The Finest Hours

Year: 2016
Genre: Docudrama/Sea Adventure
Directed: Craig Gillespie
Stars: Chris Pine, Casey Affleck, Ben Foster, Eric Bana, Holliday Grainger, John Ortiz, Kyle Gallner, John Magaro, Graham McTavish, Beau Knapp
Production: Walt Disney Pictures

The Finest Hours is one of those unfortunate titles that is forgotten as soon as you hear it. Whenever someone asked me what I was going to watch, all I could say was it was the Coast Guard movie. This is no reflection on the story but more a reflection on Disney's quixotic handling of this mid-January release. Movie after movie this year and last featured a trailer of The Finest Hours. Casey Affleck heroically keeps half a ship afloat while Chris Pine utters the manta "Coast Guard says you gotta go out, they don't tell you you gotta come back" in a thick Bostonian brogue.

Chris Pine plays Bernie Webber, a Coast Guard crewman who defines his decisions on the rule book as if it were a crutch. He even insists that before he marry his sweetheart Miriam (Grainger), he ask his superior officer as per Coast Guard regulation (though really just a formality). As a large winter storm approaches his corner of Cape Cod, not one but two oil tankers miles off the coast are split in half by the waves. The SS Mercer was able to send out a distress call and tie up Coast Guard resources while the SS Pendleton remained nearly invisible save a radar blip. Ship Engineer of the Pendleton Ray Sybert (Affleck) makes a desperate gambit to save the crew by constructing a rudder and running the aft of the ship on a shoal to slow them from sinking just long enough to get noticed and rescued.

The actual wreck of the SS Pendleton

The concept for a movie of this kind would sound ridiculous if it weren't true. In 1952, two tankers were indeed split in half and after the main crew left Chatham Station for one, a second crew was alerted to the Pendleton and braved the dangerous coastal banks to reach them in a tiny CG36500 lifeboat. The script based on a novel by Casey Sherman and Michael J. Tougias is so old-fashioned, it immediately brings to mind the sea adventures in Captain Horatio Hornblower R.N. (1951) or Sea Wife (1957). What sets The Finest Hours apart are the modernized special-effects and Craig Gillispie's dynamic direction.

The Finest Hours is far from perfect. The movie takes it's time to develop the relationship between Webber and heartthrob Miriam who does very little but delve into histrionics. It's a shame too because Grainger is an absolute vision who typifies the 1950's model of beauty and womanhood. Every scene she was in was certainly distracting from the story but for once I didn't much care. There's also something clearly wrong with the station's Commander Daniel Cluff (Bana). It's never clear how the audience should feel; is he closer to the vein of Captain Queeg in The Caine Mutiny (1954) or is he just an outsider trying to do his best given the situation? Also there's Disney's insistence that 3D is the way to go; yeah not so much. This is a movie whose main set-piece is a nocturnal nautical rescue thus wearing 3D glasses makes everything too dark to appreciate.

The scenes involving the Coast Guard lifeboat trudging through open ocean are the most riveting, barely surpassing the Pendleton's attempts to run aground via game of telephone. Throughout the movie people spout a torrent of nautical terms which appeared to go over the heads of audience members, yet what was clear were the stakes and the results of such a daring rescue. People will no doubt compare this film with The Perfect Storm (2000) which apart from it also taking place in the Northeastern United States, only makes sense as far as critical reaction.

I for one enjoyed this film, which is competently made, has some show-stopping, hair-raising scenes of seafaring mayhem and had some great low-key performances by Pine, Affleck and Grainger. Disney definitely crippled this film by giving it an instantly forgettable title and shoving 3D and IMAX 3D in our faces. It's a real shame too because the added disadvantage of having a January release and lukewarm reviews by critics all but guarantees this story will ever get the audience it deserves.

Bet you're going to watch 50 Shades of Black instead aren't you?

Final Grade: C-

Kung Fu Panda 3

Year: 2016
Genre: Animated Comedy
Directed: Alessandro Carloni, Jesnnifer Yuh
Stars: Jack Black, Dustin Hoffman, Angelina Jolie, Bryan Cranston, J.K. Simmons, James Hong, Jackie Chan, Lucy Liu, Seth Rogen, David Cross, Kate Hudson, Randall Duk Kim,
Production: Dreamworks Animation

Kung Fu Panda 3 is the third in a franchise that is said to ultimately comprise of six films. In the first one, our protagonist Po (Black) realizes his potential as the Dragon Warrior. In the second, Po comes to understand his mysterious past and finds inner piece. In this movie, Po comes to understand what Chi is and teaches kung fu to a village of pandas seemingly in one afternoon. What is Po going to do next; become the hero of colonial China?

The principle villain in Kung Fu Panda 3 is a spirit warrior by the name of Kai (Simmons). Formerly a friend to Master Oogway (Duk Kim), longtime deceased master of the Jade Palace, Kai steals Oogway's Chi to gain access to the mortal realm and seeks to remove Oogway's name from the history books. Standing in his way are Oogway's former pupils Master Monkey (Chan), Viper (Liu), Crane (Cross), Mantis (Rogen), Tigress (Jolie), Shifu (Hoffman) and Po. Meanwhile Po is visited by his presumed dead biological father Li (Cranston) who insists despite murmurs in the village, that Po come home to the panda village so he can learn to harness Chi which apparently only pandas can do. Shifu the current master of the Jade Palace agrees and delays his retirement partially because the prophecy reveals only a master of Chi can destroy Kai. Also Shifu recently let Po teach a kung fu class to the masters with disastrous results.

Happy panda!

The animation is breathtakingly beautiful in this film. The Village of Peace looks as vibrant as it ever did while new images of the panda refuge instantly brings to mind Zhangjiajie National Forrest in all it's glory. What's more, the fight scenes between masters takes advantage of each animal's unique attributes whether they be a mantis, a panda or a porcupine. Throughout the film Kai steals the Chi from different kung fu masters turning them into jade zombies (jombies); the detail work on the jade is an especially impressive as animators had to make it look smooth, hard, pristine yet slightly see-through.

I only wish they worked a little harder on the story which is where the movie takes a fumble. It's not for lack of trying, there is certainly a lot of material. The concept of Chi was never fully explained and remains a nebulous idea throughout the movie. How does this life force work? How can Kai harness it? Why are pandas especially adept to learning how to harness Chi? The fact that Chi isn't even alluded to in previous movies, makes the entire concept (which has a deeply respected history in China) seem like a cheap add-on.

Then comes the largest problem about this entire franchise which, if left unaddressed, will lead to its downfall in further installments. Let's talk about the panda in the room; Po, who just can't seem to grow up. The first movie was a perfect self-contained fable about realizing your own potential. Po was a geeky layabout who faced down a ferocious villain. The second movie, he's still a geeky layabout, only this time he comes face to face with a technological wonder (gunpowder) and defeats a villain that caused mass genocide. You'd think that kind of experience would ground someone yet in the beginning of Kung Fu Panda 3 there's Po, playing with action figures in a bubble bath. The difficulties Po faces in the first act runs contrary to the lesson he learned in Kung Fu Panda 2 (2011), and the principal lesson in this installment "be the best you, you can be," feels like an echo to the first movie. There's no new ground broken here, not for the characters, not for the story, not for China.

I sincerely hope the next few movies in the franchise learn a lesson from another Dreamworks tent-pole How to Train Your Dragon (2010). How to Train Your Dragon 2 (2014) upped the stakes, changed the formula and matured the characters. Hiccup and Toothless are a duo that I feel have learned from one another and will continue to break new ground in other movies. I fear that as audiences get older and nothing new is learned, Po, Tigress and the rest of the gang will be left behind.

Final Grade: C-

The 5th Wave

Year: 2016
Genre: Sci-Fi Action
Directed: J Blakeson
Stars: Chloe Grace Moretz, Nick Robinson, Alex Roe, Liev Schreiber, Zackary Arthur, Ron Livingston, Maika Monroe, Tony Revolori, Maria Bello, Maggie Siff
Production: Columbia Pictures

5th Wave represents the absolute nadir of Hunger Games-clone science fiction. This tonally schizophrenic, tedious exercise in survivalist disaster porn has the strong, pungent smell of weepy romanticism that threatens to overwhelm every interesting idea that captures the audiences' imagination. I cannot attest to the quality of the book series written by Rick Yancey but if the quality is anywhere near the level of this messy, disjointed, ambling film then I'm starting to question young peoples' choices in reading material.

Cassie (Moretz) is just an ordinary middle-class high school girl living in a quiet suburb in Ohio. She has a loving family and a strong connection to her little brother Sam (Arthur) whom she sings to sleep when he's feeling anxious. Then (ominous music) the "Others" come. The Others, an alien race looking to invade, attack humanity with wave after wave of synchronized attacks. They keep their own causalities low by; first cutting the power to the entire globe, destroying coastal cities with tsunamis and earthquakes, modifying the avian flu to cause a massive plague and deploying drones and snipers to pick off survivors one by one. Finally there is talk of a 5th wave that could mark the end of humanity, that is unless Cassie, her brother and a pod of diverse and supposedly original characters can do something about it. Oh and yes, by the end of the movie the pieces are set for the same normal-girl-chooses-between-two-hot-dudes scenario we've seen in everything from The Hunger Games series (2012-2015) to The Twilight Series (2008-2012)

The tone of this film is so incredibly humdrum that it's hard to really care about the fate of any of our protagonists. Family goodbyes and reunions are treated with the same visual bluntness as a tsunami hitting New York City and Cassie herself is so poorly written, that it's hard not to cheer for the Others which prove clever, interesting and emotionally complex by comparison. It's a shame too because under all the unspoken absurdities, tone-deaf directorial choices, and overcooked melodrama, there is a decent story underneath the rubble. There are interesting parallels between The 5th Wave, the Colombian Exchange and the concept of "going native" none of which get's explored. Instead of tapping into anything remotely resembling complexity i.e. anything that makes apocalyptic fiction so darn addicting, we get Chloe Grace Mortez gazing starry-eyed at the muscular Alex Roe chopping wood in the backyard.

Speaking of our two would-be suitors; Roe plays the earnest and resourceful Evan who has a few secrets up his sleeve. Evan and Cassie share a passionate kiss on the back of a an abandoned station wagon after moments of flirting that involves Cassie being shot in the leg and practicing the art of disarming someone; sexy. Meanwhile, Nick Robinson plays Ben, the high school sweetheart turned military's last hope. When Cassie and her little brother get separated, Ben takes the mantle of little kid protector and is rewarded by Cassie coincidentally appearing at the same place at the same time to do the exact same thing. Both of our supposed Romeos are willing to do anything to protect Cassie who has done nothing to deserve their attention other than wash her hair and exfoliate despite traipsing though the woods for weeks.

Hasn't showered for months...looks like this.

Stories like "The Road" and "The Last Man" deal with a total collapse of human systems that we largely take for granted. After the Atomic Age, post-apocalyptic fiction became more popular than ever, seeping into film with such masterworks as Night of the Living Dead (1968), Panic in Year Zero! (1962) and The Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). We eat it up partly because it's a dark form of wish fulfillment and partly as a challenging "what if". The psychology of individuals who deal with the end of the world as we know it intrigues us because we constantly question what we ourselves would do in a similar situation. 5th Wave answers that question in the most asinine way possible...get the hots for like, two different guys of course #winkyface.

Final Grade: F

A Walk to Remember

Year: 2002
Genre: Romantic Drama
Directed: Adam Shankman
Stars: Mandy Moore, Shane West, Peter Coyote, Daryl Hannah, Lauren German, Al Thompson, Clayne Crawford, Paz de la Huerta, Jonathan Parks Jordan
Production: Warner Bros.

A word to the wise; if you're going to make an emotionally manipulative film you should probably make the story, or at the very least the actors convincing. A Walk to Remember concerns itself with the uncompromising love of two teenagers Landon (West) and Jamie (Moore). Because at that age all love was uncompromising. Landon, a preppy jock who hangs with the popular crowd gets in trouble with the law and as punishment has to join the drama club...cause that happens. There he struggles but is helped by the bland and boring Jamie who Landon and his friends used to make fun of. She confides in him and tells him she has a list of things she wants to do in life. From there blossoms a romance to the bereavement of Jamie's minister father (Coyote).

No I really don't approve of your choices

The book written by Nicholas Sparks is set the story in the 50's but the film version tries to transplant the story into the 2000s. What results is a film whose values and aw-shucks-ness is dated upon arrival. The director and writer seem to have never set foot in a high school and as a result feel the need to populate the screen with as many pretty looking 20-year-olds as they possibly can. The ensemble is complete with Mandy Moore's unconvincing frumpyness, "popular" kids who have nothing better to do than belittle others, and a token black guy (Thompson) who calls everyone "bro."

Hey bro, how you doin' bro? What's going on bro?

Shane West can't act his way out of a paper bag and the eventual story resolution is just outlandish and silly. I wish everyone looked like Mandy Moore when (spoiler alert) diagnosed with leukemia. Shouldn't she be, I don't know, losing hair, losing weight, getting pale, throwing up etc.? It's one thing to embrace a socially conservative viewpoint like this film does, but its another thing entirely to gloss over or ignore certain realities. You seriously want the audience to believe pretty boy Landon rarely saw Jamie in a sexual light? Female audience members certainly saw Landon that way thus one of the few reasons this film has ever been popular.

Had this unconscionably bland movie been forgotten as it should have been, I may have been more forgiving in my judgment of it. But with a perplexing rating of 7.1 and an enthusiastic following, I simply had to knock it down a peg or two.

Final Grade: F

Dirty Grandpa

Year: 2016
Genre: Comedy
Directed: Dan Mazer
Stars: Robert De Niro, Zac Efron, Aubrey Plaza, Zoey Deutch, Jason Mantzoukas, Dermot Mulroney, Julianne Hough, Jake Picking, Jeffrey Bowyer-Chapman, Adam Pally
Production: Lionsgate

If anyone ever wanted to see a raunchy, offensive and bacchanalian Spring Break comedy where absolutely every actor including our main lead is on autopilot, I hardily recommend Dirty Grandpa. The main conceit of the film is based on the idea that everyone young and old would love to see acting legend Robert De Niro acting like an irresponsible college senior. Not going to lie, I myself was intrigued by the idea while still aware that I was going to get a Wal-Mart bargain-barrel assemblage of d**k jokes. In that regard, mission accomplished movie; now if only Robert De Niro gave a darn.

Nope, still don't give a s**t

The movie begins with the wake of Dick's (De Niro) long-time wife. Jason (Efron) his grandson is a corporate lawyer set to wed a shrewish woman (Hough) who seems to decide everything for him, down to the color scheme of the wedding. Partially out of a fear of old age and partially out of a desire to see Jason liberated, Dick convinces Jason to drive down to Boca Raton with him because "it's what your grandmother would have wanted." On the way down Jason bumps into an old flame from college (Deutch), her libidinous best friend Lenore (Plaza) and their tag-along Bradley (Bowyer-Chapman). Dick convinces Jason to follow them to Spring Break and take part in an escalating array of tomfoolery.

In fairness to Mr. De Niro if there is any actor on the planet who deserves to coast it would be him. His career spans sixty years. He has been nominated for seven Academy Awards (winning two) and has been an invaluable stable player to the likes of Martin Scorsese and David O. Russell. Even as he got older he had no trouble transitioning into challenging roles and even made the successful transition to self-parody playing his machismo to comic effect. This is the first movie I have seen him in where he seems completely aloof (that includes The Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle (2000)), yet on his very worst day he's still does a better job than half the cast in this movie.

There are multiple characters that could have had moments to shine; Danny Glover, Mo Collins and Adam Pally are so underutilized that they might as well have been written out of the movie. In fact, the only real stand out is Plaza who during the first and second act does a convincing job flirting with De Niro. She's profane, she's lascivious, she's ribald and we love her for it. Armed with a barrage of witticisms and blunt sexual innuendo, she's easily outperforms Zac Efron's boring straight man shtick and whatever the hell Jason Mantzoukas is trying to do.

Hey guys! Laugh at me...please!

The main problem with Dirty Grandpa is it's vulgarity has nowhere to go. Few of the jokes manage to be funny and when they are they seldom further the story in any meaningful way. In-fact most of the gags just get in the way, and after an hour of setups that go nowhere, it started to feel grating. Let's face it, after the shock of seeing Efron waking up on the beach with a swastika made of penises and De Niro saying the N-word wears off, all you're left with is a boring and cliche script.

Don't care champion (2009-2015)

Dirty Grandpa just doesn't live up to it's premise. It wastes the talent of its cast, the humor is scattershot and crude and the script is as cliche as a rated-R comedy can get. Literally everyone in this film is there for the paycheck and only Aubrey Plaza seems to be having any kind of fun. It is said that the script for Dirty Grandpa was on 2011's Black List; an industry survey that votes on the most "liked" un-produced scripts of the year. Surveys in years prior have included award winning movies such as Juno (2007) and Slumdog Millionaire (2008). If you ask me they should have left this turkey on the blacklist out of concern for the living.

Final Grade: F

Symbol

Year: 2009
Genre: Absurdist Comedy
Directed: Hitoshi Matsumoto
Stars: Hitoshi Matsumoto, David Quintero, Lilian Tapia, Adriana Fricke, Carlos C. Torres, Luis Accinelli
Production: Yoshimoto Kogyo Company

What the hell did I just watch? That is the immediate reaction I am sure most will feel when first watching Symbol. It was certainly the first thought that came to my mind. Believe it or not it's not a reaction I have often. Most movies, even badly made movies have a certain respect for story structure or lacking that a regard for the audience's ability to make sense of what's going on; not so with Symbol. A third of the way through, I was elated with the fact that for the first time in a while, I was watching something completely new. It is my personal belief that the difference between a genius and a vagrant on the bus mumbling half-formed thoughts and conspiracy theories is an audience. If you come into this Japanese import with that mindset I'm confident you will find something to like if not outright love about Symbol.

One small wiener, one giant dick joke

The movie begins with Matsumoto, an unnamed Japanese man who wakes up in a large, empty, windowless room. As he gets up an examines the white room, the only abnormality he finds is a small phallic protrusion sticking out of one of the walls. He taps it with his finger; spooky, ominous music swells. Suddenly a mess of cherubs appear slowly from out of the walls and giggle as he stands petrified. They morph back into the walls leaving only their own protuberances signaling they are all a type of switch. The man screams; smells his finger and continues to scream. There are vignettes of other stories chopped into the film; one in particular we return to constantly, involving an aging Luchador anxiously awaiting his last battle. Largely though, we're left with Matsumoto flipping switches in a frantic bid to get out of the room.

You lost?

Hitoshi Matsumoto is apparently something of a big time celebrite in his homeland often playing opposite longtime partner Masatoshi Hamada. Since the eighties Matsumoto (known as the boke or funny man) and Hamada (the tsukkomi or sadist) have dominated sketch comedy TV in Japan through their "Downtown" Owarai act and various variety hour-like comedy shows. Despite a partnership that is rivaled only by maybe the South Park (1997-Present) guys, the two Japanese darlings find being around each other after the show "awkward". This would certainly explain why Hamada is in no way involved with Symbol; yet his influence is felt in every slapstick situation. There is some borrowing from the Manzai comedy tradition here but there are more visual themes associated with Bunuel and Jodorowsky not to mention a heavy dose of Kafka. It's not surprising that despite no film release in the west, the movie has been more warmly received stateside than in its native Japan.

There are various levels of subtext and meta-text at play here yet I'm inclined to belay all that and simply recommend this bizarre little trip as strongly as I can. This movie is as absurd as you're liable to get so for those who don't see the humor in a loudly dressed Japanese man struggling to escape from a human-sized Skinner box, don't bother. Those of you who are curious to see one of the goofiest, wackiest, most nonsensical movies ever committed to film, you need to see Symbol. It's hard to find online so if you find a version sans subtitles, snatch it anyway. This movie is one of those rare foreign movies you don't need a translation to understand, or rather not understand what's going on.

Final Grade: A-

Essentials: The Goodbye Girl

Year: 1977
Genre: Romantic Comedy
Directed: Herbert Ross
Stars: Richard Dreyfuss, Marsha Mason, Quinn Cummings, Paul Benedict, Barbara Rhoades, Theresa Merritt, Michael Shawn
Production: Warner Bros.

There are a precious few writers in Hollywood who have gained name recognition among audience members. Those who have entered the upper echelons of critical and popular recognition include such names as Woody Allen, Quentin Tarantino and Aaron Sorkin. Yet hidden among this elite group is the consistently under-appreciated Neil Simon; a playwright turned occasional screenwriter who along with Mel Brooks and the Zucker/Abrahams team modernized the way we see comedy on the screen. In fairness to those who don't know his name, he was much more of a playwright in the Noel Coward, George Bernard Shaw stripe. My first experience with Simon was reading Lost in Yonkers in grade school, and I immediately fell in love with his sophisticated yet workman-like brand of comedy.

Marsha Mason sporting the perfect b***h face

The Goodbye Girl starts with Paula (Mason) and Lucy (Cummings) a mother and daughter pair living in a quaint New York City apartment. Paula has been seeing a married actor who jilts her to go to Italy to shoot a movie. Unable to pay rent and struggling with a re-ignited dancing career, Paula's troubles are compounded with the arrival of an unwelcome house guest (Dreyfuss). Elliot happens to be a struggling actor as well and happened to have subleased the apartment out from under her nose. Having the choice between moving out or dealing with the neurotic but kindhearted actor, Paula and Lucy choose to stay. Thus begins an uncommon living arrangement that turns into a budding romance.

For every grounded hardship the characters face, Simon is quick to add a one-liner to break the tension and further endear the audience to the characters. The dialogue is so sharp and bursting at the seems with goofy, quick-witted, verbal sparring that it's easy to assume the movie was adapted from a play. Yet the movie is an original. Simon did not adapt one of his plays as he so often does but instead tried to adapt a movie partially based on the overnight success of Dustin Hoffman (starring Robert De Niro). The original script was much darker than Simon would have liked so he tinkered until he came up with The Goodbye Girl's adept mix of humor, romance and pathos.

The movie has the added bonus of having three very good central actors who take full advantage of the dialogue. Dreyfuss is truly charming as the scruffy, wayward Elliot struggling to make a splash in New York's stage scene. His natural amiability and occasionally goofy demeanor brings the perfect balance and achieves a high level of energy that Mason and Cummings reach and exceed with aplomb. Mason likewise is a vision as Paula, approaching a similar balance between forlorn neuroticism and strength. The real show-stealer however is Cummings as the young Lucy. At times the dialogue makes her a bit too precocious for her own good yet between two very strong veteran actors at the top of their game, her standing out seems like a miracle. It's important to note that all three actors received an Academy Award nomination for their portrayals, Dreyfuss becoming the youngest winner at the time.

If there is one sticking point to be expanded on it's the ending which leaves the relationship between Elliot and Paula a little strained yet hurriedly resolved. Perhaps Simon ran out of material or perhaps I found the characters so relatable I simply wanted to see more. Both adults have managed to survive and even thrive in 1970's New York despite the odds being completely against them; I for one would have loved the 15 minute denouement to be more of a victory lap. I suppose Neil Simon was reminded of the old showman saying "always leave the audience wanting more."

Final Grade: A

Thoughts from the Usher Podium: #OscarsSoWhite

The first black recipient of an Academy Award was Hattie McDaniel in 1940 for her portrayal of Mammy in Gone with the Wind (1939). In a short and elegant speech, McDaniel thanked the Academy and said she "...sincerely hope[s] I shall always be a credit to my race and to the motion picture industry." More than seventy years later she still is a credit to her race yet the fact that another woman didn't win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress until 1990 is not a credit to the Academy and the motion picture industry.

It's also important to note that in the Best Actress category, no black woman won until 2001. Black men have fared better in the acting category; Sidney Poitier won his Oscar in 1963 for Lilies of the Field (1963), though that honor wasn't repeated until 2001 when Denzel Washington won for Training Day (2001). The number of black men nominated for Best Director; three, and no none of them were Spike Lee.

Oh, come on!

There has been a lot of controversy based on this year's Academy Award's lack of diversity. Despite the fact that 2015 was a trending year for black entertainers and filmmakers, only one black person was nominated in a competitive category. As a result of this, entertainers like Jada-Pinkett Smith and Spike Lee have boycotted the ceremony on February 28 and have railed against the Academy's lack of diversity. Academy President Cheryl Boone Isaacs has promised to change the criteria for Academy membership and voting. Members will now have to be "active" in the film industry over ten years to be considered a member unless they themselves have won a golden statuette. This ends the tradition of lifetime membership for all. "The Academy is going to lead and not wait for the industry to catch up," Boone said in a statement to the press.

Cheryl Boone Isaacs

Yet it is precisely that statement that's part of the problem and getting rid of lifetime membership is not going to solve the issue by any stretch of the imagination. The very sentiment that the industry needs to "catch up" is the real problem. Look beyond the familiar faces, the people in front of the camera and you will notice there's a draught of people working the less-glamorous jobs. editors, cinematographers, sound mixers, makeup artists, special effects crew, art directors all working behind the scenes to make your entertainment. Those are just the people who get major category awards; let's not forget gaffers, mic operators, stunt men, assistant directors, set dressers et al. There is a lack of diversity among the crew just as there is a lack of diversity among actors, directors and producers. The old adage it's not what you know, it's who you know applies here, so how is the Academy expected to lead when the already incredibly insulated film industry has a problem hiring diversity on a street level.

People like to think that awards are based on merit and shouldn't be based on race, nationality or any other criteria. I agree and if that were solely the case, Will Smith's sour grapes about his Concussion (2015) role would make any reasonable person's eyes roll. Yet as anyone who has ever been passed up for promotion knows, awards and rewards aren't based entirely on merit at all; they're based on economics and politics. Award season, like Black Friday or Happy Hour is all about getting people to spend money on something they could otherwise live without. The 2-3 months before award season is the ideal time for production companies to release their artistic movies; your Revenant's (2015), your Danish Girl's (2015) etc. that way people can be coaxed to seeing them by noticing they got award nominations under their sleeve. That's why despite Room (2015) being released in select theaters in October, it managed to be widely released December through January. This is all to guarantee that films of this nature get their budget back and hopefully make a nifty profit.

The problem with this economic model is it depends on the money of people who actually care about award season. That demographic usually skews older, doesn't care about diversity as much and often doesn't react well to films that are experimental in nature. Thus most movies come award season fall into one or more of these categories: period piece; a movie set in a nostalgic past such as the 60's or 50's, biographical drama; based on a person people feel smart for knowing who they are, and finally based on a novel with a fan base. This is why if a movie with a diverse cast does get nominated, racism is often the most important theme of the movie. Movies that lack racism as an important theme, or worse still, are actually popular (like Straight Outta Compton), are completely out of the loop.

So like really only one of these is not based on race or race relations

Politically, look at this year's nominees or nominees from years prior and you will start to see the same production companies; at least when it comes to distribution. Those companies have the finances and weight behind them to amass an award season campaign to convince Academy members to vote for them; smaller companies do not. Furthermore prolific producers and cross-discipline actors and actresses tend to get more nominations, or at the very least undeserved nominations because they cross-pollinate. The more you work, the more people you work with, the larger the trust, the more likely they'll vote for your movie despite maybe never seeing it. That's why objectively lesser movies like Unbroken (2014) can sneak in with a nomination or two while movies like 25th Hour (2002) barely get noticed. Many black filmmakers and (certainly many female filmmakers) tend to get pigeon-holed into working on genre movies that producers feel mirror their "strengths". Therefore they work with the same people and don't (or can't) branch out.

So what does this have to do with race? Politics and economics is ingrained into every racially tinged event in recent memory from Ferguson to Flint. Oppressive systems whether they're that way by design or not still disenfranchise and worse still are a reflection of a society that still struggles to realize the principles of equality of opportunity. Award season is just a tiny, little piece of that puzzle. I don't know if the Academy plans to increase diversity are going to do anything about the dysfunction of the film industry as a whole. Yet if the transition from Mammy in 1939 to Patsey in 2013 is any indication, we still have a long way to go.

Patsey from 12 Years a Slave (2013)

Essentials: Clerks

Year: 1994
Genre: Workplace Comedy
Directed: Kevin Smith
Stars: Brian O'Halloran, Jeff Anderson, Marilyn Ghigliotti, Lisa Spoonauer, Jason Mewes, Scott Moser, Kevin Smith
Production: View Askew

Kevin Smith's Clerks plays like a cross between 'Waiting for Goudot' and 'The Divine Comedy' with excessive c*** jokes thrown in for good measure. Dante (O'Halloran) is coaxed into working the morning shift at a convenience store by a boss we never see. Suffering through a duo of wisecracking drug dealers (Mewes and Smith), a parade of annoying costumers and his lazy best friend's antics (Anderson), his only solace is his doting girlfriend (Ghigliotti) who occasionally brings him lasagna. But when he discovers an ex (Spoonauer) is about to get married, things start to spiral out of control with hilarious results.

The cinematography of this film leaves little to be desired. Shot in grainy black and white, the camera is planted firmly on the ground as the actors populate the tiny store and play out the scene. Additionally O'Halloran and Anderson who share most of the screen time give it their all but try as they might, just aren't very talented actors. For all its supposed faults however Clerks comes across as endearing; like a seedling that's just pushed through fertile soil destined to change the tree-line.

What rises this film above the fold is the script. The raucous conversations between the two leads manages to make the mundane world of minimum wage counter-jockeying palpable. The film's instantly quotable dialogue may be unassuming to some today but back then it was new and exciting and to some quite threatening (the MPAA originally gave the film an NC-17 based solely on the script).

Without Clerks, the film industry wouldn't have realized the potential of the raunchy comedy genre and films like There's Something About Mary (1998), American Pie (1999), and Borat (2006) would have had a harder time making it to the Cineplexes. Additionally Clerks tapped into an audience demographic that has up until then not been recognized, i.e. fanboys. After all, who else would talk at length about the virtues of the Star Wars Trilogy (1977-1983)? With a budget of approximately $27,000, the film grossed $3 million at the box office and has since become a cult favorite. How much of a cult favorite you ask? The film schools of today are cluttered with those who were inspired by two major auteurs; Tarantino and Smith. Whether you think that's a positive is up to you.

Final Grade: A

13 Hours - The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi

Year: 2016
Genre: Action Movie
Directed: Michael Bay
Stars: John Krasinski, James Badge Dale, Pablo Schreiber, Dan Denman, Dominic Fumusa, Max Martini, Alexia Barlier, Matt Letscher, David Costabile
Production: 3 Arts Entertainment

I don't know an exorbitant amount about the events that transpired September 11, 2012. The things I do know are disputed left and right by various talking heads, politicians and supposed experts none of which were actually there. What I do know is the biases you have towards the subject matter will invariably inform your ability to like this movie. Therefore I would like to sidestep the debate of the film's accuracy and instead focus on the movie as a piece of art.

The story begins with Jack Silva (Krasinski) as our introduction to Benghazi just after the revolution. He lands at the airport and is greeted by friend and brother in arms 'Rone' (Dale). From there they drive to the CIA annex headed by bureaucratic nancy-boy CIA Chief Bob (Costabile). Their mission: keep CIA assets safe while they locate and eliminate Muammar Gaddafi's weapons arsenals before they are sold to terrorists. Things however go sour shortly after the arrival of Ambassador Chris Stevens (Letscher) a "true believer" in diplomacy and progress. On the anniversary of 9/11, a group of terrorists storm the American Diplomatic compound where Ambassador Stevens is held up; the only people available to save them are Jack, Rone and their stable of ex-military contractors.

13 Hours is not very good; as a piece of art, as a piece of non-fiction, as a piece of entertainment. In fact the only type of piece it is I dare not say and the fault of that lies squarely on director Michael Bay. Throughout his illustrious career, Bay has made a compendium of high-octane action-thrillers that have, for better or worse, changed the grammar of action movies for an entire generation. What he does on purpose, he does well; that is to say cater to the lowest common denominator and make things go boom real good

Yet what he does unintentionally is hold an entire audience hostage and exhausts them with a cavalcade of explosions and loud noises. To break the cacophony, he adds moments of familial and brotherly dialogues that could have worked if his constant cutting and dynamic camera movements didn't make everything look and feel phoned-in. In fact every scene where someone isn't shooting, there is a complete lack of tension. At one point Silva comments to Rone that he hates the wait in-between shelling and gunfire; "Your adrenaline starts to slow and your mind starts to wonder." Brother I feel for you.

Krasinski, Dale, Schreiber and the rest do their best with a nuts-and-bots script. Despite every important character sporting a bushy beard and flexing serious muscle, they fleshed their characters out just enough to make them interesting. I wish I could say the same thing for everyone outside of the group of contractors. Costabile gets the short end of the stick playing the pompous, weak-willed CIA Chief who has shades of Walter Peck of Ghostbusters (1984) fame. At one point he snarls at Silva saying, "we have people who graduated from Harvard and Yale here...Do your job and stay out of our way." I don't know what callous jock tied him to the flagpole in high school but there is no way that kind of sourpuss would be working for the CIA. Him and the rest of the CIA analysts act like a spiteful chess team facing off against a team of iconoclastic football quarterbacks. Even in extraordinary situations they preen and complain, that is until they get a sample of the contractors "manliness". That's when they fall in line in performances so needlessly one-note that they all might as well be mannequins.

I may have given this movie a pass if it had just a hint of insidious meta-text like Bay's slapdash crime story Pain & Gain (2013). Alas the man has fallen back on old tricks; at one point depicting the same clockwise-counterclockwise epic shot he's used to rub vigorously into his audiences faces. There is no parable in the chaos like the far superior Black Hawk Down (2001). There is not emotional core like there was in Lone Survivor (2013). There is no political theme, patriotic rebel-rousing or point; just Bayhem.

WEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

Final Grade: F

Spotlight

Year: 2015

Genre: Drama

Directed: Tom McCarthy

Stars: Michael Keaton, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, Liev Schreiber, John Slattery, Brian d'Arcy James, Elena Wohl, Stanley Tucci, Len Cariou

Production: Anonymous Content

In today's click-bait internet media culture it's easy to forget that behind every large credible story there is a reporter who did the legwork to find sources, do the research and occasionally act with editorial restraint. In Spotlight's case it was a group of dedicated reporters that blew the lid off of the Boston Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal that rocked an entire institution to its core. Michael Rezendes (Ruffalo), Walter Robinson (Keaton), Sacha Pfeiffer (McAdams) and Matt Carol (d'Arcy) were those reporters and Spotlight is their story to bring the scandal to press.

You misunderstand...I'm a journalist

The story is not altogether a very glamorous one. The offices of the Spotlight team (the oldest investigative journalism team in the country) resembles the opaque basement bullpen of a third rate claims adjustment outfit. There are mountains of paper scattered atop shrinking desks anchored by outdated computers. All the reporters who call this office home are locals, well versed in Red Sox trivia, where to get the best pizza, and have had experiences growing up with the Church's influence. So when new Head Editor, and admitted outsider Marty Baron (Schreiber) asks Spotlight to investigate allegations of sexual abuse in the church, you can imagine their apprehension. That apprehension is overstated at first by Assistant Managing Editor Ben Bradlee Jr. (Slattery), then the victims start coming in and the Church starts to take notice.

Many movies about large conspiracies unravel in a hyperbolic web of conceits. This is immediately followed by the perfunctory veiled threat on the part of the conspirators. Yet here, the plot is deliberate and very interested in the small salient details that define newspaper journalism at its best. "This strikes me as an essential story for a local paper," says the pensive Baron as he finally convinces Robinson to take the story and run with it. It is at that moment we as the audience feel the necessity of their actions and their ink; they write the story because locals are in the best position to do so and if they don't no one else will.

Major in Journalism...become a hero!

There are also no veiled threats on the part of the church yet we still feel their looming influence in nearly every scene. Every time one of the Globes reporters is gumshoeing on the streets we always see a steeple somewhere in the background. When Baron meets the infamous Cardinal Law (Cariou) in his estate office you feel the man's affluence as everything is tinged with an auburn hue and seemingly dipped in gold. The offices of the Globe is filled with lapsed Catholics yet everywhere in their personal lives there are hints of the Church's influence on their upbringing. Pfeiffer makes a habit of going to Church on Sunday with her mother, Rezendes always assumed he could go back to the fold and be accepted with open arms, Robinson himself was the product of a Catholic School education, a fact that is thrown in his face when the story's deadline looms. All have a crisis of faith not just in Catholicism but faith in humanity. When Carol realizes one the psychology centers for wayward priests resides in his neighborhood he walks down the street and stares down the house with suspicion and contempt.

Then there are the victims. In one pivotal scene Bradlee, is shocked to find there are thirteen innocents that were abused by priests, all of which are still in circulation. It is only later that we even begin to understand the full extent of the damage done lest to say it is far more than thirteen in Boston alone. Besieged Lawyer Mitchell Garabedian (Tucci) who specializes in these kinds of unfortunate cases said it best when asked how something like this was allowed to go on for so long. "If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes a village to abuse them. That's the truth of it."

Probably the biggest victim in this movie is journalism itself. In a handful of not-so-subtle scenes, director Tom McCarthy hints that the kind of journalism Spotlight does is no longer a fundamental part of journalism today. The Boston Church scandal was the first national news story to break and be covered widely after 9/11 and in the film it feels like a final triumph before investigative reporting packs up and slinks away; replaced by sensationalism and political vitriol. There are still outfits like Spotlight who work silently and make big waves when the time comes yet as paper media dies a slow death, these teams are asked to do twice as much with three times less. We have more means of communication than we ever had in history, yet the sources for the kind of system changing, disruptive information we crave or lacking that need, have become sparse. Here's to hoping change is made soon.

Final Grade: B-