"The Hunger Games" Reviewed

The Hunger Games is set in the future after something - that is never fully explained in the film - has ended civilization as we know it. As society was rebuilt, it was carved into the 13 districts of Panem, each specializing in cultivating, producing, or mining a region-specific resource, but the rich got richer and the poor got poorer until the people rebelled. The Capitol was able to stop the uprising, but as punishment for those dark days and to remind the population of its power over them, the Hunger Games were created. Every year, one girl and one boy from each district, between the ages of 12 and 18, are selected to pay tribute by participating in a televised contest where they must fight to the death. A lone survivor is crowned champion, and their district is provided with special privileges and additional food for a year. The film begins right before the participants of the 74th Hunger Games are selected. It follows the two tributes from District 12, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) as they travel to the Capital, prepare for the games, and fight for their lives.

It may be a bit of a stretch to believe Jennifer Lawrence, with her curvy, well-toned features, is a starving kid from a coal-mining town, but she really is terrific as Katniss, whose years of hunting in the wilderness have focused her senses and sharpened her instincts. Lawrence pulls it off admirably, her performance maintaining the character's vulnerability, while still projecting strength. Josh Hutcherson, a veteran of family films like Zathura and Journey to the Center of the Earth, is able to step into a more mature role and imbue it with a sad, but determined quality as Peeta, who feels overshadowed by the attention that Katniss receives, but understands the dynamics of playing the game better than she does.

The film also stars Liam Hemsworth, Elizabeth Banks, Wes Bently (Academy Award Nominee - Best Beard, 2012), Lenny Kravitz, Stanley Tucci, and Donald Sutherland as the President of Panem. Special mention, however, should go to Woody Harrelson for his stellar work as Haymitch Abernathy, a former champion from District 12 who is tasked with preparing Katniss and Peeta not just for the games, but also for the media circus that surrounds their time at the Capital, which is like a futuristic version of the Roman Empire at the height of its decadence. Haymitch deals with his own demons by drinking them away each day, but regardless of whether he does so because of surviving the games or as a result of having to relive it each year, he is the example of the price ultimately paid by "winning."

The film was directed by Gary Ross (Seabiscuit, Pleasantville) who made a name for himself in Hollywood as a top-shelf screenwriter with hits like Dave and Big to his credit. He has always gravitated to stories that place more emphasis on one, or just a few characters instead of sprawling epics or plot-driven pictures. It comes as no surprise then, that his focus is solely on the character of Katniss, using her journey as the backbone for his approach to the story, both visually and dramatically. It's clear from the first scene that this is her story; even the time we spend with Peeta, the only other main character, is done purely through her point of view. This helps to eliminate unnecessary subplots, but also makes it difficult to develop a villain, the lack of which is the film's major weakness.

There's no one to root against. The other tributes are really just obstacles, not characters. The rich socialites of the Capital city are sick and out of touch, enjoying this perverse brutal entertainment, but they are just an audience, no better or worse than those who watched the gladiators in ancient times. The game-masters are just following orders, maximizing the entertainment value by stacking the odds in favor of the audience, and the President is trying to keep the peace and follow customs that were put in place years before he took charge. Like our current worldwide economic meltdown, there is no one person to point a finger at; it's a combination of things that allow the Hunger Games to continue in Panem. Very realistic, but it's tough to wring drama out of gray areas, and a bit more focus on giving the audience someone to dislike would have strengthened the picture.

The Hunger Games will draw comparisons to films like The Running Man and the Japanese cult hit, Battle Royale, but what separates it from those films, is a determination to stay as intimate as possible from the opening scene to the closing credits. This may disappoint fans who are looking for more brutality, since a lot of that happens offscreen, but considering the core audience is teens, there is a threshold for the level of gore that can be shown. It seems a successful approach though, because they're able to use techniques that depict violence in a way that maintains the emotional impact without soaking the screen in blood.

8.4/10

In Theaters: CHRONICLE

Andrew (Dane DeHaan) is a struggling teen with no friends, a mother who is dying, and a father who drinks too much. He buys a video camera to CHRONICLE his life and is intent on documenting everything, starting with his father's abusive nature. The camera seems to bring only more unwanted attention from school bullies and his dad, and the only person who is nice to him, his cousin Matt (Alex Russell), is slightly annoyed by it at first. One night at a party, however, Matt and another classmate, Steve (Michael B. Jordan), stumble across a cavernous hole in the ground out in the woods. They decide to grab Andrew so that they can videotape their exploration of this mysterious underground cave and come across an unusual luminous crystal, which after being exposed to it, gives them all extraordinary powers.

The film uses the handheld video techniques pioneered by movies like “The Blair Witch Project” and “Cloverfield”, using footage that the characters themselves shoot as the action progresses. I don’t want to digress from the movie too much, but it’s important to note that I am not a fan of these types of movies generally. The budget for tripods, dollys, and steadicams has NEVER put a multi-million dollar movie over budget and the framework of being "found-footage" usually restricts filmmakers to uninteresting camera angles and unappealing visuals. This is simply an aesthetic choice that I rarely see as a benefit to any full-length film.

The director of CHRONICLE, Josh Trank, and its writer, Max Landis, seem to have an understanding of those limitations, however, and are even able to successfully cheat around them by having the characters use their powers to levitate the camera. Instead of one person always being behind the camera, this cleverly places all three main characters into the action and allows for smoother camerawork and angles you could never get away with otherwise.

The film works surprisingly well as we discover who these characters are, how they attain their powers, and what happens to their dynamic as they begin to experiment and strengthen their powers. The film does a nice job of taking a realistic look at what teens might do with that type of ability as they start out by knocking each other around in the backyard and pulling off pranks on unsuspecting shoppers at the store. With the exception of one grave reminder of how dangerous these powers could be, it's harmless fun that becomes infectious in a very “boys will be boys” sort of way.

As the film pushes into its dark final act though, it begins to run out of fresh ideas, giving into big-budget envy as it builds to a traditional large-scale action movie ending. It’s not bad, but it feels lazy when compared to the rest of the film as the main characters are forced into traditional good guy or bad guy clichés. The film’s narrative approach even switches gears from “found footage” to a more documentary-like style, using multiple camera sources including cell phones and security feeds.

Overall, CHRONICLE is a smart, entertaining movie which overcomes some, but not all, obstacles inherent to the “found footage” genre and should be measured as a success for everyone involved. The young actors each impressed me in different ways, and the filmmaking duo of Max Landis and Josh Trank is one to watch.

7.9/10 (B-)

2011: The List of Six

January is a strange month for movies. 2011 is over, but some films are just now getting a wide release for people to see. For people like me, this is the time when we scramble to catch those last few films before closing the book on the year in movies.

There were, of course, a number of films that I could not see for a variety of reasons (many others I avoided simply because they didn't appeal to me.) Notable misses included: Beginners, Bellflower, Cave of Forgotten Dreams, A Dangerous Method, The Guard, My Week with Marilyn, Shame, and The Skin I Live In. I will catch up with them eventually, but I don't want to put this off any longer.

I ended up seeing 68 films at the theater and about two dozen more at home from the over 200 officially released films of the year. Not bad for anyone who has a full-time job and pays for most movies out of his own pocket. I'd love to see more in 2012, but we'll see.

I'm going to keep it short and give you my fourteen runners-up and then my six favorite films from the year. Why six? Well, because ten is too many and five is too few. Here you go...

Runners-Up (Alphabetical order):

The Adventures of Tintin

Attack the Block

Bridesmaids

Contagion

The Debt

The Descendants

Hanna

Rango

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Source Code

Super 8

Tree of Life

War Horse

Warrior

And the rest in descending order:

#6 - Midnight in Paris - The first of three films on my list that draws inspiration from the past. I have not yet had the opportunity to revisit this picture since seeing it theatrically, but it sticks out as one of the most enjoyable films of the year. I was charmed by the fantasy world of 1920's Paris as Gil (Owen Wilson) meets early twentieth century artists like F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, and Salvador Dali. It's completely amazing to me that we have so many filmmakers working into their seventies and eighties and Woody Allen is still in prime form.

Favorite scene: Gil's first meeting with Hemingway.

#5 - Melancholia - Lars von Trier's "disaster epic" about the effects of depression and anxiety is both haunting and beautiful. Kirsten Dunst is absolutely stunning and the rest of the cast, including John Hurt, Keifer Sutherland, Stellan Skarsgard, and Charlotte Gainsbourg are equally good. Surreal, operatic, and darkly funny - this one will captivate you.

Favorite scene: It's a tie. The entire first half (the reception) or the prologue.

#4 - Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy - The spy world of John Le Carre's story is not a glamorous one. The characters don't drive the latest sports cars, dress in tuxedos, or swing from rooftops shooting uzis at the bad guy; they are professional secret-keepers, hiding in plain sight, walking down the same streets we do, unnoticed. The film is well acted, has great camerawork, and ends on my favorite final shot of any movie this year.

Favorite scene: The scene at the airstrip between George and Toby.

#3 - Hugo - I went into this one having never read the book and not knowing anything more than what was in the trailers. I'm glad that the mystery wasn't ruined for me and I would encourage you to avoid spoilers about where the story goes in the final act. I will say that HUGO is a lot of fun for everyone, but will hold special significance for those who love early cinema. This film should also get special recognition for being the best use of 3-D in any live-action movie to date.

Favorite scene: When the automaton draws something for Hugo and Isabelle.

#2 - The Artist - Speaking of early cinema, this film travels back to the moment when the most significant change to moviemaking occurred. Synchronized sound ruined the careers of many stars and set back the visual art of storytelling for years. This film lovingly recreates the period and (for the most part) stays within the conventions of silent filmmaking. It's a throwback, sure, but it's more than just a novelty; this is a story worth telling. It's funny, playful, romantic, sad, dark, dramatic and hopeful. Very few films are able to balance all those things as well as this one and a lot of the credit needs to go to its star, Jean Dujardin, who gets my vote for best performance of the year.

Favorite scene: It's a tie. George's dream sequence and the scene with Peppy in George's dressing room.

#1 - Drive - Some films just connect with you - stylistically, thematically, emotionally - for whatever reason. In the case of DRIVE, it's certainly the familiar elements of the 40's and 50's noir that draw me to it, but this is an example of a film that feels fresh because of its mastery of tone and its unflinching look at violence. The director, Nicholas Winding Refn, has had modest success with a few cult hits like BRONSON and VALHALLA RISING, both films that have heavy doses of savagery also. Although the action in DRIVE is stylized, the acts themselves are not glorified. Killing a man is dirty business, and some things you can't wash off. "Driver" may be committing these acts in order to help the young woman he loves, but it's the unattractive and disturbing nature of that brute force that may doom their relationship.

Favorite scene: At the stripclub, "Driver" threatens to hammer a bullet into Cook's head.

New THE DARK KNIGHT RISES poster and trailer debut, plus some thoughts on ending this franchise early.

Even with some very heavy competition next summer, THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is still the most highly anticipated film of 2012. Last week, Warner Brothers released the new poster for the film (above) and it's a dynamite piece of marketing that depicts one of the film's key moments.

I have to wonder why they are dancing around that big moment in the new trailer. The cat's out of the bag now... Bane defeats Batman; the poster confirms it. Isn't the suspense now based on what he will do after getting beaten? Why not give us something to really salivate over? As is, the trailer feels underwhelming. No Catwoman in costume, no Batman in jeopardy, nothing that equals the power of that poster image.

Here's an imbed of the trailer:

Unfortunately, it's been known since the beginning of this film's production that this would be the last one in this series and the tagline, "The legend ends." certainly drives that point home.

Surely I'm not the only one who feels that it is a mistake to close out this series with a third film. The great thing about THE DARK KNIGHT was the re-interpretation of the Joker by Nolan and the late Heath Ledger. That opened the door for them to retool other iconic villains from the rich history of Batman stories and the disappointment that it won't happen now... is hanging over this new film for me.

I remember when THE DARK KNIGHT came out in 2008, Nolan wasn't sure that he would do another film. No contract existed and no story was on paper so he can't even claim that this three-film arc was planned. The opportunity to have a filmmaker like him tackle the Penguin, the Riddler, or maybe even Robin seemed like an amazing prospect (especially the Riddler, which is perfect for an intellectual filmmaker like Nolan.) So why close the door? I know that each film has higher and higher expectations and Nolan doesn't want to be doing Batman films forever, but ending it definitively seems like vanity to me.

And... it means yet another reboot for the character in just a few years time.

I'm still excited for THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, but it makes me question whether I would have liked it better if Nolan had not done a third movie. Warner Brothers could have gotten anyone they wanted to continue the franchise after the success of THE DARK KNIGHT. Would it have been better if other filmmakers had a chance to continue this series using the template Nolan created?

I guess we can only answer that after seeing the final chapter of this series. July seems a long way off right now. I hope it's worth the wait.