This is going to sound strange... but there's this family secret.
And the secret is... that the men in the family can... travel in time.
// What?
This is such a weird joke...
// It's seriously not a joke.
// So... assuming this is true, how might I do it?
// You go into a dark place, then you clinch your fists like this, think of the moment
you're going to... and you'll find yourself there.
// Wow... okay... will you hold on one moment then?
... Okay, let's do this!
... it worked! ... and this is Movie Night!
Hello and welcome to Movie Night, I'm your host, Jonathan Paula.
Tonight we'll be reviewing three films currently playing in theaters, all of which have been
getting rave reviews.
We begin with a late look at "Gravity".
Grossing over half a billion dollars following just a month after its October 4, 2013 release,
this extremely ambitious science fiction action thriller is the latest effort from visionary
director Alfonso Cuarón, the talented man behind "Pan's Labyrinth" and the captivating
"Children Of Men".
Using every bit of its $100-million dollar budget, this stunning space epic opens with
a single, 12-minute shot that defies cinematic conventions -- bringing to life perhaps the
impressive shot in history.
The unbroken scene dynamically floats from one astronaut to the next, as they work on
the Hubble Space Telescope during a routine space walk... until a fast-moving debris field
threatens not only their precarious operation, but also their lives.
The terrifying situation of cascading debris fields is commendably based on a very real
possibility known as the "Kessler Syndrome", an occurrence so devastating it would ground
all space launches for decades if it actually happened.
Sandra Bullock and George Clooney star as the only two characters whose faces are ever
seen on screen, yet they both do a magnificent job exhibiting a figurative roller coaster
of emotions.
While Clooney remains cool and collected during the terrifying ordeal, sarcastically quipping
to his fellow astronauts that they have, "Clear skies with a chance of satellite debris".
Bullock meanwhile turns in a landmark performance that will likely scoring her another Oscar
nomination.
The rookie mission specialist finds herself in a no-win scenario, in the deep void of
space, thousands of miles from help, in a situation strictly obeys Murphy's Law - whatever
could go wrong, does go wrong.
A scene where she silently prays to herself, marks not only a pivotal turning point for
her characters' motivation, but a particularly moving moment as well.
Seemingly unfolding in real-time, this is a completely immersive and visceral experience,
best viewed in realistic 3D - especially when tensions are heightened during wisely used
first-person POV shots, inside Bullock's foggy and claustrophobic helmet.
Where this perfectly paced 90-minute adventure ends up is best experienced unspoiled, but
it is obvious this isn't the type of story where a 'happy ending' is guaranteed.
Utilizing technology specifically built for this picture, none of it even possible just
a few years ago, the PG-13 rated drama is the most visually impressive movie since "Avatar",
and equally as groundbreaking.
The effects aren't only seamless and realistic, they're captivating and artistic as well...
resulting in an absolutely gorgeous experience.
Composer Steven Price lends an inspirational and nail-biting original score that swells
in intensity at all the right moments.
Although the narrative perpetually flirts with the implausible, it is never outright
unbelievable, maintaining an almost nonstop sense of danger and urgency throughout.
A realistic, exciting, and gripping journey certainly worth watching again, "Gravity"
is a "Visual masterpiece, with outstanding thrills."
A NINE and a TEN for "Gravity"... while there was across-the-board praise for the remarkable
visuals, there were some criticisms, from the plot to the scientific accuracy of the
film, bringing your overall average down to an AWESOME.
Hardly a flawless film... but easily one of the best I've seen in ages, and worthy to
be rated amongst the top 10%... I thought it was simply AMAZING.
For tonight's poll question, what's your favorite film that takes place in space?
Plenty of options here, from "Alien" to "Star Wars" to more realistic pictures like "Apollo
13" or "Mission To Mars"... leave your response as a comment below.
Now let's review "About Time".
This quaint, British romantic comedy film from director Richard Curtis was released
on November 1st, 2013 here in the United States.
The fragmented plot follows Domhnall Gleeson as a young man, hopelessly in love, who discovers
- by way of an amusing lecture from his father - that he can travel through time, within
the events of his own lifetime.
The $12-million dollar picture is well on its way to earning back five-times that amount,
and for good reason: it's a unique story with endearing original characters.
Domhnall is perfect as the nervous and hesitant temporal wanderer... eventually falling head
over heels for Rachel McAdams, so much so that he repeatedly attempts to backtrack his
mistakes, a-la "Groundhog Day" to ensure a perfect relationship.
However, he's quick to remind the audience in helpful voice-over narration that, "All
the time traveling in the world can't make someone love you."
In her third movie as a time-traveler's love interest, McAdams' exhibits playful chemistry
between her co-star, making for some fun and realistic moments, as Domhnall's time-jumping
threatens to recursively damage their relationship.
I couldn't help but be reminded of the Star Trek Voyager episode, "Year Of Hell", which
explores a very similar concept of a time traveler's noble, but fruitless effort to
fix his own life, who only ever worsens the situation.
Later, a montage showing their improving relationship set to the sounds of a subway band is especially
effective at wrapping up the first phase of the story.
And that's when things transform from a quirky, light-hearted rom-com involving time travel
to a much deeper and emotional struggle about dealing with decisions, and taking care of
your family.
Where the film treads next is unexpected, but powerfully resonating, especially scenes
involving Bill Nighy in a really wonderful performance.
Although disjointed with the narrative-shift, the 123-minute picture remains well paced
and compelling throughout; resulting in a great date movie for all couples willing to
brave the potential heartache of the film's final act.
While the R-rated drama ends on a spoon-fed montage, very reminiscent of "Love Actually",
it is a delightful, adorable, and emotional journey worth experiencing more than once.
"About Time", contains "Unique and powerful love stories."
Now let's read some of your reviews for this film from the YouTube comments.
"About Time" on the rate-o-matic... an EIGHT and a NINE.
Although you enjoyed the performances, and the premise, you faulted it for being predictable,
and scored it a GREAT.
I was really surprised by this picture, especially on an emotional level.
I thought it was AWESOME.
Before we continue, I'd like to remind you to subscribe to the Movie Night Archive channel
for exclusive trailer commentaries - this week we'll take a sneak peak at "Grudge Match",
and an organized library of all our past reviews.
Our final review tonight will be for "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire".
Released nationwide on November 22, 2013 - the much anticipated sequel to the successful
film adaptation of the original "The Hunger Games" will no doubt recoup its $140-million
dollar budget in no time.
Based off the Suzanne Collins' novel of the same name, this 146-minute science-fiction
adventure film picks up where the first story left-off, dumping us right back into the dystopian
future where murdering children for sport is somehow an acceptable yearly event.
Fresh off her Oscar-win, Jennifer Lawrence returns in the lead role, and pretty much
outclasses everyone around her, delivering yet another fantastic performance, especially
impressive given the scope of special effects and virtual environments used to construct
this universe.
Also returning are Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz,
Stanley Tucci and Donald Sutherland - whose every other line is nothing more than a thinly
veiled threat.
The group of accomplished individuals are fortunately given adequate time to explore
each of their unique characters, with Tucci's manic personality as TV-host once again stealing
the proverbial show.
Joining the group is Phillip Seymour-Hoffman, and Jeffrey Wright, who unlike their returning
counterparts, are sadly underutilized.
Incoming director Francis Lawrence thankfully ditched the shaky-cam style that made parts
of the original near-unwatchable, resulting in a much more coherent cinematic experience...
despite a large number of scenes that were filmed in almost total darkness, making it
a bit hard to follow actors through the poorly lit environments.
The first act of the PG-13 rated story, which explores the consequences and socio-economic
hardships affecting the outlying districts is particularly interesting.
However, once the Hunger Games proper begins again, this time as a contrived "All Star"
edition of past-winners, the plot unfolds scene-for-scene, lock-step with the original;
with only names and concepts changed, with Harrelson warning, "Remember who the real
enemy is."
Instead of outrunning a forest of fire, Lawrence and her allies find themselves escaping from
poisonous fog.
In the first film, they faced down a group of deadly dogs...
here, they've been replaced with monkeys.
And while it's obvious our heroine will live to fight another day, it's less clear how
that'll happen.
A twist-revealing the unique mechanics of the arena itself however, is a pretty awesome
development resulting in a very spectacular action sequence.
Keeping with tradition for middle-installments in a trilogy, this picture indeed ends on
an abrupt cliffhanger, that'll either leave you eager for more, or frustrated it the narrative
is left unresolved.
Seriously though, do they not have any other form of entertainment in the future?
Is watching teenagers murder each other the only thing have to occupy their time?
No internet, no movies?
Just live TV?
Although the middle portion of the film shamelessly retreads the first installment, the action
and tension is improved, and the story is a more fast-paced and exciting one.
The normally potent work from James Newton Howard is sadly absent, leaving us with a
less than memorable score.
It's just unfortunate we'll have to wait another two years to witness the big-screen conclusion
to this story, as Lionsgate has depressingly decided to - pardon the pun - take a page
out of the Twilight and Harry Potter series, and split the final book into two films.
While we wait though, this is a fun film I honestly wouldn't mind experiencing again,
"The Hunger Games: Catching Fire", "Similar drama, but exciting execution."
My final score... is a SEVEN.
As with all brand-new releases, there weren't enough audience reviews to formulate your
score, so you'll just have to leave your thoughts in the comments below.
I for one, definitely enjoyed this picture - particularly when compared to the original.
But it also ran a bit long, and copied several elements from the first picture, so I'm only
giving it a COOL.
Let's take a look now at other movies currently playing in theaters with some of your Tweet
Critiques.
If you see a new movie in theaters, Tweet your review with the #JPMN hashtag, and follow
me on Twitter or Facebook for updates between episodes.
Next week, we'll be celebrating Thanksgiving by watching the 1987 comedy classic, "Planes,
Trains And Automobiles"... the Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau staple, "Grumpy Old Men"...
and "Thankskilling"... a low-budget horror film from 2009.
Once you've seen these films, share your opinions by voting in the polls below, or by leaving
a comment review.
We'll talk about it together in the next episode.
Once again, my name is Jonathan Paula, thank you for watching and listening.
Until next time, have a good Movie Night!