LA LA LAND: 4 ½ STARS
“La La Land” reinvents the traditional big screen musical by playing it straight. The original songs and new story feel like something Gene Kelly would approve of but not quite recognize as the form he helped perfect in Hollywood’s Golden Age.
Aspiring actress and barista Mia (Emma Stone) and serious jazz pianist Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) can’t help but meet cute. He honks his horn at her during a traffic jam. She flips him off. They meet again in a restaurant. She’s about to compliment him, he’s rude to her. Worse yet, they bump into one another at a pool party where he's playing with a 80s cover band, playing a-ha covers for be-bopping drunks. Third time is a charm and they finally connect, for real. Flirting, dancing and singing they build a relationship as they construct careers in modern day Los Angeles.
The real and the unreal collide in a film that values naturalism in an unnatural genre. Mia and Sebastian burst into song, dance on city streets but do so in the most unaffected of ways. It looks and feels like an old-school musical—the camera dances around the actors and it’s always magic hour—but Stone and Gosling are very contemporary in their approach to the material. Woven into the romantic, joyful script are real comments on the setting—“That's LA, they worship everything,” says Sebastian, “but value nothing”—a sense of the pleasure and pain that accompany passion, whether it's for a person or a career and melancholy when things don’t quite work out. It’s a movie that dances to its own beat. At times bright and garish or atmospheric and moody, it’s never less than entertaining.
Gosling is a charming leading man and equal match for Stone whose remarkable face and expressive performance give the movie much of its heart. Director Damien Chazelle is clearly smitten with his leading lady, allowing his camera to caress her face in long, uninterrupted close-ups.
From a trickily edited opening song-and-dance number in a traffic jam to a spectacular dance among the stars to heartfelt human feelings, “La La Land” doesn’t just breathe new life into an old genre it performs CPR on it, bringing its beating heart back to vibrant life.
FENCES: 4 STARS
“Fences,” August Wilson’s rumination on race, masculinity, betrayal and dissatisfaction, won four Tony Awards, including best actor for James Earl Jones, when it first played on Broadway in 1983. The 2010 revival was also lauded, winning Tonys for Denzel Washington and Viola Davis, who now reunite in a big screen version of the popular play.
Set in 1950s Pittsburgh, Washington (who also directs) is Troy Maxson, a former Negro League baseball player now working as a garbage man. Each Friday he turns over his $76 weekly paycheque to wife Rose Maxson (Viola Davis) before his co-worker and best friend Jim Bono (Stephen Henderson) blow off some steam with a bottle of gin. Troy drunkenly tells wild stories about beating up the Devil and lectures about the virtues of self-reliance and responsibility to himself and his family. Always teetering on the edge of a blow-up, he’s a thin-skinned man in a world that is changing rapidly around him, who builds a literal and metaphorical fence between him and the outside world.
Troy has a combative relationship with Lyons (Russell Hornsby), his son from a previous marriage, and a strict, disciplinarian rapport with Cory (Jovan Adepo), his youngest who still lives at home. Tension builds as Cory decides he wants to take a football scholarship in favour of learning a trade.
It’s tempting to suggest that “Fences” doesn’t have a plot. Certainly it presents a slice of Troy and Rose’s life that isn’t necessarily driven by story in the strictest sense, but the through lines from scene to scene create a loose narrative that paints a vivid picture of a man whose resentments and bitterness will soon have a palpable effect on everyone around him.
As a director, Washington doesn’t do much to open the story up. It takes place on a handful of sets and feels very much like a play, but when the words are this good there isn’t a need to spice it up with flashy production work. Washington focuses on the script and the performances, allowing the power of Wilson’s ideas carry the movie. “Fences” may be set in 1957 but the Troy’s sense of fighting against almost constant injustice feels as timely as it ever has.
Towering in the centre of all, this is Washington’s performance. His Troy is beaten down but not beaten. He’s hardened to the cruel realities of his life, that integration in baseball came just a few years too late for him to make a go of it, that hope is for dreamers too lazy to get a real job. He settles into the character with remarkable ease, erasing any residual memory of his big movie star turns in films like “American Gangster” or “Flight.” It is as though we’re seeing him for the first time, and yet, to many his story will feel all too familiar.
He finds his equal in Davis who brings a quiet dignity to the often put-upon Rose. Her transformation from stay-at-home wife to independent woman as she realizes the eighteen years spent with Troy have not meant what she thought is as remarkable as it is subtle.
As Mr. Bono, New York stage and screen actor Henderson rounds out the main cast in a performance brimming with wit and wisdom.
As a showcase for ideas and performances “Fences” hits a home run, offering fodder for Oscar talk and intellectual discourse. As a movie-going experience, however, it feels a tad overlong. As much of a pleasure as it is to watch Washington, Davis and Henderson interact, the film loses steam as it enters the final third.
WHY HIM?: 3 ½ STARS
“Why Him?” takes the concept of “Meet the Parents,” flips it on its head, updates it to include a Silicon Valley millionaire and wrings more laughs out of another of James Franco’s now trademarked flaky characters.
Ned and Barb Fleming (Bryan Cranston and Megan Mullally) are a typical, mid-Western couple. They had their first date at a KISS concert, run a small business and have high hopes for the daughter Stephanie (Zoey Deutch), a brilliant young woman studying at Stanford. It comes as a bit of a shock when they find out their precious Stephanie has been secretly dating dot-com millionaire Laird Mayhew (James Franco). When they arrive to spend the holidays at his ultra modern Palo Alto mansion they’re horrified to discover he’s 10 years older and an over-sharer who compliments Mrs. Fleming on her “tight body,” calls Mr. Fleming “dude,” talks about "sloppy car sex" and swears a blue streak.
The happy young couple have been living together for a year in Laird’s swanky pad and now he wants to ask for her hand in marriage. “On Christmas Day I'm going to ask Steph to marry me,” he says to Ned. “I know how tight you are so I really, really want your blessing.” Determined to win Ned over, Laird continues, “Give me a few days to win you over in by Christmas Day I guarantee you'll be calling me son and I'll be calling you dad.”
What follows is a war of wills—Laird doing everything possible to ingratiate himself to Ned while dear old dad remains unimpressed. Absent in the equation is the one person who really matters, Stephanie.
“Why Him?” is a generation gap comedy with several very funny performances. Cranston and Franco are a classic buddy pairing. Laird has no filter and strange taste in art—a moose preserved in its own urine dominates the living room—while Ned is a buttoned-down fuddy duddy who laughs at his own dad jokes.
Franco has tread this territory before but this doesn’t feel like a rehash or a greatest hits performance. Laird may be a handful and a little over enthusiastic—before he even meets the family he has their holiday card blown up and tattooed on his back—but he is genuine. Behind the wide, toothy grin is a heart of gold and it makes the Laird more interesting than Franco’s run-of-the-mill on-screen stoner dude.
Cranston revisits his “Malcolm in the Middle” days with the father-knows-best character with a twist. Ned is hopelessly lost in Laird’s world. He doesn’t understand the lingo, the home’s fancy paper-free toilets and, as a print and paper company owner in a high-tech world, he especially doesn’t get Laird’s business. It’s a role we’ve seen a thousand times but Cranston works it hard, wringing every laugh out of every pained facial expression.
In the supporting category it’s Keegan-Michael Key as Gustav, Laird’s right-hand-man, who almost steals the show. He’s the Cato to Laird’s Inspector Clouseau, a faithful handler who runs the house and randomly attacks his boss to train him for potential threats. It’s funny stuff, the kind of thing he perfected on his sketch show “Key & Peele” and while he’s a character who would seem most at home in a short skit he never outstays his welcome here.
“Why Him?” balances raunchy humour—an awkward electronic toilet sequence rivals anything from the Adam Sandler canon—with actual heartfelt storytelling resulting in an enjoyably bawdy holiday pastime.
HIDDEN FIGURES: 3 ½ STARS
The title “Hidden Figures” has a double meaning, On one hand it refers to the mathematical calculations that went in to making John Glenn the first American man in space in 1962. On the other hand it describes Katherine G. Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson, three African-American NASA mathematicians who did many of those calculations. “They let women do things at NASA,” says Johnson, “and it’s not because we wear skirts, it’s because we wear glasses.”
Taraji P. Henson is Katherine Johnson, a math prodigy who can, “look beyond the numbers.” At the beginning of 1961 she, and her two carpool pals, mathematician Vaughan (Octavia Spencer) and aerospace engineer Jackson (Janelle Monáe), were working in the segregated West Area Computers division of Langley Research Center.
With just weeks before the launch each are singled out. Johnson’s genius with analytic geometry lands her a spot with the Space Task Group to calculate launches and landings. Vaughn takes over the programming of the new IMB computer and Jackson works with on the Mercury capsule prototype.
Each face hurdles do to their race. When Johnson first walks into her new, shared workspace, one of the men hands her an overflowing garbage can. “This wasn’t emptied last night.” Personnel supervisor Mrs. Mitchell (Kirsten Dunst) thinks Vaughan is too aggressive in her requests for a supervisor’s position and Jackson, despite her degree, is told she can only become a NASA qualified engineer if she attends classes at a local, segregated high school. “Every time we have a chance to get ahead,” Jackson says, “ they move the finish line.”
The film focuses on Johnson but by the time the end credits roll all three have risen above the societal challenges placed on them to make invaluable contributions to the NASA space program.
“Hidden Figures” is a feel-good, crowd-pleaser of a movie. Based on true events, it portrays an upbeat version of the past. “Hidden Figures” is set in the same timeframe as “Loving,” Jeff Nichols’ recent look at the legalization of interracial marriage, but values broad moments over Nichols’ more nuanced approach. A blend of history and uplift it is occasionally a bit too on the money—“We are living the impossible,” says Jackson’s boss Karl Zielinski (Olek Krupa)—but engages with its subject and characters in an entertaining and heartfelt way.
Henson is the movie’s centre and soul. Even when she slips into slapstick while doing extended runs to the “Coloured Bathroom” in a building located blocks away from her office. Those scenes are played for comedy but make an important point about the treatment of African American people in a less enlightened time.
Monáe is a feisty presence and Spencer brings a hard-earned dignity to Vaughan. In the supporting category Kevin Costner does nice, effortless work as Al Harrison, head of the Space Task Group.
“Hidden Figures” details a little-known but vitally important part of American history. It’s a good-hearted look at a time of great change both in the macro—American cultural shifts in the space race and in terms of race—and in the micro universe of how African-American women made their mark at NASA.
A MONSTER CALLS: 3 ½ STARS
Conor O’Malley’s (Lewis MacDougall) needs a friend. A sensitive child with a troubled home life, he’s being forced to deal with adult problems even though he’s only 12-years-old. He is, as one character says, “too old to be a kid, too young to be a man.”
The young British boy’s troubles are many. His mother (Felicity Jones) has terminal cancer so he’s forced to move in with his strict grandmother (Sigourney Weaver). “If you get hungry there’s spinach in the fridge,” she says on the way out the door. “Don’t touch anything!” If that wasn’t bad enough his father (Toby Kebbell) lives in California. And he’s the favourite of local bully Harry (James Melville). “I’m sorry you have to face this,” says dad, “but you have to be brave.”
One night at 12:07 he meets the friend he so desperately needs, a monster yew tree (voiced by Liam Neeson) with roots for legs and long branches for arms. “I know everything about you,” he rumbles. “The truth you hide. The truth you dream.” Speaking in parables the giant tree tells Conor three stories to help him cope with the trauma in his life.
“A Monster Calls” is a quiet family drama about growing up and learning to grieve. It’s an intense topic and one that places it just outside of the kid’s entertainment category. An off-kilter tale that packs an emotional wallop in its final third, it defies expectations by allowing the characters to react in real ways. This is not sentimental fluff. Conor is in turmoil, plagued by nightmares of his mother’s grave and, as a result, lashes out in anger. It’s powerful and upsetting to see a young boy struggle with situations that he can barely understand let alone control.
At the heart of the story is Lewis MacDougall as Conor. He’s a child with an adult face that imbues the character with an unactorly authenticity that feels utterly real, even when he is talking to a giant tree.
Neeson’s voice is a thunderous roar that comes on strong but hides an undercurrent of tenderness and compassion.
“A Monster Calls” is a heartbreaking tale with a nightmarish climax that will be too intense for kids who may get wrapped up in the story. For everyone else it’s a fractured fairy tale with real insight and pathos.
