Meet the Mormons

Credible Credits

Year: 2014

Director: Blair Treu

Tagline: Six ordinary individuals.  Six extraordinary stories.

Synopsis: Get a glimpse at the lives of six individuals from around the country and around the world, all united by faith.

Review

This isn't a review like my other reviews.  Partly because this film isn't like the films I usually review.  I have no criticism to offer.  The closest thing I've got is wishing the film had been a little longer so it could have gone a bit more in depth.

First off, let me point out the documentary is called Meet the Mormons, not LDS Theology 101.  The film is not meant to be an introduction to Church doctrine.  Of course you can't discuss the lives of members without discussing some of what we believe.  After all, what we believe is inextricably intertwined into who we are.  The focus of the film shines on living our beliefs as well as finding common ground with all religious traditions, whether it be Baptist, Catholic, or Hindu.

Primarily, this is an introduction to us as a people.  The clear intent being to dispel the prejudices and misconceptions others have about us.  The film even begins by acknowledging the most common stereotypes and misunderstandings.  With each subsequent segment, the film basically says: "You think you know who Mormons are, think again."  The growing diversity within the Church is emphasized and celebrated throughout.

For those who haven't seen it yet, I'm not going to spoil any of the stories.  Suffice it to say, the first few stories are nice, lighter fare.  For me at least, the stories got more gripping as the film went on, with the last story being the most compelling of all.  That was the story of the single mother whose entire life was changed by the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

Beautiful stories would have been enough, but the film itself is also absolutely beautiful.  At times the cinematography is just breathtaking.  One segment is in Nepal.  We see pictures of the Himalayas quite often.  We don't often see the Himalayas as someone's backyard view.  Stunning.  And I clearly need to go ziplining in Costa Rica.

Just as a fun last tidbit, I'd like to point out that the film's editor was Wynn Hougaard, one of my professors when I was a film student at BYU.  Neat.

My final assessment is simply to go see Meet the Mormons.  It's 100% worth your time and 100% worth your money (which is being donated to the American Red Cross).

Quotable Quotes

• "God is the author of diversity." -- The Bishop
• "I'm not close to perfection, but I'm perfect in one thing: I'm perfect in trying." -- The Humanitarian
• "One choice can change everything." -- The Single Mother

ISFS

The Giver

Credible Credits

Year: 2014

Director: Phillip Noyce

Starring: Brenton Thwaites, Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Katie Holmes, and Alexander Skarsgard

Tagline: You Can Make Things Better
Synopsis: In a seemingly perfect world, one young man learns what it truly means to live.

Review

Yes, I have read the book for this one.  But it has been a few years and I don't remember all the details that were different.  I never read this as a young adult.  Somehow I just missed it I guess.  So I don't have the eye-opening attachment to the story that perhaps others do.

In terms of the movie, I was on the fence about seeing it.  But having gone in with fairly low expectations, I was rather pleasantly surprised.

For starters, the movie is quite beautifully composed.  The world of the "Community" feels very real, and very sterile.  Which is exactly how it is supposed to feel to the audience.  The film makes excellent use of color.  It's not simply black and white versus color.  Depending on which characters we are with, the hues have differing saturation.  It helps set the tone and feel of the movie.  And it is just fun to watch the colors gradually unfold.

Another thing the film did quite well was not shying away from the darker themes the book addressed.  It tackled those ideas head on but also with the proper delicacy.  While I don't remember many of the details of the book, the themes are what have stuck with me.  So it was nice to see the film try to embrace them.  The film is both earnest and genuine about its themes of learning what it means to live and being willing to accept pain and heartache in order to know joy and love.

Jeff Bridges does an excellent job as the Giver.  He's enjoyable throughout.  After seeing him, I can't imagine anyone else in the role.  Meryl Streep also completely fits her role as the Chief Elder.

While the film was enjoyable and certainly had the best of intentions, it still had some problems that left me disappointed.  First of all, the pacing was problematic.  It wasn't a very long movie.  But it felt rushed in some areas and sluggish in others.  We needed more time easing into the memories with Jonas.  When he gets the memory of war all I could think was, "What, already?"  Receiving those memories is supposed to be a long, somewhat jarring process.  Brenton Thwaites did a good job of embracing the joy of color and music, laughter and dancing.  But it felt like he should have been much more conflicted by the contrast of the world he lives in and the memories he's gaining.

The Giver (as a novel) predates nearly all the young adult fare that is so popular these days.  And yet it seemed to try to fit in with that crowd.  In the book, Jonas and his friends are 12.  In the movie they are 18.  Much of the tension between Jonas and his friends, Fiona and Asher, is invented for the film.  The same goes for most of the climax.  The Community is all about "sameness," so it is a pity the film falls prey to the same trap.  It felt far too anxious to "fit in" with all the other dystopian, young adult movies.  It needed to dare to be unique.

The bigger problem was heavy-handedness.  The film didn't trust the audience as much as it should have (and as much as I remember the book did).  By the film's climax (the part completely invented for the film), the Giver and the Chief Elder are practically just spouting ideological quotes at each other.  Certainly it is straightforward, rather than manipulative, which is good.  But it is also simply telling rather than showing.  I was told what to think, rather than allowed the time to discover it for myself.

I wanted the film to trust that if it presented me with the "facts" and the "truth" that I would choose for myself which world was better.  More than just watching Jonas' journey of discovering joy, music, color, and love, I wanted to go on the same journey.  And the film only kind of allowed that.  Given that the movie is about the power to choose, that was a major blunder.

The choice presented in both the novel and film is of fundamental importance.  It is whether we will taste the bitter to know the sweet; will we endure pain to know joy; will we allow hate in order to embrace love.  It is the same choice made by Eve and Adam in the Garden of Eden, the first choice made on earth.  While we may not be confronted with the choice to the degree Eve or Jonas was, it is a choice every human must come to terms with.  Otherwise they'll hop from pleasure to pleasure, never finding joy.

The film had an opportunity to really show how lost humanity would be without the power to choose or the power to truly live.  It tried to.  It had good intentions about an excellent theme and message.  And it partially succeeded.  It was an enjoyable film that I'm glad I saw.  But I'm more glad I read the book.  I want to read it again now.

Quotable Quotes

• "A dwelling is not a home.  A home is more." -- The Giver
• "Is that the pain everyone talks about?"  "Not even close." -- Jonas (after getting the memory of being stung by a bee) and the Giver
• "I apologize."  "I accept your apology." -- Pretty much everyone except the Giver
• "We are living a life of shadows, of echoes." -- The Giver
• "I loved her."  "Precision of language!"  "Couldn't have been more precise." -- The Giver and the Chief Elder

ISFS

When the Game Stands Tall

Credible Credits

Year: 2014

Director: Thomas Carter

Starring: Jim Caviezel, Alexander Ludwig, Michael Chiklis, and Laura Dern

Tagline: It's not how hard you fall; it's how you get back up.
Synopsis: Teamwork and high moral values (apparently) win football games.

Review

Let me start off by saying my fantastic company treated me and everyone else to a movie (this movie) and lunch, all during work hours even.  I'm immensely grateful to work for an employer who is so thoughtful and gracious.  And I recognize this film was probably chosen because it would be inoffensive and uplifting.

I've debated for two weeks about whether or not to critique this movie.  It seemed harsh to criticize a movie with good intentions.  If the movie had been merely mediocre and poorly constructed, I might have given it a pass.  But the more I've thought about it, the more it has irked me.  Good intentions notwithstanding, the film was a failure.  And worse, the message it ultimately sends is more dangerous than uplifting.

As for the movie itself, well, it was extremely flawed.  Basically it was a rather cheap dot-to-dot of all the possible sports cliches, rigidly following the game plan of better movies that preceded it.  And the thing with dot-to-dots, while they may ultimately reveal a picture, they do so in a very stiff, blocky manner.  The movie had a lot of elements all thrown together, but none of the components really worked together to create a unified whole.  A plot point would be dutifully brought up, momentarily dealt with, and then end up relegated to the back burner to deal with a new plot point.  For all the issues brought up, very few ever received any sort of resolution.

It didn't help that the main character, Coach Bob Ladouceur, wasn't particularly likable or relatable.  I've liked Jim Caviezel in other things, but here his performance was just wooden and almost aloof.  They set him up to learn and grow and have a character arc.  But then they never do anything with it.  All the issues he had at the beginning of the film are still there at the end.  As I've mentioned in previous posts, I'm a firm believer in a good character arc.

And then there's "trophy dad."  The more scenes he was in the more completely over the top he seemed.  All he wants is for his son, quarterback Chris Ryan, to break the state record for touchdowns.  He's obsessed and practically insane in his lust for that glory.  I'd like to believe no father is truly that crazy.  And if there are fathers like that, I'm guessing there are some sort of psychological scars they are trying to compensate for.  Yes, he's supposed to be an antagonist within the film, but his motivation is so completely superficial he comes across more as a caricature than a person.

If those had been the film's only flaws, I'd have simply skipped it and not written this post.

What finally spurred me to write was seeing a user review on IMDb claiming the film encapsulated the struggle between good and evil forces in the world.  It's high school football.  There's no evil.  Trophy dad is arrogant, clueless, and a jerk.  The players on the opposing teams have stories of their own.  How many of them were just looking for a way to go to college and to get out of the neighborhoods they grew up in?  The closest thing to "evil" is the shadowy teen who kills one of the students.  An evil act?  Yes.  But although we are given no motive (or any amount of information or closure), it seems likely the killer was either drunk or high and looking for money.

That same user review also claimed the film epitomizes the strength and values of this nation.  Whether that is accurate or not I do not say.  But ultimately this is a film that says even though winning isn't everything, let's focus on winning and the belief that there's no problem that can't be resolved by sports.  But after the celebrations are all over, what have they won?  T.K. is still dead in a senseless act of violence.  Mrs. Ladouceur is still a lonely wife.  Couch Ladouceur still has no relationship with his sons.  Trophy dad is going to be furious with his son.  And all the students have to eventually face real life off the gridiron.

The movie is called When the Game Stands Tall, but what is it standing for?  The entire movie focuses on winning.  It says if you have high moral values and work as a team you'll win.  Really?  If underdog teams always won in real life they wouldn't be called underdogs.  I'm 100% in favor of perseverance and teamwork.  But they don't guarantee success.  At least not the success this movie glorifies.  In every game, one team wins and one team loses.  Do we really believe all opposing teams aren't working together?  Do we really think that because "our" team is morally upright the "other" team must of necessity be morally bankrupt?

And really, where were those "high moral values"?  They were talked about a lot.  A day of service at a Veterans Hospital is a very good deed.  But it's a deed, not character.  The film quotes Matthew 23:12: "And whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted."  The words are there.  But the actions of the movie merely drive home the idea that such exalting of the humble ought to come in this life in the same worldly sphere one hopes for.

For a film that claims to be faith-based, I was surprised by one of the early scenes.  One player asks another player, Beaser, about his relationship with his girlfriend.  Beaser responds that they are waiting and have made a purity pledge.  The other player actually taunts his teammate and asks what cult he belongs to.  Beaser responds with the name of a local church, naively oblivious to the fact his teammate just insulted him and his beliefs.  Granted, the other player is shown to be a bit of a jerk for the first half of the film.  But at no point does the film ever reconcile this interaction.  There is never an apology or even any other interaction between the two characters.  It's never brought up again.  Thus there is no indication the film itself is defending Beaser's beliefs.

The film also makes a huge deal about the idea that if you are a good person, good things will come to you.  That is one of the most dangerous half truths the world at large and Christianity in particular have a tendency to fall for.  Note that it is a half truth.  Obedience and righteousness certainly bring blessings.  The danger comes when we build our foundation on the equation good deeds/character = good life/success.  It can.  It does.  But it doesn't always.  Just read the book of Job or the history of Joseph Smith.  Good deeds and character are not a shield against suffering or setbacks.  Nor do they guarantee any sort of worldly success.

The movie certainly shows that some of the characters, though good, have difficult lives struck by tragedy.  And the brotherhood of the team helps them cope and get through.  That message is there, but it is not central to the story.  It ends up being overshadowed by the main plot.  For 151 games, the Spartans went undefeated.  We are shown what an upstanding, unified group the varsity squad is.  Of course they won, they were like brothers.  We then see the rising class, the new seniors.  They are arrogant, self-assured, and lacking in any semblance of unity or comradery.  So it is no surprise when they lose.  But as soon as they start doing good deeds together and acting like a team they start winning again.  The film then hammers it home: if you have high moral values and work as a team you'll win every game.

Maybe that was true for the real life Spartans.  But it is not true of life.  I recently saw a post on Facebook that said: "If you fight on your knees, you'll win every battle."  I understand the sentiment and fervently advocate prayer.  But I disagree.  For one thing, it is human nature to do our own defining of "battle."  Our definition may not align with God's.  How many valiant men, women, and children have "lost the battle" with cancer?  How many faithful men and women still constantly battle with addictions?  I don't know that God promises we'll win every battle.  He knows we won't.  That's why we have a Savior.  God's promise is that if we keep fighting the good fight, no matter how many times we fall, we'll ultimately win the war.

Coming down from my soap box now.

The film did have a few redeeming merits.  While I'm no football fan, the cinematography and choreography for the different games were interesting and (reasonably) gripping.  And Michael Chiklis as the assistant coach was terrific.  He had all the best lines in the movie and was the most likable character.

Final analysis: I'm glad I didn't spend my own time or money on this film.  If you want an uplifting football film, go find Remember the Titans or Rudy.  And if you want a more realistic portrayal of teamwork and perseverance, maybe start with Monsters University.

***Spoiler Section***

By the time we got to the climax, I was quite ready to be done.  But as Ryan purposefully gave up his chance to beat the state touchdown record, I got a little emotional.  And it made me kinda mad.  Why?  Because I knew full well it hadn't earned those emotions.  One of the things I learned as a film student is to tell when I'm being manipulated by the media.  Most movies to some degree or another manipulate because they want your time, your money, your emotional investment, and your suspension of disbelief.

It can be a fine line to walk.  Filmmakers want people to connect with their stories.  Ideally you connect with the characters and the story.  That must be the foundation, and everything else is just supplemental.  But if the foundation isn't there, if the story is haphazard and the characters are flat, the connection fails.  At that point, cue the music, the cliches, and/or the adrenaline rush.

Honestly, what's the ending even about?  Is it saying "it doesn't matter if you win or lose?"  Because they won the game and the championship.  So what was Ryan's sacrifice for?  Yes, to a degree it shows the state record doesn't matter to him.  But we already knew that.  There were other ways to show that.  For one thing, it meant breaking his promise to his father.  Yes, it was a pretty rotten promise that was forced out of him.  But he gave his word.  Also, the big push of Coach Ladouceur was to always give a "perfect effort."  I'm not sure refusing to play out those last few seconds of the game really constituted a perfect effort.

As symbolic gestures go, I simply didn't get this one.  And Mrs. Ladouceur spouting off things like "he's making your son into a man" to trophy dad were without real foundation.  It was just another sports cliche platitude.

Now I don't know if Chris Ryan was a real person or made up for the movie.  I don't recall there being anything about him in the credits.  Maybe that's what really did happen.  Or maybe it was artistic license.  I just really hope no actual father was as completely insane as trophy dad.

Quotable Quotes

• "It's a contact sport.  You're allowed to hit people.  It's encouraged even!" -- Asst. Coach Terry Eidson
• "Good waffles." -- Asst. Coach Terry Eidson
• "I'll give everything until I die out there."  "Collapse.  Not die.  It's just high school football." -- Player and Coach Bob Ladouceur

ISFS

Guardians of the Galaxy

Credible Credits

Year: 2014

Director: James Gunn

Starring: Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Bradley Cooper, Vin Diesel, and Lee Pace

Tagline: All Heroes Start Somewhere
Synopsis: After a stolen artifact puts entire worlds in danger, an unlikely group of misfits comes together, puts aside their differences, and saves the galaxy.

Review

From the start, I had my reservations about Guardians of the Galaxy.  It looked like a far cry from the Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America I was used to.  And then the trailers came out ... and I was even more leery about what the movie was going to be like.  But, I decided to trust in Marvel (and the 92% on Rotten Tomatoes).  I'm so glad I did.

Guardians of the Galaxy is terrific.  It's definitely one of the most entertaining movies I've seen all year.  And it is just plain fun from start to wacky finish.

Before I rave about all it did so awesomely right, let me just mention that it did have some things I could have done without.  I was surprised at how much swearing there was.  It wasn't horrendous, but it was certainly more than I was expecting based on previous Marvel films.  And of course there was Peter Quill's crude gesture, which was not "censored" like it was in the trailer.  Seriously?  Did we need that?  No.

I was afraid most of the humor would be along the lines of the above.  Not so.  The movie was seriously hilarious.  I laughed so many times.  Practically every scene had some quotable line or funny interaction between characters.  It was tough picking just a few for the section below.  And it was never forced jokes or laughs either.  It came from the characters being themselves and from the absurdity of some of the situations (e.g., a humanoid tree whose entire vocabulary consists of "I," "am," and "Groot," in that order).  Where Iron Man is snarky and Loki is clever, the Guardians are just sorta nuts and crazy.  And it works.  Where else could the range of jokes include references to Kevin Bacon, John Stamos, and Jackson Pollock.

As with all Marvel movies, the special effects in Guardians of the Galaxy were terrific.  The film is beautiful to watch and the various worlds and ships are exquisitely imagined.  They feel like real places.  Seriously, the attention to every detail is almost mind-boggling.  They also do a great job making Groot and Rocket totally believable.  And considering one is a humanoid tree and the other is a talking, trigger-happy raccoon, that's no small task.

I was pretty dubious when "Hooked on a Feeling" was the music for the first trailer.  All I could think was, "Seriously?"  But what was a little strange in the trailer worked perfectly in the final execution.  Those 70s and 80s songs are an integral part of Peter Quill's character, as the audience almost immediately learns.  They suit him and they suit the story.  They also serve as a constant reminder that, even though the film takes place in a far off galaxy, Quill is human and relatable.

In a couple of ways, Guardians of the Galaxy is a bit like The Lego Movie.  For starters, Chris Pratt is the main character in both and plays an unlikely hero.  But both films also had somewhat misleading trailers.  The trailers certainly showed that their respective movies would be zany and funny.  But none of the trailers intimated at how much heart was in the films.  I expected the various "Guardians" to be funny.  I didn't expect to care about them as much as I did.

From the very opening scene, the film pulls you in emotionally.  And while you then spend a lot of time having fun, you also get to know and gradually understand each of the characters.  You can see why these characters have come to that point, and why they are ready to come together in a crazy alliance.  None of them is just comic relief.  They are each genuine, with anger and hurt.  Well, except Groot.  Groot only gets angry when his friends are in peril.  Most of the time he has a childlike innocence, which is quite refreshing next to the other characters.  Groot is simply good.  And in many ways, it is he who brings the other Guardians together and keeps them together ... all with his limited vocabulary.  [Vin Diesel apparently recorded 1,000 variations of "I am Groot."]

Basically Guardians of the Galaxy is what you'd expect if Looney Tunes were crossed with the Avengers and then got thrown into the Star Wars universe.  And if you are a fan of any one of those things, you should check it out, preferably on the big screen.

***Spoiler Section***

Hands down, one of the greatest moments in the film is when Ronan the Accuser has crash landed on the planet Xandar and he gives his very typical, very evil, I'm-going-to-destroy-you-all monologue.  And then Quill just starts singing and grooving.  The juxtaposition is perfect.  Ronan is so utterly dumbfounded by this man he views as an imbecile, all he can do is stammer, "What are you doing?"  It's so unexpected for Ronan and for the audience.  Who breaks out into a dance-off when an entire world is at stake?  Peter Quill.  That's who.  And the method to his madness is that he's serving as a distraction.  Brilliant.

My favorite moment, though, has to be earlier on when the ragtag group is trying to escape from prison.  Rocket is explaining to Quill and Gamora what items he needs to execute their escape.  While they're arguing, Groot, in the background of the shot, is calmly in the process of acquiring one of the "impossible to retrieve" things they need.  It's a fantastic use of staging and timing.

Quotable Quotes

• "I am Groot." -- Groot
• "We've already established that you destroying the ship I'm on is not saving me!" -- Quill to Drax
• "Metaphors go over his head."  "Nothing goes over my head!  My reflexes are too fast ... I would catch it."  -- Rocket and Drax
• "I have lived most of my life surrounded by my enemies.  I would be grateful to die surrounded by my friends." -- Gamora
• "What!  What are you doing?" -- Ronan the Accuser

ISFS

WALL-E

Credible Credits

Year: 2008

Director: Andrew Stanton

Starring: Ben Burtt, Elissa Knight, Jeff Garlin

Tagline: In Space, No One Can Hear You Clean
Synopsis: After 700 years of cleaning up Earth's trash, a little robot finds love and greater purpose.

Review

My very first movie review on this blog was Raiders of the Lost Ark.  At the time, I mentioned that it was my tied-for-favorite movie.  Well, it is high time I got around to writing about the other tied-for-favorite movie.  (That and there has been a severe dearth of interesting movies in theaters the last few weeks.)  So, without further ado, I give you WALL-E.

WALL-E is one of those movies I simply never get tired of.  It is a refreshing ray of light whenever I watch it.  Just thinking about WALL-E and EVE puts a smile on my face.  They may be robots, but they are two of my favorite characters and definitely one of my favorite cinematic couples.

Let's start with WALL-E himself.  When we first meet the trash compacting robot, we learn a lot about him without him ever saying a word.  He's insatiably curious, as seen by his ever-growing collection of human artifacts.  He's ticklish: an excellent quality.  He's sensitive; he likes musicals and is horrified at the thought he might have hurt his little cockroach pal.  Once EVE comes to Earth, we learn even more about him.  Watching him loyally and tirelessly try to reawaken or recharge EVE is both hilarious and heartbreaking.  WALL-E is just so full of joie de vivre (the joy of living).  It's endearing and contagious.

In literary terms, WALL-E is what's known as a catalyst hero: he doesn't change much himself during the story, but everyone he comes in contact with is changed.  Seriously, everyone he bumps into -- whether it be Mary who then discovers the Axiom has a pool, or the data entry robot who learns to wave, or the malfunctioning robots who learn they can still have purpose, or M-O who decides following his passion for cleaning is better than mindlessly following orders -- they are all changed by their encounters with WALL-E.  Even AUTO is changed, because once WALL-E and the plant are discovered, AUTO must choose between human orders and his directive.

Of course the changes WALL-E initiates are mostly unintentional.  He doesn't set out to change the fate of humanity.  His is the power of a good example, a light unafraid to shine.  He lives his life, pursues his dreams, and follows his heart.  And in the process, he opens the eyes of EVE, the Captain, John, and Mary to what life and living are all about.

The ship is called the Axiom, which is very fitting.  The word "axiom" means something that is taken for granted or something seen as unquestionable.  Over centuries of aimless, effortless existence, the humans take their very lives for granted.  But finally, after years of never questioning, suddenly the Captain can't ask enough questions ("Computer, define 'dancing'").  More than just WALL-E's dirt rubbed off on the Captain.

I love a good character arc.  There is something about watching a character grow and become something greater, something more than they originally thought possible.  All the humans go through a very dramatic character arc, going from a nearly infantile state to literally standing on their own two feet.  But the transformation that drives the heart and soul of the movie is EVE's.  Because when all is said and done, WALL-E is a love story ... with robots.

When we first meet EVE, she is intently focused on her directive.  But we also learn, once the shuttle leaves, that she has a yearning for freedom ... or at least enjoys flying very, very fast.  Where WALL-E is fully "humanized," at this point EVE is only partially so.  She remains focused on the task at hand, no matter how hard WALL-E tries to divert her attention.  She behaves very robotically.  But as each scan comes back negative, her more human-like qualities begin to surface as she gets increasingly frustrated (resulting in a terrific plasma-blast induced bonfire).  At last, she allows herself to meet WALL-E, from which point there is no going back.

Unlike some of the other changes or transformations in the story, EVE's is much more slow.  It takes time for her to see with new LED eyes.  She catches the spark of WALL-E's joie de vivre, but her directive still remains primary.  So much so, that EVE sees WALL-E as just a nuisance when the plant goes missing and she is viewed as defective.  She blames him and tries to send him away.  It isn't until, for a moment, she believes WALL-E has been killed in the exploding escape pod, that she starts to realize her priorities are messed up.  But while she is relieved to discover WALL-E is alive, she is also relieved to discover he has the plant and she can still fulfill her directive and prove she isn't defective.

You could say EVE is a workaholic.  At that point in the story she finally allows herself to care about something other than her directive, and takes time to share a moment -- a real moment -- with WALL-E.  Yet even then, her directive is of great importance to her.  Certainly her directive, her job, isn't bad.  It's very good.  But her focus and priorities still aren't quite in place.  It isn't until she truly sees how much WALL-E cares, until he almost is killed, that EVE realizes what really matters.  WALL-E matters.  Love matters.

And then WALL-E rather unintentionally teaches EVE one more lesson.  EVE tosses the plant (and thus her directive) aside so she can hold WALL-E's hand.  He pushes her aside and retrieves the plant.  Her directive does matter.  It matters a lot.  But now she needs to fulfill her directive for the right reasons.  It's not about her being successful or proving she's not defective.  It's about saving the robot she loves, going home, and tangentially saving humanity as a bonus.

Perhaps that understanding is what kept WALL-E alive for so long, when all the other robots shut down.  WALL-E wasn't cleaning Earth just because it was his directive.  He cleaned Earth because he loves Earth, or at least all the fascinating trinkets and memorabilia he finds.  It is fitting then that EVE's love and new-found understanding should ultimately save WALL-E from not only the scrap heap, but from reverting to his own mindless directive.

As if the characters and story weren't enough, WALL-E is simply a beautiful film.  From the brilliant sound work, to the perfectly suited score, to the amazing visuals, it is a cinematic masterpiece.  The filmmakers at Pixar did so much to make the film look spectacular, especially in terms of the lighting.  The film absolutely earned its Academy Award for Best Animated Feature as well as its nominations in five other categories.  And it has absolutely earned its place in my heart.

I could easily write more about WALL-E, going scene by scene through all the little details and moments that I love.  But I'll resist.  I feel I've done justice to my tied-for-favorite movie.  Now I'm tempted to go watch it again ...

Quotable Quotes

• "Ta-da!" -- WALL-E
• "Foreign contaminant." -- M-O
• "Computer, define 'dancing.'" -- The Captain
• "I don't want to survive.  I want to live!" -- The Captain

ISFS

How to Train Your Dragon 2

Credible Credits

Year: 2014

Director: Dean DeBlois

Starring: Jay Baruchel, America Ferrera, Gerard Butler, Cate Blanchett, and Craig Ferguson

Tagline: N/A
Synopsis:  Five years after bringing dragons and the vikings of Berk together, Hiccup and Toothless are still inseparable friends pushing the boundaries of their world.  But as they discover new lands and new dragons, they also discover new dangers and new threats.

Review

I loved the first How to Train Your Dragon.  It may very well be my favorite DreamWorks Animation film.  So I've been quite excited for the sequel.  And while I don't feel like the sequel exceeded the original, it did not disappoint.

There were three things that made the first movie stand out so well: 1) visuals, namely the incredible flying sequences; 2) humor, thanks to Hiccup and Toothless; and 3) heart, especially the bond between Hiccup and Toothless.  All of those elements are still present in the sequel, though perhaps not in quite the same degree.

First the visuals.  The animation is once again astounding.  And watching Hiccup and Toothless soar through the clouds, over the ocean, and across new lands is just as breathtaking as it was the first time around.  We aren't treated to a huge array of new lands, but the few we do see are a beautiful contrast to the world of the first film.

There is still a good deal of humor this time out.  Toothless is still the most endearing character and he gets some nice moments to be goofy and playful.  There's also a lot of background humor in this one.  For instance, Hiccup and Astrid will be talking in the foreground, but Toothless and Astrid's dragon are wrestling and tug of warring in the background.  It's subtle.  I don't recall missing out on conversation because of what was going on behind.  But it was a fun way to add a layer of richness to this world: the dragons aren't going to sit around and be boring just because humans are talking to each other.  Oh, and the other vikings bring the same humor they brought last time around.

The film, overall, is a bit darker than its predecessor.  It's a little more mature in the elements it deals with.  This time around we have loss and regret and forgiveness to deal with.  It works really well.  The story has grown up a bit just as the characters have grown up.  It did feel like Hiccup lost a bit of his charm though.  He was still unsure of himself, but seemed to have lost the dry wit that helped make him so likable in the first film.

Lastly, this film had heart.  Once again we have Hiccup dealing with his various relationships: with Toothless, with Astrid, with his father, and now with his mother. (It was in the trailer; they spoiled it, not me.)  Hiccup and Toothless still make a terrific duo, even when their friendship is put to the test.  Aside from them, I think my favorite interactions were between Stoick and Valka, as they come together again and reconnect.  In some sense, I suppose it was a slow section in terms of the main plot, but it was such an important sequence for the characters and the heart of the story.  I hope the third film (this is planned as a trilogy) somehow manages to play off the importance of that sequence.

If the movie had a weakness, it might be the villain.  He had the beginnings of an epic, menacing villain.  But somehow he just never attained the level of awesomeness he should have.  For a ruthless man amassing an army of men and dragons, his motivations and overall plan weren't entirely clear.  In the end, he was kinda meh.  What can I say, Disney still has the best villains.

One other nitpick.  For a movie that is interested in expanding the world of the vikings and dragons, they really didn't expand a whole lot in terms of civilization.  The characters find a huge new colony of dragons.  And we are introduced to the villain and his armies.  Other than that, we don't really know of any other peoples.  Besides tiny Berk, what all is Drago planning on conquering?  We sure haven't seen anything else to conquer.

Overall, How to Train Your Dragon 2 is a worthy sequel.  It retains enough of the charm of the original while expanding the world and characters in fresh, new ways.  The animation is top notch.  The music is lively and fun.  Toothless is as endearing as ever.  I look forward to adding this one to my movie collection and eagerly await the end of the trilogy.

***Spoiler Section***
Okay.  There were a few times when I kind of wanted to knock a bit of cynical sense into Hiccup.  I get that he's young and idealistic.  But after a while, his dogged insistence that he could reason with Drago started seeming ridiculously naive.  After Stoick related what kind of man Drago was, "a man who kills without reason," it seemed pretty clear that peaceful reasoning was not going to work.  And trusting such a villain to listen ... well, that worked out about as well as you'd expect.

At some point I read that this was going to be kind of like The Empire Strikes Back of the trilogy.  By which I mean it would be more expansive and with more at stake.  That was certainly the case with this one.  At one point though, I thought they were going to really go that route and leave us hanging in the story.  After Stoick is killed and Drago rides off on Toothless, everything seems bleak for our heroes and Berk.  But Hiccup refuses to be defeated and vows to protect his home: humans and dragons alike.  For a moment, I really thought the film might just end there.  It would have been a gutsy move for an animated film.  It also might have allowed the film to be that much more epic.

Don't get me wrong.  The ending was good and wrapped up nicely.  But the retaking of Berk and the freeing of Toothless could have been a story on its own.  It would have allowed us to better understand Drago (and thus up him on the epic villain scale).  Oh well.  Like I said, the ending works.  And I'm not entirely sure just what became of Drago.  So maybe he will be back for the third film.

Quotable Quotes

• "This is Berk.  Life here is amazing.  Dragons used to be a bit of a problem.  But now they've all moved in." -- Hiccup
• "A man who kills without reason cannot be reasoned with." -- Stoick
• "You have the heart of a chief, and the soul of a dragon." -- Valka

ISFS

Edge of Tomorrow

Credible Credits

Year: 2014

Director: Doug Liman

Starring: Tom Cruise, Emily Blunt, Bill Paxton, and Brendan Gleeson

Tagline: Live. Die. Repeat.
Synopsis: During a war with an invading alien race, an officer finds himself trapped in a time loop, reliving the same two days over and over and over.

Review

I don't remember when I first saw the trailer for Edge of Tomorrow.  I do remember being moderately intrigued by what appeared to be Groundhog Day meets an alien invasion war movie.  So I let it stay on my radar, waiting to see what sort of reviews it would get.  I started getting a little excited when I saw it was getting good reviews.  And the more the good reviews piled up, the more excited I became to see it.  It currently is at 90% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Go see this movie.

Why?  Because it's terrific.  Is it the best movie ever?  No.  But it is smart, clever, well-made, well-acted, humorous, and a whole lot of fun.  And in a world of sequels, remakes, and reboots, Edge of Tomorrow is refreshingly original (though I should point out it is based on a Japanese novella).

My only qualm with the movie is the language.  I don't remember Cage or Rita (Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt, i.e., the main characters) swearing much.  But the other soldiers around them swear quite a bit when they are on screen.  Oh, and the bum shot.  Could've done without that too.

With my qualms out there, let's get into why this film is so much fun.

For starters, the movie is simply funny.  There were lots of humorous moments in the film, mostly revolving around the fact that Cage is killed over and over and over again and he (unsurprisingly) gets a bit tired of it from time to time.  There was one point when the entire audience -- myself included -- laughed out loud at a particularly unexpected death (and the subsequent look of complete befuddlement on another character's face).

It seems pointless to avoid comparison with Groundhog Day.  The 1993 movie may very well have inspired the novella's time loop idea.  It doesn't seem coincidental that the female protagonist is named Rita in both.  Both movies use and play off the time loop concept well.  Even though we are in some sense watching the same scenes being played out repeatedly, they stay fresh.  Why?  Because we get to watch Cage change and adapt.  We seem him confused, then hopeless, then accepting, then frustrated and impatient, then completely in control.  And Cruise does a great job selling it, especially when you realize he has started to truly care about Rita and is finding it increasingly difficult to watch her die day after day.

For a movie based on the premise that the main character gets killed again and again, Edge of Tomorrow was surprisingly (and refreshingly) restrained in terms of violence.  Aside from the killing of the aliens, the violence is kept primarily off screen and implied.  I was truly surprised how conscientiously restrained it was.  That's not what I would ever expect from an alien invasion war movie.  For instance, there's a scene where Rita is wounded and Cage must inspect and then treat her wound.  All we see is Cage's concerned reaction.  No gratuitous blood or gore.  Thank you.

In a way, the experience for Cage is probably what it would be like to live out a video game.  He gets as far as he can, then dies, resets, and tries again to "complete the level" as it were.  Each time he makes it a little farther.  It's the ultimate practice of trial and error.  And it's enjoyable to watch the payoff as Cage starts to move along with choreographed precision, with Rita in tow just trying to keep up.  The setup also allows for a nice character arc for Cage.  It isn't quite as dramatic as Phil's in Groundhog Day.  But it is a good arc nonetheless, because Cage starts out as anything but heroic or selfless.  By the end, he's willing to do what needs to be done, and not just for himself.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed Edge of Tomorrow.  It's clever and fun and just what a summer blockbuster ought to be.  So beat the heat for a while in a nice air conditioned theater and go see it.  Show Hollywood that quality trumps mindless plots, endless rehashes, hollow characters, senseless violence, and gratuitous anything.

***Spoiler Section***

If you look at the message boards of IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes (something I almost never do I might add), you'll find a fair amount of discussion regarding how the movie ends.  Basically there are those who don't like it and think it is a Hollywood happy ending cop-out.  There are those who dismiss the reality of it and ascribe it to being a dream or an afterlife.  And there are those who have worked immensely hard to work out all the internal logic for it to make sense (which is quite impressive actually).

As for me, I loved the ending just as it was.  Yes, I'm a sucker for a good happy ending.  But I've learned that whenever you have a film (or book) that deals with any sort of time travel, at some point you just have to suspend your disbelief and accept whatever narrative unfolds (within reason).  Trying to hash out the logic will primarily make your head hurt and possibly dampen your enjoyment of the film.  Still, I hope the film doesn't completely abandon its own internal logic (I'm looking at you Frequency).  When I left the theater, I felt satisfied with the ending, whether it made complete sense or not.  I guess it was the ending I wanted.  And having just read (okay, skimmed [it was really, really detailed]) a few people's logical breakdowns, I'm still satisfied the ending does work.

And can I just add that I love how the film actually closes.  It's understated and brilliant.  A similar ending that comes to mind is from Monsters Inc.  Even though Rita at this point in a new timeline has no idea who Cage is, he knows her.  He knows everything they've been through together.  He cares for her.  But instead of some confused, overly sentimental scene, all we see is Cage's face as he sees her.  He's so relieved and happy to see her alive that he doesn't even know what to say.  He just smiles.  Cut to black.  Perfect.

Quotable Quotes

• "Come find me when you wake up!" -- Rita
• "Who gave you permission to talk to me?"  "You did ... tomorrow." -- Rita and Cage
• "What do we do now?"  "I don't know; we've never made it this far before." -- Rita and Cage
• "What do you want?" -- Rita

ISFS