Ruby Sparks* (2012) 9.5, 10, 9, 28.5

          Often since beginning this blog, I have found myself writing out of a sense of obligation. This isn't awful, because I know that without obligation, I would only take in and never produce. But, I'm on a plane from Paris to Chicago, so I figured I'd write my review for Ruby Sparks now. I watched this film under the worst possible circumstances. The screen can't be more than 5"x4" and the whole time I was could hear, slightly louder than the film I was watching, Finding Nemo in German. But despite these inhibiting factors, I really loved this movie.
          I normally insist on having my list of movies open so I can compare with previous films I've seen. But I can't do that now. Because I'm on a plane. So here are the reasons I liked this movie.
          First, Paul Dano. I wanted to give Zoe Kazan first pick, because she wrote it and knocked it out of the park as the co-star as well, but Paul Dano is a revelation. I think that word normally works when you didn't already know that something was good, but every time I see him in a movie, he truly opens my eyes. I gushed on him after Looper too. He was in that for ten minutes. He executed perfectly. He lived on that edge where you, or I anyway, get so nervous for that character who is deliriously happy but you know he's going to chuck it away. He managed to sell abject misery and delirious happiness with the same clarity and truth. He truly wiped the floor with me emotionally. And all I can do is thank him.
          Let's not forget Zoe though. The movie is fantastically written to the romantic comedy genre specifications, but it goes way darker and plumbs the absolute depths, before bringing you back. In this way, I would compare it to (500) Days of Summer. There were so many points in which I forgot that Paul's character was not Paul writing, but also those moments that worked so brilliantly, as one-liners or whatever, that you want to kiss the writer...I literally cannot stop myself as I write, "yes, she's also quite pretty too."
          Beyond her writing, she played a silly part without being campy. She makes the fantasy/sci-fi concept believable. Steve Coogan and Chris Messina are quite good too. They play their little parts quite well without being too much.
          As far as wisdom goes, I think the film doesn't make a particularly new point. It's really easy to take for granted those we love. It's really easy to be selfish, even when we are in love, which ought to be the least selfish time of our lives. This message is simply given new life in this odd story. I think this is the best mode of science-fiction or fantasy. It uses a fantastical concept to show us the same truths that we ought to know by now.
          For wonder, the film is so straightforward that I gave it a 9. I am starting tot think that something may be wrong with my rating system that a simple film can't go above a 9. I'm not sure. One caveat. I could barely hear, so music appreciation was out of the question. A better viewing could easily elicit a 9.5. I would guess it would as the directors we the same ones from Little Miss Sunshine. And the music in that, oy veh. For those who don't know me, that sound has become so integral to my language that I say it completely without thinking.
          I hope anyone who sees this film after reading this loves it. I did. I was so happily surprised, and I was super-psyched for this one. When I watch a trailer that gets me really excited, I put it on my list with a plus sign or a cross next to it(+). I often refer to this, in the lengthy conversations that I have with myself, as crossing a movie. I crossed this and I was still pleasantly surprised. I don't know how many times that's happened. Maybe never. I'm usually just affirmed. I expected good things and I was right. In this case, I expected good things and I was given a great film.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey* (2012) 7.5, 8.5, 9.5, 25.5

          I come to this review with a heavy heart. I know many of my dear friends in the U. S. will still be impatiently awaiting the first of a trilogy of movies based upon The Hobbit by J. R. R. Tolkien. The first thing I can say is that I was extremely disappointed. I don't want to get too into generalities, so I'll get specific from the start.
          I gave this film a 7.5 for wit. It fell so under films like JFK and The Kite Runner that I could not conscionably give it an 8. I compared it to The Ides of March, which was also a huge disappointment. The writing was the biggest flaw. Incident suffered most. Dialogue actually worked almost all the time. Moments that are extremely flawed. The opening gets really technical and tells a lot more back story than necessary about the dwarves and the circumstances they come from. It explains the loss of the Lonely Mountain in excruciating detail. All before the introduction to Bilbo and the main heft and weight of his story. Then we go to the world immediately previous to LOTR. We get cameos from Elijah Wood and Ian Holm, as if to say "Remember how much you all liked our last movie?" This again takes too much time. I continually wished we would just arrive at Martin Freeman and the story that we really want to hear.
          To be fair, the scene with the entrance of the dwarves to Bag End was hilarious and they genuinely made me feel at home. I was totally satisfied until they really got going on their journey. They encounter a number of very general threats and the beauty of Bilbo's intelligence getting them out of scraps is missed. For those who know the story, I thought the troll sequence was mishandled, which is unfortunate, as that is my favorite sequence in the early part of the book.
          The relationship between Bilbo and Thorin Oakenshield has an all too neat and tidy conflict-escalation-resolution structure that seems forced. The decision to show the Lonely  Mountain at the end also seems overly convenient, as they haven't even entered Mirkwood yet. In many ways it seemed like they were trying to fill space since they decided to do a trilogy. I really hoped that maybe Peter Jackson had found enough genuine material to make three films and now I'm nearly sure he hasn't.
          A lot is lost, but some highlights in terms of acting deserve praise. Martin Freeman gets the beauty of Bilbo's reluctance, that it is simply the modern man's reaction to adventure. He has pleasure and security. Why should he risk his own life for this adventure? He doesn't see the emptiness of his life in the same way that so many materialists now do not see how much more meaning life ought to have. But he has compassion for the dwarves.
          Besides this, all the old cast slip back into familiar and comforting roles. Sir Ian brings Gandalf the Grey back to life in a way I thought would be hard after seeing Gandalf the White. Christopher Lee, Hugo Weaving, and Cate Blanchett bring back Saruman, Elrond, and Galadriel with ease and never betray any sign of weariness in playing these characters, which is inspiring. Andy Serkis again inhabited Gollum so convincingly that I forgot there was an actor again. I also thought most of the dwarves played their parts to perfection, but I did feel as if Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield felt weird, even awkward.
          A special note should be given to Sylvester McCoy's shining performance as Radagast the Brown. This was truly inspired and made the middle of the movie more bearable for me.
          For wisdom, I gave the film an 8.5. Many parts of it did well in this category, better certainly than in wit, but the aforementioned loss of some of the spectacular nature of Bilbo's wit bothered me in the construction of the themes. Beyond this, I can only think to complain about the loss of the joy and lightheartedness of the book. The Hobbit won so much acclaim as itself, a children's book. It wasn't about all the dark pieces of the mythology like LOTR. It uses the depth of that world, but doesn't feel the need to constantly invoke it. It leaves it as background so it can tell an adventure story. This gives too much focus to the background and we lose the childish sense of adventure that is the lesson that Bilbo's story has to teach us.
          I have very little to complain about in terms of wonder. The film is beautiful from beginning to end. WETA blows me away with how intelligently and painstakingly they conceive and bring forth a world of such depth visually. There are a couple complaints, without which I would probably have given this a 10. First, the dwarves are rarely given in a context that reminds you they are short and stocky. When Thorin fights the great goblin, he looks like a full-grown man. Enforcing the size of the dwarves does not seem to have been done as painstakingly here as it was with Gimli in LOTR. Second, I think again the darkness comes across visually and they don't contrast it with LOTR, as I think they should have.
          I can't say to anyone that they shouldn't go see it immediately, because I know that no human being on earth could have told me that before I saw it that I would have listened to. I only forewarn that some might not get their hopes up. Good luck.