Divergent

In the future, Chicago will be governed as a society divided by factions based on personality and virtues. Divergent follows Beatrice Prior (Shailene Woodley), a member of Abnegation (the "selfless" faction), as she attempts to join the Dauntless faction (bravery, security, etc.) and keep hidden the fact that she is divergent (can't really be placed into any of the five factions) from the Erudites (intelligence), specifically Kate Winslet.

I walked into Divergent expecting another teen action romance film trying to replace Harry Potter (which will never happen). I had lower than usual expectations for this film, but it surprised me. I understand why critics haven't been responding well to it, so I'm going to do my best to explain.

I really enjoyed the first hour of this movie. From Beatrice discovering her divergence, through her decisions, and her training in Dauntless, it was cool to see her character change and react to the stressful situations she's put into. It's not often a film does that without glossing over it in a montage. Woodley gives a much stronger performance than I anticipated, but the rest of the cast seems to fall flat thanks to some clunky dialogue and cheesy deliveries.

Dream and hallucination sequences were somewhat cool to watch. They weren't too trippy, and they played a part in the actual story. It's usually very difficult for me to sit through something similar to these mental tests and easy to lose interest, but the film managed to keep me engaged.

During most of the first hour, the film really ignores the overall conflict being divergence. Watching her transition into a Dauntless member was uplifting, but once the film regains focus on its subject matter, it turns right back into what I expected walking into the theater. A boring, predictable mess. As soon as the forced teen romance that you definitely saw coming hits the screen, everything just falls apart.

I may not be familiar with the source material, but it feels like someone was just bored writing the third act and just gave up. I enjoyed the first half of this film for the same reason I enjoyed Ender's Game. Showing a protagonist struggle is good, but watching bad stuff happen to them because their loved ones are selfless or stupid is not. The genocidal story arc was less intense than the training, making for an underwhelming third act.

The supporting cast is weak to say the least, because the studio probably spent their budget on Kate Winslet. After seeing the trailer, I now refer to the actor who played "Four" as "discount James Franco". Kate Winslet plays her part well, but just watching her, I just thought to myself "Anybody can do what she's doing right now." Zoe Kravitz delivered her lines as they were written, poorly, but it didn't take away from the friendship her character had with Woodley's.

Not since Sunshine have I been so disappointed in the second half of a film. It's almost a cruel trick pulled by the studio making us think we didn't have to watch the same basic story again. But no, we got our Phantom Menace ending with our forced Twilight romance in our Hunger Games dystopian society. So I'm going to break the tie. I was ready to give this movie a B+ half way through, and the second half feels like a C. If you're a fan of the books, you're going to see it anyway. If not, just wait for Mockingjay.

Rating: B-

The Monuments Men

In the last year or so of the Second World War, a group of architects, art restorers, and collectors were sent into Europe to protect and recover pieces of art and buildings stolen by the Nazis or to be blown up by the Allies. George Clooney stars and directs The Monuments Men with this all-star cast of Matt Damon, Bill Murray, John Goodman, Bob Balaban and Jean Dujardin, respectively.

As subject matter for World War II films has become scarce, this seemed like a refreshing change and a story that should be told. Art being part of history, and that when you destroy it you erase history, should be enough for this film to go on. But where Monuments Men stumbles is the center. It brings focus to a couple key pieces of art that most of its audience will not understand, but an inconsistent tone suggests the whole operation to be a joke.

When I say inconsistent tone, I mean they switch between comedy and historical war drama like a routine light switch check. They give several jokes, but most won't be that funny given the dramatic tone between them. Each Monument Man gets his moment, but the whole movie feels like dramatic sketch comedy with a clip of George Clooney driving a Jeep woven between each bit. And I understand that these were based on true events, but they could have done a better job of writing some of the scenes. Each situation was unaffected by the others, because the group was spread across the continent for a lot of the movie. There were even some scenes that felt like they only existed for one joke, and there's not enough payoff for me not to ask "Why was that scene in the movie?".

I'll give it this, I cared for a couple of these characters thanks to some fantastic performances, particularly Goodman. But character development is rushed through a montage and then each character gets a scene or two. Bill Murray steals the show when he opens his mouth, but the script didn't give him a whole lot to do. And that's kind of what happens with most of them, there are a few things about them that are told to the audience, and then those rich back stories are never brought up again. 

Matt Damon spends nearly the entire movie trying to convince Cate Blanchett to trust him with the locations of the art, and then they try to force an almost romance that no one could care less about. Clooney doesn't seem to do anything in this movie except point at maps. Goodman and Dujardin have some great moments, same with Murray and Balaban, but the film really didn't show them growing together, or even spending much time together as a team. It just felt like a historical drama filled with poorly timed jokes.

There's also some strange editing in this film. It's not like there's weird after-effects or anything, and this just might be nit-picky, but the transitions seemed to be chosen randomly. They basically only used a cut or a dissolve, but they'd dissolve mid conversation, and cut between scenes after a soft dramatic scene. It was just something that took me out of the movie is all. 

The movie was paced very well. For a two hour movie, it felt like an hour and a half, maybe. That was a benefit of the quick changes in scenery. But part of the ending is so anti climactic (not spoilery), given there's so much tension, that I thought to myself "But what about the- aw nevermind" right as the film begins to wrap itself up. 

SPOILER: It's a giant middle finger to the audience when you show the men rushing out of a mine full of art to escape the Russians, you don't think they're going to make it, and then it dissolves to them driving away smiling, and a Russian officer smiling at an American flag. None of that makes sense.

The film fails to make its audience care about art and its place in our society. While yes, there's many scenes involving pieces being rescued or destroyed, they kind of glaze over why they're doing it. Yes, they want it to get it back to its rightful owners, that's understandable. But if Clooney, who also co-wrote the screenplay, had thrown in a lengthy monologue instead of the ten second one he gave at the beginning, he might have gotten the point across better.

This really was not a bad film, simply mediocre. Performances aren't really an issue, thought it feels a little phoned in given the little screen time of each actor. It seems like it was a lot more fun to make than to watch. Had they taken their time with the characters, it might have been worth the wait, but all we got was an artistic remake of "Saving Private Ryan" with a ton of "we're too old and smart to be in the army" humor that you will definitely not remember a week from now.

Rating: C

Her

Spike Jonze brings us Her, a sci-fi romance drama between newly divorced Theodore (Joaquin Phoenix) and his new artificially intelligent operating system Samantha (Scarlett Johansson). As Theodore becomes more depressed and lonely after his wife (Rooney Mara) leaves him, Samantha slowly learns what learning and experiencing existence is like, even without a body.

The screenplay, which literally just won the golden globe, is fantastically, refreshingly original. The idea is so simple but the relationship still reaches its complexities that seem as accurate as they could for the near future. This concept will definitely become real at some point in our lives, but it amazes me that there hasn't been a movie just like this before.

Joaquin Phoenix gives a strong performance, but not one to pass up other Oscar contenders (he still deserves a nomination). His interaction with an OS as a love interest is believable, entertaining and accessible. Amy Adams also gives her usual solid performance.

The best part about Scarlett Johansson in Her is that men can see this film with their women without worrying about getting distracted by Johansson's body. She gives a strong performance without being on screen, without having a character on screen. She plays a computer learning to be a part of a human world, but all centered around Theodore, and she makes that character very engaging.

It's unclear what city Theodore lives in, but Jonze gives us beautiful shots of post modern skylines that seem similar to what we have today with their own futuristic tweaks. The colorful sights will keep the audience dazzled when things slow down.

Parts of the movie feel pretty predictable, because every romantic drama has to have a moment or two where the protagonist's love interest goes away for about 3-4 minutes after a fight before they make up. What makes Her special, is the way the relationship develops and how it continues to grow.

Chris Pratt serves as a form of comic relief, and I think that's about it. I feel like Jonze could have taken Pratt's character and his wife out of this movie entirely and the plot wouldn't change. Theodore doesn't seem to talk to him about anything important other than the fact that he's dating an OS. He still gets laughs, so it's not like he brought down the ship.

Overall the film was insightful and charismatic, and it will set the standard for AI dating when introverts being looking for it. It might be a bit over-hyped, because it's not the love story to end all love stories because it involves a computer. The story was original and the acting is strong. I would only expect this to win for its screenplay, but Her is definitely worth the watch.

Overall: B+