Whiplash (2014) - Reviewed

If we've talked recently, you've probably heard me talk about this movie at least several times - I've praised its amazing characters, the addicting soundtrack (which my roommates have had to listen to endlessly), and just everything about it. Well, I'm here to do it again.

Whiplash features Andrew, a jazz drummer at the prestigious Shaffer Conservatory, and Terence Fletcher, his maniacal instructor. Andrew aspires to become 'one of the greats' of jazz and practices insanely to get into Fletcher's band. When he invites Andrew into his band, the best one in Shaffer, Andrew is happy to have finally been recognized. But Fletcher's teaching methods aren't orthodox - he believes in pushing students beyond their limits and does this by inflicting physical pain and verbal abuse. As Andrew continues to desire acceptance by Fletcher, his goals become an obsession, which slowly drives him insane.

According to IMDb, Whiplash's genre is drama and music - if you ask me, I'll tell you it's a thriller. When I first stumbled upon Whiplash, I honestly didn't expect much. I hadn't seen too many memorable music-themed movies, and I didn't think this would be any different. Boy, how wrong I was. When the movie ended and the credits rolled, I wanted the movie to keep going for another two hours because the 100 minute run-time was too good.

Whiplash is set in the U.S., but there is almost nothing that ties it to a specific place or time. Andrew could be a student in any setting, along with the other characters. Anyone can relate and empathize with this timeless and place-less story. Although they do mention Fordham University, football, and the NFL, they are insignificant and do not detract from the emotional connection. Along with the story being relatable, it is also very ordinary. What do I mean by this? In many movies these days, the world within the movie seems different from the real world. An obvious example would be Transformers, a world in which giant alien robots that can turn into vehicles exist. But this is the case even in non- Sci-fi movies. In Gone Girl, there is still something that makes me think, 'most likely, this cannot happen in real life'. But for Whiplash, I believe that this could happen. I know from friends who study music that there are very harsh, terrifying teachers out there. I know some extremely ambitious students, not just in the musical world, who will do anything - anything - to achieve their dreams. I consider Whiplash to be an epitomes of a good movie: it doesn't have fancy special effects or a spectacular cast, but it can take an ordinary situation, mix in some interesting characters, and produce the best movie of its year.

Let's talk about the characters. In the beginning, I didn't think that Andrew, the main character, is very unique. We've all seen an ambitious but unconfident college student without many friends. On the other hand, Fletcher was an original piece of work from the start. He is neither the mean, despicable coach who bullies his students for fun nor the caring, saint-like mentor that turns the life of a troubled kid around. He is obviously extremely mean (I could talk about his badass insults, but that's a whole other topic), but there is also a meaningful motive behind his actions which he mentions throughout the movie. Because of this strange dichotomy, we cannot make up our minds about him, hating him one moment and admiring him the other. Back to Andrew - he doesn't stay the boring character that he is. Through his interaction with Fletcher, he continues to change - but it's not necessarily for the better. As Fletcher continues to torture him, he simultaneously motivates him, turning him more and more crazy. His insanity spreads to other aspects of his life, as we see in the dinner-table talk scene and the way he breaks up with his girlfriend (which, by the way, is not a spoiler because it's in the trailer). I cannot say that this movie has the best characters I've seen (that award is still kept by The Fantastic Mr. Fox) - but I can definitely say that it has one my favorite character interactions.

The plot itself is very simple and concise. A majority of the scenes focus on the two's relationship. The other scenes add character and insight into Andrew. There are no elaborate plot sequences or plot twists (which seem to be a trend these days), but I have heard people say that Whiplash has the best ending to a movie they have ever seen. I've also heard from others that they felt it was too sudden - they were expecting more but it just ended. I relate with the latter more, although I don't necessarily deem the ending as bad: a movie makes me crave two more hours is a pretty damn good movie. Whichever side you're on, the 100 minutes will fly past without you knowing.

I rarely talk about this aspect of a movie (mainly because I don't know much about it) but I want to praise the music in Whiplash. You might be thinking, 'it's a music movie - the music has to be good'. Well, it's really, really good. I've never been a fan of jazz - not that I didn't like it, I hadn't the opportunity to listen to it much. This movie not only showed me amazing filmmaking, but also introduced me to a previously-unknown beautiful genre of music. Ever since my first viewing, I've turned on the soundtrack at least once a day. I can't get it out of my head, and I don't want it to leave. Due to Whiplash, I'm trying to get more familiar with jazz, and I even have a growing desire to learn drums. If you don't watch too many movies but want to hear some good music, watch Whiplash. 

If you look closely at the poster, you can see many quotes from various sources. Every one of them is true. Oh, here's a fun fact. Whiplash was filmed in 19 days and edited in a month; most movies take years to its final product, and they aren't half as good as this one. To the director and writer of this fantastic movie: Damien Chazelle, I will be expecting many more great works from you.

10/10 - favorite movie of 2014.

Boyhood (2014) - Reviewed

The biggest film gimmick of the 21st century - but it worked. Boyhood walks through the youth and adolescent years of Mason Evans Jr. (Ellar Coltrane) from age six to eighteen. He goes through what every child has to while growing up - schoolwork and friends, problems with parents, moving and meeting unfamiliar people, relationships and breakups - just think about your adolescence. But he also experiences more hardship than the average kid, which adds some spice to the storyline. Through Mason's 12 years of both good and bad times, we enter a time capsule that allows us to reminisce on our own childhood.

When I had heard of this movie, what stuck in my head was, 'it was made over 12 years'. Surely I'm not the only one who was impressed by this fact. Not only is the length of time itself a surprise, but the risks of this journey are incalculable. Let's say any of the actors chose to walk out on the movie - that's the entire project from start again. However, they managed to get through it without noticeable difficulties. And not only is that praiseworthy - the actors in the movie did something for which they will be remembered for a long time. Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke star as the parents of Mason, and they do a tremendous job at it. For that period of time, staying in character is not easy - but to evolve as the character goes through its experiences is a task on another level.

I actually did not go to watch this in theaters when it came out, even though I had heard that "it's really good!" and was intrigued by the lengthy time of its making. To be honest, the reason I didn't go was the length of its making. I assumed that some people watched this movie with the 12-years-gimmick hype and overrated it, when in fact it is mediocre. I did not want to go through another Gravity: [Digression] I was excited to watch Gravity because everyone was telling me how amazing it was. They said that the special effects feel so real that no child will ever want to become an astronaut after watching it. Then I went to watch it - I was so bored I fell asleep during one of the supposedly-intense space scenes. Anyways, what I realized is that some people had overrated it simply due to the special effects, which I admit were good. 

Back to Boyhood - months after it came out on theaters, I watched it on my computer and realized that this was not the same case as Gravity. The movie was "really good!" and didn't feel boring for the entire three-hour runtime. And the more I thought about it, the more shocking this fact was - let me tell you why. The way they filmed this movie was by shooting a few scenes a year and later combining it as a whole. Through a period of 12 years, a movie can begin to lose its focus, and editing that much footage can be daunting. However, the fact that they managed to produce an end-product that not only flows coherently but also completely absorbs the viewer is incredible.

As of now, some time has passed since my viewing of Boyhood, and the effect of the gimmick has worn off. I've come to realize something important. Imagine if, instead of 12 years, this movie took one year to make, with the child actors in each scene being different people. I highly doubt it would have gotten as much attention. The script itself is extremely ordinary - the characters are, more or less, quite common; the storyline is very basic. The only character I found unique was college-student Mason as he develops his own worldview. Considering this, it's surprising that I wasn't bored throughout the movie - but I think I know the reason. As I was watching, I knew that all the characters were played by the same actors throughout the entire movie. This got me curious as to how the cute children will grow up to become young adults. It's not necessarily the characters that left me intrigued. It's more the actors themselves - how their looks will change as they age. So the reason I wasn't bored cannot be attributed to the movie itself.

Finally, Boyhood is enjoyable to watch - once. When I was done watching, I felt the satisfaction I receive when a good movie is over, but I can say that I will never feel the desire to watch it again. This says something, because when I really like a movie, I want to watch it again and again until I get tired of it - and then watch it once more. It's like when you're listening to music and a song gets stuck in your head. You just have to listen to it until its out of your system. The day I watched Boyhood I also watched Whiplash and their difference is that the latter is stuck in my thoughts and will be for a long time. If you can enjoy Boyhood more than once, that's great - I admire you. But I can't.

8.5/10 - If you haven't seen it yet, you should.

Birdman (2014) - Reviewed

As I happen to live in a place where superhero movies aren't terribly popular (a.k.a. South Korea), it's a huge shame that Birdman didn't get many views in theaters. But wait, Birdman isn't a superhero movie! Sadly that's what many people here thought. And those who did watch it sat down on their seats expecting another Ironman or Batman. What they got was two hours of complex, meaningful scenes (should I say one scene?) that explores deep, unknown parts of the film industry and the psychology of celebrities. But before we go into that, let me introduce the movie.

Birdman, or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance, follows the happenings of Riggan Thompson, a once-popular actor of the Birdman series who is now much forgotten. Riggan tries to gain back his popularity and acclaim through a Broadway play, which he himself directed, wrote, and stars in. However, not everything goes as he wants - in fact, the condition of his play only becomes more disastrous. Through Riggan's struggle to turn his life around, we get a deeper look at his relationships with coworkers, familial issues, and most importantly, his psychological well-being.

Watching the trailer to this movie did not at all prepare me for a movie like this. I thought it would be a somewhat-ordinary movie which has a great cast and an entertaining storyline. And while it is an extremely well-cast and entertaining, it's definitely not ordinary. If we want to talk about the technical things first, the sort of gimmicks that makes the common audience go 'wow', Birdman is made to look like it's taken in one shot. This is a physically difficult task both for the actors and the editors, and it's definitely a brave accomplishment. It's no surprise that it took Best Cinematography. Also, almost the entirety of the soundtrack is just drums. Another notable fact.

The cast was great without a doubt. Michael Keaton plays Riggan, which is an excellent choice. Keaton is similar to his character in that, a few decades ago, he was Batman in Tim Burton's series. Since then Keaton has been sort of forgotten. (To prove this point, even I didn't know who he was until this movie.) Keaton can empathize with Riggan, and he did an excellent job in his role. Edward Norton is Mike Shiner, a huge asshole with amazing acting and artistic skills. Both despicable and likable, Mike is portrayed by Norton with precise, skillful acting. (I start to question whether J.K Simmons deserved the Best Supporting Actor Award.) Emma Stone, Zach Galifianakis, and others were good too.

To delve deeper into the film- did I mention that Birdman is extremely complex and meaningful? It's difficult to choose where to start explaining this. Let's look at the main character first. Riggan is bombarded with problems - his play ruined beyond repair, relationships with other actors are crumbling apart, and every encounter with his daughter ends up in a fight. In other words, his life is not too hot - and it's starting to affect his mental health. Riggan has a desire to become known and admired again. And in his mind, there are two ways he can go about it. He can revive himself through a distinguished piece of art, which is why he sacrifices so much on his play. On the opposing side is the voice that tells him to achieve fame through the old Birdman movies again. We can assume that the two choices contrast in that the first is 'actual' art made by a 'real' artist, while the second is 'just a franchise' to make money and become a celebrity. When his play starts to fail, the latter voice becomes bigger and bigger and slowly drives him crazy. Throughout the movie, there are numerous scenes where his psychological battle heightens, and we can feel this very intensely.

Other characters also convey depth. We can tell what each character symbolizes, some more clearly that others. Mike is a natural actor - and even beyond that, he is an artist. But since he is so preoccupied with that, it's difficult for him to live in the real world. He easily antagonizes people but doesn't really care - all he cares about is art and its truthfulness. Mike represents the true artists in the film industry who don't get along with others very well and can sometimes be unrealistic about their ambitions. The theater critic in this movie, Tabitha, is a reflection of critics in the real world. Other supporting characters show briefly but accurately their respective symbols - the various types of people in the film and entertainment industry.

Not only is Birdman an enlightening view on the world of cinema, but it's also an honest portrayal of relationships between people. Preoccupied father and juvenile delinquent daughter - this relationship is seen through Riggan and Sam just a few times, but its so real. At a certain point, Sam shouts an essay of hurtful words at Riggan but none of it seems exaggerated. It feels like an truthful outburst that she has been keeping inside her for a long time. Divorced man and woman; neglectful husband and jealous wife; coworkers that don't get along because they have differing views - these are all shown accurately in this movie.

I want to emphasize again that this is extremely intricate and enlightening, but due to that, confusing. It's definitely not something for the common movie-goer. So be prepared.

9.5/10 - The reason it's not a ten is that it can sometimes feel long. The one-take style can make the movie seem even longer for those who don't really like artistic films.