Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (2011)

Tom Hanks and Thomas Horn

Two months in a row with at least one post is no great achievement, but it's better than nothing! Here we present our review of Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close. It is rated PG-13 for some foul language (including a few fairly creative replacement curse words) and for emotional thematic material (specifically death and 9/11).

Dan - I have kind of a weird goal each year to watch all of the Academy Award nominees for Best Picture before the awards are handed out if possible. And while I have only accomplished it one time (in 2010), I still make an effort to watch all of the nominees at some point. This was the final movie of 2011's nominees that I had not seen. My expectations were not very high as everything I had read suggested it was a mediocre movie at best. To my surprise it was much better than mediocre.

This is the story of a boy whose father (played by Tom Hanks) died in the events of 9/11. The boy, Oskar, is fairly eccentric and has some OCD tendencies to say the least. Oskar finds a key in his father’s belongings and takes it upon himself to find the lock that to which it belongs. With only the word Black written on the envelope to go on, Oskar decides it must be a person’s name and sets out to visit all of the people with the name of Black listed in the NYC phone book.

This movie deals with a lot of emotions that occur in a mind too young and undeveloped to truly understand them, indeed many adults may struggle with also (I know I do). Oskar deals mostly with fear, loss, anger, and love. About halfway through the movie after a particularly angry argument that Oskar has with his mother, they both begin to process some of the feelings they have about losing their husband/father. Linda tells Oskar that why and how his father died "doesn’t make sense" so there is no point in trying to understand in the first place. She doesn’t know why it all happened nor does she have the answers to his questions, but nevertheless tries to help him understand that he may not ever find them.

My own mother passed away when I was barely a teenager from cancer and I still don’t know the "why" of a lot of things. I remember asking my dad why this was happening to our family and he didn’t know the answer for himself let alone for me. So I feel like I can relate to Oskar in some small way. Not completely of course, since it was my mother and not my father who died and I had several months to prepare for the inevitable while Oskar’s loss was sudden, unexpected, and the direct result of someone else’s actions. But the underlying emotions are still the same: fear, loss, anger, and love. I was just a kid trying to make sense out of something that does not.

There is a powerful scene where Oskar is watching TV at the moment when the first tower collapses, and just as it begins the camera cuts to Oskar collapsing to his knees in a similar way as he puts it together that his father didn’t make it out of the World Trade Center. The images of the towers collapsing are forever in my mind (as with most people), but that shot alone helped the movie resonate that much more and seemed to tie the tragedies of the story more tightly together.

I liked this movie. I liked the characters. They felt real to me. Newcomer Thomas Horn was quite impressive taking on a character like Oskar and pulled it off handsomely. Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock as parents bring home the reality that being a parent is not easy and they aren’t invincible to either emotional insults or even life itself. Even Max von Sydow (in an Oscar nominated role) who never speaks a word was a great character. He conveys so much with only his facial expressions that he seemed to feel the words he wasn’t speaking.

I give this movie 4 out of 5 stars. The emotions reflected in the characters and how they deal with loss is what resonated most with me. I am still amazed at how seeing videos and images of 9/11 still gives me chills, not to mention stories that are interwoven into those events (even if they are fictional).

Nerd Note: Director Stephen Daldry only has done four feature films in his career. All four of his movies have been nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars (even though none have ever won) - Billy Elliot, The Hours, The Reader, and now Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close.


Mark -

This movie is one of the most difficult for me to rate, and it all has to do with the main character of the film.  The main character of this film is portrayed by a new child actor appearing in his first film, Thomas Horn.  Horn plays the character of Oskar Schell, a nine year old boy who is extremely independent by nature but dealing with the loss of his one true friend, his father.  His father Thomas, played by Tom Hanks, loved to create elaborate puzzles for Oskar, testing his already high knowledge for his age, while encouraging Oskar to have to search deeply and abstractly at times for the simplest of solutions.  When Thomas is suddenly killed in the World Trade Center catastrophe, Oskar is left without the solution to the final puzzle that Thomas created.  A year after Thomas’s death, Oskar finds a mysterious key amongst Thomas’s belongings, and thus starts Oskar’s newest hunt for his answer.  The key is found inside of an envelope with the name Black written on it.  Oskar sets out to contact everyone in New York City with the last name Black, hoping to find the owner of the key, and in return answers from his Thomas.  

For me Oskar is one of, if not the most difficult character to try to relate to in all of the films I have seen.  By nature you want to root for him to find the answers he is looking for, but his awkwardness and often spiteful nature push you away from giving your full support to him.  I haven’t read the book, which I am assuming would give a more detailed description as to why he acts the way he does, but due to the lack of description in the adaptation, the audience is left with the little knowledge that Oskar was once “tested” for Aspergers, but the results were “inconclusive.”  I’m not trying to be insensitive in any way, but in order to try and give Oskar the benefit of the doubt in a lot of situations, I was left almost hoping that he had some type of mental or behavioral disorder so that there is an explanation and reason for his actions.  I wish that there was more explanation in the film about what if anything he is dealing with, because otherwise he just comes off as an extremely selfish, bratty kid with absolutely no filter on what he says or does.

In contrast to Oskar, the film’s supporting actors and actresses are amazing!  Max von Sydow plays a character known as The Renter, and it is one of my favorite characters of all time.  Von Sydow plays a character that is mute by choice, and that we later find out happens to be Thomas’s father, who abandoned Thomas and his mother at a young age.  Von Sydow was well deserved of his Oscar nomination for best supporting actor, and if not for being in the most competitive category the past few years, likely would have won.  Along with Von Sydow I thought the performances of Viola Davis, Jeffrey Wright, and Sandra Bullock were very good.

For a variety of reasons this movie isn’t going to be for everyone, but there are definitely some strong reasons to watch it.  While the tragedy of 9/11 plays a role in the story of this film, it is by no means the only, or the main, focus of the film.  3 ½ *’s out of 5

MY RANDOM THOUGHT FOR EXTREMELY LOUD & INCREDIBLY CLOSE:
Going off of my earlier comment about the nominated performances of actors in a supporting role, I would strongly recommend seeing all of the films from last years category.  Nick Nolte in Warrior, Jonah Hill in Moneyball, Kenneth Branagh in My Week With Marilyn, Christopher Plummer in Beginners, and of course Max Von Sydow in this film all gave amazing performances.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)

Tom Hardy and Gary Oldman

For a slight change of pace, we decided to review Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. It is rated R for violence, language, and some brief sex and nudity. It was nominated for 3 Oscars, including Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Actor.

Mark-
I went into this movie with really high expectations, despite not really knowing much about it.  Unfortunately my lack of background concerning this film is what deterred me from enjoying it more than I did. I’ve never read the book or seen the mini-series concerning this story, which having done would provide a much greater understanding of how this movie ultimately comes together.

The general plot of this film revolves around the British Intelligence during the Cold War. When an operation in Budapest goes wrong, the head of the operation team (Control), along with a senior member (Smiley) are forced to resign. When Smiley is approached a short time later by a rogue agent, he is informed that the true operative of the Budapest mission was to discover if there was a mole within the British Intelligence. Smiley agrees to explore and investigate the situation, working to determine which of four remaining senior agents may be the Russian mole.

There is no doubt that the acting in this film is unbelievable.  While Gary Oldman has received the majority of the notoriety for his portrayal as Smiley, the film would not be the same without its huge contributions of the supporting cast.  I expected a much bigger role from Colin Firth, but the real gems of the supporting cast for me were John Hurt, Toby Jones, Benedict Cumberbatch, Mark Strong, and Tom Hardy.

The unfortunate downfall for this film is that it was incredibly confusing.  There are a lot of inferences made about different situations and characters in the film, but there is little to no actual finality to the inferences. Sadly, I don’t feel that rewatching the film would provide any more answers, but instead the only way to really know what the inferences mean would be to read the novel, or possibly watch the mini-series from the 1970s.

I love a good spy movie, and especially love twists and turns, but the confusion of the plot was just a little too much for me. I still really enjoyed the performances of the cast, but they weren’t enough to help me enjoy the film more than I did.  3 ½ *’s out of 5.

MY RANDOM THOUGH FOR TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY: I don’t think that I’ve been as excited about the possibilities of an actors career as I am for Tom Hardy right now. I’m really hoping that he gets, and takes, the opportunity to have more roles like he did in this film, and not end up being known simply as a tough guy action star. It’s crazy how much he reminds me of Russell Crowe.

Dan-
Let me begin by saying that this movie seems like it would be the most accurate portrayal of espionage from the Cold War era ever shown in movies. There are no unbelievable action sequences like you would see in a James Bond or Jason Bourne movie and no fancy gadgets either. All of the action and intrigue is cerebral and internal because I never knew who to trust. And while it is to be commended for being grounded in realism,  it unfortunately did not make a great movie. The source material is a much beloved novel (unread by me) which was previously adapted into a successful BBC miniseries from the 1970s (unseen by me) starring the original Obi-Wan Kenobi himself, Alec Guinness, I hoped for good things. But sadly, my expectations did not meet the reality of the movie.

The plot of finding a Russian mole working inside British Intelligence in the midst of the Cold War made it sound intriguing, and the cast seemed like it couldn't miss. Unfortunately, the script just couldn't get into the unspoken details that surely were in the source material. There just isn't enough time in a two, or even three, hour movie to explain more. When the identity of the mole is ultimately revealed (don't worry I won't spoil it!) the problem for me was that while I wanted to know, it didn't quite have the impact that I thought it should have. Too much was left unsaid, too many details went unexplained, and too many questions were left unanswered. It perhaps requires multiple viewings to flesh out the characters a little better and catch details that went unnoticed the first time, not to mention trying to keep all the characters straight as there were so many that are involved.

It was a little difficult to jump right in to this story considering that the structure of the movie did not seem to flow for me, not to mention that there isn't much dialogue in the first 20 minutes of the movie either. A large portion of the story is told in flashback and the times when the scenes switched back and forth didn't work and were confusing. It became difficult to remember everyone's names and whether or not I had seen them in the flashback or the present, and what significance they held. There were several shots of characters staring at pictures as well as lingering camera shots of the faces of them as if I was supposed to be reading the mind of who was on screen at the moment. It also seemed like there was a homosexual subtext happening with a few of the male characters. Now I admit that I could be completely wrong about that aspect, but I doubt it.

Much is to be said about the strength of the cast, which made this movie very watchable so that I wanted to know what happened with all of them. Gary Oldman as George Smiley was nominated for Best Actor, but I found the other supporting characters more compelling, particularly Benedict Cumberbatch (best name ever!) as Peter Guillam, Tom Hardy (Bane himself!) as Ricki Tarr, and Mark Strong as Jim Prideaux. These characters were easiest to identify with and credit goes also to the rest of the big-name cast for doing so much with so little screen time, particularly Colin Firth, who has such an engaging screen presence in everything he does.

I give this movie 3 out of 5 stars, which seems high considering how much I didn't like it. The performances elevated this movie, but I couldn't figure out for the life of me the 'why' of it all at the end. I realize that some people enjoy this type of plot structure and screenplay because it is open to endless interpretation by the audience. And while this may work for a film studies class it did not work on an entertainment level.

Nerd Note: Of all the memorable characters that Gary Oldman has played, this movie resulted in his first Oscar nomination! This is the same guy that was Commissioner Gordon in The Dark Knight Trilogy, Sirius Black in the Harry Potter movies, as well as pure evil embodied as Stansfield in Leon: The Professional. He also has an amazing voice talent to further disappear into his roles and as a result I did not know he was British until after I saw an interview with him before he showed up in the Harry Potter movies. I don't think I've ever seen him look or act the same in any two movies that weren't part of a series. He is truly an original actor.

War Horse (2011)

Tom Hiddleston, Geoff Bell, Joey, Jeremy Irvine, and Peter Mullan

After a rather lengthy hiatus, the Movies for Lunch Guys are back! Thanks to Dan for switching offices this blog has suffered greatly, and for that we make no apologies but merely set a new goal for reviewing two movies per month. For our return we watched War Horse, directed by Steven Spielberg. It is rated PG-13 for sequences of war violence. It was nominated for 6 Academy Awards including Best Picture.

Dan -
I have never tried to hide the fact that I love Steven Spielberg movies. I think I’ve seen almost every one of them. And hearing that he was making a movie like this, it should go without saying that I was excited to see it. I had no idea what the story of this movie was since the preview only seemed to show a horse running in various locations during World War I. What I did know was that the play War Horse won 5 Tony Awards last year, including best play, and I thought the movie was an adaptation of the play. I have since learned that both the play and the movie are based on a book. So with an award-winning play already adapted and a supremely talented director set to take the reins, I had very high hopes for War Horse.

This is the story of a remarkably strong and smart thoroughbred horse named Joey who is purchased (unwisely it first seems) to work on a farm in Northern England just prior to World War I. After the Great War begins, the horse is sold to the British infantry, and then changes hands/owners several more times throughout the movie. Meanwhile the boy who trained him, Albert, joins the army and longs to be reunited with Joey.

I am not an animal person. I've never had a pet, and between my wife and I we are allergic to just about every domesticated animal. That being said, the best thing this movie has going for it is Joey and, surprisingly, I found myself emotionally attached to him. I was rooting for him. Each time Joey changes owners is practically an emotional travesty - he is sold to the British Army by Albert’s father in order for them to keep their farm and is subsequently captured by the Germans. He is then discovered by a young French girl and is captured again by the Germans when they march through her farmland, and then ultimately escapes from the grueling clutches of the German army to what would seem almost a worse fate. Simply stated: Joey is put through the ringer, and so was I as I watched this horse endure trial after trial.

If I had one complaint about this movie it is that it feels, for lack of a better word, stagy at times. Not to the point of excess, but rather in the feel of it. For example, the lighting in the first half hour of the movie seemed phony and didn’t look natural at all. There is also a scene toward the end of the movie where a German soldier and a British soldier meet in No Man’s Land and carry on a rather polite conversation. This unlikely situation almost took me out of the movie if it wasn't for the scenes with Joey leading up to it that completely invested me emotionally in the outcome. But it serves the plot and artistic license must be taken (after all, it’s only a movie).

I give this movie 4 out of 5 stars. I wanted to love it more than I actually did, so there was a slight letdown. It took a while to get into it, but as soon as the war started I was hooked. This is a good movie and is in my top ten for the year 2011, but I was expecting and hoping for more.

Nerd Note: This is the second movie released in 2011 (the other is The Adventures of Tintin) that composer John Williams wrote the music for with director Steven Spielberg and the 25^th in total that the two have worked on together. Williams was nominated for an Oscar for the music for both War Horse and Tintin, raising his total Oscar nominations to 47! He is second only to Walt Disney who has 59 nominations. The next closest living nominee: Woody Allen with 23.

Mark-
War Horse tells the story of an amazing horse named Joey.  The film tells the story of Joey’s interactions with a number of individuals during a few months preceding World War I, and following through the duration of the war.  Joey’s journey begins when Ted Narracott ,a lowly farmer, sees great promise in Joey and purchases him for an above average price at auction.  Ted‘s son Albert shares in the faith of Joey, and takes it upon himself to train Joey into the horse that lives up to, and exceeds, expectations.  Due to unfortunate circumstances, Joey is forced into the war, with the hope and promise that Joey will be well taken care of, and returned to Albert when the war is over.  The events of the war bring Joey into contact with a variety of individuals, finding promise in the eyes of the English, German, and French.

Luck, for lack of any better term to use, is a prevalent theme throughout this film.  Unfortunately not all of the luck is good.  From the very beginning it could be argued that Joey had good luck in being bought by the Narracott‘s, but the Narracott‘s dire circumstances could also be termed as the bad luck that forced Joey into the war.  Throughout the war it could be termed good luck for Joey that in each of his interactions, he comes into contact with individuals who continue to see promise and respect in Joey.  The unfortunate bad luck in these circumstances is that many of these new interactions come about because of the demise of the previous interactor(s).

A clearly conveyed message of this film is that of support, and that each of the characters that came into contact with Joey were made better for it; not only better, but Joey was able to bring out the best in them.  Joey is also able to learn from each of the characters that care for him, and thus the support and kindness is shown between each of the characters and Joey.

The one thing I found somewhat interesting prior to viewing the film, is the notion that Steven Spielberg made a big budget film with virtually no star actors or actresses.  Granted there are plenty of distinguished supporting actors in the cast, but the absence of any big names actually helps the film more than any other detail in my opinion.  By having lesser known stars, and primarily only minor characters; the film is able to show and maintain that the major focus and star of the film is Joey.

Overall I enjoyed this film, to the extent that I would likely put in my top 10 movies for 2011, but not so much that it would make it in my top 5.  There are unfortunately a few parts that are slow, but there are also extremely compelling and gripping moments (my favorite being the meeting of the English and German soldiers between enemy lines).  4 *’s out of 5.  

My Random Thought For War Horse: My random thought for this film is really more of a random bit of trivia, courtesy of imdb.com.  There were a total of 14 horses that portrayed Joey in this film with the main horse, Finder, also having starred as Seabiscuit in its film.