Tag Archives: brad pitt

‘Allied’ a Slow-Burning Thriller Worth Watching

Allied_(film)Part of me spent the entire runtime of this film hoping it would turn out to be an “Inglourious Basterds” spin-off…

 

“Allied” stars Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard as two spies in World War II who meet and fall in love during a mission to assassinate a German official. Jared Harris, Lizzy Caplan and Matthew Goode also star as Robert Zemeckis directs.

 

This is one of those films that on the surface screams awards season, if not Oscar-bait. Two Academy Award-winning stars and an acclaimed director teaming up to make a WWII period drama released in November? It’s clear what they want to sell this as. Well it turns out “Allied” isn’t really interested in awards (we’ll touch on that), nor is it really centered on the plot its trailers have been selling (again, more on that in a second) but is an old-fashioned adult spy thriller that, for the most part, is fine entertainment.

 

First things first, the performances are all solid here, but duh. Brad Pitt is never bad (as much as it’s near impossible to see him as a character and not just “Brad Pitt pretending to be [blank]”) and Marion Cotillard is hardly ever bad (we’ll give her a pass for “Dark Knight Rises,” there were way worse things about that film than her death scene). The two have good chemistry and sell their characters, making us buy into their romance but still question their motives.

 

The production value and costume design are both top notch and really put you into the 1942 settings of WWII North Africa and England. This is where my note about awards comes in, as this film will be what I pick for my Oscar ballot to win those two categories; the score is also mesmerizing.

 

The biggest problem with “Allied” is it isn’t fully sure what it wants to be, or at least refuses to commit to it. The trailers sell it like the whole film will revolve around Pitt trying to find out if Cotillard is a German spy, but in actuality that plot point doesn’t come into play until the halfway mark. The main plot of the film, at its core, is the love story between these two spies, with a war-torn city as its backdrop.

 

And I am fine with that, I dug the immersion into the world, but it creates some riffs and some slogs and the middle of the film, transitioning from their assassination mission to Pitt becoming aware of her possible spy-ness (a term?), does slow down and you just want something to happen that isn’t a picnic with their baby.

 

By the time the credits began to roll, I can say I enjoyed “Allied” enough to recommend it, but also issue a grain-of-salt warning that it is a slow-burner and there are some people who won’t be engrossed by love plot or distracted by the time period and will find the whole ordeal boring. But hey, this is my review and I’m saying if you like the stars, the setting or good ole fashioned spy thrillers, then this is a type of film seldom made anymore worth checking out.

 

Critics Rating: 7/10

Paramount Pictures

Paramount Pictures

‘Fury’ Is Powerful, Gritty and One of Year’s Best

Fury_2014_posterBrad Pitt and World War II. So far, it has proven to be a potent combonation. First Pitt was hunting Nazis in “Inglorious Basterds”, now he is commanding a tank in Germany.

“Fury”, written and directed by “End of Watch’s” David Ayer, tells the tale of five American soldiers who get stuck in their tank behind enemy lines. Outnumbered and outgunned, they must fight their way through and defeat the surrounding Nazi forces. Brad Pitt, Logan Lerman, Shia LaBeouf, Michael Peña and Jon Bernthal portray the members of the tank.

There’s really no point of sugar coating it or beating around the bush: “Fury” is one of the year’s best movies and one of the better, and most realistic, war films of all-time. From the haunting depictions of battle, to the heart-wrenching performances, to the high production value everything about this film is as beautiful as it is chilling.

The performances across the board are nothing short of fantastic, with the standouts being Pitt and Lerman. Pitt plays a man who has clearly let the evils of war shatter any morals and sensitivity he ever had, and this is demonstrated when on the first day of the job for the tank’s new recruit (Lerman), Pitt orders him to execute an unarmed German solider.

I have never been a Logan Lerman fan, I believe he plays a pretentious, spoiled boy in every role he takes (“Noah” and “3:10 to Yuma”, just to name two), but the man shut me up with his performance here. He is a soldier who was pulled away from his desk and put on the front lines, and it seems like he will never get used to the idea of taking a human life. But throughout the film we see him begin to change and become more desensitized to the notion of war, but he never loses the innocence that we empathize with.

The rest of the cast are all cookie-cutter roles (minority member, jerky sociopath and Bible-thumper), but the actors all have their moments to shine.

Ayer has proven that he is more than capable of shooting an engaging action scene, but never while sacrificing drama or content. Even when the bullets are flying and shells are being rocketed off, we see the characters’ weaknesses and at times hesitation in their actions. Even at the end of the film, in the midst of an extended battle, the action never feels derivative or redundant, because we are getting heavy doses of human drama, accompanied by a fantastic score from composer Steven Price.

What holds “Fury” back from the greatness it so clearly was striving for is a scene in the middle of the film. After taking a town, Pitt and Lerman come across two German women, who proceed to make lunch. The scene drags on for 22 minutes (I remember looking at my phone twice), and in the end the entire interaction took place simply for a plot point down the road.

If that one scene had been shorter, which it should have been, then “Fury” may have been able to be mentioned in the same breath as “Saving Private Ryan” and “The Hurt Locker” for greatest war movie of all-time. That being said, “Fury” is still a fantastically shot, grittily depicted and powerfully acted war story, which features a climax that had my theater silent when the credits began to roll.

Critics Rating: 9/10

2014 Oscar Predictions

The 2014 Oscars are right around the corner, so here are my thoughts on who I want to win (SHOULD WIN) and who all signs point towards winning (WILL WIN) for the 6 main Oscar categories.

BEST PICTURE

For all intents and purposes, this is a two horse race between “12 Years a Slave” and “Gravity”. “American Hustle” has an outside chance of squeaking in, but the Academy will probably choose between the visually stunning “Gravity” and the historically important “12 Years”. Regardless of who wins Best Pictu12_Years_a_Slave_film_posterres, both films will win multiple awards Sunday night. “Wolf of Wall Street” and “Captain Phillips” were my top two favorite films from 2013, but they are either too controversial or too under-publicized to stand a chance here. Also if “12 Years” wins, it will be Brad Pitt’s first Oscar win, so that would be cool.

Should Win: Captain Phillips

Will Win: 12 Years a Slave

Best Director

I personally feel Paul Galfonsoreengrass was snubbed for “Captain Phillips”, but it wouldn’t have mattered much, because it is pretty much a lock that Alfonso Cuarón will win for “Gravity”. If you watch any of the behind the scenes for the film, he had so much to do with creating the most visually stunning film ever (Avatar be darned). Steve McQueen could win for “12 Years a Slave” because of the emotional toll of that film, but honestly this would be an upset if anyone other than Cuarón wins.

Should Win: Alfonso Cuarón

Will Win: Alfonso Cuarón

Best Actor

This is by and far the tightest race in any category in Oscar history. Tom Hanks didn’t receive a nomination foractor “Captain Phillips”, yet he wasn’t snubbed; that’s how great this year’s nominations are. The leaders, however, are Matthew McConaughey for “Dallas Buyers Club”, Chiwetel Ejiofor for “12 Years a Slave” and Leonardo DiCaprio for “The Wolf of Wall Street”. Christian Bale (“American Hustle”) and Bruce Dern (“Nebraska”) both gave great performances, but it would still be a small shock if they won. McConaughey has done an amazing job turning his career around from the awful rom-coms and was phenomenal in “Dallas”. Ejiofor had such a large range of emotions in “12 Years”. And DiCaprio went all in with “Wall Street” and may deserve to win simply because he has been snubbed by the Academy for near 2 decades now. It will be close, but in the end I think the actor with the most physically demanding role will win, and that goes to McConaughey, who lost 38 pounds.  

Should Win: Leonardo DiCaprio

Will Win: Matthew McConaughey

Best Supporting Actor

Much like Best Picture, this is pretty much going to come down between 2 nominees: Jared Leto (“Dallas Buyers Club”) and Barkhad Abdi (“Captain Phillips”). 2-time nominated guys Bradley Cooper (“American Hustle”) and Jonah Hill (“Wolf of Wall Street”) will have to try their luck again actor2another year, and despite being memorizing in “12 Years a Slave” Michael Fassbender has denounced the Academy after getting snubbed for “Shame” several years back, effectively knocking him out of contention. Between Leto and Abdi, Leto has the slight edge because his role was extremely demanding in several categories (he played a cross-dresser, lost 40 pounds and got his arms and legs waxed). As fantastic as Leto is, however, I personally would love to see Adbi win, giving “Phillips” it’s likely only win of the night. Plus he had never acted before this role; the guy was driving limos. That would be a crazy rags-to-riches story.

Should Win: Barkhad Adbi

Will Win: Jared Leto

Best Actress

Like many non-Academy members, I did not see Cate Blanchett in “Blue Jasmine”, but the buzz around Hollywood is she is a lock to win. She has essentially swept every award this year. Sandra actressBullock (“Gravity”) and Judi Dench (“Philomena”) both gave great performances, but this just isn’t their year. And if Meryl Streep wins for “August: Osage County” I am pretty sure everyone watching the TV will groan and throw up. The only person who can challenge Blanchett is Amy Adams, and it is for the same reason DiCaprio stands a chance: she’s a 5-time nominated, no time winning actor. The Academy may feel bad if Adams goes home empty handed for a fifth time, and as much as I would love the overrated “Hustle” to not win a single award on Sunday night, I think Adams deserves a trophy for once.

Should Win: Amy Adams

Will Win: Cate Blanchett

Best Supporting Actress

I am going to begin by saying Jennifer Lawrence doesn’t deserve her nomination and was nominated for the same reason Meryl Streep was: because of her name being credited in a movie. That being said, everyone in Hollywood does not agree with me, as Lawrence has won the BAFTA and Golden Globe this year for “American Hustle”. She has two real competitors: June Squibb (“Nebraska”) and Lupita Nyong’o (“12 Years a Slave”). I thought Squibb was the best part of “Nebraska”; she was funny, angry and honest, often all at once. Nyong’o did a good job stirring up emotion in her role, and stands the best chance of beating Lawrence from sweeping the Big 3 awards. I really don’t know how this one will go; my gut says Lawrence, my logic says Nyong’o and my heart says Squibb. As long as Lawrence doesn’t win I’ll be happy, but deep down I fell I’m going to be disappoinlupita-jennifer-600x450ted come Sunday night.

Should Win: June Squibb

Will Win: Jennifer Lawrence…or Lupita Nyong’o, I really truthfully haven’t a clue.