"Lost" had the scope, the power, and the ambition of the cinema

Although I have solely dedicated this blog to reviewing films and discussing films, I feel the urge to divert from the path I usually take and feed one of my obsessions: "Lost". With the show just ending merely a few days ago, I feel compelled to gather my thoughts and spread word about this epic show. Now, I must admit that up until two months ago, I hadn't watched "Lost" since season three. This absence from the show wasn't because of the show's quality. In actuality, I just never found the time to fit it in my busy schedule. But, just before season six started in February, I decided to put on my "ambition" hat and run through the series a few weeks before the season six premiere.

"The Room" is hilarious as hell. Too bad it isn't a comedy (1/5)

Every year there are many great films released. But, for every great film released, there are also a plethora of bad films that make their way into the cinematic world. If there was ever a legendary bad filmmaker it would be Ed Wood. Once you see an Ed Wood film, you will know why he's seen as the Godfather of bad filmmakers. From horrendous special effects to non-existent acting, Wood's films have etched their own kind of legend in film lexicon. With that in mind, for as bad as Wood's films are, there was a certain charm and naivety to them that made them extremely fun to watch. Sure, the films were complete garbage, but with each scene you could see the love Wood possessed for the world of film. It's quite endearing for me to know that no matter how bad Wood's films were perceived, he just kept on making film after film. Now, he has his own place in history, a place that most directors don't even come close to achieving in their careers.

"Volver" is a colorful and provocative film (4.25/5)

Over the last year, I have pushed myself to seek out films that emanate from directors that many would claim are the best the world has to offer. In what seems like a never ending quest, this week I finally tackled at least one film from the canon of Pedro Almodovar and that film was "Volver". Going into the film, my prior knowledge of Almodovar was limited at best. If anything, the only thing I knew about him is that his films often feature a strong color palette mixed in with sex appeal. As alluded to in the title of this review, my expectations were met. Yet, what I really didn't expect was Pedro crafting an impressive film based on a cast compromised almost entirely of women. I'm not saying that women don't make for great cinematic centerpieces. Instead, I was stunned at how a male could form a film about female relationships and attitudes without relying on stereotypes, nor falling into the traps of a Lifetime movie. Granted, at its core, the plot of the film resembles many of the films you'll find on the Lifetime channel, but never is it as one dimensional.

Sure, on the surface the film seems like something we've seen before, as it deals with the sins of man and multi-generational squabbles, but it also possesses moments of the ethereal kind. The story opens up with two sisters, Raimunda (Penelope Cruz) and Sole (Lola Duenas), who are grieving the death of their Aunt, as well as reminiscing about their own parents who passed away in a mysterious fire. Things become a little more complicated though when Raimunda comes home one night to find her boyfriend murdered (at the hands of her fourteen year old daughter) and Sole arrives home with the ghost of her dead mother, Irene (Carmen Maura), following close behind. As both women try to hide their respective problems, they find out the past never dies and is never entirely what it seems. So, what starts as a family drama quickly evolves into a film of supernatural intrigue. Yet, no matter how far fetched the film may turn, it always hinges on the well constructed family drama which deftly balances dark subject matter (adultery, rape, etc.) with a sense of humor that keeps the film from treading too deep into a depressing state.

This is obviously attributed to the screenplay, but Almodovar does his part as he gleefully stages many of the darker sequences against a colorful landscape. Almodovar's use of color not only makes the film interesting to look at, but it also makes each scene bubble over with life despite the macabre subject matter. Despite the life and compassion that Almodovar pumps into the film, he also loses focus just a bit in the second act as he tries to give each sister's story the time to breathe. Splitting time between the stories of Raimunda and Sole, between the grim and the fantastical,  Almodovar at times can't quite switch between both stories and tones without seeming abrupt. It's at this point that his (and the screenplay's) desire to be many things at once begins an act of betrayal. Fortunately, Almodovar is able to reestablish an equilibrium before the film's style, tone, and substance collapse. When looked at in the confines of a bigger picture, this is merely a minor issue I have with Almodovar's direction, which is otherwise impeccable, as he adds great style to what is already a provocative screenplay. But, above all the style he offers,  it's Almodovar understanding  of his female characters that is the most important aspect of "Volver".

It's through this understanding that he not only allows us to sympathize with their situations and behaviors, but also to feel empowered by how strong these women have been when they've all seemingly faced the wrath of despicable men. Assisting Almodovar in the cementing of womanhood are the actresses that grace our presence. All of the actresses in this film deliver magnificent performances that not only deliver many layers to their characters, but also are charming as they go wherever Almodovar takes them. But, for as good as all of the actresses are, the best performance belongs to Penelope Cruz who shows a range that seemed non-existent in her English speaking endeavors. Surprisingly to me, Cruz is able to match the demands and shifts that Almodovar needs. She's funny, heart wrenching, and all together great. In the very least, Cruz would've provided at least some great eye candy for my first foray into the realm of Almodovar, but fortunately her physical appearance was the least impressive thing about this venture. Instead, it's Almodovar's palette, the acting, and overall range of the film that have made this film into a must see. Even more so, "Volver" made me excited to descend even further into  the mind of one of Spain's finest treasures.

"Kick-Ass" is for the most part everything its title implies (4.25/5)

As much as I loved the recent batch of comic book adaptations, I was patiently waiting for a movie to come along and just lampoon the hell out of them. By lampoon I don't mean anything along the lines of "Superhero Movie" or "Epic Movie"  which mimic and hail from the film abortionists known as Seltzer and Friedberg. Instead, I was waiting for a film to legitimately tackle vigilante justice through the perspective of an everyday human being; not an expertly trained billionaire, or a billionaire decked out in iron. In the case of Dave Lizewski, the protagonist of "Kick-Ass", we get our street level view. Dave isn't anybody special. He's just a kid going through the motions as he battles teenage life. And like most teenagers, Dave has a great deal of angst. Portions of Dave's angst is channeled through chronic masturbation, but most of it is redirected towards his disgust for bad behavior going unpunished. With his comic book sized imagination, Dave is compelled to take matters into his own hands. Donning a wetsuit he purchased off the Internet and two clubs, Dave sets his sights on the streets as a means to clean them up and to make some part of his life seem cool.

"How to Train Your Dragon" is a fun, light-hearted film (4/5)

Let's be honest, with the exception of "Shrek" and "Ants", Dreamworks has been pretty much treading water in regards to their animation division. This is not to say that what they've put out hasn't been entertaining, but very rarely have they captured the magic and essence of a Pixar film. Unfortunately for Dreamworks, they're still left in the dark with their newest creation "How to Train Your Dragon", a film that's just as cute as a Pixar film, but one that lacks depth to create a film that delivers on all levels. Now, the film itself possesses a focused  and imaginative story that rivals almost any Pixar film. "How to..." tells the tale of Hiccup, a teenage Viking who has a zest for invention and an intention to be a heralded dragon hunter in his home town (or village) of Berk. Berk is a special place of sorts, considering that it's a relatively happy place aside from the frequent attacks by dragons. Yet, the Berk faithful are a group of people that are strong and resilient...aside from Hiccup of course. If anything, Hiccup is merely a visitor at Berk. Physically he's meek, strategically he's unorthodox (at least by Berk's standards), and his leadership presence is non-existent.

Although Hiccup may not be the spitting image of his fellow brethren, he is quite resourceful in his own way. More specifically he has a rather high level of ingenuity as he creates an assortment of inventions that could aid Berk in its defense of dragons, but like most progressive thinkers, Hiccup is seemingly cast away to the outskirts while history takes precedence. Obviously, dragons need to be killed as gruesomely as possible for that is the Viking way! Of course this difference between Hiccup and his village manifests itself extrinsically as Hiccup's father, who appears to be the soldier of fortune in Berk, finds himself on the prowl, hunting for the dragon's nest. At the same time, Hiccup comes across a wounded dragon that he befriends, which ironically occurs when he is being trained to slay dragons.This ideal of barbarianism versus a (for lack of a better word) humanism, although somewhat cliche, is a well oiled cog in a story that for the most part acts as a voice for the respect and understanding of all creatures.

Eventually, as you might expect, Hiccup convinces the village of Berk in the end that you can't hate, nor kill, something you  don't fully understand. No matter how preachy the story may sound, it's executed extremely well. Featuring well established primary characters, motivations, and fun action pieces, the film does a wonderful job balancing an important message with lively dragon based hijinks. Accompanying the story is the visuals, which are truly fantastic. Whether it's the design of Berk, or the detail and imagination poured into the dragons themselves, "How to..." is a smooth ride for the eyes that is heightened when it's combined with 3-D. Granted, the 3-D itself doesn't make the film like it does for "Avatar", but it certainly makes some flying sequences far more thrilling and enticing had they not been in 3-D. So, it's quite clear that the film offers an engaging and important story mixed in with some dazzling visuals, but the question becomes: where did the film falter? Honestly, I feel the film falters when it comes to voice casting and secondary characters.

Let's begin with voice casting, an area that you may deem me as being too fickle in. Nonetheless, I feel that aside from Gerard Butler and Craig Ferguson, whose voices and personalities add a distinct flavor to their respective characters, the voice cast lacks any power. From the lead Jay Baruchel to Jonah Hill, a few of the voice actors just seem to be going with the flow.  None really go the extra mile and make their characters come off as being authentic, where as Butler and Ferguson add a bit of zest and zeal. Aside from Baruchel's voice, his character was well written, as were most of the primary players, but it was side characters and jokes along the way that came off flat. Some of them, most of which consist of Hiccup's dragon training classmates, are mildly amusing, but often come off as boring riffs of characters we've already seen before. Unfortunately some of this lack of originality also found its way into a few jokes, but the film is loaded with enough great jokes to make up for the ones that get away from the screenplay. With that being said, "How to Train Your Dragon" is a step in the right direction for Dreamworks. They have always exceeded in the visuals department, but now they've finally showed they can handle the art of storytelling, at least when it comes to their post "Shrek" filmography. Surely, "How to Train Your Dragon" isn't their most polished effort, but it's definitely one of their most enjoyable and focused films.

"Sugar" is the rare sports film that has more going for it beyond the field (4.25/5)

If you know me well enough, you'd probably know that I'm a huge baseball fan. So, going in to "Sugar" my bias was probably already working in the film's favor. Yet, what was most interesting about "Sugar" is that it was less about the game of baseball than it was about getting into the game, as well as the risks that come with such an occupation. The film follows Miguel 'Sugar' Santos (Algenis Perez Soto), a Dominican baseball player working his way from the Dominican League to the Major Leagues. Yes, it seems like your basic rags to riches story, but it really isn't. Instead, writers/directors Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck are more focused on the pitfalls of reaching for a lofty dream, as they tackle the issues that come up when foreign born players try to assimilate into a new culture while attempting to hedge the pressure of maintaining a roster spot. In the case of Sugar, his story begins in the Dominican League where he is pitching considerably well, having fun, and most importantly his family and friends are always within reach. But, for most athletes the dream is to always reach the pinnacle of their respective sports and Sugar is no different. If he could reach the apex, then he would be able to not only provide for himself, but also his family back home.

So, with some initial trepidation, Sugar finds himself picked up by a major league team and designated to the Minor Leagues (Class A). With this, Sugar goes from the Dominican to the beautiful (maybe) land of Iowa. Despite being assigned to a host family, Sugar faces many challenges upon his entrance in the United States. Obviously cultural differences are a huge obstacle, but the most pressing issue right off the bat (no pun intended) is the language barrier. Knowing very little English, Sugar has a hard time communicating with both his host family and American teammates. Fortunately for Sugar, he has a handful of friends from the Dominican on his team that initially allow for an easier transition. This gives Sugar a sense of ease which ends up being pivotal in his great start for his new team. Yet, as the season progresses, Sugar's friends disappear (some are cut, some are promoted) and he struggles to regain the form he originally had, leaving his confidence in shambles with no one in sight to help him pick up the pieces. Feeling that his spot on the team is slipping away, Sugar bolts from the team and begins a pilgrimage to New York, where he hopes he can find some semblance of a future.

It's from this point on that the film becomes a rarity as it affectionately provides a voice for the Dominican ( or Latino) baseball player, as well as becomes a study on expecations lost and furthers the examination on cultural intergration. This unheralded perspective carries emotional heft, as it demonstrates the high expectations for and from latino players, and the trials of trying to fit into an unforgiving culture. This idea is further exacerbated at the end when the film brings in real, former Latino baseball players who have succumbed to the issues that plague foreign born players. Both Fleck and Boden are able to convey these issues within their story with great discipline and subtlety. Instead of relying on big, flashy scenes, they let the emotions gestate in Sugar through quiet moments, as he is placed against the vast, but empty Iowa backdrop. Credit also must be given to Fleck and Boden for casting Soto in the role of Sugar. With this being Soto's first film, one would assume he wouldn't be able to completely demonstrate the constant emotions working in Sugar, but that isn't the case. Soto comes off as a veteran, as he gives Sugar a humble air that evokes empathy for the titular character.

Even though the film creates a rather bleak picture for Latino players who end up moving to the United States, Boden and Fleck do a great job keeping the film filled with genuine humor to ensure the subject matter isn't too heavy. Some of the humor may come at the expense of Sugar's cultural transition, but much of it is in good fun. In addition to this, Boden and Fleck also construct the baseball scenes with great vigor. Not only are they fun to watch, especially when it involves Soto generating chemistry with his fellow actors, but they're wonderfully orchestrated as a means to expose Sugar's character and demeanor. With enjoyable moments on the field and well developed strife off it, "Sugar" is a baseball film that goes beyond the chalk lines. It's a film that adequately captures the many challenges a foreign born athlete could face when they leave their countries with ambition and dreams in hand, while attempting to land a roster spot and some footing in an alien culture.