Followers

This Movie Guy Headline Animator

Showing posts with label James Newton Howard. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Newton Howard. Show all posts

Saturday, June 9, 2012

Happy Birthday, James Newton Howard!

Today, we are celebrating the 61st birthday of Oscar-nominated composer James Newton Howard. A Los Angeles native, Howard attended the University of Southern California's music school, but he dropped out so that he could tour with Elton John. From there, Howard turned to composing and creating music for film and television, and he's been doing that ever since. Interestingly enough, Howard never actually conducts his own music; rather, he simply crafts and composes it then allows other conductors to take the helm in bringing the score to life. In his career, he has scored over one hundred films, and he continues to go strong to this day. In recent years, he has established an ongoing relationship with director M. Night Shyamalan, for whom Howard has scored a number of films. In his personal life, Howard has been married twice: first to Rosanna Arquette for just over a year, and then to Sophie Howard, with whom he has been married since 1992 and with whom he has had two children. And now, here's a few fun facts and accolades that Howard has earned throughout his career:

Composing
First Film: Head Office (1985)
Last Film: Snow White and the Huntsman (2012)
Next Film: The Bourne Legacy (2012)

Academy Awards
Nominated: Best Original Score, The Princes of Tides (1991)
Nominated: Best Original Score, The Fugitive (1993)
Nominated: Best Original Song, Junior (1994)
Nominated: Best Original Song, One Fine Day (1996)
Nominated: Best Original Score, My Best Friend's Wedding (1997)
Nominated: Best Original Score, The Village (2004)
Nominated: Best Original Score, Michael Clayton (2007)
Nominated: Best Original Score, Defiance (2008)

Over the years, I have managed to see thirty-one films with Howard's scores, and on average, those films have received a 'B-' grade. From those thirty-one, I have created the following list of my five favorite of his scores:

5. Defiance
2008

*****

4. The Sixth Sense
1999

*****

3. Waterworld
1995

*****

2. Batman Begins
(with Hans Zimmer)
2005

*****

1. King Kong
2005

Once again, I'd like to wish James Newton Howard a happy 61st birthday!

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Movie Review: THE HUNGER GAMES

THE HUNGER GAMES
2012
PG-13


"May the odds be ever in your favor."
-- Effie Trinket


The Hunger Games is a 2012 dramatic action film directed by Gary Ross that serves as an adaptation of Suzanne Collins' novel of the same name. In a dystopian future amidst the ruins of what was once North America, where the nation of Panem has arisen. After suffering a massive civil war, the leaders in the Capitol decided on a punishment for the twelve outlying districts that rose up against them. From that time, each year would see an annual "Hunger Games," in which each district would send one young man and one young woman between the ages of twelve and eighteen to be trained in combat and survival before fighting one another to the death as part of a show for the residents of the Capitol. The time has come for the 74th Annual Hunger Games, and we meet our heroine, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), who finds herself as one of District 12's "tributes" to the Games after volunteering to take her sister's place. She and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), the other tribute from the district, make their way to the Capitol to receive their training before entering the arena against twenty-two other young people, all of whom are desperately trying to survive.

I think I have to start this review by stating that I have not read Collins' source novel in its entirety. At the time I saw this film, I had not read any of it, but in the time since, I've managed to secure a copy and have started to read a little bit here and there. Therefore, most of my relationship with this story comes from the film, which I've already begun to realize stays relatively true to the source material, but as with any adaptation, it also has its differences. So all that being said, let's get on with the review, shall we?

Because I wasn't all that familiar with the novel itself, I can't say that I was terribly excited when I heard about the film's adaptation. I had heard all the buzz from the fans, but seeing as I didn't have any prior knowledge, I couldn't seem to wrap my head around all the fuss. As the film's release date grew closer and closer, the buzz increased tenfold, and when the film opened to stellar reviews, I knew I had to see it as soon as I could. Joined by my fanatic of a girlfriend, I ventured down to the local theater and quietly watched as the reel started to roll.

What I saw was a beautifully-crafted film that managed to pull on heartstrings and leave you desperately wanting for more. I suppose I'll start with the film's screenplay. Now, I've heard from a number of fans that this film is one of the better novel-to-film adaptations that they had ever witnessed, stating that the movie follows so closely to the book's storyline that its almost a little uncanny. Not being able to distinguish this myself, I merely had to follow along and keep up as best I can. There were two things about the screenplay that truly stood out to me. First, I liked the fact that it jumped right into the action. We don't waste any time getting to the "Reaping," where the tributes from each district are chosen. By throwing the audience into the fray immediately, it almost catches us a little off-guard and forces us to stay engaged with everything that's happening, and I thought this tactic worked well here. Second, I thought the film explained the events very clearly, which was a huge help for someone like me who was unfamiliar with the storyline. These two things gave me the opportunity to enter the story and keep up with it throughout the film, and for that alone, the screenplay should be applauded.

One of the biggest differences between the book and the movie, however, is the point of view. The novel is written in the first-person, giving us her thoughts and her actions through her own eyes. The film, however, has to take a third-person approach, offering the viewer a slightly different perspective. For example, once she's in the arena, Katniss could only know what's happening in her immediate surroundings. In the film, we're able to see beyond the arena and into the minds of the people watching and hoping and praying that she makes it out alive. Even based off the little bit of the novel I've read, I think that this added a little more depth to the film, only making its story all the stronger.

Luckily, we're also getting a stellar cast to bring the film's characters to life. Jennifer Lawrence has been all the rave since the film was released, and there's definitely a reason for it. She plays her part to the tee, and despite her already above average acting credentials, this has been the performance to spring her to superstardom. I first saw her talents in 2010's Winter's Bone, and I knew then that she could act. Her performance in The Hunger Games only cements my previous thoughts on her abilities. Hutcherson also does well in his performance, but I felt he was a tad bit overshadowed by Lawrence. We're also getting a fantastic supporting cast that includes the likes of Woody Harrelson, Stanley Tucci, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz and Donald Sutherland. All in all, I'd have to say that the casting department did a fine job here.

We're also getting a great musical score from the likes of James Newton Howard, who always knows how to set the tone of a film with his compositions. The music always seems to fit into the storyline, and it greatly aids the overall movie-going experience.

At the end of the day, I thought The Hunger Games was a fantastic film that managed to strike a chord with both fans and non-fans alike. It's always rare for a film to drive me to read the source novel, but this has definitely been one of those cases. If a movie can impact me that much, then there must be quite a bit of merit to it. It's just a truly well-made film, and it deserves all the accolades its receiving.



Movie Review Summary
Grade: A-
2 Thumbs Up

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Movie Review: GREEN LANTERN

GREEN LANTERN
2011
PG-13



Green Lantern is a 2011 superhero action film directed by Martin Campbell that tells the origins of Earth's first addition to the Green Lantern Corps. When hotshot fighter pilot Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds) manages to destroy a new fighter jet during a simulated dogfight, he comes under heavy scrutiny from his superiors and his peers, especially his wingman (and love interest) Carol Ferris (Blake Lively), for being reckless and irresponsible. Later that night, Hal is whisked to a remote swamp by a mysterious ball of green energy. Once there, he meets an alien who has crash-landed on Earth - the alien soon bestows a mysterious green ring and lantern to Hal and tells him that the ring has chosen him to succeed him. Confused, Hal takes the items home and begins to ponder their power. He soon learns the basics of their use, but as soon as he discovers the ring's hidden power, the same ball of energy takes him to a faraway planet called Oa, where thousands of Green Lanterns reside. Hal begins to learn the ways of the Lanterns via a crash course from lead Lantern Sinestro (Mark Strong). Meanwhile, back on Earth, an aspiring scientist name Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard) receives the honor of conducting the autopsy on the aforementioned alien. In the process, however, he becomes infected by another alien source hidden inside the creature's body. Almost simultaneously, the Lanterns learn of an old enemy named Parallax spreading throughout the galactic sectors in the form of a new type of evil that threatens to take over the universe.

To be fair, I'm selling the storyline a little bit short with the synopsis I've given above. There is a little bit more going on than what I've posited already, and it actually comes off as less confusing than what I've written. However, I don't want to delve into too many details lest I give away the entire storyline before you have a chance to give it a gander. We actually get a relatively interesting story to follow. Sure, it's not brilliant, and it's lack in anything truly unpredictable, but it does well enough to keep the audience engaged in something more than the characters. There are holes here and there, but for the most part, the screenplay works relatively well considering the genre.

If anything's really selling the movie as a success, it's the level of acting. It's nothing truly spectacular, but the cast does a decent job with what they're given. Reynolds always finds a way to be engaging and charismatic in his own off-beat way, so he does well as our central lead. There are a few bigger names that are given screen-time but don't necessarily bring much to the table (here's looking at you, Miss Lively and Tim Robbins). We actually get some semi-strong performances from Sarsgaard (whom I never would've recognized aside from his voice) and Strong (who I also probably wouldn't have recognized), two actors who generally bring a higher standard to their roles. We are also graced with some rather good vocal performances from some of our CGI characters. Be on the listen for the likes of Michael Clarke Duncan and Geoffrey Rush as two of the Green Lanterns who aid Hal in his training.

We also get a rather well-crafted soundtrack for the film, and although it's not the most stellar score I've ever heard, I would like to tip my hat to James Newton Howard for his work.

Overall, Green Lantern has its moments, but it never truly pushes itself beyond a level of "good." I think it had the potential to be something more, but for whatever reason, the filmmakers decided to hold back a little too much, going for something rote and a little contrived instead. In different hands, this movie could have been a smash-hit, but as it stands, it will probably be a fun once-view that will quickly fade into obscurity. Although, they did leave a set-up for a potential sequel - be sure to stick through the credits for an additional scene (it comes halfway through the credits, so you don't have to wait all the way through).

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: C+
0.5 Thumbs Up

Friday, April 22, 2011

Movie Review: WATER FOR ELEPHANTS

WATER FOR ELEPHANTS
2011
PG-13



Water for Elephants is a 2011 dramatic romance film directed by Francis Lawrence that centers around the final rise and fall of a circus during the Great Depression. When his father and mother are killed in a car accident, Jacob Jankowski (Robert Pattinson) abandons his veterinary studies at Cornell University and sets foot for the big city to find work. One night, he stumbles across a railroad track and stows aboard a passing train. In the morning, he learns that the train houses the very livelihood of the Benzini Brothers circus. Jacob is immediately impressed and seeks employment doing whatever he can to earn a living. He catches the eye of the circus's rash, and sometimes violent, ringleader August (Christoph Waltz) after telling him of his training as a veterinarian; August decides to hire him as the circus's full-time vet. Jacob meets August's wife Marlena (Reese Witherspoon) who stars as the main attraction in the circus's lineup. As time passes, Jacob and Marlena start to grow fond of one another, sending August into consistent states of fury. When he happens upon an elephant, August purchases the creature in the hopes that it can bring more revenue for the circus. He enlists Jacob to train the animal and Marlena to star alongside it, bringing the two ever closer until their affections towards one another is no longer deniable.

The story starts off well enough, with an elderly Jacob (played by Hal Holbrook) stumbling upon a modern circus. When he's seated with the circus manager, he begins to recant the tale of the disaster surrounding the Benzini Brothers circus, and the rest of the film serves as his flashback. Generally speaking, I'm not much for the concept of "the whole movie is a flashback" because I feel like I've seen it so many times before, and it's gotten a little cliché. With this film, however, I feel like it works a little bit better, although I'm not entirely sure why. The screenplay itself is relatively strong, and it does just enough to keep you intertwined with the story and the characters. There are moments that are going to pull at your heartstrings (especially if you're an animal lover like myself - you all should probably be forewarned of some animal cruelty presented in the film), and those moments alone make the movie all the more endearing. At times, it's a little difficult to watch (for those aforementioned animal lovers), but the lead characters are so likable that they make everything seem all right.

We're given a relatively good cast that works well with the material. I have not seen any of the Twilight films, so my vision of Pattinson's acting ability has not yet been muddied. Truth be told, I've only seen him in a few other films (2005's Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and 2010's Remember Me), so I still don't have much of a feel for him as an actor. I thought he did well with his role here, but there wasn't anything spectacular about his portrayal. The best compliment I could probably give him was that his Jacob felt like a real person, and ultimately, that's probably what every actor hopes to achieve with their character. Witherspoon is also decent, but she hasn't come close to hitting her Oscar-winning performance in 2005's Walk the Line since that film; still, she's serviceable here. The real praise should go to Waltz who has his first legitimate role since winning the Academy Award for Inglourious Basterds (I'm sure we can forgive and forget that tremendously bad bit in The Green Hornet, right?). He plays a fantastic madman who has no control over his issues with anger, and every time he's on-screen, you're just waiting for him to lose it again. My only fear is that he's starting to be typecast as a villain or antagonist - I personally would love to see him as a good guy at some point. Oh, and Holbrook is quite the revelation in his limited amount of screen-time. If you're looking for an emotional and spirited performance in this film, you need not look past him.

I also found the film's musical score to be quite well-done, so I'd like to tip my hat to James Newton Howard for creating it. He's always been a favorite of mine, and he definitely does well here.

I'm going to be honest: when I first saw the trailers for this film, I wasn't entirely impressed and had no real desire to go see it. However, considering this weekend's other major releases (Madea's Big Happy Family and African Cats), I figured this would probably be my best shot at seeing something relatively entertaining. And although I wasn't entirely blown away, I'd have to say that Water for Elephants is definitely a solid film that's worth giving a gander if you've got some time for a romantic drama.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: B-
1 Thumb Up

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Movie Review: UNBREAKABLE

UNBREAKABLE
2000
PG-13



Unbreakable is a 2000 dramatic mystery film directed by M. Night Shyamalan. The film opens on David Dunn (Bruce Willis), a married man on his way home from New York on a train that derails, killing everyone on-board - except him. Somehow, David walks away from the crash unscathed, causing everyone around him to wonder just how he managed to do so. After leaving a memorial service for all those killed in the crash, David finds a note stuck under his car's windshield asking him how many times he had been sick in his life. The question quickly becomes an obsession, and with the help of his wife Audrey (Robin Wright), David realizes that he had never once been sick in his life. He traces the note to a special art gallery where he meets Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson), a man who was born with a type of brittle bone syndrome. After conversing for a little while, Elijah believes that David may be "unbreakable," in that he cannot be injured. He starts to attempt to convince David that the world may need a person like him - a protector, so to speak. David shrugs off the notion, but as time goes by, he starts to wonder whether Elijah may actually be correct.

Now, I watched this film last night but was too tired afterward to write the review, so bear with me if this sounds a little jumbled. I had been meaning to watch this film ever since I watched The Sixth Sense because many people had told me it's actually good Shyamalan fare. And in comparison to some of his recent efforts (i.e., 2008's The Happening and 2010's The Last Airbender), Unbreakable is damn near brilliant. However, compared to the annals of the rest of film history, it simply falls into the "quite good" category. I had a very interesting viewing of this film, considering it's one of the only Shyamalan films I've seen in which I did not know the ultimate twist going into watching it. The Sixth Sense and The Village (which I have yet to watch) were both spoiled for me before I had the chance to see them, so they proved to be a little lackluster (although, the power of The Sixth Sense still ranks it at #142 on my all-time list). That being said, let's get to the actual review of the film...

We actually have a pretty good screenplay, although it literally makes you wait until the very last scene to punch everything home. This seems to be Shyamalan's sole purpose in making film - to make the audience wait until the final moments to garner some resolution. I have to say that I wasn't entirely expecting the final outcome, but as I thought about it as I drifted off to sleep, I realized how obvious it had been. I should have picked up on it a lot sooner, but perhaps I was tired from a long day of movies (in case you didn't notice, check out my other review from yesterday: Insidious; Source Code; Win Win). We've basically got a superhero story on our hands here, but it's not really packaged as such throughout the film. The story really focuses on Dunn's inner struggle as he tries to figure out just what's "wrong" with him. In a way, I guess you can say this is like an origins story of a superhero. The fact that it's all encased within this comic book universe that Elijah so craves makes it all the more dashing. My only real issue with the screenplay was that it moved so slowly that it never lets you properly hook into what's going on. Again, that could've just been me trying to watch it as I slowly succumbed to the wonders of dreamland - maybe I'll have to give this one another view on a fully functional day.

The acting is good, in a very subtle sort of way. I loved Bruce Willis in The Sixth Sense, and I wanted desperately to love him here as well, but I came away merely liking the character. However, his collaboration with Shyamalan helped to bring out the actor in Willis, rather than the comedic action junkie we had all grown to know and love. His roles in both The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable are so glaringly different from roles he's taken on in the past that it's a little awkward to see him as such. That doesn't take away the fact that he is a very good actor, though. Aside from Willis, there's really no one else to talk about except Samuel L. Jackson. It took me a little while for his character to grow on me, but eventually, I was able to fall into his warped sense of reality. Jackson plays him well, with an outward subtlety that almost masks the manic energy floating around inside Elijah's skull. It's quite a sight to behold, actually.

I'd also like to take a moment and give credit to James Newton Howard, who composed the score for the film. Although it's not quite as good as his composition for The Sixth Sense, it's still quite good and fits the film very well. Here's a little taste of the score, in case you're curious to hear it:



Overall, I think I'm going to have to go back and watch Unbreakable again in a few weeks. The more I think about the film, the more I like it, but I might want to give it another go just to prove that my feelings are warranted. In a day and age when Shyamalan has become a bit of a laughing stock in Hollywood, everything he does has to be taken with a grain of salt. However, Unbreakable might actually be one of his better films, and although it's not quite reaching The Sixth Sense, it could very easily come close.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: B-
1.5 Thumbs Up