Birdman

Continuing to play catch-up, my latest review is Oscar-contender: Birdman.

Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is an actor on the wrong-side of his career. Decades removed from being an A-Lister with a big budget Hollywood franchise, Riggan finds himself trying to re-establish his career by trying to self-finance a Broadway adaptation of 'What We Talk About When We Talk About Love'. Trying to write, direct and star in the play, though, begins to take its toll on Riggan's professional and personal life.

Riggan's daughter, Sam, (Emma Stone) fresh from rehab takes a job as Riggan's assistant in an attempt to help make Riggan's passion project a reality. Troubles arise when Riggan and his lawyer Jake (Zach Galifianakis) decide to hire method actor Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) for the lead role of his play. Mike's ex, Lesley (Naomi Watts) co-stars in the play and their relationship is still a fresh wound which causes problems during rehearsals. Mike and Sam then begin to flirt which strains Riggan's already fragile psyche.

While trying to ensure he creates the best play he can, Riggan is tortured by Birdman, his inner voice, Birdman constantly reminds Riggan about his time when he was the envy of Hollywood. Egging Riggan on about how he should return to his roots as a Hollywood actor and give up the new life he is trying to start. All of these characters and problems begin to come to a head as Riggan struggles to get his play ready for opening night.

An idea that could be inspired by Michael Keaton's career, Birdman provides a perfect vehicle for himself and all actors within the film. Birdman is dripping with self-indulgence, yet each actor steps up and brings their A-game to elevate the film above its own self-important ideas. Michael Keaton allows the camera to show a man who's life has taken its toll on him. When not hiding behind the wigs used for his play, Michael Keaton is able to play Riggan as a man who understands that his life is not what he would want it to be, yet gives optimism that he may be able to save himself, or at least, what is left of his family.

Equally good is Edward Norton's Mike, who steals every scene he is in. Mike wants to be the best actor he can, and will go to any lengths allowed to be the actor he is. Funny, yet uncompromising, Mike and Riggan butt heads about what is best for the play. The interactions between both actors provide some of the best scenes in the film.

The star, though, is still Michael Keaton. For all the showy scenes in the film, the scene that works best comes when Riggan and his ex-wife, Sylvia, (Amy Ryan) discuss what Riggan has missed in his life by putting his career first. Michael Keaton completely owns the scene and shows how vulnerable Riggan is. The scene is Oscar-bat, for sure, but Michael Keaton uses his acting skills to really invest the audience in seeing that Riggan is a sad man and wants you to root for Riggan in an attempt to regain his life. Definitely one of the best scenes of the year.

Birdman is a true tour de force, filmed with the appearance of one-take by director Alejandro G. Innarritu. The acting, directing and screenplay are all top notch with the exception of the final scene. The film builds towards opening night and delivers in all ways one would expect. My issue comes after opening night. I will not go into specifics, but my feel is that Birdman should have ended with opening night as it feels like the logical conclusion. The last scene, though good in its own right, does not jive with the film that came before it. A slight letdown in an otherwise great film.

With great acting and directing, Birdman is my favorite film of 2014 and hopefully gets the recognition is deserves from the Academy.

8.2/10

Movie 43

.......yeah.

So much talent. Why? I mean, Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Richard Gere, Kate Winslet and Uma Thurman aren't hurting for money are they? There's no real way to review each skit in this film as there are many and I don't have the time or energy to do all that.

So odds are this film will be looked back upon 30 years from now as a comedy classic that I didn't get. Don't care. Funny comedy will always be seen the first time out of the gate. And from what I saw, this was a film that appeared to have no concept of what makes a comedy.

Balls on the chin? Check. Making guacamole with your over-enlarged breasts? Oh, yeah. An IPod designed to look like a naked woman? Why not. Black guys with large penis jokes? Absolutely. Gratuitous swearing just becuase? Fuckin' A. Gerard Butler as a leprechaun who loves to threaten others' balls? Heck yes. Oh, and how about a skit dedicated to a woman wanting to be pooped on because that means someone loves her? Damn straight.

What ever happened to a good ol' pie in the face gag? It worked in Blazing Saddles.

Whatever, most of the skits are very lazy and rely on trying to offend rather than make the audience laugh. I've seen a lot of gross things, nothing in this movie made me laugh uncomfortably or uncontrollably. I think I sneezed more times than I laughed. Then I laughed at the sound of my sneeze because my sneeze sounds were funnier than anything in this film.

The one thing I will give this film, is that a large portion of the big name actors brought into this film do give their all. Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry standout as not really caring what comes from their reputations (in Halle Berry's case, she's already done Catwoman, so why not) and just going for it. Unfortunately for them, the material lets them and all the actors down.

If there were some skits that got a lukewarm reaction from me, I would have to say the ones I thought were less bad were: the aforementioned Hugh Jackman skit only because of how hard Hugh goes for it, a couple very predictable skits, one involving Naomi Watts and Liev Schreiber as parents who homeschool their kid and Terrence Howard playing a basketball coach in the 1950's. Lastly, James Gunn wrote and directed a skit involving Elizabeth Banks, Josh Duhamel and an animated cat. None of these skits were home runs, but they were less bad.

I understand what the filmmakers were trying to do, but comedy is art and you need to understand what makes comedy work. The persons involved in this film don't understand that. When you just try to shock the audience, it comes off as cheap and never works in small doses, let along an entire feature-length film.

I don't know, I really don't have much more to say. I need something to take my mind off this film.

Ah, that's better.

1.4/10