Review: In Time

Sometime in the near future, or sometime in a parallel universe depending on how you look at it, our biological clocks have been engineered to stop at age 25. At that point we are given one year to live and must attain more time by any means necessary.


For the rich this means exploiting the little man to extend an already expansive life. For the poor this means working in a factory and getting paid just enough to live another day. And for some this means turning to crime, stealing other people's time, dooming them to a swift time out.


This is the premise that sets up In Time, starring Justin Timberlake as ghetto resident Will Salas. Will lives day-to-day with little hope of advancing out of his time zone. Soon, Will meets Henry Hamilton (Matt Bomer), who has more than a century's worth of time on his clock. After a deep discussion about life and wasted time both men fall asleep.


Will awakens to discover Hamilton has given him all but five minutes of his life and is too late to stop the man from timing himself out. Will is accused of murdering Henry and thus sets us off on our journey.


Along the way, Will meets Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfried), the daughter of the richest man in the world Philippe Weis (Vincent Kartheiser in a role strangely reminiscent of his Mad Men character Peter Campbell). Hunting Will all along the way is Timekeeper Raymond Leon (Cillian Murphy), who knows what it's like to live day-to-day.


The film's most interesting plot point is Sylvia's onset of Stockholm Syndrome, which allows the story to take a Bonnie & Clyde-esque turn.


The film is the product of writer/director Andrew Niccol, the man behind Gattaca, which is another film in which human life is determined by technology and the rich exploit the poor. He really likes using this theme.


The film contains so many themes that it's pretty much just a philosophical playground. The predominant theme, however, harkens back to the old adage, "Live like there's no tomorrow." Usually when we hear that phrase it's because someone is telling us not to procrastinate. Well, in this film the stakes are high because procrastinating could mean your life.


There is a scene in the film in which two characters are playing poker and they're betting the time on their clocks. It's a scene of high tension and is probably the most heart pounding scene in the film. What happens when one character raises two centuries and his opponent calls, leaving himself with only 30 seconds of life? It's great storytelling.


The film isn't prefect, but it's helped by an ensemble of great performances. Justin Timberlake is really proving himself in the acting field and it will be nice to see how far his career goes. If nothing else, the film is a commentary of our times, and who doesn't like scathing social commentary?


In Time - 3/5

Review: Trollhunter

Trollhunter is the latest film to capitalize on the "found footage" movement blowing through the film industry. Found footage means that the film was shot documentary style on what appears to be a consumer grade camera. The Paranormal Activity films are found footage films, as is Cloverfield and The Blair Witch Project.


This style lends itself to certain stories better than others. Half of the reason Paranormal Activity was so scary was because of this style. It made it seem more real and people were more inclined to think something like that could happen to them. The Blair Witch Project is also a film in which this style works. Of course, both of those films produced sequels that were mere shadows of the original.


This is because they didn't maintain the feeling that what we were seeing was real. Paranormal Activity 2 and 3 both incorporated title cards telling us the date, thereby ruining the effect that we were seeing something in its unadulterated and most frightening state.


Trollhunter, which is from Norway, contains a story that is highly effective because it is told in this way. It follows three college students making a documentary on a bear poacher only to discover that he actually hunts trolls for the government. The reason this style of storytelling works so well for this film is that we, as the viewers, only know as much as the students making the film. We figure things out when they do.


It also works, though, because sometimes we know things they don't There is a sequence later on in the film where the students and the hunter are trapped in a cave and the camera switches to night vision. We, the viewers, see five trolls, called Mountain Kings, move into the cave and hunker down for the night. This is a very tense moment because the only people who know the exact number of trolls are us, the viewers, and the cameraman.


This style of storytelling also presents a limited point of view for the audience. We are never away from the students. It is their story we are seeing, from beginning to end. Sure, the hunter is prevalent throughout the story, but he isn't always present.


Director Andre Overdal deftly handles the camera and treats it like a character itself. One of the most interesting sequences involves the cameraman being manhandled by one of the trolls, but we only see what the camera sees. It's creative filmmaking at its best.


If anything, it's worth it to see Trollhunter because it incorporates all of the troll folklore we learned as children: Trolls turn to stone or explode when exposed to UV light, they can smell the blood of Christians, and they eat old tires.


Trollhunter - 4/5

From the Collection: Days of Heaven

Country: America

Year of Release: 1978

Given that Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life came out on Blu-Ray/DVD earlier this week, I find it only fitting that this edition of "From the Collection" covers his 1978 sophomore outing Days of Heaven. To date, it is only one of two Malick films housed in The Criterion Collection (the other is The Thin Red Line).

Although Malick is a formally trained filmmaker (he attended the American Film Institute with David Lynch), he is first and foremost a philosopher. His films require thought and aren't just viewed, they're experienced.

Days of Heaven came five years after his feature debut Badlands and it is this film that really sets up his directorial style. While Badlands has more of a straightforward story, complete with voice-over narration by star Sissy Spacek, Days of Heaven mixes elements of the dramatic with that of the avant-garde. This style can be viewed again in The Thin Red Line and more prominently in The Tree of Life, which is Malick's most experimental process thus far.

Days of Heaven tells the story of Bill, a laborer out to advance his station by any means necessary. The first thing we see Bill doing is murdering his foreman during an argument gone wrong. Thus sets Bill off on his journey in which he is joined by his younger sister Linda (Linda Manz) and his lover Abby (Brooke Adams) whom Bill tells people is his sister.

They hop a train filled with migrant workers and end up on a wheat farm owned by an unnamed character simply called "The Farmer." Bill sees the man's wealth and convinces Abby to get in good with him so they'll be able to stay on the farm after the harvest.

Just like in Badlands, a voice-over narration is provided by little sister Linda, though, as opposed to Spacek's narration in Badlands, Linda's musings don't so much advance the story as much as they advance ideas. She isn't a main character but she is always near to the action, floating around with one migrant worker or another having real conversation.

Her narration is interesting, to say the least. At times it seems as if she's just letting us in on what she's up to, without much knowledge of Bill and Abby's defrauding of the farmer, while at other times she seems to know all that's going on and is inviting us to know just as much.

As if it weren't apparent that this story belongs to Bill and Abby, Malick leaves the farmer nameless, which tells us that no matter what emotions we see from Abby, she doesn't let herself get too close to this man, keeping her love for Bill at the fore.

Days of Heaven seems like a small film with a big heart, but when you truly dissect it and see how it contains innumerable moods and thoughts it becomes apparent that (until The Tree of Life) this is Malick's most ambitious film. The film's greatest triumph is that despite all the many elements it contains, it successfully structures them into a unified mass.

Days of Heaven is an essay in film form and deserves all the praise (and more) that it has received these past 30+ years.

Review: The Thing

What made John Carpenter's The Thing so good was its subtlety. It instilled legitimate fear in the hearts of its viewers and left suspense hanging in every scene. Never sure if "the thing" would be lurking around the next corner, or even if it were standing right behind you, guised as your partner, the original film was about one thing: fear. Fear through isolation, to be more specific.

This new The Thing lacks all of that.

Before going further let's talk about what the new The Thing is. It is not a remake, nor is it a reboot. This new film is a prequel to John Carpenter's film, which, of course, was a remake of a 1950s Howard Hawks (kind of) film, which, of course, was an adaptation of a 1930s short story. The history of The Thing is a convoluted mess, which is actually a great way to describe the latest entry into the series.

The film stars Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Kate Lloyd, a paleontologist who is hired by scientist Dr. Sander Halvorson (Ulrich Thomsen) to come and unearth a strange monument discovered in Antarctica. They are flown there by pilots Braxton Carter (Joel Edgerton) and Jameson (Adwale Akinnuoye-Agbaje). Also in the film is Erik Christian Olsen as Dr. Halvorson's assistant Adam Goodman.

They arrive in Antarctica to find a large alien spacecraft and what appears to be a frozen denizen of said spacecraft. As is expected Dr. Halvorson has them bring it back to the base (filled with several Norwegian fellows) and asks to take a tissue sample. This compromises "the thing's" frozen prison and it escapes, hiding among the survivors by assimilating its victims and imitating their cells.

I went into this film with a sense of excitement. I was excited to see the origins story, as it were; where "the thing" originated from, how it ended up as a dog being chased across the tundra during the opening roll of John Carpenter's film. Also, I'm a big fan of what Winstead and Edgerton have been doing lately.

I left this film with a sense of having been cheated. Cheated, mostly, out of the same fear I experienced when I watched Carpenter's The Thing. In this film, gone are the subtlety, the moments of dread, and even the theme of isolation is downplayed. Sure the characters keep talking about how they can't leave because they risk letting "the thing" our into the world, but they never let on how that affects them. They just act like nine-year-olds who have been put in time out.

The film's biggest downfall is its complete lack of regard for what made the original so great. It contains many of the same elements but doesn't capitalize on them like Carpenter did. It really just amounts to a blood orgy with death-after-death filling up the screen. "The thing" is never given the chance to scare us while in disguise. Each victim is really just a vessel to keep the film moving until the filmmakers have decided it's a good time to make the audience jump again.

The Thing is, unfortunately, the latest horror film to do away with actual scary elements and replace them with Michael Bay-esque action sequences: a poor choice for first time director Matthis van Heijningen, Jr.

The Thing - 2.5/5

Review: The Ides of March

The Ides of March marks the second time George Clooney & Grant Heslov have partnered up to write a film together. It also has Clooney once again pulling double duty as actor/director. The film was adapted from Beau Willimon's stage play "Farragut North."


Ryan Gosling stars in the ensemble drama as Steven Myers, an up-and-coming staffer aiding Clooney's Governor Mike Morris in winning the Ohio Democratic primary, and, inevitably, the Democratic nomination. Also starring in the picture are Philip Seymour Hoffman as Morris' senior campaign manager Paul Zara and Evan Rachel Wood as intern Molly Stearns.


Also in the mix are Paul Giamatti as Tom Duffy, the senior campaign manager for the opposition, Marisa Tomei as Ida Horowicz, the most cliche movie journalist I've seen in a while, and Jeffrey Wright as Senator Thompson, whose endorsement Governor Morris fights for vehemently.


The story follows Myers as he works his charm and ability to bring favor over to Morris' cause. He is soon approached by Duffy with an offer to jump ship and work on his campaign. He juggles all of this with a sexual relationship with Stearns. It is from these three plot points that the movie grows and turns into a subtle political thriller.


Now, if you're like me, you can really only deal with Ryan Gosling in small doses. I won't deny his acting ability, but there's something about him that just screams, "Don't let me say too much!" Actually, this is part of the reason I loved Drive so much. His dialogue amounts to less than half of the film's run time.


In The Ides of March, however, we have a very vocal Gosling. I went into the film knowing he was the headlining star and knowing he would have much to say given the film's content, but, I must say, I was pleasantly surprised. Yes, there were points in which I felt he was trying too hard, but his performance is commendable, to say the least.


It helps that everyone else gave five-star performances, too. The story is engaging and good enough, but it's the acting that gives this film its appeal. (Just wait for Seymour Hoffman to nab a Best Supporting Actor nod from the Academy).


In any case, while The Ides of March may not be the best film of the year, it's certainly one to remember come awards season. No, it won't take home any production awards, but as I said, it's the acting that made this movie.


The Ides of March - 3.5/5