A common symptom of Aspergers Syndrome is an intense and keen preoccupation with specific subjects that go beyond a hobby - what parents of kids on the autism spectrum call a "special interest." They come and go in phases. My son is transitioning from a passion for animals to an interest in science (convenient that those two subjects are mutually compatible). He has also developed an obsession with maps.
So when I first saw the preview for Martin Scorsese's Hugo - I knew it would be the perfect movie for my Aspie son. An adventure of a boy with a narrow interest in fixing things, a robot that is the focus of all his energy, and the inner workings of a Parisian train station; it fit right in with my son's new fascination with all things scientific. The foreign setting would lend itself to map exploring when we were home again and in front of a computer.
What appeared on the surface to be a visually stunning and potentially emotionally manipulative tale turned out to contain a delightful story.
The movie opens with Hugo - an orphan that lives behind the walls of the Gare Montparnasse in Paris. Hugo steals food to survive, keeps all of the clocks in the station operational, and watches the lives of normal people from behind the clock faces - all while avoiding the grasp of the station master (Sacha Baron Cohen) a stern guard who likes to capture stray children and send them to the orphanage.
He also steals springs and gears and other mechanical trinkets from a grouchy toy-maker (Ben Kingsley) to repair a robot salvaged by Hugo's father (Jude Law). The boy is skilled at fixing things - be it his robot, clocks, toys, or the lives of people who have lost their place in the world.
Along with the toy-maker's goddaughter, Hugo works to interpret a message drawn by the robot - a path that takes him through the history of film to a forgotten legend.
There is an air of magic that surrounds the story - yet it is wholly grounded in mechanized realism with a hint of steampunk romance. Through Hugo's eyes, we see the world full of wonder yet tainted with heartbreak. It presents us a message of purpose - that everyone is here for a reason, that every person is like a part in a machine where there are no extra parts.
My son was captivated by the film, often leaning over and whispering "This is a good movie." I expected him to enjoy the movie - but he learned more than I anticipated. At a point where the early days of cinema was portrayed showing the hand cranked projectors used in the first movies, Christian took his eyes off the screen for the first time and turned to look to the back of the theater - inspecting the projection booth that I'm sure he never before knew existed. I could see the awe in his face coupled with the sudden realization of how movie magic worked.
Like most of Martin Scorsese's work, Hugo is a bit long. It clocks in with a running time just over two hours and bits of the movie seemed lumbering or overly drawn out. At times, it also felt as if I was watching the longest National Film Preservation Foundation PSA ever created. It should be noted that Martin Scorsese founded The Film Foundation in 1990 and is on the board of directors.
But the picture is dazzling. The message of fixing things that are broken and of purposeful reason for existence lends the movie some teachable moments for kids. It is worth watching and (in hindsight) I wished I had shelled out the few extra bucks to see it in 3D.
I recommend you see it. And if the opinion of a seven year old is worth anything - Christian gave it praising remarks. Go, and take your kids with you.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Hugo
Labels:
2011,
Asa Butterfield,
Ben Kingsley,
Chloƫ Grace Moretz,
Christopher Lee,
GK Films,
Jude Law,
Kids and Family,
Martin Scorsese,
Paramount Pictures,
Rated PG,
Sacha Baron Cohen,
Science Fiction
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Contagion
What better way is there to wrap up the summer movie season than a film about a contagious disease that decimates our home planet's population? Am I right?
Before we continue, let's make one thing clear. This is not a raging virus movie like Outbreak (1995). That movie was nothing more than a monster movie where the heroes spend all their time figuring out how to win. Where Outbreak was steeped in action, Contagion has more of an intellectual bent grounded more in reality. Rather than following an A + B = C formula (where A is the virus, B is the doctors, and C is a cure), Contagion follows the tragedy and human reaction to a massive epidemic. The media and medical personnel attempt to downplay the scope to prevent a swine flu kind of public panic. The interactions between those in-the-know and the lives of those around them. The tender moments between a protective father and his daughter. The Chinese government trying to hide their possible involvement in causing the outbreak. Political hostages. Government assumptions. Military reaction. Widespread fear. Riots. Looting. Truth vs disinformation.
This isn't an easy movie to watch as the subject matter is heavy and the imagery is gritty and occasionally unsettling. The film makers appear to be aware of this potential buzz kill and break up the dismal prospects of their characters with a few moments of levity (snow angels) and quick one-liners. Some of those one-liners work ("Blogging is not writing. It's just graffiti with punctuation.") and some don't ("Someone doesn't have to weaponize the bird flu. The birds are doing that.")
By no means is this a perfect movie. It is slow paced making it feel longer than its actual running time. And while the film makers made every attempt to keep the story as scientifically accurate as possible, they cast Demetri Martin as one of the scientists engineering the cure. I kept waiting for him to crack a dead-panned non sequitur joke - which was a bit of a distraction from the actual story.
My biggest complaint is that Contagion comes across as a long "you should always wash your hands" PSA. But that one squabble aside, Contagion is an great movie. Bekah enjoyed Contagion and recommends it - which says a lot because she doesn't often recommend movies. My father-in-law said it was a bit "sterile" but overall an excellent film. He also lauded the ending as being a fantastic piece of story-telling (though I will not spoil the ending here).
Maybe not, but Contagion fills that role and does it with near expert precision. Aside from a couple of flaws, this film has a lot working in its favor: an all-star ensemble cast, dynamic filming locales, a fantastic script, with a relevant and plausible story.
Let's start with that cast.
There are four divergent yet overlapping stories fleshing out Contagion's plot. First is Mitch Emhoff (Matt Damon), whose wife (Gwyneth Paltrow) and stepson die from a mysterious illness. He's been exposed to the pathogen, and must cope with his loss while trying to protect his daughter and prevent her from becoming sick. Next are two CDC doctors (Laurence Fishburne and Kate Winslet) researching the effects and spread of the virus. Jude Law plays a smarmy blogger/journalist/conspiracy theorist capitalizing on the medical crisis, advertising a cure that doesn't work. And the final story arc involves a World Health Organization doctor (Marion Cotillard) sent to Hong Kong to investigate the source of the virus.
Before we continue, let's make one thing clear. This is not a raging virus movie like Outbreak (1995). That movie was nothing more than a monster movie where the heroes spend all their time figuring out how to win. Where Outbreak was steeped in action, Contagion has more of an intellectual bent grounded more in reality. Rather than following an A + B = C formula (where A is the virus, B is the doctors, and C is a cure), Contagion follows the tragedy and human reaction to a massive epidemic. The media and medical personnel attempt to downplay the scope to prevent a swine flu kind of public panic. The interactions between those in-the-know and the lives of those around them. The tender moments between a protective father and his daughter. The Chinese government trying to hide their possible involvement in causing the outbreak. Political hostages. Government assumptions. Military reaction. Widespread fear. Riots. Looting. Truth vs disinformation.
This isn't an easy movie to watch as the subject matter is heavy and the imagery is gritty and occasionally unsettling. The film makers appear to be aware of this potential buzz kill and break up the dismal prospects of their characters with a few moments of levity (snow angels) and quick one-liners. Some of those one-liners work ("Blogging is not writing. It's just graffiti with punctuation.") and some don't ("Someone doesn't have to weaponize the bird flu. The birds are doing that.")
By no means is this a perfect movie. It is slow paced making it feel longer than its actual running time. And while the film makers made every attempt to keep the story as scientifically accurate as possible, they cast Demetri Martin as one of the scientists engineering the cure. I kept waiting for him to crack a dead-panned non sequitur joke - which was a bit of a distraction from the actual story.
My biggest complaint is that Contagion comes across as a long "you should always wash your hands" PSA. But that one squabble aside, Contagion is an great movie. Bekah enjoyed Contagion and recommends it - which says a lot because she doesn't often recommend movies. My father-in-law said it was a bit "sterile" but overall an excellent film. He also lauded the ending as being a fantastic piece of story-telling (though I will not spoil the ending here).
Labels:
2011,
Demetri Martin,
Gwyneth Paltrow,
John Hawkes,
Kate Winslet,
Laurence Fishburne,
Marion Cotillard,
Matt Damon,
Medical Thriller,
Participant Media,
Rated PG-13,
Science Fiction,
Warner Bros.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
I never quite understood the original Planet of the Apes movies. Perhaps I was too young when I first watched them, so the cautionary tales against nuclear war my have been lost on me. Or perhaps the morality tales confronting the social issues of the 70s were too complex for the younger version of Nic. Either way, I never considered myself a fan of the movies.
However, the concept intrigued me. It compelled me to re-watch the original series. It made me excited at the idea of Tim Burton working his magic with the mythology surrounding the Apes, but was disappointed by how Burton mangled the ending of 2001's iteration.
With that in mind, I approached this new reboot with cautious optimism.
My fears were unwarranted. The new Apes delivers a satisfying story that pays homage to the original movies, yet stands as it's own entity.
This isn't a sequel and not exactly a prequel. Where Charlton Heston's 1968 Apes played into that generation's fear of a nuclear holocaust, the new Apes capitalizes on bio-engineering and genetic mutation.
The film's protagonist, Will Rodman (Franco) is a genetic neuroscientist researching a cure for Alzheimer's disease with personal interest in hopes to save his father (Lithgow) who is battling Alzheimer's.
After a workplace accident, Will reluctantly becomes the guardian of a baby chimp - the offspring of a genetically altered test subject.
If you've seen the previews - or possess any understanding of the themes of the Apes movies, you know that this baby grows up to be an intelligent chimpanzee.
There is much in this movie to praise. The motion capture work with Andy Serkis (the man who brought LOTR's Gollum to life) is extraordinary. Lithgow's performance is convincing and tragic. The screenwriters created apt reason to feel empathy for the apes and provided enough foreshadowing to understand their motivation. And while Franco's role as a groundbreaking scientist is dubious, the relationship between him and Caesar the chimp makes the movie worthwhile.
Pay attention to the names given to the apes - many of them honor characters, cast members, or crew of the original series. For example, Caesar was the baby chimp born at the end of Escape and the main ape in Conquest.
Icarus - the spaceship that delivered Charlton Heston to the original planet - makes a cameo through broadcast and print news (hinting at a possible sequel). And the Statue of Liberty makes a creative appearance.
Fans of the original movies will find other familiar bits. A few lines of dialog were borrowed from the originals including the notorious "damn dirty apes" quip.
While entertaining and wholly satisfactory, Rise is not a perfect movie. Aside from casting Franco as a scientist, I have a few other complaints about the film. There were a couple prominent clips from the preview that did not make the final cut - a major pet peeve of mine. And some of the action sequences were blurry and/or dizzying.
Minor squabbles aside, Rise of the Planet of the Apes was a fantastic way to end the weekend. I give it nine angry monkeys out of ten.
(and yes, I know, they're apes, not monkeys)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)