Plot summary (with possible spoilers): Ryan Bingham (played by George Clooney) is the kind of man who has commitment issues, which is not unheard of for a good-looking guy pushing 50. But Ryan is not your typical womanizer. Instead, his commitment issues have manifested in a different way: he basically lives life out of a suitcase and doesn’t have any real friendships or relationships.

Ryan is a “reorganization specialist”, which means he travels the country firing upwards of 30 people per day for bosses who can’t stomach such proceedings themselves. Though Ryan doesn’t particularly like the job, he does love the constant travel. In fact, his secret goal is to achieve 10,000,00 frequent flyer miles — a feat that has only been accomplished by seven other people. He’ll get all sorts of special perks once he reaches the milestone, so he doesn’t spend a single dollar unless it earns him miles in some way.

Life starts to get complicated when two women enter his sphere. The first is Alex (Vera Farmiga), who seems to live much like himself. They begin hooking up whenever they cross paths and end up in the same city. The second woman is Natalie Keener (Anna Kendrick), a recent Cornell grad who is assigned to follow Ryan around to learn the ropes. Natalie’s big idea for the company is to start conducting firings via video conference without so much as giving the terminated employees a little handbook with Velo binding explaining their severance package and health insurance continuation options. But thi will save on travel expenses, which is appealing to the higher-ups, so initially Natalie and Ryan are at odds. But once they get to know each other, a mutual respect develops.

As the film progresses, we see Ryan’s priorities gradually change. He begins to think that perhaps he has wasted his life chasing 10,000,000 miles when he should have been establishing meaningful relationships with people. He thinks Alex could be the one, so on a whim, he turns up at her door in Chicago — only to get a nasty surprise.

Thus, just when the viewer thinks Ryan might have changed his mind about the way he lives his life, he goes right back on the road and relishes being rootless once again.

Liked:

• On paper, this story doesn’t sound all that interesting, but it worked very well on the screen. I think it’s because the acting was absolutely superb. All three main actors (Clooney, Farmiga, Kendrick) were nominated for Oscars, and deservedly so. They were excellent — and this is coming from someone who doesn’t ordinarily pay attention to acting. But these actors managed to make me care deeply about what the characters were going through, and that was quite a feat.
• I liked seeing the perks that high-end travelers get. I just wish we had gotten more of a glimpse of what a 10,000,000 club member would receive (besides a glass of champagne and a visit from the copilot).
• I loved when the three of them crashed the tech conference and got drunk. That was a fun, amazing scene that really served to flesh out the characters.
• The Amelie reference made me smile, as did that whole cheesy shtick about photographing the married couple in random places.
• The scenes where Ryan and Natalie had to fire people were suitably uncomfortable and awkward. Wow. That is definitely the worst part of the job for anyone in a managerial position.

Disliked:

• The wedding stuff went on a bit too long for my tastes. That was the only blemish in an otherwise excellent film.

Rating:

I’m very surprised by how much I enjoyed Up in the Air. It’s easy for character studies to go astray, but director Jason Reitman did a wonderful job of keeping everything on track. This film could have been a disaster with the wrong actors or wrong director. Fortunately, everyone involved was top-notch. Up in the Air deserved every major award nomination it received, and probably should have won a few Oscars. I give it 5 stars out of 5.

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): Sixteen-year-old Miranda (played by Evan Rachel Wood) has been taking care of herself for years. Her father Charlie (Michael Douglas) spends his time in and out of mental institutions, while her mother disappeared a long time ago. Miranda manages to make ends meet by working at McDonald’s, and evades social services because of paperwork snafus that make it look like she’s always with one parent or the other.

Miranda’s calm existence changes when Charlie gets released from his latest stint in a hospital. Not only does he disrupt her daily routine, but she also has to babysit him to ensure he doesn’t get into trouble. This proves difficult, as he is currently convinced that there’s a big cache of treasure buried somewhere in the vicinity by a long-dead Spanish explorer named Father Juan Florismarte Torres. While in the hospital, Charlie came across some books detailing Torres’s exploits. He now takes it upon himself to find the treasure.

Charlie manages to get hold of various surveying equipment, and traces the treasure’s location to a specific spot. The problem is that it’s buried about six feet under a Costco. This doesn’t faze Charlie, however. Instead of giving up as a rational person would do, he convinces Miranda to get a job there so she can learn about the alarms and security practices, as well as steal a master key from the manager. This accomplished, the two enlist the help of Pepper (Willis Burks II), an old band mate of Charlie’s, and they move in for the digging.

Charlie digs through the floor, only to come upon what Miranda thinks is the foul-smelling sewer line. But Charlie is sure this is a sulfur river, not the sewer line, which means he’s on the right track. He appropriates some scuba gear from the back of Costco, and dives in. After a while, he comes back to say he did indeed find the treasure. Unfortunately, while he was under, the cops finally realize what’s going on inside and close in on the dig.

Charlie manages to make it look like Miranda was dragged in against her will. He ties her up, gives her a product ticket from the store, and goes away. He then dives back into the river to try to get to the rest of the treasure — but his body is never recovered. The next day, Miranda purchases the item from the ticket Charlie gave her (it was a dishwasher she had her eye on) and discovers that he had managed to hide some of the gold in there for her.

Liked:

• I thought this was a very sweet film. I wasn’t expecting Charlie to actually find the gold, and though that outcome was definitely far-fetched, I thought it fit with the overall tenor of the story. I was glad that Miranda was able to get her happy ending, even if Charlie couldn’t be around to enjoy it with her.
• Miranda was a likable character. I think teens in movies are the hardest characters to pull off, because they either come across as too much of a know-it-all, or they’re just bratty, snotty, and selfish. Evan Rachel Wood did a good job of playing Miranda as a world-weary “adult” who has been taking care of herself, while at the same time being a kid who desperately wants her father to take care of her for a change.
• Michael Douglas wasn’t as annoying as I thought he would be. I’m not gonna lie: the previews for this movie had me wondering if I would be able to stomach the Douglas character, with his wild eyes and unkempt beard, for an hour and a half. Turns out this character was far more understated than I expected, and was actually rather sympathetic as well.
• I thought it was believable how Miranda ended up helping Charlie. At first, she allowed herself to believe in the treasure just a little bit. It was a lark that gave her a way to escape the monotony of her life. But as she saw how serious Charlie was about it, she started to rein in her own enthusiasm and look at the whole thing from a more logical perspective. She “knew” there wasn’t any treasure out there, but she continued to play along and humor Charlie. Then we had her reaction at the end, when she realized that Charlie was actually correct. I thought this was a wonderful character arc.

Disliked:

• If Costco security really is as lax as portrayed in this movie, I’m surprised we don’t hear about their warehouses being robbed on a regular basis! Come on, now… it was FAR too easy for these guys to get in and dig through the friggin’ concrete floor!!! Fortunately, this didn’t dilute my enjoyment of the film.

Rating:

I thought King of California was a very sweet, touching film. I loved seeing the different nuances of Charlie and Miranda’s relationship, liked watching these characters pursue their goals, and enjoyed the happy ending. I give it 4 stars out of 5.

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): The film opens in the year 1898 with Daniel Plainview (played by Daniel Day-Lewis) prospecting for silver somewhere in California. He ends up striking oil in his mine a few years later, which leads to a change in focus. From then on, Daniel is intent on becoming an oilman, not afraid to face competition from major corporations like Standard Oil.

Daniel adopts H.W. (Dillon Freasier), the son of a worker who is killed in one of the wells, and together the two go around buying up land to expand their empire. They get a big boost one night when a young man named Paul Sunday (Paul Dano) comes to them and reveals that there is oil on his family’s ranch. He’s sure his father will sell. Daniel and H.W. go to the Sunday ranch, where they get the ranch for a song. But Paul’s twin brother Eli (Dano) insists that Daniel promise $10,000 to build a church. Daniel reluctantly agrees.

Daniel’s men begin construction on the derrick immediately, while Eli constantly hovers nearby reminding Daniel of his pledge for the church. Daniel has no patience for this kind of thing, and when he refuses to let Eli bless the derrick before the first drilling, the action is akin to an open declaration of war. From that point forward, Daniel and Eli are at odds with each other.

The rest of the film chronicles various happenings in Daniel’s life over the next 20+ years. We see H.W. lose his hearing in an explosion, which alters the father-son relationship forever. We see a man named Henry (Kevin J. O’Connor) come on the scene and claim to be Daniel’s half-brother from Wisconsin. We see Daniel become more and more withdrawn and paranoid as his wealth grows. And we see the bloody culmination of the feud with Eli.

Liked:

• Daniel Day-Lewis’s performance was simply amazing. He definitely deserved the Oscar for his work here. I don’t think I could have watched this whole thing if not for him.
• The initial relationship between Daniel and H.W. was really very sweet. Though Daniel later claimed that he was just exploiting H.W.’s cute face, I believe that the man did truly love the boy. I have a feeling that if H.W. hadn’t lost his hearing, his presence would have had a profound impact on Daniel, and perhaps would have saved the man from becoming such a sociopath.
• The way this story was told was unlike any movie I’ve seen in a long time. It was refreshingly different in that way.

Disliked:

• I HATED the interminable opening sequence, because I can’t stand extended periods without dialogue. That’s just a personal pet peeve of mine when it comes to film. Hey, I hated it in Wall-E and I hated it here. I fast-forwarded through the first 15 minutes until I saw the characters’ mouths moving.
• What was the point of having Paul and Eli be twins? I read somewhere that direct Paul Thomas Anderson originally intended Paul to be 12 years old, so the twin thing wasn’t a necessity. Did the character Paul even show up again after the first scene with Daniel? He and Eli were never on the screen at the same time, where they? In that case, can we even be sure that there were two brothers to begin with??
• The ending seemed a bit out of place. I know Daniel hated Eli and had pretty much lost his marbles by then, but still…. Also, it was odd that the much younger Eli couldn’t out run the older, physically weaker (limping) Daniel.

Rating:

There Will Be Blood just has the look of a film that I wouldn’t like. I ordinarily don’t go for epic “character studies” that take up three hours of my life without telling a concrete story. But I couldn’t ignore all the buzz this particular film generated, and though there were indeed some very slow spots that had me hitting the “skip” button on my DVD remote, I was surprised by how watchable this was (for the most part). It’s not perfect, and I don’t think I could ever watch it again in its entirety, but I give it 4 stars out of 5 (mostly due to Daniel Day-Lewis).

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): On June 1, 1937 American pilot Amelia Earhart (played by Hilary Swank) and navigator Fred Noonan (Christopher Eccleston) departed from Miami, FL on an attempt to fly around the world. The many lonely hours aloft give Amelia plenty of time to reflect on her life, which is displayed for the audience through a series of flashbacks.

We first meet Amelia in 1928 as she tries to convince publishing mogul George Putnam (Richard Gere) that she should be chosen to be a passenger on board the Friendship, piloted by Bill Stutz (Joe Anderson) and Slim Gordon (Aaron Abrams), for a transatlantic flight. This was at a time when such a crossing was still extremely dangerous, so there was plenty of risk involved. Moreover, Amelia would be the first woman to make the journey. Putnam, influenced by Amelia’s good looks and personal spunk, agreed to let her go.

After the successful crossing, Amelia became an instant celebrity. She began endorsing lots of different products in order to finance future flights, wrote a best-selling book about the journey, and was a success on the lecture circuit. Putnam remained her PR man and handler, and the two eventually married. (The film conveniently leaves out the part about Putnam leaving his first wife for Amelia.)

Amelia didn’t particularly like the celebrity circus. Instead, she wanted to focus on accomplishing additional aviation feats, such as flying solo across the Atlantic, entering cross-country endurance races, and helping found a group dedicated to encouraging women to get into aviation. As she did all these things, her celebrity status continued to grow.

The action finally shifts back to Amelia’s present, where a faulty radio, low fuel, and the tall task of finding a tiny patch of land called Howland Island in the middle of the Pacific presumably led to the pilots’ demise. Of course, no one is sure what really happened to Amelia Earhart and Fred Noonan, and the filmmakers didn’t bother hazarding a guess here. The final shot is of the ill-fated plane descending through clouds as it runs out of gas.

My Reaction: I love Amelia Earhart, so I was looking forward to seeing this film — at least until all the negative reviews started pouring in. The biopic was slammed as being boring, having no conflict, and lacking depth. Nevertheless, I decided to take my chances and give it a try. Well, for once I agree with the majority. This film was not worth it.

Besides the problems already mentioned, my biggest issue with the script was how the audience was frequently “told” things instead of “shown”. That’s a major no-no in any kind of storytelling, so it surprised me that a seasoned, Academy Award-winning writer like Ron Bass (Rain Man) had a hand in this. For instance, we were told, not shown, that crossing the Atlantic was dangerous. How hard would it have been to flash a few shots of the pilots wearing pool floats or something? We were told, not shown, that Amelia was a major American celebrity during her prime. How hard would it have been to show the paparazzi swarming around her whenever she went out? We were told, not shown, that Fred Noonan had a drinking problem. The list goes on and on.

And yes, the critics were right to say that the characters lacked depth. I felt nothing for George Putnam, even though he should have been a more pathetic figure, pining away for Amelia while she was fooling around with Gene Vidal. The same goes for Amelia herself. I’m sure I wasn’t alone in not getting overwhelmed with emotion as the plane started to go down. Even in the final moments, there was no energy, no real sense of panic and urgency. We saw Fred clasping his hands in prayer and Amelia’s eyes welling up with tears. That was it??? How could anyone in the audience be expected to react to that?

Overall, I was extremely disappointed by Amelia. I think there was plenty of material in her life story to make an exciting, engaging biopic, but this wasn’t it. I give this film 2 stars out of 5.

Plot summary (with possible spoilers): Daigo Kobayashi (played by Masahiro Motoki) is a professional cellist with a struggling Tokyo orchestra. When the orchestra disbands because of lack of funds, Daigo and wife Mika (Ryoko Hirosue) decide to move back to his old home town of Sagata, where they can take up residence in the old coffee shop/house that Daigo’s mother used to run.

Daigo’s immediate concern is to find a job. The next morning he sees an ad in the paper for an NK agent to handle “departures”, and, thinking the position might have something to do with travel, he goes in for an interview. The boss, Ikuei Sasaki, asks Daigo a few basic questions, looks him over, and decides he will be perfect for the job. He pays 500,000 yen per month (roughly $5,000) and gives Daigo 20,000 yen in cash (about $200) right there at the interview. Daigo is puzzled, but accepts.

Soon Daigo discovers that the job has nothing to do with travel after all. Instead, he is to be a “nokan” specialist, someone who performs a ritual cleansing ceremony to prepare dead bodies for the coffin prior to cremation. This was not at all what Daigo had in mind, but the shacho convinces him to give it a try for a little while, claiming that Daigo is a “natural”. Daigo reluctantly agrees.

Things go along relatively well until Mika discovers the true nature of Daigo’s job. She is horrified, because working with dead bodies is considered “unclean” in Japan. She demands that Daigo quit, and when he refuses, she leaves him. Eventually, though, she returns, announcing that they will soon be parents. Once again she exhorts Daigo to quit, saying that their child will be teased mercilessly once others find out about Daigo’s occupation. But after she sees Daigo in action, she changes her mind.

The film ends with Daigo performing the cleansing ceremony on his father, who had abandoned the family when Daigo was just six years old. Previously, Daigo resented the man and couldn’t even remember his face very clearly. But after seeing how his father died alone, while clutching a souvenir from Daigo’s childhood, he can finally put the past behind him and move on.

Liked:

• The boss was the most interesting character in the film. He took everything as it came, rolled with the punches, and knew Daigo better than Daigo knew himself. He seemed like he had some great stories to tell. Too bad the filmmakers didn’t let us get to know him a bit more.
• The cleansing ceremony seemed quite peaceful and beautiful. I’d never seen anything like that before, and was very interested whenever they showed one in the movie.
• The last 40 minutes of the film were wonderful. Yes, the ending was extremely sappy and viewers were shamelessly manipulated with that “stone letter” thing, but it somehow still worked.

Disliked:

• I thought the actor who played Daigo was just terrible! I couldn’t stand looking at this guy because he only had two facial expressions: completely dumbfounded and sad-sack mopey. He was so annoying!!! I wanted to scream at him to buck up and be a man, for god’s sake. Ugh! It took me several days to get through the first hour+ of this movie because I got sick of watching Daigo.
• I hate seeing people vomit in real life or on screen, so the couple of scenes where Daigo did this had me scrambling for the remote control so I could hit “Skip”. Nasty!
• This film took way too long to unfold. As I mentioned, things didn’t start to get really good until the last 30-40 minutes. I wasn’t expecting shoot ‘em up action or anything, but man, it was tough to slog through the beginning. The ending was worth it, but this is NOT the kind of movie I could ever watch twice.

Rating:

Overall, I have to admit that I was rather disappointed by Departures (Okuribito). After the Oscar win for Best Foreign Film, this movie received a lot of hype, but I didn’t think it was that great. Then again, I rarely like Japanese films (other than Miyazaki) so maybe it’s a cultural thing. I give this one 3 stars out of 5.