The Hunger Games: Mockingjay

Posted on November 20, 2014 at 5:59 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	Middle School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, some disturbing images and thematic material
Profanity:	Mild language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Intense peril and violence with hundreds of deaths, grisly scenes, torture
Diversity Issues:	None
Date Released to Theaters:	November 21, 2014
Date Released to DVD:	March 6, 2015
Amazon.com ASIN:	B00PYLT0OW

It seems no different at first. While the second in the “Hunger Games” series ended with the surprise last-minute rescue of heroine Katniss Everden (Jennifer Lawrence), and the even bigger surprise that insider Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) was secretly helping to organize a rebellion against the fascist dictator President Snow (Donald Sutherland), we begin this first half of the final installment with Katniss gripped by anxiety and terror, listening to the voice of someone we cannot see, calling her “Miss Everdeen,” which sounds respectful, even deferential, but still delivering orders. Is this more of the same? Just another version of the world of Panem where the thinnest gloss of rhetoric about ideals and values is used to disguise the vilest abuse, corruption and even genocide.

No, this is District 13, thought to have been exterminated, but in reality literally driven underground, as much as 40 stories down, as they work to find a way to overthrow President Snow’s totalitarian regime. They are led by Alma Coin (a somber Julianne Moore), President of the rebel forces. Coin can be abrupt, but it is a manifestation of urgency and decisiveness, not dictatorship. Snow dresses in spotless white, surrounded by lush white roses, and the capital city of Panem is a riot of garish, decadent colors. District 13 is all in gray, looking a bit like Janet Jackson’s “Revolution” video, evoking its uniformity in dedication to its goal and seriousness of purpose. Coin is not cynical, but she is realistic, constantly establishing priorities, understanding the consequences but willing to pay the price.

Coin and Heavensbee believe Katniss is what they have been waiting for, a symbol who will communicate to the other districts that the time has come for rebellion. She is the Mockingjay, named for the distinctive birds creation through genetic manipulation mating with natural species. Katniss is a figure whose sacrifice and resilience lend her enormous national credibility. She was made into a celebrity by Snow through the original Hunger Games.

Now Coin wants to use that as a weapon against Snow’s regime. They try to make a “propo” (propaganda) video with CGI effects, but realize that Katniss is too honest to be effective unless she is telling the truth. So, they take her to see what has happened to her home community in District 12. It has been reduced to rubble, with an enormous pile of skeletons of those who died there. And so Katniss is able to produce the outrage and resolve Coin’s forces are looking for in the video.

Katniss agrees to serve as symbol, on condition that the rebel forces rescue the Hunger Games competitors who were left behind, and pardon them for whatever they have done. She believes Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) is dead, but then he appears on a televised broadcast hosted by Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci), the game show emcee with the sepulchral smile. Her joy turns to horror as she hears him plead for her to stop any opposition to Snow. Has he been tortured? Does he know something she does not?

That seems more likely as the initial attempts at rebellion result in enormous losses, including the firebombing of a hospital. With support from Haymitch (Woody Harrelson), now reluctantly sober, and Effie (Elizabeth Banks), whose adjustment to live without wigs, make-up, and fashions that would make Lady Gaga say “too much” provides much of the film’s comic relief, Katniss struggles with PTSD and with the painful moral dilemmas of asking others to risk their lives for a cause that may be doomed.

The series is a respectful adaptation of the books, but its real strength is not the writing of Suzanne Collins but the performance of Jennifer Lawrence, who is to the film all that Katniss is to the rebellion and more. Once again, Katniss is the heart of the story and Jennifer Lawrence is the heart of the film. In a plot that has her devastated and horrified much of the time, she manages to give a performance that is moving but never an atom out of control. Her conviction and presence is what anchors the film and makes the wildest absurdities of the storyline work. While I am not in favor of splitting the book in two just to double the box office, this version skillfully finds a story arc that comes to a satisfying conclusion while making us eager to see what happens next.

Translation: Brutal dictatorship relying on military force, bombing (including bombing unarmed civilians), shooting, executions, hundreds injured and killed, disturbing images including wounded civilians and piles of skeletons, torture (off screen), some teen kisses

Family discussion: What made Katniss the best choice to symbolize the rebellion? Why was it necessary to have a symbol? Why did President Snow refuse to use the word “rebel?”

If you like this, try: the first two “Hunger Games” films and “The Maze Runner”

Interstellar

Posted on November 5, 2014 at 8:55 am

Writer/director Christopher Nolan takes on literally cosmic issues with “Interstellar.” It is an ambitious, provocative, thoughtful, and highly entertaining film that deals with, well, pretty much everything, and, all things considered (believe me, ALL things are considered), it holds together very well.

It’s the near future and some blight has turned humans from progressive, curious, and optimistic to beaten down, hopeless, close to desperate. “We once looked up to the stars and dreamed,” says Cooper (Matthew McConaughey). “Now we look down to the dirt and worry.” Cooper was once an engineer at NASA. Now, like most people left, he is a farmer, struggling to grow crops in a world that has turned into a dustbowl, with plant species dying off until all that is left is corn. Cooper is a widower with two children, teenaged Tom and 10-year-old Murphy, and they live with his father-in-law (John Lithgow). The earth is not all that has been blighted. It is a post-enlightenment society scrambling for “caretaking,” with no intellectual aspirations or opportunities. Cooper’s wife died because medical technology and expertise that was once available no longer exists. And he is called into school because Murphy is in trouble for insisting that Americans once landed on the moon. That never happened, Murphy’s teacher explains a little impatiently. That was just a clever ruse to bankrupt the Soviet Union. The clear implication is that this revisionist history is itself a clever ruse to prevent young people from developing an interest in science that human society no longer believes has any value when the only possibility of survival is to return to the cultural norms of a thousand years ago, when most of human endeavor was devoted to making food. We do not know why the idea that science might be of aid in solving the food production crisis is no longer of interest. A comment by one person that greed created problems may be a clue.

Murphy insists that she is getting messages from a ghost who throws books off the shelf in her bedroom. When Cooper investigates, it appears to be an anomaly of some kind, a gravitational singularity, a message. The “ghost’s” message points to a location. When Cooper goes there, Murphy stows away in the car. It turns out to be a secret NASA facility led by Dr. Brand (Michael Caine). They have concluded that Earth can no longer sustain human life. They have sent out rocket probes to find an alternate planet that can sustain human life. Plan A is to be able to transport Earth’s inhabitants to a new location. The project is called Lazarus. Plan B, if no one alive can be saved, is to transport fertilized eggs to the new location and begin again, a new Genesis. They want Cooper to pilot the ship.

And this sets up the central conflict of the story. It is only secondarily about whether humans can, will, or should continue as a species and culture. The primary concern is the relationship between Cooper and Murphy. He wants more than anything in the world to stay with her and watch her grow up. But he knows his participation is critical to the mission — no one else going has ever actually flown before — and if the mission fails, Murphy’s generation will be the last. In a wrenching scene, Cooper has to leave while Murphy is furious and hurt. He promises he will come back. Parent-child relationships and especially promises broken and kept, echo throughout the storyline.

Dr. Brand’s daughter (Anne Hathaway) is on the crew and the trip into space leads to some mind-bending conversations about cosmology, including wormholes, black holes, and why an hour on one planet can translate into seven years for the occupants of the spaceship circulating above. The visual effects (all built or “practical” effects, no digital/green screen) are stunning.

The storyline also provides an opportunity for extremely complex and difficult moral choices, as the crew has to make decisions based on very limited information and even more limited time. The broad sweep of themes means that some choices work better than others. The ending seems rushed and not entirely thought through. Cutting back and forth between scenes in outer space and back on earth during one passage goes on too long, and one mention of Dylan Thomas’ famous poem would be plenty. A detour involving an unbilled actor with an almost-unforgivably on-the-nose character name is particularly poorly conceived. But even that scene is so visually striking that it barely registers as a diversion. And overall, the film’s willingness to place the biggest questions in the grand sweep of the universe is absorbing and it is impossible not to be moved by it.

Parents should know that this film includes themes of environmental devastation and potential human extinction, sci-fi-style peril and violence, sad deaths of parents and children, attempted murder, characters injured and killed, and a few bad words.

Family discussion: Why did the school insist that the moon landing was faked and what does that tell us about this society? What should the crew have considered in deciding which planet to try?

If you like this, try: “2001,” “Silent Running,” and “Inception”

Related Tags:

Action/Adventure Science-Fiction

John Wick

Posted on October 23, 2014 at 5:44 pm

This is a movie directed by two stunt men, which means it is pretty much a first-person shooter video game projected onto a movie screen. But that also means that it is directed by people who really know stunts and the kills on screen (reportedly more than 80) are on display for maximum effect. It delivers exactly what it promises, with a couple of surprisingly sharp and witty touches that lift it above the usual bang bang. There aren’t many movies where the funniest line is the way a character says, “Oh.” And I loved the idea of a very high-end, very specialized safe house/hotel just for assassins. Of course the only currency accepted is gold coins. And of course there is a doctor on duty 24/7 to sew up wounds without any pesky questions.

Keanu Reeves plays the title character and we know from the beginning of the film that he is not having a good day. We see him very badly, maybe mortally wounded, lying out in the rain, watching a video of his wife on his phone. And then we go back a couple of days to see what got him there.

His wife (Bridget Moynahan) is dying. At the funeral, he has an cryptic and uneasy conversation with Marcus (Willem Dafoe), a former colleague. That night, alone in his beautiful but spare home, John accepts delivery of a package. It is an adorable puppy, a gift from his late wife, with a note telling him that “you still need something, someone to love.” She urges him, “now that I’ve found my peace, find yours.”

When he goes out to get food for the dog, he stops to fill up his vintage ’69 Mustang with gas. An arrogant, hot-headed young Russian thug (Alfie Allen) wants to buy the car, snarling that everything has its price. His handler/bodyguard apologizes courteously and they go their separate ways. But that night, when John is asleep, they break into his house, brutally attack him, kill his puppy, and steal the car.

But they have stolen from the wrong person. Before he left the business to live blissfully with his wife, John Wick was employed as a killer and he was very, very good at it. “He was the one you sent to kill the boogeyman,” Viggo, the crime kingpin (Michael Nyqvist) says grimly. He has reason to know, as he was John’s employer. Viggo once saw him kill three guys with a pencil. And Viggo has reason to be grim; the hothead who stole John’s car was Viggo’s own spoiled son.

John gets out his sledgehammer to break the concrete floor and get to the weapons and stash of gold coins he had hidden there. He suits up (bulletproof vest and impeccably tailored grey duds), and off he goes, dodging the attacks from Viggo’s goons and then from the open contract Viggo puts out on him for any hitman (or women) who is willing to take him on, mowing down everyone, and I mean everyone (well, everyone male) who gets in his way.

Reeves is well cast as the implacable, unstoppable John Wicks, and Nyqvist (“Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol” and the Swedish “Girl With the Dragon Tattoo” series) is outstanding as the wily Viggo. There are some nice darkly comic moments (trust me about that “Oh,” and a later reprise), but this is all about the stunts, and as pure adrenaline action fodder, this movie delivers the goods.

Parents should know that this film includes extremely graphic and intense violence with many characters (and a dog) injured and killed, disturbing images including spurting blood, wounds, stabbing, assault weapons, and explosives, strong language, smoking, drinking, drugs, skimpy clothes

Family discussion: Does everything have a price? Why did Viggo decide to make a deal? What did he mean when he said “this life follows you?”

If you like this, try: “Shoot ‘Em Up” and “Point Break”

Related Tags:

Action/Adventure Crime Thriller

Fury

Posted on October 16, 2014 at 5:58 pm

History, Winston Churchill reminds us, is written by the victors. But sometimes those victors have some second thoughts, more complex thoughts, about the nature of heroism, patriotism, and the spoils (in both senses) of war. And sometimes people want to comment on contemporary conflicts but find that it is more compelling in an historical framework. That is how we get “Fury,” a fictional story set in the last days of WWII, with Brad Pitt as “Wardaddy” (everyone gets a “war name”), the leader of a tank team pushing through an increasingly desperate Germany.

“Fury” is what is painted on the gun barrel of the tank. Death, both German and Allied Forces, is everywhere. Our forces, we are told at the beginning, are “outgunned and out-armored,” with “staggering losses.”

The first person we see looks like a cowboy hero, a lone figure on a horse, silhouetted against the sun. He is not a cowboy and he is not a hero. He is about to be killed, and not in a Hollywood, glamorized, bang bang way.

“It will end, soon,” Wardaddy tells Norman (Logan Lerman), his fresh-faced and terrified new driver, a kid fresh from the typing pool who has never been in a tank or fired a gun in combat. “But before it does, a lot more people have to die.”

I’m in favor of movies that show war as brutal, morally compromised, and horrific. Ultimately, though, it has to have more to say than that. It is a movie, a work of drama, and if it is not going to be about something bigger than how terrible war is, it runs the risk of making the very horrors it depicts turn into entertainment and have exactly the opposite impact from the original intention. Steven Spielberg did it with “Saving Private Ryan,” making both the personal story of the individual characters and the larger story about sacrifice and honor compelling and meaningful.

But writer/director David Ayer, whose previous films included the pulpish law-and-order “SWAT,” “Sabotage,” and “End of Watch,” is no Spielberg (though this film borrows a lot from “Saving Private Ryan”). This film tells us very little about history, war, or the human experience.

Parents should know that this film includes very intense and graphic wartime violence with many characters injured and killed, executions, disturbing images, sexual assault, looting, constant very strong and crude language, drinking, smoking

Family discussion: How does this differ from other portrayals of WWII combat? What are the different ways the men in this movie cope with the moral compromises of war? Why did the men choose “war names” and what did they signify?

If you like this, try: WWII dramas “Saving Private Ryan” and “The Big Red One” and the Israeli film “Beaufort”

Related Tags:

Action/Adventure Drama War

Tracks

Posted on September 25, 2014 at 6:00 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated PG-13 for thematic elements, some partial nudity, disturbing images and brief strong language
Profanity:	Some strong language, one F-word
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking
Violence/ Scariness:	Animals and humans in peril, sad animal death, references to suicide
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	September 26, 2014

In 1977, a 27-year-old woman named Robyn Davidson took a dog and four camels and walked 1700 miles across the Australian desert. A National Geographic photographer met up with her four times to cover it for the magazine. That led to a book, the international best-seller Tracks. And now it is a film, starring Mia Wasikowska, with Adam Driver as photographer Rick Smolan, and directed by John Curran, whose previous films (“The Painted Veil,” “We Don’t Live Here Anymore”) show a gift for letting the environment be an essential part of the story-telling. The result is a journey set in surroundings of punishing conditions but spectacular beauty that manages to be meditative and internal, and all the more illuminating for it.

This is the first of two movies based on soul-restoring real-life hikes taken by real-life women that we will be seeing this fall, both based on best-selling books, with Reese Witherspoon’s more high-profile “Wild” coming out December 5, 2014. While there are flashbacks to suggest that Davidson took on the trip to deal with some family losses, in real life Davidson has not just refused to give a reason; she has insisted that it is a foolish question to ask. She walked across Australia for the same reason that Mallory climbed Mount Everest. “Because it’s there.” Her version of a response: “Why not?” It’s pretty clear why not. It is very dangerous. The terrain is blisteringly hot and with very little water. If she is injured or lost, no one will be there to help her. But she is determined to go, indenturing herself with camel dealers to learn how to train camels and earn some to take with her. When the first one cheats her out of what is due to her, she reluctantly agrees to allow National Geographic to sponsor the trip, though it means she will have to allow Smolan to meet up with her four times to take photos.

This is not the usual travelogue, with adventures that include quirky characters, daunting dangers, and lessons learned, though all are there. Along the way, she meets up with Aboriginal people, including one who serves as a guide for a part of the journey because it includes sacred land which she is not permitted to travel on without him. She comes across a farmhouse, and the couple who live there welcome her in a beautifully understated manner.

You’d also expect spectacularly gorgeous and exotic scenery, and that is there, too. And, with just one person on screen much of the time, a lot of voiceover narration, though that’s not too bad. Most of all, this is a spiritual saga, a pilgrimage. Davidson wanted to be alone — she admits that she is much more comfortable with animals than with people. And she wanted to accomplish something difficult by herself. It almost seems at moments as though we are intruding in her beautiful solitude. But mostly, we are sharing it, and feel grateful for the privilege.

Parents should know that this film includes sad and disturbing material including suicide of a parent (off-screen) and putting down animals, dangerous activities, peril, animals shot and poisoned, some disturbing images of dead animals, some strong language (one f-word), and non-sexual nudity (female rear).

Family discussion: Why was Robyn happiest away from people? What was the hardest moment of her trip and why?

If you like this, try: other movies set in the Australian desert, including “Walkabout” and “Priscilla, Queen of the Desert”