Movie Review: Silver Linings Playbook (2012)

I have mixed feelings about Silver Linings Playbook. To be sure, it had several laugh out loud moments that felt more meritorious than the cheap laughs achieved in most modern comedies. But the drama was somewhat confusing, and it could either be the case that the writers created a deep and subtle psychological struggle or they were utterly conventional. The main character, Pat (played by Bradley Cooper), has recently been released from a mental institution to which he was dedicated after committing a violent act towards his wife's lover. His motivation throughout the film is to improve himself and regain the affection of his wife. Along the way he meets a similarly eccentric woman, Katniss (played by Katniss), with whom he agrees to help in her dance contest.

Here is why I say the drama is confusing: from the beginning, Pat's quest to woo his wife seems to be a lost cause, and one can reasonably expect that at some point he will become romantically interested in Katniss. [SPOILER ALERT.] He does, but not explicitly until the very end of the movie. It's as if he realizes what the audience has known the entire movie: he doesn't have a chance of reconciling with his wife, but there's a readily available female right in front of him (who happens to be like 15 years younger, but whatever).

I'm also unsure how I feel about the plot element created by Pat's father (played by Robert De Niro) who is a compulsive gambler and decides to put a high stakes bet upon the dance performance of Pat and Katniss. It is reminiscent of the fact that people place wagers on the outcome of events they otherwise have no interest in. Is it the case that the plot absent the betting lacks an adequate amount of tension that the writers feel that they have to add more by having gambling involved? There is an argument to be made that it is: we all know Pat isn't going to get his wife back (as if his success as a dancer had any bearing on it) and they don't expect to be serious competitors but want to pass a minimum score (stipulated by the bet). So, the jury is still deliberating whether this was a legitimate tactic or a cheap way to create more tension.

Lastly, Chris Tucker once again demonstrates why he deserves an award for best supporting actor. We look forward to his next buddy cop film.

Movie Review: The Hunger Games (2012)

Well, this one certainly has the stink of Twilight on it. While that execrable series deserves to be soundly made fun of at every turn, The Hunger Games should at least get a fair shake on its own merits, instead of the consistant and unavoidable comparisons with those other tween bestsellers. Now, I have not read The Hunger Games, and I don't plan on doing so. I can say, without resorting to lengthy, rote recitations of the differences between the source and the adaptation (differences which always end up reinstating a tired heirarchy of the arts, venerating literature and bastardizing film), that this film is about as ordinary as can be, and just barely competent enough to be watchable. Enough has been said of the alleged allusions or homages or thefts from Running Man, Gladiator, Starship Troopers, Truman Show. That kind of sophomoric listing has little critical value, and even worse, it doesn't matter to audiences. Hunger Games is set in an ill-defined, unnecessarily vague and dystopic future, where rustic "districts" must each select one child from both genders to do combat for the "State" on national TV until only one remains alive. Our focus is on Katniss Everdeen, a young woman who volunteers to represent her district in place of her younger sister. She is then teamed up with her male "partner," perpetual mouth-breather Peeta Mellark, and off they go to train for the sadistic games.

Moot points about originality aside, what matters is the way this story, however recycled, is told. Unfortunately, Hunger Games makes several key formal errors. One element that has drawn significant criticism is the use of the reviled "shaky cam," and rightly so. I can understand the desire for a kind of documentary realism, but the camera movement is so messy and burlesqued that I often had no idea what was going on until the characters came to a stop, and even then, by the time I had regained my bearings, off we were again on another blotted green trip through the simulated woods. Even when the camera was forced to settle down for a minute while Katniss and Peeta gabbed, their dialogue was so insipid, and their delivery so poor, that I secretly wished for the familiar Roy G. Biv blur to resume. During these confabs, though, K and P decide to put on a front of love. They do this in order to earn the support of a million-plus saps watching around the world, specifically the powerful "sponsors," who, if properly touched or impressed by their "affection," can provided emergency medical supplies to the participants. Naturally, this kind of unintentional self-critique is something Hollywood simply cannot stand. And, naturally, simplistically, their love soon ceases to be an act, so what could have been a wonderful challenge to the kind of enforced, monogamist pair-bonding characteristic of Hollywood, becomes yet another triumph of simplistic, unfettered, "normal" heterosexual love. Hunger Games is just another movie, albeit one without conviction, without awareness, without politics.