep you greatly entertained. 

Now, every film enthusiast has a favourite genre of movies, be it horror, action, drama or comedy etc. Personally, I find the most enjoyment in dark dramas with deep and engaging characters, and from what I had heard about it, Take Shelter was supposed to be exactly like that. And by God. It is. Explaining how far up my alley this movie is would take hours, so I'll just settle with saying that it's pretty God damn far. It's a very atmospheric movie, meaning that you have to sit yourself down and really 'lock in' in order to get the most out of it. Watching it on a laptop with a pair of bad headphones on a train, in school or anywhere else where you might get distracted by something isn't going to work at all, you just won't get as emotionally engaged as you need to be in order to enjoy this movie as much as you should. A lot of people aren't going to like Take Shelter very much, simply because it requires so much ability to just sit down for two hours and focus on watching a movie. For true fans of cinema and great film making though, this movie is deep, enthralling, thematic and spellbindingly atmospheric; a must see. 

As explained in the beginning for this review, the question of whether Curtis is sane or not is the main plot of the movie, and the way Nichols handles this element is extremely impressive. On one hand you can easily see how the things Curtis are doing to prepare for the (supposedly) impending storm are kinda ludicrous, but on the other hand, his dreams seem really realistic and horrifying, and the way Michael Shannon displays his characters inner fears and struggles are strangely convincing. At no point during the movie was I wholly convinced that either of the two solutions was right, and I flipped between leaning more to one side than the other several times throughout the entire two hours that the movie lasted. The fact that the mystery is so well preserved and carefully constructed is impressive to say the least. It's worth noting that the dreams/nightmares that Curtis is subject to are truly terrifying and well created, and the fact that the film crew managed to make Jessica Chastain more shit-in-pants inducing than hot in one of them is a true feat of greatness. 

Some people who generally liked this movie sadly were turned off by how long it seemed to be at times. Admittedly, there are parts in the early second half that seemed to drag on a bit too long, but it never got to the point where I was bored or lost interest in the story. I agree that the movie could have been a good 15 minutes shorter and still be as effective is it is, but it's not a huge problem in my opinion. I'm very forgiving when it comes to this commonly criticised part of a lot of movies though, and I understand why a lot of less enthusiastic moviegoers than myself are going to loose interest in the plot because of these dragging parts. Forgivable as they are, these bits do limit the movie's re-watch ability somewhat. If you manage to stick with the story to the last act of the movie though, I promise you that you'll witness the most amazing ending to a movie you'll see in a long, long time. The last three scenes or about 20 minutes are intense in such a degree that I'm struggling to put it into words, but rest assured, the climax of Take Shelter is nothing short of jaw-dropping.

Whether you like the movie or not, one thing that every sane person has to agree upon, is the fact that Michael Shannon deserves inhumane amounts of praise for his performance in this movie. Take Shelter is the first movie of his that I've seen, and I'm already convinced that this man is an incredibly talented individual. His facial expressions are authentic and believable, ans the way he delivers his lines, filled with agony and emotion, it's simply surreal. The amount of times I was convinced that his character was completely and utterly insane, yet still lovable and caring is beyond counting, and the list goes on and on. The entire cast was good, but every single one of them, several time oscar nominated Jessica Chastain included, paled in comparison to the powerhouse performance of Michael Shannon. 

When everything is said and done, Take Shelter is a deeply emotional and captivating movie, for those who are capable of appreciating quality film making for what it is. I enjoyed it immensely myself, and I definitely recommend everyone who enjoys a dark drama to give it a go. Jeff Nichols' second feature film is a masterpiece in terms of character driven storytelling and character development in itself, something I enjoy immensely. It's also an extremely underrated movie that didn't see a wide release anywhere in the world, but I truly believe that it's one of those movies that'll gain a large following over time, and will be looked back upon as one of the cult classics of our time. For that reason alone, Take Shelter is easily worth buying on BluRay. (5/6)

Take Shelter IMDb page here

Take Shelter trailer here

Iron Man 3 - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

*wink* "You'll never see me coming..." *wink*

Take a look at that picture above. I made it larger than usual so you can really get a good look at it. Take a good hard look. See how Tony Stark is falling from the sky, smoking, on fire, destroyed, beaten, defeated? That's your dreams. That's your expectations. That's this movie. Think about how hard this film has been hyped for God knows how long, and try to imagine how sad you would feel if it turned out to be a sloppy mess with no context what so ever. Wouldn't you feel let down and disappointed? Sadly, that's exactly what the latest Iron Man movie is; a let down and a disappointment.

I was so exited for this movie, I literally could not wait to see it. I loved the first Iron Man movie, I didn't think the sequel was as bad as people made it out to be, and the fact that Shane Black, the director of the Lethal Weapon series and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, one of the most underrated movies of all time, had been hired, not only to direct it but also to write the script, only served to get me even more exited for Iron Man 3. But man. Oh man. This movie has so many flaws that I hardly know where to begin. Explaining what's so bad about it without spoiling too much of the plot might become a challenge, but I should be able to give you a general idea of what you should expect from this movie without spoiling anything. 

Frankly, the movie is a mess from the very beginning. Iron Man 3 takes place after the events of The Avengers, and Tony Stark is suffering from post dramatic stress syndrome. Saving the world from an alien invasion proved to be a little more than he could handle, and the first third of the movie shows how his life has taken a change for the worse. He can't sleep at night, Pepper and him have begun to drift apart, and his competitors in the technology business have begun to catch up to him. We're also introduced to the the main bad guy/bad guys in this first part, and the foundation for the main conflict is constructed. Sadly, all these things happen in a very convoluted and weird way, and I never really got on board. The movie goes in a million different directions right form the beginning, and they never manage to sort of reconnect and make sense compared to each other. This tendency continues in the second part where the plot kinda starts to escalate, but still, a lot of things just happen without much reason or explanation, and this sadly carries on throughout the movie. Things just happen, and they don't make sense. 

By far my biggest problem with Iron Man 3 is the plot. If I had to compare it to a dairy product, I'd probably say that its closest comparison would be a Swizz cheese; stinky a full of holes. There are so many "but if that's possible, why can't they do that?"-moments, even more "why do these people care about each other?"-situations, and almost just as many "OK, what does that thing that just happened have to do with anything?"-scenarios. This movie is so poorly put together, so many things are never explained, so many things just happen for no reason, and I found myself not caring about what was gonna happen next way too many times, because I knew it would have nothing to to with anything that had already taken place. I sadly can't explain what my biggest problem with the plot is without spoiling some of it, but what I can say is that one of the big important story lines, the most important one actually, the one that the whole movie relies upon to make it interesting, gets completely and utterly ruined half way through. Tony Stark's character progression gets completely swiped under the rug by something way too simple and minor that makes no sense what so ever, and from that point on, I didn't give two shits about his character progression any longer. Everything the trailer and the fist half of the movie had build up about his battle within himself, was just completely shrugged off as a joke. Tony Starks character progression basically got Boba Fetted. 

Another thing I absolutely have to touch upon is the villains. Ben Kingsley and Guy Pierce are fantastic actors, that goes without saying, but they were completely miss used in this movie. Especially one of their characters take a completely unexpected turn for the bizarre in the latter half of the movie, people who have watched it will know what I mean. There are many different opinions on this twist, and I personally found it kinda hilarious and well though up. That being said, it completely smashed the villain concept of the entire movie, and gave the other guy about 20 minutes to become an astablished character worth fearing, before the final showdown. I love when a movie has an awesome and respectable bad guy, but in that department, Iron Man 3 went down a road that just did not work at all. None of them had any credibility, and the small amount of motivation they had for doing what they did seemed weak and confusing. 

The final showdown of this movie is bad, it just is. Sure, the pyrotechnics and the explosions are impressive, but it fell through completely. The setup was poor and the execution was worse, but what irritated me the most about it was the emotional bait and switch half way through. The creators had an opportunity to do something extremely cool and surprising, but in the end, they chickened out and made the safe decision anyway. At no time was I emotionally invested in this movie, even in the final moments of the big confrontation between good and evil. On top of that, when the thing that really was supposed to make the audience shudder in grief happened, I just didn't care. I own a big werehouse where i store all sorts of things, and no matter how hard I searcheh it, I literally couldn't find a single fuck to give. It just didn't phase me in the slightest, because of how badly it was handeled.

I personally think that special effect and cool looking CGI should be used as a tool to improve something that is already great, add a little bit of seasoning to an already finished product, and not as a foundation or something that everything else is based upon, as it sometimes is the case in Iron Man 3. Sometimes things happen just to look cool and awesome and impressive, which they admittedly do, but they just don't fit into the context of the movie. It's as if they were put in just so the editors had something cool to put in the trailer. The fact that the two coolest things in the entire movie were in these trailers as well, isn't exactly a plus either. Speaking of editors; another major complaint I have about Iron Man 3 is the way it's edited. Often times it's way too easy to see when a scene is filmed in two or more takes and clipped together afterwards, and it feels too rushed and incomplete at times. Sometimes when I actually got close to getting invested in the story, I'd suddenly snap out of the experience because of some jumpy or clumsy piece of editing. 

Most people will go easy on this movie and say things like "it's a superhero movie, what did you expect?" or "for what it tried to be, the movies was awesome!", but I strongly disagree. Yes, I realize that all movies can't be like Schindler's List or a Taxi Driver in terms of storytelling, emotional appeal and character development, and I know that Iron Man 3 is based on a comic book for children and young adults, but that doesn't mean it isn't meant to be taken seriously. A movie can have as many sparkly explosions and as much good looking action as it wants to, but if it has no structure or integrity, it becomes a sloppy mess that true fans of the superhero genre aren't going to enjoy at all. I liked The Avengers because it knows what it is and doesn't try to be something it's not, I love the first Iron Man movie because it was simple, had a great plot and some amazing character development, and both of those movies have great special effects and tons of action, just like Iron Man 3 has. The latest addition to the marvel movie universe just doen't have that solid base and structure that good movies have to fall back upon, and it suffers tremendously because of it. 

In the end, no matter haw many hilarious oneliners Tony Stark has or how likeable Robert Downey Jr. is as an actor, In a world where we have comic book movies like 300, V For Vendetta, Iron Man 1, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, Iron Man 3 sadly just isn't worth anything more than a silent facepalm. (2/6)

Iron Man 3 IMDb page here

Iron Man 3 trailer here

Children of Men - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"As the sound of the playgrounds faded, the despair set in. Very odd, what happens in a world without children's voices."

Children of Men is a science fiction movie set in a near future where all women in the world have become infertile, and as a result, no babies are being born any longer. In the beginning of the movie, the youngest person in the world is killed at 18-years-old, so it's been almost twenty years since the last child was born when our story begins. Panic and despair has spread across the globe, and almost all major cities and governments have been brought to ruin, leaving the world in a state of chaos. England is the only country that hasn't completely fallen apart, mainly because the government has an extremely aggressive and radical way of dealing with the mass immigration that the country is experiencing. At every train station, airport and ferry dock, armed-to-the-teeth soldiers pick up anyone without a British passport, and send them to a camp that practically works the same way as a modern day concentration camp. 

Theo Faron, played by Clive Owen, lives a lonely and depressing life, until a certain someone from his past one day comes along, and asks him to help her do something that essentially could rescue the world from it's steep decline into pandemonium. Theo is a lonely office worker who lost his sense of purpose when his his son died at eight years old, and he used to be a political activist who fought against the violent and radical British immigration system. However, since his wife left him after the the death of their child, he's lost his sense of meaning in life, as well as his motivation to try and change the ways of the government. A turn of inevitable events eventually force him to return to business, and thus we have our movie. 

Right from the beginning, Children of Men is an extremely dark and chillingly atmospheric movie that does a really great job of creating a depressive mood of despair and catastrophe. The streets of London are grey and littered with trash, and living there is a constant struggle against crime, fear of terrorist attacks, hunger and sickness, and the griddyness is completely believable because of the realistic set design. The beautiful camera work is also worth noting, and especially some of the longer scenes are incredibly well filmed in my opinion. There's just something about long, unedited and uncut takes that is just incredibly fascinating to me, and Children of Men have several of those. The editing and phasing of the movie is top notch as well, and as a result, this movie manages to tell what could have easily been a three hour story, in almost fifteen minutes less that two hours. There were a few times when the CG could have been a fair deal better, but it's not very noticeable, especially if your not one of those people who pays a lot of notice to detail. To sum it up: almost all of the technical aspects of this movie are extremely well done, but they are not what you'll be thinking about the most after you've finished watching it. 

In my opinion, the level of emotional engagement i felt towards the main characters and the task they set out on, is Children of Men's strongest selling point. There were so many times throughout this movie where i found myself left breathless by the raw, emotional and tragic things that occur, and the speed at witch I became attached to most of the main cast is something I've rarely experienced before. Juliane Moore is terrific in this movie, and Clive Owen's character has a lot of emotional connection to Moore's, something that's very well depicted in a very short amount of time, and it's a very vital element in Theo's character progression. Owen's portrayal of Theo is probably the best performance of this movie also, so having his progression as a character be as important as it is makes perfect sense. He plays the "Average Joe gone heroic and sacrificial hero"-type flawlessly, and his powerful screen presence is hard to ignore. 

Charlie Hunnam and Chiwetel Ejiofer are both great at portraying political activists/terrorists, and Michael Caine is just being Michael Caine; utterly fantastic. I liked Pam Ferris and Clare-Hope Ashitey much less though. Ashitey's acting was just kinda horrible at times, and it was a little too visible that her character weren't originally in the book that the movie is based upon. In the book, her character and Julian Moore's is the same person, and I'd have liked it better if this was the case in the movie as well. I do however see why they decided to split them up, and as a whole, the writers probably did the right thing by splitting the role in two. Ferris' character was just plain annoying, dispensable, stupid and unlikeable. All in all though, I'd say that the cast does an all round good job, Clive Owen, Juliane Moore and Michael Caine especially. 

The world in which Children of Men takes place is another thing I liked tremendously about it. Post apocalyptic movies have always fascinated me, and out of the many movies in this franchise that I'we seen, I feel like this one creates one of the more realistic and well though out illusions of how things would be in such a situation. In one of the opening scenes, the one where Theo is buying coffee just before the beginning credits, I was really impressed with how well the director and the camera crew captured the essence of what a society on the brink of downfall would be like to live in, and the fact that the climax of a scene so early in the movie is as memorable as this one is, is extremely impressive.

Children of Men is a great movie in my opinion, and it's a film that the wast majority of people will be able to watch and enjoy. The characters are great, the technical work that went into the movie is top notch, and there's not a single scene in which I found myself bored or in lack of entertainment. It's an emotionally engaging picture with lots of heartbreaking, realistic tragedy and nail bitingly intense moments that will make your heart pound, and as a whole I've got very few bad things to say about it. It's relatively short and to the point, which makes it easier to watch than a lot of other sci-fi dramas, although I would have liked to see a bit more of the political stuff that would be going on behind the scenes in a world like this, but then again, it might have dragged on a bit too long if this had been the case. I feel like this is one of those movies that you can just watch over and over again and never get tired of seeing, and as such, Children of Men is very much worth buying in BluRay. (5/6)

Children of Men IMDb page here

Children of Men trailer here

Chronicle - A Movie Review by Andrew Lawrence

"A lion does not feel guilty when it kills a gazelle, right? You do not feel guilty when you squash a fly... And I think that means something. I just think that really means something."

The found footage genre has been done to death in the past five years, so when I heard that yet another one was coming out, I didn't think too much of it. I've always though that the the concept of found footage is very interesting and compelling, but I had also kinda lost hope of ever seeing another film pull it off in a way that seemed realistic, because it's been done so bad so many times as of recent. Thankfully though, when the genre had reached it's lowest low and all hope seemed lost, something came around and changed all that completely. 

Chronicle is a movie about three college seniors, who find a meteorite in a cave that gives them super powers. They have a lot of fun with their new found abilities in the beginning, but as they begin to discover just how powerful the skills they've gotten really are, things start to spiral out of control. The main character Andrew (played by Dane Dehaan), is a troubled young man who gets abused by his father. His mother is very sick as well, and on top of that he's being bullied in school. Taking this into consideration, it's not hard to imagine that things start to get out of hand when he suddenly learns telekinesis. Andrew's character development is the main story arc in Chronicle, although the movie also deals with things such as responsibility, friendship, high school popularity and being an outcast as well. 

The thing that usually bothers me the most about found footage movies, is that feeling you often get of "Okay, by now a normal person would have turned off the camera!". Thankfully Chronicle deals with this problem very early on in the movie, by having Andrew state that he likes to use the camera as a way to create a barrier between himself and the people around him. He's being portrayed as a very anti social person from the very beginning, so this totally makes sense. Also, when the three boys eventually make their discovery and gain their mystic powers, Andrew begins to levitate the camera and have it follow the boys around, a storytelling decision that probably was made to give the filming crew more freedom than the found footage genre usually allows for. This works out just fine, and Chronicle has some pretty good looking sequences in the latter part of the movie, which is largely because of this freedom that the "levitating camera"-plot provides. 

Another thing about Chronicle that struck me early on is how realistic it actually is. Have you ever wondered why Spiderman suddenly feels an incredible sense of responsibility as soon as he gets his super powers? So have I, and it has always seemed a little fishy to me. In Chronicle however, it takes the main character a lot longer to start realizing what it is they're dealing with, and as a result, I got to enjoy about 45 minutes of the coolest shit I've seen in a found footage movie, ever. The guys did all the awesome stuff that everyone has always wanted to do, and I was incredibly entertained by how closely Chronicle depicted how I'd probably use my super powers, if I had any. 

Even though it's a movie about super powers, there are three elements in Chronicle that makes it feel oddly realistic. The realistic curve at which the guys learn about their powers and how to deal with them, the great execution of the found footage element and some surprisingly decent performances from all the main actors, when combined, create an authentic and believable reality that makes the movie more exiting than super hero movies normally are. Calling Chronicle a movie about super heroes probably isn't the right way to put it though, seeing as the main character kinda looses his shit from time to time. "Super villain origin movie" is a more fitting title in my opinion. 

Having been created on a very low budget, Chronicle sadly lacks a bit in the special effects department. The things that Andrew and his friends do, awesome as they are, often don't look very authentic. Their flying looks down right bad at times, and there are scenes where it's 120 % completely obvious that the actors are acting in front of a greenscreen. Had the budget for the movie been a bit higher, these things would not have looked as fake as they did, and my over all enjoyment of the movie would have been greater. The last 20 minutes of the movie didn't quite get to me either, in that I was not as exited about what was gonna happen next as probably should have been. I'm not saying that this part of the film was bad or anything, I just enjoyed the earlier parts a great deal more. 

All in all, Chronicle was a really cool movie that kept me entertained from start to finish. The early parts where the guys are beginning to get a grasp of what they're capable of doing is fantastic, I really enjoyed the chemistry between the actors, and Andrew's character progression was impressive, interesting and quite disturbing at the same time. There are rumours about a possible sequel floating around on the internet, and if they're true, I'll definitely be looking forward to watching said sequel, especially if the special effects budget gets raised a bit. Chronicle is a great movie that covers a lot of great themes when you consider how short it actually is, it's dark and gritty yet still entertaining and exiting, and sometimes even suspenseful. This movie has definitely earned by seal of approval, and I'd be willing to spend some money to buy it on BluRay if the price was low enough as well. (4/6)

Chronicle IMDb page here

Chronicle Trailer here

The Place Beyond the Pines - A Movie Review

"You know something Luke, if you ride like thunder, you're gonna crash like Thunder."

In The Place Beyond the Pines, Ryan Gosling Plays a stuntdriver called Luke, who works as a motor cycle stunt driver for a travelling circus. One day he reunites with a woman he once hooked up with, and when she deals him some shocking news, Luke decides to turn his life around. Unfortunately this doesn't work out the way he planned, and a turn of events eventually lead him down a dark path. This is the beginning to a long, twisted turn of events, and as a viewer you suddenly find yourself watching a saga of tragedy, loss, ambition, consequences, destiny and family, unfold before your eyes. 

I was really looking forward to this movie, mainly because of the actors involved, and as predicted, they all did a very good job. No surprises in that department. What really took me by surprise however, was the pure craftsmanship that went into creating this picture. The Place Beyond the Pines is one of those visually stunning movies that comes around every so often and leaves you nailed you to your seat, completely stunned by the visuals. I was not a big fan of the directing in Derek Cainfrance's last movie, Blue Valentine, but I gotta say that he surpassed any and all expectations PBTP's early reviews had given me, in terms of directing. This movie has many beautiful shots of people simply traveling through pine forests, one of the best looking car chases I'we seen in my life, a beautiful use of sound and music that the movie several new layers, things that are all vital to creating a good movie. 

But. As important and well executed as these things are, none of them are the things that make The Place Beyond the Pines as remarkable as it actually is. In my opinion, nothing stands out from this movie as much as the story in itself. This might sound like a minor thing, but honestly, The Place Beyond the Pines has one of, if not the best storytelling element I've seen, ever. It reaches the status of classic Greek tragedy very early on, and the way human behaviour, ambition and consequence is displayed through nerve wracking intensity, but also beautiful, discrete and subtle hints and winks is truly breathtaking. As great as the actors are, none of them would have been able to do what they did without the writer/director's script and story. This is Derek Cainfrance's masterpiece, his baby, and it's a piece of hard work that I will look back upon in awe, seen from a story telling point of view. 

Being as cinematic and story based as it is, this is very much a movie that you have to let yourself completely submerge into, in order to enjoy it to it's maximum potential. Sure, it has some dramatic and breathtaking suspense scenes that everyone can enjoy, but the vast majority of this movie consists of brutally honest depictions of human behaviour, motivations and consequences, and you have to be able to enjoy these things in order to really appreciate the movie. It's a moody, atmospheric and grand picture, nothing like most movies that come out these days, and as a result of this, a lot of people who maybe don't care that much about movies that are based on dialogue and emotion storytelling won't enjoy this movie nearly as much as other people who do. You kinda have to be a fan of movies and movie creation, have an interest in human psychology and emotional elements like ambition, hopelessness and frustration, in order to enjoy the full 140 minutes of this completely original movie. 

When I say that The Place Beyond the Pines is an original movie, I truly mean it. It's 100 % completely unpredictable, and it's put together in a way that makes it seem like a saga or a legend that spans over a huge period of time. Every so often you hear a movie being described as "taking movies to a new level", but in my humble opinion, none has ever been more fitting for that title than The Place Beyond the Pines, simply because of how original it is. It's completely possible that many other directors have done "things" that are similar to what Derek Cainfrance has done with this movie, but I've personally never experiences anything like it. 

Now, this is the part of the review where I normally begin to list the things i didn't like about the movie I'm reviewing, and looking at all the praise I've given it so far, I bet it's hard to imagine that i would have a single gripe about The Place Beyond the Pines, right? Well, I do. This will be the first time in my history of blogging that I'll be complaining about the length of a movie, because honestly, this movie is too long. I know this might sound a bit contradictory to what I'we said about the amazing storytelling elements in the movie and the whole thing about enjoying films based on dialogue and emotional depictions and that jazz. What I mean when i say it's too long, is that I was very aware of just how much time i spent sitting still. After we had exited the theatre, my mother and sister told me in detail how they never felt like The Pines was a long movie. I wish I'd felt the same way, but the fact of the matter is that it felt like a four hour movie to me. It was an exhausting movie to watch, and it's taken me more than three days to digest it completely. No matter how great a movie is acted and and created, if it makes me, the guy who would gladly watch the 3.5 hour extended edition of Gladiator every single day of the week, actually think that a movie is too long, that kinda says a lot about how slow paced a movie actually is. 

The Place Beyond the Pines is like three movies mixed into one. I won't explain how this works out in detail because I'll end up spoiling too much, but I will say that the first two parts are 100 % worthy of the Movie Magic rating. Some people claim that the movie quote on quote "falls apart" in the last part, but that's not how i see it. Granted, it becomes overambitious and some of the things that happens are a little cliché and way too coincidental, but at no point in time was I ready to straight up leave the theatre in anger, like other reviewers have stated they were. I enjoyed the last part less than the first two, but it was still worth watching, even though it made the over all movie feel much longer than it was.

All in all The Place Beyond the Pines is a fantastic story that deserves major praise for the craftsmanship and dedication that went into creating it. I didn't get to talk much about the acting in this review, but if I had to summarice it shortly, I'd say that Bradley Cooper and Ben Mendelsohn both have very bright futures, that Dane DeHaan has an even brighter one, and that Ryan Gosling is one of the best actors working today, even though he plays the same character in almost all the movies he has been in recently. No one plays the "silent but violent" role better than Gosling, let's settle at that. 

No matter how long it is and how slow paced it is at times, The Place Beyond the Pines is a movie I'd be glad to own on BluRay, even though I might end up only watching the first two parts. It's got a lot of movie magic potential, but the fact that watching it almost becomes a physical challenge drags it down a whole lot. The Pines gets my seal of approval, and a huge one at that. (4/6)

The Place Beyond the pine IMDb page here

The Place Beyond the Pines trailer here