A Superhero Story of a Boy and His Huggable Robot

“Big Hero 6,” a computer-animated film that is based on the Marvel comic of the same name by Steven T. Seagle and Duncan Rouleau, brings us a heartfelt and witty tale about a young boy who’s dealing with loss and later uses his intellectual strengths to save the day.  Able to be enjoyed by both children and adults, this is a film with an admirable blend of comical and emotional elements, a synthesis that viewers of any age can appreciate.

In the city of San Fransokyo, 14-year-old robotics expert and early high-school graduate Hiro Hamada (voiced by Ryan Potter) spends most of his time involved in secret robot fights.  When his older brother, Tadashi (voiced by Daniel Henney), thinks Hiro should be doing something better, he takes him to his lab at a local university and introduces him to Baymax (voiced by Scott Adsit), a healthcare robot that he created.  Hiro, having been encouraged by his brother to apply to the school, builds a swarm of microbots to present at a science show put on by the university.  When a fire following the show kills Tadashi and destroys the microbots, Hiro teams up with Baymax and some of his brother’s college friends, forming a group of heroes that begins a pursuit of a masked villain who might be responsible for the tragedy.

The animation throughout the film is resplendent in its detail.  The city of San Fransokyo is vividly realized and stunning to look at with its merging of the cultures and architectural structures of San Francisco and Tokyo.  All of this is seen especially in the sequence when Hiro, having finished providing Baymax with his new armor, takes him out for a flight through the bustling city.  It’s a section of the film that gives you an expanded view of the film’s setting, allowing you to become familiar with the film’s colorful and imaginative backdrop.

The screenplay by Robert L. Baird, Dan Gerson and Jordan Roberts does a thorough job in providing us with an idea of the sibling relationship between Hiro and Tadashi.  Actually, most of the first half hour of the film commits itself to having us get to know these two characters and the strong bond they share.  The time we spend with these two brothers allows us to have a deeper understanding and feeling of the grief that Hiro experiences when losing Tadashi.  The emotion of this story is Pixar-esque in its sincerity, a sincerity that I love to see in children’s movies because of how it allows older viewers to appreciate this type of film as well.

Although the movie could have spent a little more time developing the villain, it’s a minor and forgivable flaw because the film doesn’t waste that time, but rather uses it to focus on Hiro to have us learn about his origins as a superhero in the making.

Directors Don Hall and Chris Williams do a terrific job with the action sequences, especially the chase scene between the villain and soon-to-be-heroes on the streets on San Fransokyo.  These thrilling segments are finely spaced throughout the movie, never overtaking the film’s emotional core.

Given how well they carry out the action, I wouldn’t mind if Hall and Williams directed a big-budget film in the future, similar to how Brad Bird successfully went from directing animated films, such as “The Incredibles” and “The Iron Giant,” to directing “Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol.”   

“Big Hero 6” delivers a great deal of fun as it introduces us to its group of heroes, providing us with a story that is as humorous as it is touching.  Given how enjoyable this film is, I would really like to see another outing of this superhero team, and the final shot of the film does its job in getting us excited about where the story will take these heroes next.

Final grade: A-

Reviewer’s note - Before the main feature begins, there is an animated short called “Feast,” a truly heartwarming story about a Boston Terrier, his new owner, and their bond over food.  It’s a magical start to what is a wonderful viewing of animated cinema.

Also, be sure to stay through the end credits of “Big Hero 6” for a special scene.  The one at the end of this film includes an insanely fun cameo that hilariously sets up a possible sequel.

When Trying to Heighten Your Musical Talent, It Can Be Brutal

Director Damien Chazelle’s musical-arts drama, “Whiplash,” opens with a black screen.  We begin to hear a snare drum playing slowly and softly.  As the seconds tick by, the sound crescendos and becomes faster.  It’s a way of preparing the audience for how the relationship between the student and teacher at the center of the story plays out.

Andrew Neiman (Miles Teller) is a gifted, 19-year-old jazz drummer at the (fictional) Shaffer Conservatory of Music in New York who strives to be one of the greats.  When his band class is visited by one of the school’s conductors, Terence Fletcher (J.K. Simmons), he notices Andrew’s talent, and invites him to be an alternate drummer for his jazz band.  After the first practice, however, Fletcher proves to be ruthless, and Andrew realizes he’s going to have to work harder than ever to win the approval of his instructor.

Miles Teller is a superbly talented young actor, and he provides one of the year’s most painful performances.  Not in the sense that it’s bad, but because of what his character has to go through when trying to reach his fullest potential.  There is literally blood, sweat and tears involved with what Andrew as to go through, and Teller excellently displays the physical and mental damage of his character’s strive for perfection.  It’s a mighty expression of what it means for his character to suffer for his art.

J.K. Simmons, like a sledgehammer smashing a glass window, shatters the screen as the tyrannical and verbally abusive conductor who rules his jazz band with an iron baton.  For a film that’s not in the horror genre, Simmons makes Terence Fletcher one of the most terrifying movie characters of the year.  The power of his performance will have you sitting frozen in your chair and will reduce you to a nervous wreck as you wait to see what he will do to put his students on edge.  Even in his character’s calmer moments, you can sense his viciousness lurking underneath, and you’re always trying to mentally prepare for his next angry outburst.

The screenplay by Chazelle isn’t just a performing-arts drama about a talented musician trying to make it big, but is also a story that really dives into the relationship between the student and his conductor, a relationship that can be seen as both helpful and destructive to the pupil.  The story makes you question whether Fletcher’s teaching methods do more harm than good, a question that is especially brought to light in a scene shared by him and Andrew where the former explains his reasoning behind his abrasive teaching methods.  It’s a film that belongs to Teller and Simmons as they present the ongoing confrontation between their characters, and you’re constantly wondering where their relationship is going to bring them.

Director Chazelle has the ability to film astonishing musical sequences, and there are two in particular that come to mind.  One is where Fletcher has Andrew and two other drummers go through a grueling audition to see who’s a better fit to be the band’s main percussionist.  The other is the last five minutes, which will give you one of the best adrenaline rushes of any film this year, but I won’t say anymore concerning that scene.  Chazelle is capable of making these segments as intensely dramatic as the interactions between Andrew and Fletcher.

With “Whiplash,” Chazelle gives us an unyielding look at the fierce dedication and discipline that a young musician will show in order to achieve greatness, and it has the thunderous power of the banging of drums and crashing of cymbals.

Final grade: A

An Actor Fearing His Irrelevance

Director Alejandro González Iñárritu has made some emotionally heavy films, such as “Biutiful” and his “Death" trilogy, which consists of “Amores Perros,” “21 Grams” and “Babel.”  There’s a grim nature that runs throughout these movies, but the way he films that grimness shows how Iñárritu can find something meaningful to say, even in the harshest of situations.  With the projects he’s done in the past, his latest filmmaking accomplishment is something that comes as a surprise.

Iñárritu decides to bring us something insanely different with his dark comedy, “Birdman.”  In a film that displays show business from several different angles with touches of satire, he has made one of the best comedies of the year, as well as one of the best films of the year.

Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is a washed-up Hollywood actor who gained his fame by playing a superhero called Birdman for three movies.  Now trying to be taken seriously in the entertainment industry, he decides to write, direct and star in a Broadway-play adaptation of Raymond Carver’s short story, "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love."  Wanting to get an esteemed Broadway actor to perform one of the other lead roles, Thomson brings in the highly demanding Mike Shiner (Edward Norton).  Aside from these two egos butting heads, Riggan must also deal with family issues, while also having to come to terms with the possibility of no longer being famous in the eyes of the public.

Michael Keaton delivers an enjoyably strange performance.  It’s an accomplishment that’s terrifically suited for the humorously bizarre nature of the story, and the voice of his Birdman persona in his head adds a duel between the two personalities that drives the comical side of the story.  Keaton’s portrayal of a struggling actor trying to revamp his popularity is every bit as funny as it is sad.  In the scenes he shares with his daughter and wife, we can see that, despite being firm about bringing his career back to life, he still cares deeply about his family.

Edward Norton is wonderfully funny as an insanely committed actor who comes in as a replacement for one of the play’s leads.  It’s outrageous fun to see how far he will go to give the most honest performance he can, and he comically displays his character as a nightmare to work with.

The supporting cast includes Emma Stone as Riggan’s just-out-of-rehab daughter, who gives a searing monologue to her father on his irrelevance; Naomi Watts, whose character is at hilarious odds with Norton; Zach Galifianakis, who plays a refreshingly against-type role as Riggan’s lawyer and best friend; Lindsay Duncan as an unreasonably harsh theater critic; and Amy Ryan as Riggan’s warmhearted ex-wife.

The cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki is made to look as though the whole movie is shot in one long take.  Although you can pretty much tell where the editing was done, that doesn’t make the camerawork any less stunning.

The screenplay by Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. and Armando Bo is endless with its laugh-inducing character interactions, especially those involving Keaton and Norton.  The childish, physical fight between the two is one of the funniest parts of the movie, and is also one of the ways that the film presents its clash between a Hollywood actor and a Broadway actor.

There is also a noticeable parallel between the character of Riggan and Keaton himself because they both gained much of their popularity by starring in superhero movies, with Riggan portraying Birdman and Keaton portraying Batman.  Seeing as the film is fictional, but includes some references to the Hollywood of today, it makes sense that the story has you think of a real-life actor and his similarity to the character he plays.

Iñárritu also crafts a very clever ending for the movie, and the ambiguous nature of it has the potential to spark some fun debates.  

As a director, Iñárritu shows a new skill in handling comedy, and also displays some talent with special effects as well, which is shown in one of Riggan’s daydream sequences.  

“Birdman” is another example that Iñárritu is a dependable source of ingenuity in cinema, which is evidenced by the fact that he worked with original screenplays for all five of his feature films.  This movie comes four years after Iñárritu’s last project, “Biutiful,” and hopefully, we don’t have to wait through another lengthy gap like that for his next movie because Hollywood needs more stories from an inventive filmmaker such as him.

Final grade: A

Launching Into Deep Space and Deeper Ideas

Thinking big is something that is a most welcome commonality throughout Christopher Nolan’s films.  With his original films, such as “Inception” and “Memento,” and his adaptations, such as his “Dark Knight” trilogy, he’s able to weave in grand ideas that can only come from a true filmmaker.  It’s still amazing how he went from a complex indie thriller to treating us to uncommonly complex blockbusters that encourage the viewer to be in deep thought throughout the experience, while still getting a terrific sense of enjoyment out of them.

In his sci-fi epic, “Interstellar,” he provides a detailed exploration of time and space.  Although the human story could have used some more work, there isn’t any denying the visual and intellectual ambitiousness of this movie.

In the near future, humanity is no longer able to inhabit the earth.  Crops are ruined by blight, dust storms frequent the land, and mankind has reverted to an agricultural society.  When former NASA test pilot-turned-farmer Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) is led to a secret NASA facility by mysterious coordinates, he meets Professor Brand (Michael Caine) and his daughter, Amelia (Anne Hathaway).  They reveal to Cooper a plan for him, Amelia and two other individuals to travel through a wormhole that has been discovered to be orbiting Saturn, which will bring them to a new galaxy in which there are a few planets that could possibly sustain human life.  With time running out, they will have to travel to these planets to find out which one provides the best chance for humanity.

Matthew McConaughey has showcased his surprising acting abilities in recent smaller films, such as last year’s “Dallas Buyers Club,” and now shows that he has the talent to carry a film as big as this.  Although it’s the type of role that several other actors could have played, it’s fun to see him headline an epic such as this, especially because of his growing commitment to reputable acting.

Although the other cast members, such as Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain and Michael Caine, get a dramatic moment here and there, Christopher and Jonathan Nolan’s screenplay mostly requires them to deliver exposition.  McConaughey has to do exposition as well, but at least he gets a sort-of emotional arc with his young daughter, Murph (Mackenzie Foy).  Yes, I do understand that a good amount of explanation is necessary, especially given the significant scientific ideas that this film tackles, and everyone does whatever they can with the material they’re given; I’m just saying that the Nolans could have added a little more scope to the human story.

The visuals are the true highlight of the film, and the cinematography by Hoyte van Hoytema gloriously frames the grandeur and vastness of outer space, so much so that this movie should be seen on the biggest screen possible, preferably IMAX.  One image out of many that terrifically captures the starlit abyss is when we see the main spacecraft merely viewed as a moving white dot flying past the gargantuan planet of Saturn. 

Many people have probably heard “Interstellar” being compared to “2001: A Space Odyssey.”  While both films have considerable differences in their actual stories, it’s the imagery of the two films that are equal in their impressiveness.  “2001” particularly comes to mind when the crew travels through the wormhole, and when Cooper passes the event horizon in the film’s last half hour.  With their strange beauty, these sequences call to mind the famous scene of Dr. David Bowman traveling through the vortex of colored light in “2001.”

The Nolans’ screenplay finds most of its strength in its presentation of considerable scientific ideas.  It’s important to pay close attention during the film, especially in the second half because there’s a lot that’s thrown at you.  It can get pretty overwhelming at times with the dialogues concerning time and space, but that’s a positive thing because of how much it gets you invested in the ideas that are encouraging this space exploration.  With how much the film has to offer in terms of making you think, you walk out of the movie feeling the same as you probably did after watching “Inception” or “Memento” for the first time.  After all, many of the best movie experiences are the ones that encourage you to use your head.

Director Christopher Nolan has one of the finest creative abilities for visuals in modern filmmaking, but what would have made this film even better is if he added more dramatic depth to his characters in order make the emotional stakes more present in the larger scope of the story.  He always assembles very talented performers, and he’s been able to make many of his films emotionally involving for his characters in the past, but he has to make sure to keep that ability consistent.  If he can always remember to do that, then I’ll always look forward to his upcoming films.

Final grade: B

Media Leeches and Their Desire for Grisly Stories

“If it bleeds, it leads.”  That’s on quote that I’m sure many people can use to describe today’s news culture.  Viewers’ appetite for stories involving death have disturbing implications as to where their interests are in the scope of current events.  Whether the story is focusing on a horrific car accident or a deadly home invasion, one thing that can be guessed is that many viewers won’t touch their remotes until such a story finishes on the news.

What is it with cameras becoming best friends with bloodshed?  Dan Gilroy makes his directorial debut with the broadcast-news thriller, “Nightcrawler,” in which he travels into the dark world of video journalism and brings us close to the uncomfortable invasiveness of certain on-site corespondents.

Louis Bloom (Jake Gyllenhaal) lives in Los Angeles, and is in desperate need of a job.  After some failed attempts to earn money, he eventually emerges into the field video reporting.  Equipped with a camcorder and radio scanner, Bloom tries to make his way to as many LA crime/accident scenes as possible.  As he begins selling his stories to a local news station, Bloom becomes more and more determined to impress his employers, and will do anything to beat his competitors to a story. 

Jake Gyllenhaal has always been a highly gifted actor, but he has had an especially notable run as of late, between his supporting gig in “Prisoners” a year ago, his lead role in “Enemy” back in the spring, and now his role as Louis Bloom.  Between these three movies, you can say that Gyllenhaal has experienced a superb period of thrillers, and with “Nightcrawler,” his character is easily the least likable of his more recent roles, but it’s a performance that’s endlessly fascinating to watch.  

We first see him as someone who’s rather strange, and maybe a bit socially inept, and it doesn’t seem like he has much interaction with the outside world.  As he starts to record his stories, it’s really something to see Gyllenhaal command the transition of his character rapidly going from being a newbie with a camera to an accomplished videographer, having tapped into a perverse talent he never knew he possessed.  Even when he first establishes his production business with his one and only employee, Rick (Riz Ahmed), his role as a boss who knows what he wants shows how much he intends to strive for the big leagues.

Rene Russo turns in a vigorous performance as Nina, the tough morning-news director whom Bloom works for.  Just like Bloom, she wants “something people can’t turn away from.”  The ruthlessness of her character is displayed in her insatiable hunger for news that will boost her show’s ratings, and her morals and ethics as a journalist are every bit as questionable and twisted as Bloom’s.

The scenes between Gyllenhaal and Russo burn with tension as he tries to use their professional relationship to become more than what he started out as.  There’s a scene in the film when the two are in the news station, and Bloom delivers a monologue where he tells Nina what he demands for his continued work with the station.  It’s a real moment of character growth that’s all caught in one take that allows us to deeply focus on him and absorb his every word.  

The screenplay by Dan Gilroy could have used a little more subtly in its message, but it’s still a very interesting critique on current video journalism.  It doesn’t hold back in showing how far some reporters will go to get the story they want, even if it means withholding information to make the story fit their intentions.

Seeing as Gyllenhaal’s character is always chasing stories, it would make sense to worry that the film would become repetitive, but this is certainly not the case.  With each crime/accident scene he barges in on, we learn more about the type of person he is and how easily he’s able to throw away his decency in order to impress his boss and further his career.

Gilroy’s story is also extremely voyeuristic in how it displays Bloom’s subjects being bombarded by his camera and watched from afar.  This causes certain sequences to be uncomfortable to watch, especially the home-invasion scene and the ending, but that makes them all the more potent in what the movie is trying to say.

“Nightcrawler” will make you think about what goes on behind the scenes in video journalism, and it may even change the way you watch the news.

Final grade: A-