Blade Runner 2049 Review

Starring: Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks, Robin Wright, Jared Leto

Blade Runner is the thinking man's Star Wars. I'm not claiming that Star Wars isn't thought-provoking, nor that it lacks depth. Blade Runner draws heavy from theology, specifically Christianity, and its references are not subtle in the slightest. The world of these films centers around replicants: artificial robots crafted in our image to be used as slaves to assist in interplanetary colonization. The replicants have been banned from Earth, and the 1982 Blade Runner focuses on a rogue group of "fallen angels" trying to seize power, and the police officer (dubbed a "blade runner") hunting them down. The Christian parallels are obvious. It is one of very few instances in which a film about science relies so heavily on religion in its narrative. This sequel is long overdue, and when it was announced, justification was necessary. What warrants the re-visiting of the replicant world? Much like Mad Max: Fury Road, which was another late sequel to an 80s action film, Blade Runner 2049 has surprised critics. Fury Road became the most acclaimed film of the year, and Blade Runner 2049 has similarly received immense praise. When the credits began to roll, I could feel the silence in the theater. We were all similarly dumbfounded at what we had witnessed. At nearly 3 hours long, Blade Runner 2049 is a long lesson in what it means to be human, what to do with life, and how we too often waste the time given us. Not since Arrival (which non-coincidentally has the same director) have I been so struck by the philosophical contents of a film.

I often address the acting of a film first. In most films, it is the actors who are the audience's window into the characters and storyline. In Blade Runner 2049, this is not the case. The cast gives great performances, but it is the visuals that give the viewer insight into the fictional world. The cinematography is breathtaking. From the stills I present you, you should gather that every shot of Blade Runner 2049 is a stunning achievement in photography. From the colors to the framing, the camerawork is absolutely beautiful. I met Roger Deakins, the cinematographer, at a film festival earlier this year. Deakins is the man behind the camera in some of the best movies of all time, including The Shawshank Redemption, Fargo, Skyfall, and A Beautiful Mind. He has also been nominated for an Oscar thirteen times without a win, and I think this will easily get him a long-awaited trophy. This might possibly be the most visually incredible film I've seen in my life, and I've seen a lot of movies. The fact that a sci-fi film achieves this is no easy feat; it's easy for science fiction to just reduplicate and rehash the same stories and shots. Everything in Blade Runner 2049 feels fresh, unlike anything I've seen in Star Wars, Star Trek, or any similar film.

Ryan Gosling is our hero in this adventure. Gosling has been working to establish himself as a leading man for years to little success. Cultural awareness of him is present, but he has never driven audiences into theaters. La La Land, an immense success both critically and financially could have marked a turning point, and this is a fantastic follow-up. His role in La La Land was jazzy (pun intended) and expressive, but this role requires him to be calculated and reserved. Gosling demonstrates he has incredible range and likability. He's literally playing an Everyman and it is not difficult to relate to his journey. Gosling really is the only actor in this film with a juicy role. Sadly, Harrison Ford is nothing more than a glorified cameo (albeit a fantastic one) who does not appear until the last third of the film. Jared Leto is literally just a cameo and has maybe five minutes of screen time. Most of what Leto did in the film confused me and lacked sensible reasoning other than to set up a sequel. I have stated numerous times that setting up a sequel is one of my biggest pet peeves in cinema. To waste an actor as talented as Leto is absolutely baffling, and left me with a sour taste towards his character. Robin Wright channels a (slightly) more-upbeat version of Claire Underwood for House of Cards, and her role is similarly very small. The waste of great talent is mind-boggling. The next largest role next to Gosling goes to unknown Ana de Armas, who plays Joi, Gosling's holographic girlfriend. Joi (seen in gargantuan pink form above) is a great segue into the next topic, centering around the film's depiction of mass media and over-sexualization.

As you probably figured out, this film takes place in 2049. That's 32 years into the future, and a lot will likely change in those years. However, the most startling thing about Blade Runner 2049 is how the dystopian future has parallels to our present. In 2049, Joi is an artificial girlfriend you can purchase for any needs. She can appear as a voice or as a hologram capable of actually performing tasks for him. Gosling comes home to a clean house. She cooks him food and she gives him his inspiration to go on his journey. Yet near the end of the film, the viewer sees the billboard above: "Joi: Everything You Want to Hear". He feels very close to her, yet this is reminder that she is nothing more than a program designed to fulfill his wants and needs. Disappointment doesn't exist in her world. Billboards were important in 1982's Blade Runner and they play a big role here as well. The colors are bright and the pictures are moving. Women are topless or fully naked. Coca Cola appears in oversized letters over barely clothed models. The women are all versions of Joi, and they interact with the men who pass them. Every man has the same girlfriend who just tells him what he wants to hear. The sad thing is that this isn't far off for our society. We have billboards with enormous advertisements on them. Unrealistically beautiful women try to sell us products during commercial. Porn on the internet is an industry rooted in selling unrealistic sex. If Siri had a body, this could easily be Joi. We can also analyze the treatment of women in our current climate. If you've seen any news about the sexual harassment and assault revelations, you can gather that women aren't being treated very well in this industry. Blade Runner 2049 is a fantasy future and a cautionary warning.

Fans of the original Blade Runner will enjoy this spirited sequel, and I believe that you should see the first before attempting this behemoth. If you're not fully immersed in the world of this universe, you will not enjoy it as much. While Ridley Scott's original is a deep-seeded mystery that few can fully decipher, Denis Villeneuve creates a puzzle. The twists and turns in the story are endless, and it's as if watching pieces snap together. My chief complaint is that too much of the film is setting course towards a sequel. Jared Leto's storyline, along with the last twenty minutes serve only to leave the audience wanting to see the next installment. I think most would be happy to have the series end here, lest we have to sit through another three hour film that might not be as good. It perfectly paid homage to the original while telling an original story, and that is much more than most sequels can achieve.

The themes of class separation are present in this film, though not as crucial to the story as in the original. Replicants are seen as scum even though they exactly resemble human beings. It's impossible to tell them apart, yet they're preyed on and exterminated. People murder those who look exactly as themselves without batting an eye. At one point in the film, Robin Wright's character, a commander of the blade runners, makes a chilling observation. She states: "The world is built in a wall that separates kind. Tell either side there's no wall, you've bought a war." I can imagine no one that would want that to be the world we live in. But if you start to think, you see that we've been in that world for quite some time.

Rating:

mother! Review

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris, Michelle Pfeiffer

Without a doubt, you've likely heard of mother!, the newest film from Hollywood's "it-girl" Jennifer Lawrence. Once at the pinnacle of the film industry and able to sell blockbuster fare (The Hunger Games) and arthouse films (Silver Linings Playbook) while keeping a very relatable image, she seems to be falling from her high. A number of PR issues have pushed people to the edge, and mother! could be the breaking point. This movie has received an F CinemaScore, one of only 19 films in history to receive such a rating.... Here's a little hint: Most people pay to see movies because they know they'll enjoy them, and getting a B- usually means a movie is terrible. An F is unheard of. So the question is: Is mother! really that bad? I was anxious to figure out why everyone seemed to have such a visceral reaction to it. The film's ad campaign was shrouded in secrecy and early reviews called it "The WTF Movie of Our Generation". mother! is directed by Darren Aronofksy, the man behind brilliance like Black Swan and less-brilliant achievements like Noah (It has its fans, but I'm not one of them) and if you've seen Noah you may recall that he took many liberties with the Biblical tale. It surprised me to learn that mother! is actually a Biblical film and not the horror movie it was sold as. The parallels to horror classic Rosemary's Baby end abruptly, and the movie descends into a fever dream allegory of God and Genesis that can be very difficult to decipher. I can understand why it got an F, as audiences had no idea what they were being served. I sure didn't. Yet I was entranced by mother! It baffled me, it disgusted me, but it also challenged me to follow its crazy narrative. I respect this movie, and I'm going to go in depth into what this movie really is about and why people hate it so much.

WARNING: This is a spoiler review. If you want to see mother! on your own with no information on the plot, characters, or Biblical twists, stop reading.

What's the Story?

First, I'll introduce what mother! is at face-value. We follow a young woman (Lawrence) living a tranquil life with her husband (Javier Bardem). He is much older than she is and a talented poet. He spends his days seeking inspiration while she remodels their house. One day, a man (Ed Harris) shows up at the door. The woman is very anxious at having a stranger in her house, but her husband loves the company he provides. She is annoyed that he spends more time with their guest than he does working on his poetry. The next day, his wife (Michelle Pfeiffer) shows up. Now there's two strangers. Gradually as the film goes on, more and more people show up, filling her house and she gets more frustrated at how her husband pays more attention to them than his wife or art.

The Bible Twist

mother! is actually a re-telling of Genesis. Jennifer Lawrence is the titular "Mother" who is Mother Earth. Her husband is God. He creates her on the first day, and she lives alone with him in the paradise she creates (remodeling the house). Then "Adam" shows up at the door, followed by "Eve" the next day. Mother doesn't like having t to share her husband. God seems to care more about the humans than her. It's easy to miss these references as no character is named, but when the couple's two sons come in her house arguing and one kills the other, it's suddenly apparent. That was Cain and Abel and this is the Bible. When Adam and Eve get kicked out, they return with a bunch of people who make a mess of the house. Two people break her sink, causing the water to spray out. Mother screams at them to leave (The Great Flood). Long story short, she gets pregnant and she gives birth to who I assume is Jesus. Her pregnancy with the Savior causes her husband to write a poem that everyone goes crazy over (The Bible) and they flood her house to get autographs. While Mother just wants peace and quiet, He lets them into her house and doesn't listen to her. This ultimately ends in them killing and eating her baby (YES, THIS HAPPENS), which I guess is the Sacrament, and they try to destroy the entire house in their shame. She opens the furnace, lights gasoline, and burns them all. As she dies, God removes her heart and builds a new wife, and metaphorically, a new Earth.

Analysis

That sounds pretty ridiculous, right? I'm not kidding, this is what mother! is. It is NOTHING like the movie the commercials make it out to be. A Biblical allegory is easy, so the question we need to ask is why? Why would the director make this in 2017 and depict Genesis in a modern setting? What accessibility does this movie have for our era? I believe that mother! is commenting on man's treatment of the Earth and how this is not a new concept. People in the Biblical times hurt Mother Earth as well, and the film calls out God as the first to betray her. It is this idea that fascinates me. It does not portray God as a wicked man, but still asserts that in His creation of Man, he forsake the first thing he created: the Earth. In seeing Jennifer Lawrence brutalized physically and emotionally by these people she does not want in her house, we are able to see an Earth that does not trust humans to take care of her. She is ultimately correct, and even God can't see how wrong He was. This film is a sort of environmental message about how the mistreatment of the Earth started with God.

God's Selfishness

Part of the controversy likely comes from Javier Bardem's God. In this film, God is seemingly drunk on the affection of his followers. From the moment Adam walks in, Mother can tell that His attention is divided. Instead of appreciating everything she has given Him, He instead focuses on his new creations. When Adam and Eve return with multiple new faces, God basically ignores Mother and does not try to stop them from destroying their house. When the actual craziness begins in the film's third act, God actually encourages their activity, as He is fascinated with their worship. When Mother gives birth to their child (we assume it's Jesus), He steals the baby and gives it to the followers. They kill it, and He comes to a realization, but also allows them to continue. This film asserts that God is a selfish individual that loves the admiration and worship that we give Him. Instead of helping make us better out of His spirit, He does it because he wants us to worship. Mother says to him as she dies: "You never really loved them. You loved how much they loved you." I find this idea fascinating. I do not necessarily agree with the stance, but I think it's an interesting ideal.

The Ridiculous Ending (Baby Cannibalism)

mother! descends into madness in its third act, and I believe it is completely misguided. The actions are set into motion when God gives His son to the people, and they break his neck (it's very graphic) and then eat him while Mother watches in shock. Then they proceed to rip her clothes off and beat her while He watches. It's just too graphic. I understand the reference of the Sacrament but I believe it's horribly misguided. No one wants to see a baby being eaten. That is too much. I understand what they were trying to do but that is just too graphic and grotesque, almost as if he's trying to rile up Christians. The film also descends into a very loud and explosive montage of different events in history. We see Native Americans, Iraqi soldiers, non-peaceful protests and guerrilla warfare. But it's all rushed to make a montage. If the message is that God watched while all these happened, it's muted because no time is devoted. It almost seems tacked on. Comedian Kristen Wiig also makes a bizarre cameo as an "Angel" and it's absolutely unneeded. She also descends in the chaos and murders some folks execution style. I don't think this is resulting in my lack of understanding, I truly believe that this movie just doesn't make sense in parts.

My Verdict

I love interesting films. I really enjoy all the questions mother! poses and all the reactions it creates. If you just reject this film, you miss the point. Though I would not judge anyone who rejects mother! because I get it, eating babies isn't for everyone. I don't share the beliefs of the director or the people involved, though I think it is a very fascinating interpretation of Genesis and a great take on environmental issues in an original way. However, I think while the message is great and original, the methods are flawed. I was not a fan of the filming style, the sometimes boring pace and choppy dialogue. I also detailed my issues with some of the symbolism. I think that Lawrence does a fantastic job in the lead role, and the rest of the cast is great as well. But mother! is sometimes caught up in its own fevered message and forgets to relax. If Lawrence is Mother Earth, why is she giving birth to Jesus? Where is Mary? Isn't the Great Flood arbitrary if Noah isn't somewhere in the mix? I believe the director focuses on symbolism and loses his narrative in the process. I read that this is based on a dream he had and that he wrote it in only five days. I believe it, and I wouldn't say it as a compliment.

Rating:

It Review

Starring: Jaeden Lieberher, Bill Skarsgård, Jeremy Ray Talor, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer, Nicholas Hamilton, Jackson Robert Scott

The last movie I would have expected to become a cultural phenomenon was Stephen King's It. I don't want to get bogged down in the business angles, but here are some numbers to prove how incredible It's success is. The previous September opening record was $48 million. The previous record for the entire autumn season was $55 million. The previous horror record was $52 million. This was the bar that was set. It managed to make $123 million in three days, doubling the previous records and dwarfing the $60 million projections for the film. If only Texas and Florida were not affected by the hurricanes, It could probably have broken Deadpool's record for biggest opening for an R-rated movie. That's right, Pennywise and Stephen King are posting superhero numbers. It's absolutely mind-boggling. It seemed that everyone wanted to see It this past weekend, and they all showed up. In the five years that I've been following box-office numbers I have never seen a movie that has so massively over-performed. And yes, part of this is because the movie is great. It tends to help when the word-of-mouth for a film is so overwhelmingly positive.

Pennywise

The first piece of the film to discuss is the titular "It", referred to most commonly as Pennywise the Dancing Clown. So many people have Tim Curry's version of the terrifying clown in their memory (I'll touch more on the original later), and I was skeptical that Bill Skarsgård could replicate the image that Curry created. He doesn't, but instead forms a new version of the character equally scary in its own right. This Pennywise is an animal looking to feast. He doesn't quite seem human despite his appearance. I make it well-known that I am terrified of clowns, and I hope that the rest of the populous understands me now. Pennywise's appearance is grounded in realism (a humanoid clown) so he seems realistic, but it's that supernatural angle that makes him truly scary. It is the fact that you watch these kids and recognize that they are psychologically facing their worst fears that chills you. The fact that Pennywise preys on something so real and scary, coupled with the fact that he does this to vulnerable children, is a very dark and deep premise. Everyone is afraid of something.

The Losers

When I saw Stranger Things, I claimed that show had the greatest working group of child actors I had seen. The children in It blow them out of the water (save for Finn Wolfhard who is actually in both). While Stranger Things has an adult storyline with Winona Ryder and David Harbour, this movie is only children. If Pennywise is this film's driving force, the kids are the heart and soul. You may see It because of the scary clown, but it's the tender moments and the emotional setup between the kids that tie the whole movie together. The audience will not mourn victims that they don't care about. By making us care for these kids and grow attached, we are guaranteed to feel the stakes as they appear. I felt the fear in each of them as they faced their nightmares, even if it was something I wasn't personally afraid of. Very few of these actors are name-talent, save for Wolfhard from Stranger Things, and Jaeden Lieberher who had a great first role in St. Vincent with Bill Murray a few years back. Even those two only have one big credit to their name. I think they all have great futures ahead of them if they play their cards right

Comparison to the 1990 Miniseries

I saw the first It last year when the clown fever was hitting the United States. It scared me because I'm afraid of clowns but I was left wanting more. Everyone spoke such high praise of this series (it's actually a two-part miniseries event) that I had a hard time seeing why I was different. While I found the first episode incredible, I thought the second one was terrible. It's worth noting that the one constant in the uneven mess of the series is Tim Curry's phenomenal performance as Pennywise. He's more of a human version of the character, and he always struck me as aiming for the child-molester image. I think a huge reason there is a stigma against clowns and such deeply rooted fear in children is Curry's performance. This is why I stated Skarsgård had a different take on the character. Curry's clown shoes are too big to fill and it'd be worthless to try. Also, I've never read a Stephen King novel, but I hear they're pretty uneven and I'd imagine It would also suffer those same pitfalls. I think the director was able to streamline King and Curry's best pieces of the story and really made it his own.

Detractions

All this being said, It is not a perfect movie. This will be short because the film is nearly perfect in my eyes. Certain inaccuracies, vague plot points, and unnecessary setup occur throughout. There is one "death" in particular that doesn't make sense given that the character survives to the second part in both the series and the novel. Given the way they exited the film at the end, it'd be hard to come back alive. If they do, then there better be a great explanation. For the most part, It escapes the nonsensical setup so many superhero and franchise movies fall into. This film can easily exist on its own and wouldn't even need a sequel. Of course, it has one coming, and occasionally a few setup quotes or plot-lines occur that I just deemed unnecessary. I firmly believe in "show don't tell".

 Conclusion and Casting

In conclusion, I think It is coming out at the perfect time to be a cultural phenomenon. Nostalgia is at an all-time high with Stranger Things and Beauty and the Beast, and its a Stephen King property that was never given the proper treatment. It's a horror movie that's more psychological than jumpy, and it relies on mental terror. I guarantee when the sequel comes out, the hype will be just as insane if not more. And just to humor myself, here is my casting for the sequel. I think it's a given that Jessica Chastain will be Beverly since she worked with the director on Mama, his only other film.

Billy- Jason Bateman
Beverly- Jessica Chastain
Richie- Bill Hader
Eddie- Adam Scott
Ben- James Corden
Stan- Ben Foster
Mike- Idris Elba

Rating:

Spider-Man: Homecoming Review

Starring: Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Jon Favreau, Zendaya, Donald Glover, Marisa Tomei, Robert Downey Jr, Jennifer Connelly, Jacob Batalon, Laura Harrier, Tony Revolori

Contents:

Opening

Peter Parker / Spider-Man

Iron Man, Happy, and the Avengers

Aunt May

The Vulture

The Twist (Spoilers)

Karen

A John Hughes Superhero Film?

Donald Glover

Diversity

The Problem with Setting Up

If you're feeling franchise fatigue with this series, you're not alone. In the time I have been alive there have been three different Spider-Mans and six movies. After the reboot failed miserably with The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Sony handed the web-slinger's rights back over to Marvel in a co-production agreement. Spider-Man finally joined the Avengers in Civil War last year and he will return for Infinity War next year. This version of the web-slinging hero is played by Tom Holland, who was an actual teenager during filming. He is the most authentic version of Peter Parker that I have seen. He seems like a kid playing a kid and it seems to come naturally to him. This is the most fun I have ever seen Spider-Man have, and it harkens back to the cartoons I grew up with as a kid. Peter Parker has a special place in my heart and it is really meaningful to see him in this way. However, I have to push that beaming fanboy aside and acknowledge some serious issues this movie has. I love Spider-Man and I want nothing but to love this movie. Yet it took maybe 45 minutes before I figured out if I even liked the film. This movie has some pacing issues and it focuses too hard on getting its ending correct so it can set up a future movie. This is the issue Marvel is facing these days and it's the same problem that tanked The Amazing Spider-Man 2. They still have not learned from their mistakes. Before I get too much into this problem, I am going to break down more of what I liked and what I didn't like in this NON-SPOILER review below.

Peter Parker / Spider-Man

Tobey Maguire was never Spider-Man to me. Andrew Garfield perfectly captured the angst of the character, yet it was clear by the second film that he didn't possess the playful side. Tom Holland arrives with the complete package. I saw a little-known film called The Impossible at Railroad Square five years ago. In it, Holland plays the son of a family caught in the 2004 Indonesia tsunami with the kind of heart one doesn't expect a child actor to have. I knew he was destined for greatness if only he found the right agent to take him there. His dramatic chops are at play in some of Peter's key scenes, but he also possesses the wide-eyed wonder that makes him relatable. He reacts as you and I would if we suddenly woke up with superpowers. I think that Homecoming succeeds when it focuses on Holland's Peter because it grounds it in the present day. Too much of this movie is crafted on setting up the future.

Iron Man, Happy, and The Avengers

I was worried that this would be Robert Downey Jr weaseling his way into another solo movie. However, this is surprisingly not a Spider-Man / Iron Man team-up film as the trailers would suggest. In all actuality, he's nothing more than a cameo. I appreciated this angle rather than having him dominate screen time because I'm a little tired of Iron Man at this point. I think it's sad that Marvel did not trust Homecoming to sell tickets alone so they had to attach RDJ to the ad campaign to sell tickets. Happy, on the other hand, became the character I never knew I missed. Jon Favreau brings such joy to this role that it is a pleasure to watch him act. It just made sense that Happy would be the liaison between Peter and Tony. As for the Avengers references, it seemed a little too TV for me. I haven't been a fan of the Marvel or DC TV shows because they just seem like commercials to me. Seeing glimpses of the tower and hearing names dropped here and there felt a little too scripted for my taste, and it made the film lose its focus.

Aunt May

I'm searching for a way to say "milf" professionally. Anyways, that is the angle with Aunt May and it's jarring but a lot of fun. For someone used to seeing Aunt May as a feeble old lady, it's shocking to see Marisa Tomei's sexy and fun performance. As this franchise reboots time and time again, Aunt May seems to get younger with each iteration. She didn't have a big role in the film, but what she did was very noteworthy. She seemed like the reasonable age to be Peter's aunt and mother-figure. She actually helped guide him through situations he could not do on his own. We assume she's a widow yet we have no mention of Uncle Ben so she seems like her own woman and has her own story. They took a gamble and I think it paid off.

The Vulture

When it comes to villains, Marvel usually misses the mark. While DC has some of the best villains ever dreamed up, Marvel has fallen short with all but Loki. Recent efforts of last year such as Doctor Strange and Civil War also provided lackluster villains. Luckily, Marvel has decided to start casting Oscar-caliber actors and it's paid off brilliantly. Kurt Russell became arguably the studio's most serious villain, and Cate Blanchett in Thor: Ragnarok looks to be a deliberate move by the studio to fix the common criticism. Smack in the middle is Michael Keaton, who has been enjoying a renaissance of his career since his Oscar nomination in Best Picture winner Birdman. Ironically, he's a bird-man here as well, playing the Vulture. His background is brilliant, as he is depicted as a literal vulture who cleans up superhero debris from cities and his motivation is realistic. He isn't really a "bad guy" per se, rather a man driven to an extreme who has made the wrong decisions. The Vulture feels like one of the scariest villains Marvel has offered audiences. He threatens children and attempts to murder them. Keaton definitely delivers, and he outmatches every actor he shares a scene with. I've been a huge fan of where his career is gone, and it seems like he is still making great choices.

The Twist
WARNING: SPOILER ALERT

Click below at your own risk.

The point where I respected this movie came in a rare instance of shock and awe. For most of the film I was trying to figure out if I liked the direction of the characters and the pacing. I had almost made up my mind for the positive when I was hit with a huge twist. Peter is going to the homecoming dance with the girl of his dreams, and is on his way to pick her up. When he answers the door he realizes in shock that the Vulture is her father. The way this scene builds up is interesting, as there is no buildup. It comes so far out of left field that I would challenge anyone to come forward and say they saw this coming. Peter's love interest was black, and my mind would have never guessed that he was in an interracial marriage with a mixed race daughter. The idea of it hung in my mind and I commend the movie for its brilliance. What follows is a tense car ride in which the Vulture takes what his daughter is saying and slowly pieces together that Peter is Spider-Man. Historically, Peter's secret identity is one of his character's most important aspects, and to see his enemy discover him is terrifying. It was unexpected, but the best Vulture scene was in a car without a costume.

Karen

Peter gets an AI courtesy of Tony named Karen. She acts much like Jarvis did for Iron Man, providing him with all kinds of gadgets and tactical advice. Karen is voiced by Oscar winner Jennifer Connelly, who is actually Paul Bettany's wife (Bettany voiced Jarvis and appears as Vision). This is a very cool nod and Karen has some of the funniest scenes in the film. However, I think a major problem was how sexual they made her out to be. She seemed to have a lot of romantic advice for Peter and her tone was often concerning to me. For artificial intelligence, she seemed to have a specific agenda in mind and if he's a kid, this is kinda crossing the line. I've seen Ex Machina, so female AIs will always leave a bad taste in my mouth.

A John Hughes Superhero Film?

Peter Parker's been in high school before, but Andrew Garfield and his co-stars were far too old to give an authentic view of what high school really is. In Homecoming, they have younger actors, but they make a very interesting choice in how they depict high school. Their version is ripped straight from the reels of John Hughes' classic films. From the social hierarchy to the camaraderie between different groups to the accented color palette, this is a John Hughes vision of a superhero movie. The actors should fit perfect caricatures of Hughes' casts, yet none of them really connect. Peter's love interest Liz seems like a stepping stone and not a dire interest. His friend Ned is often rude and annoying, and not trustworthy. It seems like Peter's right-hand man will always be his girlfriends, and I honestly am interested to see how they handle a new Mary Jane. Flash Thompson doesn't seem like a real obstacle to Peter, which is a shame because Tony Revolori needs a good role after his turn in The Grand Budapest Hotel.

Donald Glover

I really hope there are not any huge Donald Glover / Childish Gambino fans anxiously waiting to see him in a superhero movie. He says next to nothing and does even less. It's honestly a glorified cameo. I'm perplexed as to why they would cast someone with the mainstream heat and pure talent that Glover possesses and waste him. Actually, I have a pretty good idea, and this segues into my final two sections.

Diversity

Diversity is a tricky thing to execute correctly, especially in movies as mainstream as superhero films. Homecoming has been the first film to try to have a completely diverse cast. Holland is white, but various other ethnicities (not just African-Americans) appear in the supporting cast. However, these actors have very little to do in this movie. It's honestly the Spider-Man / Vulture show, and everyone else is relegated to cameos. I expressed my dismay that Donald Glover was subject to this treatment but he's not alone. And here we arrive at the problem. Diversity for the sake of diversity is ridiculous. It pushes no new ideas forward and ultimately has nothing to offer. Simply put, it is wasting opportunities. I hope that Black Panther switches this up, because it has a mostly black cast simply because the source material's cast is black. Race-bending is an interesting idea but it has to be done correctly. If not, you'll end up with Homecoming's issue: a film that claims to be starting a conversation about the issue yet has nothing to say.

The Problem With Setting Up

My biggest problem with Homecoming is that these movies don't feel like complete thoughts anymore. There are easter eggs galore and references to events that have not even happened yet. I want to see grounded, realistic characters and a script that is focused on the present, not looking towards the future. Of course, providing any examples would give spoilers, but I read a review that called this film "Easter Egg: The Movie" and that is shockingly accurate. When it's good, it's good, but Marvel has its eyes on a prize far off in the future, and on a finish line that only seems to extend with every film.

Rating:

Wonder Woman Review

Starring: Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Robin Wright, Danny Huston, David Thewlis, Connie Nielsen

If you're a diehard fan of the DC Extended Universe (aka Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman, Suicide Squad) you are in the minority. These movies have been torn up by fans and critics alike, and have failed to generate the kind of excitement and revenue Marvel consistently achieves. While Batman v. Superman was a cluttered mess, one light saved the film from being written off as garbage: Gal Gadot. Suddenly everyone was anticipating a Wonder Woman film, and fans desperately needed it to be good. Wonder Woman is the first major film with a female superhero as the lead, while simultaneously directed by a woman. Wonder Woman blew expectations out of the water when it opened with over $100 million and started off with a Rotten Tomatoes score in the high 90s. I've seen the film twice now, and both times it has managed to blow my mind. This film is so different than the cookie-cutter superhero films we are used to. It's artistic. It has vision. Marvel films are great, but this is the kind of quality entertainment action fans deserve. Even this early, I would argue Wonder Woman is possibly the best superhero movie since The Dark Knight in 2008. It isn't without its flaws, but it presents one of the most satisfying, well-crafted, and seemingly perfect action movies I've seen.

Gal Gadot

This has been mentioned numerous times, but I still feel it needs to be said. Gal Gadot is Wonder Woman. She transcends any acting ability and she becomes the character. It doesn't happen very often in superhero movies. By no means does Benedict Cumberbatch "become" Doctor Strange nor does M "become" The Hulk. I'd say the only other examples to compare Gadot to are Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man, and Heath Ledger as the Joker. Yes, that is how good she is as this character. She plays every note of Diana Prince's character superbly. From her humble beginnings, to her introduction to the human world, to her self-discovery and her discovery of the true nature of mankind, Gadot nails every emotion. Her facial reactions are powerful. Her physical acting is a spectacle. I believe that anything more is just rambling, so let it be known that Gal Gadot, even beauty aside, is the perfect Wonder Woman.

Wonder Woman

Gal Gadot aside, something needs to be said for Wonder Woman and the powers she has. She's a little overpowered, yet she feels authentic. Superman is basically a God, yet he seems alien and un-human. Diana is a Demigoddess, yet somehow she seems human. I'm not certain how immortal she is. I think while regular things can't harm her, bullets can still pierce her skin (Antiope took a bullet for her) and there seems to be actual stakes in her battles. Yet she also can deflect bullets so easily that it's kinda ridiculous how powerful she is. Her sword is pretty cool, yet as powerful as she believes it is, she never uses it casually. It'd make things so much easier. But hey, maybe she's saving it for Ares. Her lasso of truth is so well done. They even gave it an explanation I never asked for.

Chris Pine

Out of all the "Hot Hollywood Chris's",  Pine was my least favorite. Maybe it's because Evans, Hemsworth, and Pratt were at the forefront of Marvel, whereas Pine heads Star Trek (which I don't watch) and he's the love interest of a DC superhero I wasn't particularly interested in. Yet with this performance, he might be the most competent love interest in the history of superhero movies. Maybe it's because he's a man, and that shows a problem with sexism in action movies. But Maggie Gyllenhaal, Emma Stone, and Gwyneth Paltrow have all created equals to their respective heroes. Yet Steve Trevor feels like the equal to a goddess, and that is a feat. While Diana is so over-powered and so wise beyond her appearance, he stands as her equal. She loves him, but he isn't a side-plot. Their love actually isn't even the forefront and he never feels second-billed. He carves out a great storyline and he holds his own against Wonder Woman, while actually creating a lovable character.

The Love Scene

There is a point in this film where Diana and Steve have sex. Now, we always assume that Tony Stark and Bruce Wayne have sex with their respective others, but there really hasn't been a sex scene. Wonder Woman is also devoid of a sex scene, though it has an immense buildup to a very poignant and tender love scene. Steve teaches Diana how to dance, and she has her first experience with snowfall as they stand close, swaying back and forth. They go upstairs, and the music swells as she looks at him with love. They kiss passionately, and it fades to black. It's very tame, of course, this is a PG-13 film we're talking about. But through their entire dance scene, I felt very strong emotions that built up to this beautiful climax as they went upstairs. The chemistry between Gadot and Pine is just so intense. It was deep, it was moving, and it was a standout of the film. This is the correct way to tastefully include sex in a movie meant to include children and families.

The Action / Slow-Motion

The reception to Wonder Woman's action has been divided. I think the extended slow-motion sequences come off excellent, while some people think they are overdone. It is true that slowing down fight scenes is a large part of director Patty Jenkins' vision for this film, but I think it is not cheesy, nor does it go into "Matrix territory". I think the action is artistic, and it has a unique flair that separates this film from others in the genre. We really get to see the action when it's slowed down. However, there is a scene at the end where there is a large battle, giant explosions and hundreds of casualties. It is as if this film threw away all the artistic visuals and went instead for a typical DC ending like in Batman v Superman or Suicide Squad. It was much more meaningful than those films' endings, and it had its moments, but overall it was a black mark on the film for me.

Feminism

One of the biggest headlines surrounding this film is the feminist angle. This is the first solo female superhero movie. Wonder Woman is a feminist icon. The film is directed by a woman. Yes, this movie is feminist. Diana is a fantastic character with the outwit, outplay, and defeat any opponent that comes her way. She is in no way a stereotype in any form. But it is the kind of feminism that all movies should strive to achieve. It isn't in your face. I'm thrilled that people have accepted this movie because it really is inclusive. It never tries to claim that Diana is above all men, rather, she is above the human race of men. And she is. I hope that other movies can follow Wonder Woman and promote feminism that everyone can get behind, and portray it as positively as this film did.

Ludendorf & Doctor Poison

Without spoiling too much, these two actors turn in very fine performances. Neither one of them is a very complex character, and Doctor Poison is even used later on to show the true wickedness of man to Diana. These people are just pure evil. I enjoyed the contrast of Ludendorf's military and war themes and Doctor Poison's witchcraft, and how those played off of each other. Overall, they didn't end up really doing much for the story as antagonists, and the message of the film didn't really tie into either of their characters. I was much more invested in Diana and Steve. Also, there are multiple scenes where Ludendorf snorts something and it makes him super-powered...I've seen it twice and I'm still not sure what that was. It never gets addressed and it is very unusual and campy.

Comparison to Marvel / Conclusion

I am arguing that this film is better than what Marvel is currently offering. I love Marvel films, and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is one of my favorite movies of the year. But they have a formula, they stick to it, and it works. A film like Wonder Woman, that has an artistic vision, themes of war, and a deeper message about pinpointing blame on ourselves instead of a God, really stands out as a breath of fresh air. Not since The Dark Knight trilogy have I seen a superhero film attempt to dive this deep. The Winter Soldier did a great job, but Patty Jenkins proves that an indie filmmakers touch can do wonders. Wonder Woman has flaws with its last act, and it leaves the viewer with a little bit of cheese. But for the entirety of its refreshingly short runtime, Wonder Woman is a massively enthralling experience that even casual moviegoers can enjoy.

Rating:

Top 20 Best Movies of 2016

Below are my picks for the Top 20 movies of 2016. When it gets to the Top 5, essentially all the films are perfect and it was extremely difficult to arrange them. However, there was a clear outlier for me that deserved to be #1. If I've reviewed the film in the past, clicking on the title will bring you to my full review of the film. Hope you enjoy!

#20. Captain America: Civil War
Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr, Scarlett Johansson, Sebastian Stan, Anthony Mackie, Don Cheadle, Jeremy Renner, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Paul Rudd, William Hurt

I've seen Civil War multiple times since its release in May, and I'm impressed every time by its massive scope and its execution. However, it doesn't quiet soar to the heights of The Avengers or Marvel's best work in my opinion. I think too many characters were shoved into one film, and it makes me worried for the future of these movies as the characters increase. But it's still a well choreographed, action-packed, sophisticated superhero film that never disappoints.

#19. Finding Dory
Ellen DeGeneres, Albert Brooks, Ed O'Neill, Kaitlin Olson, Hayden Rolence, Ty Burrell, Diane Keaton, Eugene Levy, Idris Elba, Dominic West, Sigourney Weaver, Kate McKinnon, Bill Hader

Finding Dory is a movie that is perfect for what it is. It lives up to expectations of what a Finding Nemo sequel should be, and it stands on its one as a great outing for Dory. However, it leaves a little to be lacking if you really analyze it. Notice it didn't get nominated for an Oscar, which is usually a Pixar staple. It's rehashing old themes, and playing with heartstrings. There really isn't a lot of new things on display in Finding Dory, but the nostalgia factor works, as evidenced time and time again.

#18. Me Before You
Emilia Clarke, Sam Claflin, Steve Peacocke, Janet McTeer, Charles Dance, Brendan Coyle

Me Before You is another film that, like Finding Dory, is perfectly executed. We can see detail in every set and costume, and it has a really smart script. Unfortunately, it's a run-of-the-mill romantic comedy. It's not really bringing anything new to the table, and is somewhat of an adult version of The Fault in Our Stars. Emilia Clarke and Sam Claflin are charismatic leads, and they really make us believe in what seems at first an unbelievable romance. The film is charming and heartbreaking, and it is one that has stuck in my mind since June.

#17. Rogue One
Felicity Jones, Diego Luna, Ben Mendelsohn, Donnie Yen, Mads Mikkelsen, Alan Tudyk, Riz Ahmed, Jiang Wen, Forest Whitaker, James Earl Jones, Genevieve O'Reilly, Peter Cushing, Carrie Fisher

I feel like I'm betraying myself. Star Wars is my thing, yet here I am placing Rogue One at #17 on my list. That is a true testament to all the good movies that came out this year. Rogue One is a very smart and very unique addition to the Star Wars franchise. It's really a Star Wars war movie, and its brilliant in its premise and its story. And who could forget that iconic ending with Darth Vader? And Carrie Fisher? While The Force Awakens was full of inside jokes and references, Rogue One had just the right amount for it to seem genuine, but to also remind us what galaxy we were in. I wish I could put it higher, but I have to go with my gut.

#16. 10 Cloverfield Lane
Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman, John Gallagher Jr, Bradley Cooper, Suzanne Cryer

At this point, 10 Cloverfield Lane was released over a year ago. The film had essentially no background, no trailers, and no information on it when I went into the theater. Everything was new. It remains one of the smartest horror/thriller I've seen. John Goodman gives what is likely the performance of his film career as Howard, a man who has "saved" a woman from the apocalypse and trapped her in his doomsday shelter. The audience knows nothing. We have to guess whether Howard is telling the truth or not, and the twist still surprises us, showing that the drama below and above ground are two separate ideas. I thought the movie dropped off a cliff in the last twenty minutes, so that's why it isn't higher on my list.

#15. The Jungle Book
Neel Sethi, Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley, Idris Elba, Lupita Nyong'o, Scarlett Johansson, Giancarlo Esposito, Christopher Walken, Garry Shandling, Brighton Rose, Jon Favreau

As Beauty and the Beast is captivating audiences right now, I invite you to to look back at The Jungle Book. The Jungle Book was one of the most acclaimed films of the year, and even took home an Oscar. Director Jon Favreau created an entire world out of visual effects, with Neet Sethi's Mowgli as the only human connection. Yet we fell into his lush and extravagant jungle, and believed every minute. With some of the best voice/motion capture work I've ever seen from actors like Bill Murray, Scarlett Johansson, and Idris Elba. It takes the few good aspects of the disjointed original film, and creates a magical 3D experience. It builds off of nostalgia, yet feels like an entirely new story.

#14. Elle
Isabelle Huppert, Christian Berkel, Anne Consigny, Virginie Efira, Laurent Leffite, Charles Berling

Elle is a French film, so there's a good chance you haven't heard of it. Isabelle Huppert won the Golden Globe and was nominated for an Oscar for her performance as a woman who has an interesting reaction to an assailant raping her. Rather than report it, she goes on with her life. Her attacker returns, raping her multiple times and she does nothing. Huppert plays a complicated woman with a complex past. The film draws off of themes of Catholicism and religious repression, and contrasts her upbringing full of scrutiny at her father's misdeeds with that of her religious attacker's life. She's unhappy in her life, and this gives her some feeling of excitement, while her attacker is lashing out at his repressed life. It's a sick and twisted film, made even more confusing by Huppert's character's final trick, in which she sets up a morbid trap to enact her revenge. It's a wild ride, albeit an uncomfortable one, that is headed by one of the strongest lead performances I've ever seen.

#13. Lion
Sunny Pawar, Dev Patel, Rooney Mara, Nicole Kidman, David Wenham, Priyanka Bose

Lion builds off what I've learned about Indian slums from Slumdog Millionaire (another Dev Patel film) and has convinced me of the horrors that occur in those areas. Lion broke my heart. It made me cringe, and it made me shift in my seat. Horrifying acts are one thing, but when it's small children, it's so much worse. But don't be deterred, Lion has the heart to deflect its horror. Patel and the child actor Sunny Pawar play Saroo Brierley, an Indian boy who lost his mother and was given up for adoption in Australia, where he still looks for his birth family. The film boasts fantastic performances from Patel, Pawar, Rooney Mara, and Nicole Kidman, and it's the feel-good tearjerker of the year.

#12. Jackie
Natalie Portman, Peter Sarsgaard, Greta Gerwig, Billy Crudup, John Hurt, Max Casella

I wasn't alive when JFK was assassinated, but Jackie gives you what I would assess as a pretty accurate depiction. The film is sad. That's the only way I can describe it. It never brought me to tears, but a level of depression hangs over the film like a dark cloud. The haunting strings score adds to the feeling of gloominess. After all, this is a sad topic. After multiple descriptions of Kennedy's death, I thought the film was not going to attempt to show his murder, and I was content. Then, in a flashback, you see his head explode, and see Jackie trying to grab the pieces. It's shockingly realistic, and Natalie Portman sells it. She becomes Jackie, embodying her style and everything she stood for. It's a transformative performance that commands the screen, and makes Jackie a worthwhile history lesson.

#11. Hacksaw Ridge
Andrew Garfield, Vince Vaughn, Sam Worthington, Luke Bracey, Hugo Weaving, Teresa Palmer

It pains me a little to praise Hacksaw Ridge, because it's Mel Gibson. But Gibson has truly made his comeback this year. I believe that Hacksaw Ridge is the best war film since Saving Private Ryan, in that it really throws you into the trenches in an experience I've only felt while watching that 1998 classic. All of the technical aspects are so perfectly executed, and it is clear to me how this movie received a Best Picture nomination. Andrew Garfield gives the best performance of his career as a pacifist trying to do his part to save lives. It suffers from an extremely cheesy final ten minutes, with far too much slow motion and dramatics. But it's not enough to take away from the film's merit.

#10. Deadpool
Ryan Reynolds, Morena Baccarin, Ed Skrein, T.J. Miller, Gina Carano, Leslie Uggams

Where to start with Deadpool? It came out of nowhere and completely changed action movies forever. From a business standpoint, it proved that there is an audience for R-rated stylistic action, and that X-Men movies have the gravitas and technical talent that Marvel lacks (they've of course continued this with Logan). Deadpool is rude, it's dirty, and it's obscene. But its script is a brilliant combination of self-referential humor and satire that it truly felt like something fresh. The ad campaign was brilliant, and from the opening credits to Juice Newton's "Angel of the Morning", to the final dirty joke during George Michael's "Careless Whisper", Deadpool is a wild and brutally honest tale of what would happen if a regular weirdo became a superhero. There's no sugar coating or bumpers here.

#9. Hell or High Water
Chris Pine, Ben Foster, Jeff Bridges, Gil Birmingham, Marin Ireland, Margaret Bowman

Hell or High Water is the most honest film released this year. It doesn't rely on any dramatic themes, or heavy messages, and it's not really trying to convey any hidden meaning. It just is what it is: a modern Western. It centers around two brothers suffering from the recession who rob banks in Texas to save their family's ranch. Two comrade officers hunt them down. It's quite literally that simple: two vs two. It's very short, and there are not really any interwoven themes. It has a script that's brilliant in its ability to be blunt and simple, and a great performance from Jeff Bridges as the sheriff hunting the brothers down. Hell or High Water doesn't take a lot of effort to watch, and even less to enjoy.

#8. The Lobster
Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz, Olivia Coleman, John C. Reilly, Léa Seydoux, Ben Whishaw

I will never recommend The Lobster unless I believe that person can enjoy it. It's perhaps the oddest film I have ever seen. In a futuristic society, single individuals must live in a hotel where they have a specific amount of time to find love. If they fail, they are turned into an animal of their choice. The foreign-produced indie film centers around Colin Farrell's journey to not be turned into a lobster. It's hard to explain the scope and events of The Lobster, but it is a movie that made me think for at least a week after I saw it. I love this movie and what it has to say about our culture. The Lobster presents a world in which we are obsessed with companionship, and a society in which marriage is the ultimate endgame, with punishments for the contrary. It depicts married people who turn their nose at the single insurgents who live on the outskirts, and hunt them for sport. Yet the single people are no better, and viciously abhor the married individuals. The film makes a heady argument for society's fascination on these themes, and lets the viewer decide where they stand.

#7. Hidden Figures
Taraji P. Henson, Octavia Spencer, Janelle Monáe, Kevin Costner, Kirsten Dunst, Jim Parsons

It's a feat that movies like Hidden Figures are even being made. For the last two years, there has been an emphasis on the lack of films depicting African-Americans being honored at the Oscars. Sometimes this has been negligence on their part, but sadly, not enough quality movies are being made. Hidden Figures was one of the most successful and critically-acclaimed films of the year, gently taking a racial and feminist stance while not angering anyone. I expected biting commentary, and it's not there. It merely depicts events as they happened, and tries to make these "hidden figures" hidden no more. Judging by how deeply this film has been appreciated, I think it succeeded.

#6. Zootopia
Ginnifer Goodwin, Jason Bateman, Idris Elba, Jenny Slate, Nate Torrence, Bonnie Hunt, Don Lake, Tommy Chong, J.K. Simmons, Octavia Spencer, Alan Tudyk, Raymond S. Persi, Shakira

You'll see that the next two films are both Disney animated films. They really had a fantastic year. Zootopia came first in March, and featured some of the best world-building I've ever seen. If you're unfamiliar with that term, I mean that Zootopia created a fictional world where everything was explained brilliantly, and our attention was immediately captured. Sloths run the DMV. A bunny can't be on the police force. A fox works as a con man. Every detail is so well thought out. Then there is the underlying social messages that propelled Zooptopia to awards gold. The film centers around a conflict between predators acting violent, and the prey animals' fear of them. It all turns out to be a government plot to try and strip away the predators' rights so prey rule supreme. It isn't a coincidence that white supremacy just happens to be on the rise in America when this children's movie was released. The film boasts a phenomenal message about inclusion that is needed. It's great that kids can see a movie with wit and humor, and for it to also have an important message.

#5. Moana
Auli'i Cravalho, Dwayne Johnson, Rachel House, Temuera Morrison, Jermaine Clement, Alan Tudyk

I'm a huge Disney fan. That being said, I know what they're capable of, so I hold them to a high standard. I was completely blown away by the craftsmanship, story, and music in Frozen, like most of the world. Then here comes Moana, which blows Frozen out of the water. If you're a fan of feminist messages, Moana is one of the strongest female characters in animation. She has no love interest, no dead parents, and no trusty animal sidekick (There's no way Hei Hei is trustworthy). Lin-Manuel Miranda of Hamilton fame wrote beautiful Polynesian inspired tunes like "You're Welcome" and the Oscar-nominated "How Far I'll Go". The message is original, yet deeply ingrained in Polynesian culture and mythology. It's the most culturally fascinating Disney film since Mulan. With its ability to transcend Disney stereotypes, Moana is so much more than just Disney magic. It's pure movie magic, and it is sure to delight children and parents alike. There is simply no way you can dislike this.

#4. Moonlight
Trevante Rhodes, Ashton Sanders, Alex Hibbert, Janelle Monáe, Mahershala Ali, Naomie Harris

As most of you know Moonlight won Best Picture, and it won in a pretty extraordinary fashion. With these last four entries, I shifted them around constantly before finally settling on this final ranking. At one point, Moonlight was ranked #2. I've sung Moonlight's praises multiple times over, especially to convince people that it did deserve to win Best Picture as much as La La Land did. It's a bleak depiction of a black man growing up gay. I described the plot to a friend, and he replied with "Wow his life must really suck." He immediately tried to correct his statement, but I assured him that was essentially the movie's message. Writer/Director Barry Jenkins and playwright Tarrell Alvin McCraney created a character that everyone can identify with. Whether you identify with growing up black, LGBT, in poverty, boyhood, or just growing up in general, there is some part of this movie that has connected with everyone I know that has seen it. It's a beautifully dark journey into what it is like for this protagonist to grow up uncomfortable in his own skin, and how he accepts himself in his own way. Bolstered by phenomenal standout performances from each actor, especially from Mahershala Ali (an Oscar winner) and Naomie Harris (a nominee), Moonlight is a movie that everyone needs to see.

#3. Arrival
Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker, Michael Stuhlbarg, Tzi Ma, Mark O'Brien

I've seen Arrival twice, and I've been captivated by it both times. Science-fiction is a genre we've all been accustomed to. The evil aliens descend from the skies and we have to fight to save humanity. Arrival shares some of these tropes, but completely subverts most expectations of the genre. The aliens arrive on Earth cryptically, with no explanation. Instead of the aliens causing the problem, it is the paranoia and questionable methods by the world's leaders that could lead to war. Dr. Louise Banks, played wonderfully by Amy Adams, is a linguist the US Army sends to teach the aliens English and decipher their set of symbols. The film is a powerful statement on how we treat outsiders, and how we as a population communicate with each other. It won the Oscar for Sound Editing (its droning sounds are incredible), and its visual effects, cinematography, and direction are all perfect. I will admit, the massive twist ending went over my head the first time I saw it, but the way the twist reflects on both the past events and the future is truly a powerful message about life and love...and it barely has anything to do with the aliens. Yes, while at face-value this is a tale about extraterrestrials landing on Earth, it is so much more. Be prepared for some deep philosophy that requires undivided attention.

#2. Manchester by the Sea
Casey Affleck, Michelle Williams, Kyle Chandler, Lucas Hedges, Gretchen Mol, C.J. Wilson

When I first saw Manchester by the Sea, I named it "The 12 Years a Slave of regular life". If you've seen 12 Years a Slave, you know that it is a relentless assault on the emotions. However, it is an extremely specific situation. Manchester by the Sea, however, is a completely plausible situation that people live with today. Every instance I felt that I had recovered, Manchester by the Sea knocked me down again. While it is incredibly depressing, it has a really healthy balance of humor and wit that comes at the perfect times. This film deserved its Oscar win for Best Original Screenplay, as the script is truly masterful in its ability to go from moments of sadness to humor. Casey Affleck won the Oscar for his performance as a man destroyed by grief trying to be strong in the face of another loss. His performance is so subdued and so realistic, it's a little terrifying to watch. We are all just one horrible day from becoming Lee Chandler, a man so consumed by his grief it destroys his life. I believe that this film will be studied and endure the test of time, for it is the only accurate depiction of grief I have seen. It doesn't sugarcoat a single thing. The dialogue is presented with the sharpness and venom of those who are suffering, and the film's events perfectly mirror the process of trying to come to terms with loss. It just feels so authentic. We've all lost someone. Manchester by the Sea reminds us of those feelings, bringing forth the nasty truths while also reassuring that they are, in fact, normal.

#1. La La Land
Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, John Legend, Rosemarie DeWitt, Finn Wittrock, J.K. Simmons

As soon as I saw La La Land, I just knew it would be here. From the stunning opening scene on an LA highway, to the beautiful yet somber ending, I was in love. La La Land is everything moves were, and should still be. It's a gorgeous throwback to a genre that's nearly dead, yet it still stays modern. It feels like a classic musical, yet it takes place in the present. There really are only two characters, and Mia and Sebastian's relationship is one of the most mature and realistic depictions of love I've seen. It's also a very stark portrayal of artistic success and its consequences, yet it doesn't ever feel sad. With memorable songs and a beautiful score, La La Land is one of the most mystifying, whimsical films I've ever seen. Every piece of it is crafted to perfection. Sure, the script is a little lackluster, but I believe it achieves absolutely everything that writer/director Damien Chazelle intended. If you haven't seen La La Land, I cannot recommend it enough. Hopefully it will captivate you in the same way.