Video Game Review: Thomas Was Alone [PS Vita/PS3]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Thomas Was Alone
System: PS Vita/PS3 (crossbuy) [also on PC and Mac]
Genre: Puzzle platformer
Publisher: Mike Bithell
Developer: Bossa Studios, Curve Studios (Vita/PS3), Mike Bithell (PC/Mac)
Release Date: April 23, 2013

At first glance, Thomas Was Alone doesn’t look like much. There’s a black background, a few blocks and some ledges. Hardly anything visually stimulating.

Yet here is a game that will have you hooked from the very first level.

It all starts with the narrator. British humorist Danny Wallace, who earned a BAFTA Award for his performance, is there to narrate every single one of the game’s 100 levels. Through his voice, he gives every block in the game a name and personality.

There’s Thomas, the titular character, a red rectangle that is trying to make sense of the world around him. Soon he meets Chris, a short and stout orange square, and he is a particularly grouchy character. Later, Claire is introduced. She is a large blue square, one who is insecure but takes some great pride in helping others. A tall and thin yellow rectangle named John also enters the picture, and he loves to show off his high-jumping abilities.

These are only but a handful of the characters we are introduced to in Thomas Was Alone, and all of them are different-sized squares and rectangles. Sometimes a level will require you to use a few of them together in order to solve puzzles, while others only use one character.

Every level has the same basic end goal: to move the blocks to their appropriately-sized exit portals. Since each character has its own ability (i.e. Claire can float in water, John can jump really high), these specific traits must be taken advantage of in order to make progress. Most puzzles can be solved by using some variation of stacking blocks and using each other as a platform, and very few of the game’s levels actually present a real mind-bending challenge.

However, it is this simplicity that only enhances the game’s ambiance. Combined with the glitchy, minimalist soundtrack, Thomas Was Alone is a laidback experience, perfect for when you just want to relax after a long day.

It’s rather amazing that a game so basic in concept can achieve so much thanks to good, quality writing. It’s hard not to be enchanted with Wallace’s witty quips about isolation, loneliness, companionship and artificial intelligence. If you had told me beforehand that I could get attached to a few blocks, I would have called you crazy. While sometimes I wish the game did have more of a challenge, the setting and overall charm makes this an easy one to recommend.

8/10

About these ads

Movie Review: Mud [2013]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Mud [2013]
Director: Jeff Nichols
Screenplay: Jeff Nichols
Genre: Drama
Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Tye Sheridan, Jacob Lofland, Reese Witherspoon
Running Time: 130 minutes

Much like the water/soil mixture of the same name, Mud, Jeff Nichols’ latest film, is a mixture of a number of elements. This is part “coming of age”, part love story and part mystery/thriller. While sometimes films fail when mixing so many themes together, that is not the case here. With Mud, all ideas are expertly interwoven in a film that is as American as it gets.

Set deep along the Mississippi River in rural Arkansas, Mud tells the tale of two 14-year-old boys, Ellis (Tye Sheridan) and Neckbone (Jacob Lofland), who together share a wild adventurous spirit. They ride dirtbikes and regularly sneak off on afternoon boat trips to a hidden island down the river. One day, they notice a boat in a tree on this island. While exploring what they believe to be their new treehouse, they discover that someone is actually living there. Shortly thereafter, they meet this inhabitant, a man who only goes by “Mud” (Matthew McConaughey).

It turns out that Mud is on this secluded island for a reason — he’s on the run from the law. The fact that he is a wanted fugitive doesn’t deter the boys from developing an unlikely friendship with him. As Mud tells them about his long-lost love, Juniper (Reese Witherspoon), the boys make an oath to help him find his lady and ride off to the sunset.

There are other factors at play as well. Ellis is feeling distant from his soon-to-be-separated parents (played by the fantastic Ray McKinnon and Sarah Paulson), and surely this is part of the reason why he is so drawn to Mud. Ellis also has a love interest of his own — Maypearl (Bonnie Sturdivant) — with two first names, just like his mother. No matter that she is a few years older than him; Ellis is the type of feller who isn’t afraid to ask her to be his girlfriend after just one date.

The comradery between Ellis and Neckbone is tremendous. These two young boys really do feel like they are best friends, and both are expertly portrayed by relative newcomers to the acting biz (Sheridan was in The Tree of Life, this is Lofland’s first film). Matthew McConaughey also takes an exceptional turn as the multi-layered Mud. After several excellent Southern-fried roles in the last few years (including Killer Joe and Bernie), this manages to stand out as his best work. The supporting cast here is terrific as well. Reese Witherspoon is a surprisingly good fit as the damaged and confused Juniper, Ray McKinnon and Sarah Paulson make for a strong pairing as Ellis’ disgruntled parents, and Sam Shepard has a memorable appearance as the grizzled old vet who lives across the river. Even Nichols favorite, Michael Shannon, has a small role as Neckbone’s uncle/guardian.

Mud is very much an enjoyable film, but it does suffer from two notable flaws. One, it runs a little long. The film’s pacing is slow and methodical, which isn’t a problem in itself, but certain subplots and minor characters could have been reduced or even omitted with minimal loss. Two, the explosive final act feels a bit out of place after the slow burn drama leading up to that point. While exciting, the transition to this action setpiece is jarring.

Regardless, Jeff Nichols has delivered another engaging film, one that especially nails its Southern setting. Everyone involved feels like a real Southerner — even McConaughey is touched up to look more rugged — and it’s hard not to get attached to most of these characters. This is a film that makes us feel like teenagers again, and through their eyes, it’s not hard to empathize with ol’ Mud.

8/10

Movie Review: Evil Dead [2013]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Evil Dead [2013]
Director: Fede Alvarez
Screenplay: Fede Alvarez & Rodo Sayagues, Sam Raimi (1981 screenplay)
Genre: Horror
Starring: Jane Levy, Shiloh Fernandez, Lou Taylor Pucci, Jessica Lucas, Elizabeth Blackmore
Running Time: 91 minutes

Evil Dead is a horror film that means business. After a brief prologue set in the past, the film wastes no time diving headfirst into pure, unadulterated horror.

This reboot/remake takes the premise of Sam Raimi’s 1981 original film and kicks it up several notches. Once again, five friends are getting together for a weekend vacation in an old cabin in the woods. David (Shiloh Fernandez), Eric (Lou Taylor Pucci), Olivia (Jessica Lucas) and Natalie (Elizabeth Blackmore) have arranged this little trip as an effort to help Mia (Jane Levy) kick her drug addiction. Within minutes of arriving, they discover a hidden door on the floor of one of the bedrooms. Downstairs in this room are dead, rotting cats hanging from the ceiling and bound in barbed wire. There’s also a burned corpse. Oh, and a book known as the Naturom Demonto. You may have heard of it.

Eric, ever so foolish, reads a short passage from this book aloud, awakening an evil supernatural force that begins haunting Mia. It doesn’t take long for the evil to spread to others in the group, causing a wild, bloody and gory affair.

Oh, the gore. This film is not for the weak of heart. Skin is pulled in unfathomable directions, limbs are tossed aside like cigarette butts, and blood sprays everywhere. I usually have a strong stomach for this type of stuff, but I had to look away on more than one occasion. This is a gruesome, violent movie, and it’s bound to disgust those not suited to this style of horror.

For fans of the genre, though, Evil Dead is a real treat. Despite lacking a strong central figure like the original’s Bruce Campbell, the cast is solid enough to make the film work. None of the performances are exceptional, but Jane Levy does stand out with her well-played transitions from evil to innocent.

The real highlights in Evil Dead come from the makeup and special effects. The film is essentially CGI-free, and it is all the better for it. The attention to detail with the blood and gore is a thing of sick, sick beauty. Again, I cannot stress enough that this is not for the weak of heart.

Evil Dead is a rare remake that gets it right. It’s extremely doubtful that it will obtain the same type of cult following that Sam Raimi’s film has achieved over the years, but it’s still strong enough to stand on its own. For that alone, Evil Dead can be considered a success.

8/10

Movie Review: Stoker [2013]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Stoker [2013]
Director: Chan-wook Park
Screenplay: Wentworth Miller, Erin Cressida Wilson (contributing writer)
Genre: Drama/Mystery/Thriller
Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Nicole Kidman, Matthew Goode
Running Time: 99 minutes

Stoker will forever be known as Chan-wook Park’s first English language feature film, and the comparisons to his Vengeance trilogy are hard to avoid. However, it is best to go into his latest film with an open mind. Stoker is strong enough to stand on its own, comparisons be damned.

The film begins with a funeral for Richard Stoker (Dermot Mulroney), a wealthy man who passed away in a car accident on his daughter India’s (Mia Wasikowska) 18th birthday. She remains in the care of her estranged mother, Evelyn (Nicole Kidman), but they are soon joined by Richard’s long-lost brother, Charlie (Matthew Goode). Right off the bat it seems that something is amiss with Charlie. Goode plays him to smarmy perfection as he weasels his way into the household. Evelyn falls for his charms rather quickly; India, not so much.

India is a complex girl. She’s quiet and often gets picked on at school, but she’s also not afraid to stand up for herself. The loss of her father has clearly been quite damaging, and Charlie’s insistence on building a friendship with her is not exactly welcomed. Yet as she learns more about her seemingly-vagrant uncle, she begins to discover things about herself that she perhaps didn’t know before.

As such, Stoker is something of a “coming of age” tale. However, it’s unlike any such tale you have seen before. After all, this is a Chan-wook Park film with a screenplay written by Prison Break star, Wentworth Miller. Stoker is completely unnerving during its entire running time, and it seems determined to leave its audiences feeling as uncomfortable as possible. Violence is kept to a minimum, but Park plays with a number of social taboos, all using a distinct visual style that only he can offer. His use of color and flawless transition shots are a thing of beauty, even if at times they do distract from the film itself.

The cast here is terrific, led by the very talented Mia Wasikowska. Best known for playing Alice in Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, Wasikowska thrives in this much, much darker role. It’s also great to see Nicole Kidman deliver another strong performance in her limited screen time, but perhaps most surprising is Matthew Goode. He has one of those faces where he feels instantly familiar, but beyond his pretty face is a disturbing interior that comes out more and more throughout the film. While Wasikowska is the star, Goode is the one who keeps the wheels turning.

Stoker is arguably Chan-wook Park’s most accessible work, but it’s still not for everyone (even notable amongst critics, given its 66% Rotten Tomatoes average). For those willing to brave the incommodious atmosphere, this is a rare great film released during the first quarter of the year. Park has transferred his talent masterfully to Hollywood, and I can’t wait to see where he goes next.

8/10

Movie Project #10: The Warriors [1979]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

In what has become an annual tradition, I have decided to embark in a third round of the 50 Movies Project. The premise is simple — I have put together a list of 50 movies that I feel I absolutely must see in order to continue my progression as a film lover. With so many films to see, it’s easy to get off track and forget about some of the essentials. This is my way of making sure I watch those that have been on my “must see” list for too long.

The Warriors [1979]
Director: Walter Hill
Screenplay: Sol Yurick (novel), David Shaber, Walter Hill
Country: USA
Genre: Action/Thriller
Starring: Michael Beck, James Remar, Dorsey Wright
Running Time: 92 minutes

Reason for inclusion: This is one of the essential cult films I have heard so much about but never seen.

Accolades: Part of the 500 Essential Cult Movies list and the New York Times Guide to the Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made

Warriors, come out to play-i-ay.

One of the great joys in watching film is to finally see a cult classic for the first time. I had heard so much about The Warriors already — I’m sure *everyone* has heard the quote above, right? — but watching it still managed to be fresh and invigorating.

The Warriors takes place in a dystopian version of New York City in which gangs run the streets. It’s a dark, gritty city, and it seems that everything is tagged with graffiti, including the inside and outside of subway trains. The most powerful gang in the city is the Gramercy Riffs, and their leader, Cyrus (Roger Hill), has called a midnight summit of *all* New York area gangs. He requests that every gang sends nine unarmed delegates to meet in the Bronx to hear his proposal. Cyrus calls for a truce so everyone can work together to obtain total control of the city.

Shit hits the fan when the leader of the Rogues shoots and kills Cyrus, then pins the blame on a member of the Warriors group. Now every single gang member in NYC is out for blood against the Warriors, and the film follows them as they attempt to make it back to their Coney Island stomping grounds in one piece.

“I’ll shove that bat up your ass and turn you into a popsicle.”

It’s a pretty basic story, but what makes The Warriors so great is its style. This goes for the dangerous NYC wasteland all the way to its colorful cast of characters. The gangs we are introduced to are all memorable and utterly ridiculous at the same time. The Warriors are a shirtless bunch that wear brown pleather vests with a “Warriors” patch on the back. The Orphans — a group of misfits so low on the totem pole that they didn’t even get invited to the summit — wear greasy green shirts and blue jeans, and they are anything but intimidating. My favorite gang? Easily the Baseball Furies, a silent, facepaint-wearing bunch that wears old baseball jersies. Also, who could forget the Boppers — a snazzy-looking group with bright purple hats and vests?

Very few of the characters are even attempted to be fleshed out, but that’s not a problem here. This is a film in which you need to just sit down and enjoy the ride, campy dialogue and all. Taken on these values, The Warriors is a lot of fun. I can dig it.

8/10

This film inspired a 2005 video game of the same name. Anyone play it?

Video Game Review: Oddworld: Stranger’s Wrath HD [PS Vita]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Oddworld: Stranger’s Wrath HD
System: PS Vita (HD version also on PS3 and PC)
Genre: First-person/third-person action-adventure
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Developer: Just Add Water
Release Date: December 18, 2012

Oddworld: Stranger’s Wrath HD is an upscaled version of the 2005 Xbox title of the same name. In this, you play as The Stranger, a Clint Eastwood-esque bounty hunter — complete with poncho! — who is looking to raise some cash for a life-saving surgery. In order to get this money, he visits various towns to accept bounty contracts, most of which have high payoffs for bringing back the bounties alive (though they pay well for dead captures, too).

Gameplay consists of both first-person and third-person shooting, and the transition between the two is seamless. Instead of using the L2/R2 buttons (which don’t exist on the Vita), a simple double tap of the front touch screen will move between the two views. The third-person view is critical for advancing between areas, as the Stranger will plop down on all fours and run extremely fast. Switching to the first-person view opens up the gun-play, with standard controls like many other shooters.

As this is an Oddworld title, weapons are anything but conventional. The Stranger’s main weapon, the crossbow, can use several different types of ammo, all of which are actually live creatures. Boombats, zap flies and stunkz are just a few of the different types of critters that can be hunted and captured as live ammo, and each one has its own unique characteristic. Some work as rockets, some work as cannon balls, and others are used to stun and knock enemies down. As such, there are enough options to suit multiple styles of play, though most will likely find two or three types that they will want to use exclusively.

The game takes place in a relatively large world full of weird little anthropomorphic characters. Many of the towns are inhabited with chicken-like creatures — their ridiculous voice acting never ceases to amuse me — and they will give you helpful hints if you get stuck. In fact, it’s near impossible to get lost, as pushing the square button will prompt the Stranger to remark on what he’s “gotsta” do next. Another handy Stranger function is the ability to beat his chest in order to heal himself (this is done by pressing the triangle button rapidly). He’s quite a handy little character, and he makes a good central protagonist.

Most of the game revolves around finding and acquiring bounties, but just as this becomes repetitious, the story goes in a completely different direction and introduces an all-new set of allies and foes. This is a refreshing twist, even if the final act relies more heavily on shooting than ever before.

For $15, Stranger’s Wrath HD offers a lot of bang for its buck. The campaign can last anywhere from 15-20 hours, and it’s a fun ride throughout. The game is incredibly well-suited for the Vita as well, as it is easy to pick up and play in short bursts, and the HD graphics look pretty damn slick on the OLED screen. If not for the dated CGI cut-scenes, this would blend in perfectly as a brand-new title.

On a system starved for shooting games, Oddworld: Stranger’s Wrath HD stands tall. There certainly isn’t anything else like it on the Vita.

8/10

Movie Project #7: Leaving Las Vegas [1995]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Leaving Las Vegas [1995]
Director: Mike Figgis
Screenplay: Mike Figgis
Country: USA
Genre: Drama/Romance
Starring: Nicolas Cage, Elisabeth Shue, Julian Sands
Running Time: 111 minutes

Reason for inclusion: I heard this is one of the greatest films about alcoholism, a subject I have always found fascinating. I have also heard many great things about Nicolas Cage’s performance.

Accolades: Four Oscar nominations (one win for Best Actor), four Golden Globe nominations (one win for Best Actor), total of 29 wins and 19 nominations from multiple awards outlets

“I don’t know if my wife left me because of my drinking or I started drinking ’cause my wife left me.”

That one line perfectly encapsulates the life of Ben Sanderson (Nicolas Cage), an alcoholic screenwriter who lost control of himself long ago. After getting fired from his job, Ben decides to travel to Las Vegas to “drink himself to death.” A rather generous severance check allows him to do as he pleases in Vegas, and he continues to consume seemingly endless amounts of booze. Beer, vodka, tequila, whiskey… you name it, Ben will drink it.

It is in Vegas where Ben meets another sad soul, a prostitute named Sera (Elizabeth Shue). The two of them immediately bond over their shortcomings, and both seem willing to overlook the other’s major faults. It isn’t entirely clear what draws the two of them together, other than both are incredibly lonely and desperate to find someone to care for them. Truth be told, there really isn’t a whole lot that they can do for each other. At one point, after Ben tells Sera that he cares about her, he makes a point to say, “You can never, ever, ask me to stop drinking.”

Sarah’s reply? “I know.”

And so goes this tragic tale. There is a strange affection between these two characters, even though their relationship seems doomed from the start. After all, can a hooker really help a drunk, or vice versa? Yet even though this is a bizarre couple, their relationship is completely believable.

This credit completely and undeniably goes to Nicolas Cage and Elizabeth Shue, both of whom have delivered arguably the best performances of their careers. Their chemistry is perfected to the point of absurdity, with each expertly portraying someone who has essentially hit rock bottom. There are others in the cast — such as Julian Sands as Sera’s brute of a pimp, or Ben’s old colleagues played by Richard Lewis and Steven Weber — but this is very much a two-person show. Cage won an Oscar for his performance, and I’m willing to forgive his last decade of shoddy work based simply on this alone. It’s that good.

Leaving Las Vegas was filmed on a very small budget, which paved the way for Mike Figgis to direct, write the screenplay and compose its music. He filmed most of the scenes on location with Super 16 cameras, and as a result the film has a very personal, authentic feel to it. His overtly jazzy soundtrack may be a bit too much at times, but it does fit in with the overall bleak, downtrodden nature of the movie.

As far as films about alcoholism go, this is one of the better ones I have seen. Leaving Las Vegas is painstakingly depressing, but its authentic nature hits all the right notes.

8/10

Movie Project #5: Amores Perros [2000]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Amores Perros [2000]
Director: Alejandro González Iñárritu
Screenplay: Guillermo Arriaga
Country: Mexico
Genre: Crime/Drama/Thriller
Starring: Emilio Echevarría, Gael García Bernal, Goya Toledo, Vanessa Bauche, Álvaro Guerrero
Running Time: 154 minutes

Reason for inclusion: This is the only film in the “trilogy of death” that I hadn’t seen, and the constant comparisons to Pulp Fiction had me intrigued.

Accolades: BAFTA Award for Best Film Not in the English Language, Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Language Film, Prize of the Critic’s Week at the 2000 Cannes Film Festival, included on Empire’s 2008 list of the 500 greatest movies of all time, ranked #182 on IMDB’s Top 250

This review discusses several plot points and may contain spoilers.

In English, Amores Perros translates to “Love’s a Bitch.” It’s a clever play on words for a film in which love and dogs play an important part in each of its three segments.

As the first entry in Alejandro González Iñárritu’s trilogy of death (later followed by 21 Grams and Babel), Amores Perros is similarly structured as an anthology film. Three completely different stories are intertwined due to a horrific car crash that happens in Mexico City.

The first segment is the hardest to watch, and it is the reason why a “no animals were harmed during the making of this film” warning appears beforehand. It involves dog fighting, and through the illusion of quick cuts, the fights come across as all too real. The viciousness of these moments are enough to make animal lovers squirm (and possibly shut off the film altogether), but numerous precautions were taken to make sure no animals were actually harmed. It’s very effective film-making from Iñárritu in his feature film debut.

The main character of this first segment, Octavio (Gael Garcia Bernal), becomes involved in dog fighting by total chance. After his dog kills that of a local thug’s in an impromptu “non-sanctioned” fight, Octavio sees this as an opportunity to begin profiting from his pet. His ultimate goal is to make enough money to escape with his sister-in-law, Susana (Vanessa Bauche), who is stuck in an abusive relationship with his brother, Ramiro (Marco Pérez).

The beginning of the film indicates that things aren’t going to go as planned, as it shows Octavio and Jorge in a car chase, culminating with them smashing directly into another car.

The second segment follows the lives of Daniel (Álvaro Guerrero) and Valeria (Goya Toledo). Daniel has left his wife and two kids in order to live with Valeria, who is a Spanish supermodel. She is the one driving the other car that Octavio and Jorge crash directly into. As a result, she breaks her leg, and is unable to continue working as a model. On top of this, she also loses her dog, Richie, who has somehow managed to get himself stuck underneath the floorboards of her house. With so many things going wrong at once, the strength of the new relationship of Daniel and Valeria is already put to the test.

The third and final segment focuses on one person, a hitman (Emilio Echevarría) nicknamed “El Chivo” (aka “The Goat”). His connection to the crash is the loosest of the group, as he is getting ready to perform an assassination at the exact moment the accident happens. El Chivo’s story is the saddest of the group, as he is a homeless man who just wants to reconnect with his long-lost daughter. His loyal group of dogs seem to be the only thing holding him together.

Three segments. Three completely different stories. On their own, they likely wouldn’t be particularly enthralling, but the way they are interwoven together keeps the film fresh. Little hints and reminders are dropped here and there, showing that these characters are all related in more ways than originally meets the eye. As with 21 Grams and Babel, this is a film that would seemingly warrant multiple viewings to pick up on these clues.

Filmed on a modest budget of $2.4 million, Amores Perros has a very personal, authentic feel. The performances are raw and impressive, and the fact that much of the movie was filmed in the poorer areas of Mexico City adds even more to the grittiness. In a crazy bit of trivia, Iñárritu and some of his crew were actually robbed by street gangs during filming.

It’s easy to see why Amores Perros is held in such high regard, and it is a thoroughly entertaining film overall. However, its 2 1/2 hour running time is a bit of a burden by the end, and some sections could have been easily reduced or cut entirely. The middle segment especially could use some trimming, as Valeria and her cries for Richie grew more and more ludicrous with every minute.

Regardless, this is still one hell of a filmmaking debut, and Iñárritu set the stage for a formula that he would go on to perfect with 21 Grams.

8/10

Movie Review: Zero Dark Thirty [2012]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Zero Dark Thirty [2012]
Director: Kathryn Bigelow
Writers: Mark Boal
Genre: Drama/History/Thriller
Starring: Jessica Chastain, Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Jennifer Ehle, Mark Strong, Joel Edgerton and Chris Pratt
Running Time: 157 minutes

When Osama Bin Laden was killed by American forces a year and a half ago, a movie release was inevitable. How could Hollywood pass up such a juicy story as the hunt for the man responsible for the deaths of 3,000 innocent Americans? Although such a film was expected, it was still a surprise to see it released the very next year. Even more shocking is that it is a damn good film getting all sorts of Oscar buzz, although it certainly helps to have the talented Kathryn Bigelow at the helm.

Zero Dark Thirty begins in 2003 with the introduction of Maya (Jessica Chastain), a CIA officer who has been reassigned to work at the U.S. embassy in Pakistan. She is teamed up with Dan (Jason Clarke), a fellow officer who has been interrogating detainees as to the whereabouts of Osama Bin Laden (“UBL”) and other Al-Qaeda terrorists. As this is the early 2000s and during the Bush administration, this involves gratuitous torture, much of which we are there to witness. In fact, many have deemed these scenes to be controversial, some stating that they glorify torture. I don’t see it that way, as none of the interrogators are actually enjoying the torture, especially not Maya, who seems startled by it at first. It’s also hard to say just how much the torture helped in the hunt to find Bin Laden — it’s not like the only helpful information came from those who were abused. But I digress.

A few years later, Maya has her eyes on a well-concealed man known as Abu Ahmed. She is determined to find him, whose whereabouts are unknown according to every detainee she talks to. Others involved in the CIA, including the top chief Joseph Bradley (Kyle Chandler), tell her she is wasting her time. Yet Maya is anything if not persistent.

It’s a long paper trail to Osama Bin Laden, and when the CIA finally believes to have discovered his location, they are anything but certain. Everyone involved have varying levels of confidence as to whether or not “UBL” is in the targeted compound, and there is a great deal of uncertainty as to whether or not they should go through with the raid. Of course, we all know how this plays out, but it’s still fascinating to watch as we follow the breadcrumbs leading to the world’s most wanted fugitive.

While many are bound to praise the scene during the final raid inside Bin Laden’s fortress, I found the thrill of the hunt to be far more enthralling. I only vaguely remembered hearing about some of the “smaller” terrorists attacks over the years, and it was quite stunning to see them reenacted on screen. Watching Maya piece together every lead or hint she found became an intriguing process, even if the end result was known.

Perhaps most interesting is that the film focuses so heavily on a female’s perspective. I was not aware that Maya (or rather, her real-life counterpart) had such a crucial role in the pursuit of Bin Laden, and without her persistence it’s hard to say whether he would still be alive. The role of Maya is played admirably by Jessica Chastain, who continues to rise to the occasion with every new role she takes. Maya’s progression (or rather, deterioration?) over the last decade is remarkable, as she toughens up with every attack, even becoming a bona fide badass by the end.

The rest of the cast is impressive as expected, another who’s who of great character actors. Jason Clarke and Kyle Chandler have important roles in the CIA, the former of which caught my eye as someone I hadn’t even heard of before. Familiar faces such as James Gandolfini, Mark Strong, Jennifer Ehle and even Mark Duplass all make welcome appearances, each playing a small, but important part in the film.

While Zero Dark Thirty succeeds in many areas, I am a little surprised by the overwhelming praise surrounding it. The film’s running time — nearly three hours — could have used a little trimming, and the final raid was surprisingly anticlimactic. It’s kind of amazing that the operation had so many mistakes and yet the mission was still accomplished; however, this is well-known information and still fresh in the mind. Perhaps with a few years perspective, this could have been more riveting.

Regardless, I rather enjoyed the film overall, and any reservations I have had are relatively minor in the grand scheme of things. Bigelow has been on a roll lately, and it will be interesting to see where she goes next.

8/10

Movie Project #50: The Searchers [1956]

Posted by Eric @ The Warning Sign

Due to the surprising success of my initial Movies Project, I decided to do a part two for 2012. This time around I put a greater emphasis on directors I am not familiar with, but I also tried to compile a mix of different genres and eras. This will be an ongoing project with the finish date being sometime this year.

The Searchers [1956]
Director: John Ford
Writers: Frank S. Nugent (screenplay), Alan Le May (novel)
Genre: Western
Starring: John Wayne, Jeffrey Hunter and Vera Miles
Running Time: 119 minutes

That’ll be the day.

Imagine my surprise when I realized I had never seen a John Wayne film (outside of the terrible propaganda movie, The Green Berets). How could I have missed out on one of America’s most popular figures? There isn’t a better place to start than with John Ford’s The Searchers, ranked the seventh greatest film of all time per this year’s BFI Sight & Sound poll.

The year is 1868. Ethan Edwards (Wayne) has returned home from the Civil War after a three year absence. He takes in residency with his brother Aaron (Walter Coy) and his family. Almost immediately upon arriving, cattle from a neighbor are stolen. Ethan and a small group of Texas Rangers head out to investigate, only to find that the theft was a diversion from the Comanche Indians meant to draw them away from their families. The men realize this too late, and they return to find the house in ruins. Ethan’s brother, sister-in-law and nephew are all dead, and his two nieces are missing. Now, with vengeance on his mind, Ethan heads out to find the Comanche tribe that he suspects has kidnapped the two girls.

Upon first glance, this appears to be a formulaic American Western. It’s a battle of cowboys against Indians, with both groups out for blood. However, there is another layer to The Searchers that I didn’t expect to find, and it comes from the character of Ethan Edwards.

Ethan is the very definition of an anti-hero. When he returns home at the beginning of the film, hints at his troubled past are subtly acknowledged. He didn’t arrive until three years after the war ended, he has a large amount of unmarked money on his person, and he refuses to take an oath of allegiance to the Texas Rangers. He is a clear loner, and his stubborn tendencies make appearances throughout the entire film. He is also a blatant racist with absolutely no shame toward his beliefs, and at one point he even laughs as a Native American woman is kicked down a hill. In short, he’s an asshole, but he is a damn interesting character.

For most of the film, Edwards is joined by Martin Pawley (Jeffrey Hunter), an adopted member of his brother’s family. This accompaniment isn’t by Ethan’s choice, as he has an obvious resentment for this character (calling him a “half breed” early on, which Pawley rebuts that he is 1/8 Cherokee). Their partnership is shaky, and the men do not like each other at all. But both have the same goal, and somehow it makes sense to work together.

The Searchers is a beautiful film, shot in vibrant Technicolor, and it makes strong use of its landscape (Monument Valley, Utah). It has been said that David Lean watched the film over and over again to generate ideas on how to use the desert in his brilliant Lawrence of Arabia. The VistaVision format really makes the colors pop, and this is easily one of the more visually stimulating American Westerns I have seen.

The more I think about The Searchers, the more I appreciate what it offers. I’m not ready to call it one of my favorites of the genre — some of the racism is really hard to stomach in this day and age — but it’s easy to understand how this has been so influential over the years.

8/10

And that wraps up this year’s movie project! Once again, this has been an enlightening journey. Stay tuned this week for a wrap-up of the entire project!

	The Heretic on Poll Results: Most Anticipated…
	VictorsMovieReviews on Top 10 Songs by The Natio…
	John on Poll Results: Most Anticipated…
	Eric @ The Warning S… on Movie Review: Mud [2013]
	Eric @ The Warning S… on Video Game Review: Thomas Was…

The Warning Sign

Providing words of caution since 2009!

Tag Archives: 8/10

Video Game Review: Thomas Was Alone [PS Vita/PS3]

8/10

Movie Review: Mud [2013]

8/10

Movie Review: Evil Dead [2013]

8/10

Movie Review: Stoker [2013]

8/10

Movie Project #10: The Warriors [1979]

8/10

Video Game Review: Oddworld: Stranger’s Wrath HD [PS Vita]

8/10

Movie Project #7: Leaving Las Vegas [1995]

8/10

Movie Project #5: Amores Perros [2000]

8/10

Movie Review: Zero Dark Thirty [2012]

8/10

Movie Project #50: The Searchers [1956]

8/10

Follow “The Warning Sign”