Amy Adams

American Hustle

For me there’s nothing like that familiar buzz of excitement I feel when I’m anticipating a new movie.  I eagerly awaited American Hustle because crime dramas are among my favorites, and I looked forward to the reunion of Oscar nominee David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook) and charismatic lead actors Bradley Cooper (The Place Beyond the Pines) and Jennifer Lawrence (The Hunger Games: Catching Fire).  Amy Adams (Man of Steel), Christian Bale (The Dark Knight Rises), and Jeremy Renner (Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters) rounded out the talented cast, making for a promising lineup.  Awards season is upon us, and you’ll hear lofty praise for American Hustle in the coming weeks and months.  While it’s not the instant classic I thought it might be, I found its performances to be nearly flawless – and it’s one of the better movies I’ve seen this year.

The film takes place in 1978, and much like my fascination with Argo I have a personal interest in a depiction of the time period around which I was born.  The film centers on the relationship between three people: a con-artist couple and the federal agent with whom they cut a deal to avoid jail time.  Irving and Sydney (Bale and Adams) have a passionate, tumultuous relationship based on a shared, volatile chemistry essential to their grifter lifestyle.  There is genuine affection between the two, but the dynamic of their relationship is inherently complicated.  Irving is mired in a loveless marriage to Rosalyn (Lawrence), an immature, impetuous woman from whom he cannot extricate himself.  Despite their apparent unhappiness, they have a lasting connection that isn’t easily broken.

Irving’s loyalty to Rosalyn and her young son preclude him from making a clean break in favor of Sydney, and this drives a wedge between the pair despite their uncanny success at separating fools from their money.  After being caught mid-hustle by FBI agent Richie DiMaso (Cooper), Sydney and Irving are given little choice other than to cooperate with authorities by bringing in some proverbial bigger fish.  Richie is ambitious and wants to make a big splash with a significant bust; he’ll do anything to break up a major criminal enterprise.   His “cowboy” attitude jeopardizes Irving and Sydney, as they’re the ones who must do the double-crossing of any prospective mark.  As their relationship woes increase, Sydney grows less enamored with Irving and more willing to exact a measure of revenge with Richie, who is all-too compliant.  Whose side is she on, and are two well-oiled hustlers really ready to drop a dime?

David O. Russell delivers once again, always able to elicit the best performances from Cooper and Lawrence.  Cooper is starting to bring a characteristic realism to his roles, and there was a manic, visceral quality about his performance.  Bale turned in another transformative performance as the well-intentioned Irving.  His character could have easily been a sleazebag, but Bale made him a sympathetic figure for which viewers could feel compassion.  Lawrence made her supporting role a layered and textured one, conveying subtle depth beyond first blush.  Russell’s storytelling was superb, and I appreciated the briefly non-linear way he began the film.  The performances were buttressed by authentic cinematography and costuming, which masterfully captured the era.  The movie seemed to get a little stodgy about halfway through, but I thought it rebounded well in its final act.  Definitely worth checking out.  Grade: B+

Man of Steel

As other superhero franchises have recently established themselves as powerhouses (Batman, Iron Man), the venerable Superman franchise seemed like an afterthought.  Brandon Routh is somewhere salty as hell.  You’re probably like, who the hell is that?  Exactly.  Routh wore those famous blue tights only once in 2006’s Superman Returns, and now he’s a distant memory.  It seemed like Superman was lost in the iconic days of Christopher Reeve…until now.

Once Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight Rises) was attached to the project, I think people were amenable to giving it a chance.  Just conjuring images of The Dark Knight franchise gets me excited, and Nolan brought instant credibility to the film.  The addition of director Zac Snyder (300, Sucker Punch) also ensured a fresh departure from the last Superman attempt.  The movie begins on Krypton, with a frantic Lara and Jor-El (Russell Crowe, Broken City) facing the destruction of their planet.  General Zod (Michael Shannon, Mud) has attempted an unsuccessful coup and been subsequently banished to an intergalactic prison.  Krypton and its inhabitants will become extinct as the planet comes to a tumultuous, destructive end.  Anticipating such an apocalypse, Jor-El and Lara planned to send their newborn Kal-El to another planet where he will thrive and ensure the survival of his race.

As the familiar story goes, Kal is given the name Clark and raised by the Kents – the couple who discovered him (and the vessel that brought him) on their farm.  However, after leaving Krypton the movie shifts to Clark’s adult life, as he grapples with finding his place on Earth, given his otherworldly abilities.  Nolan’s influence was apparent, as he offered a non-linear approach to Clark’s story.  Instead of following his upbringing chronologically, the movie flashes back to key events in Clark’s childhood that shaped his current existence.  We’re introduced to him as an adult, a nomadic laborer of sorts who lives in relative obscurity.  Clark consistently struggled with the two distinct messages given to him by both fathers.  Jor-El believed that he was special and could be a symbol of hope to many people.  Conversely Jonathan Kent (Kevin Costner, The Company Men) cautioned his son that people will fear what they don’t understand, and that mankind would reject him.

When General Zod is released from his interstellar prison, he locates Kal on Earth and pursues him there, spelling dire consequences for humanity.  This new development is what forces Clark into action, causing him to confront his obligation, if he even has one.  I’ve purposefully omitted a lot of plot details, because I don’t want to spoil the movie for you, plus I think they are inconsequential to my discussion of the film.  There was an earnest quality to the film, though not quite as dark as the Batman movies for which Nolan is known.  This subtle restraint in storytelling made the interpretation unique, and I can say that Man of Steel was not like The Dark Knight or any of the Iron Man movies.  Whereas Batman seems affected by external forces, Superman’s struggle is largely an internal one – at least in this first edition of the reboot.  The structure of the movie was flawless, and the viewer feels as if he or she really understands Clark’s conflicting duality – revelation vs. obscurity.  Couple that with a lifelong feeling of being the only one of your kind, and it’s easy to see why Clark felt confused and alone.

In addition to the storyline and character development, I thought the casting was also effective.  Henry Cavill (Immortals) is perfect as the new Superman.  He looks the part and he is believable.  Those are big tights to fill, and I’m sure the role is his for a while to come, especially since Man of Steel 2 has already been announced.  The casting of Amy Adams (Trouble With the Curve) as a more intrepid Lois Lane was also successful.  Russell Crowe is incomparable; you already know this.  What more can I say?  The movie was nearly flawless.  In fact, the only criticism I have is minor and probably misplaced.  I’m no expert, but I had a small quibble with the editing.  I thought a few scene transitions were not seamless – but again, what do I know?  The special effects were incredible, and no self-respecting movie buff would go more than a week or two without seeing this movie.  What are you waiting for? Grade: A