Wonder Woman (2017)

Wonder Woman is really quite good. The superhero genre has gotten pretty worn out, but this movie feels fresh. This is loads brighter and happier and better than those other dark, brooding DC movies. I find myself watching a lot of those superhero movies and just not caring about the characters. But these characters are well developed, they're likable and interesting. Gal Gadot and Chris Pine have great chemistry. Admitted, the movie's special effects are kind of cheesy and weak. Whereas superhero movies tend to rely on special effects, this movie has plenty other merits.

The story and production design (and some nice lighting) recreate the WWI battlefront. Much like X-Men and the first Captain America, this movie steeps itself in history. History and quasi-mythology interact in an intriguing way here. They serve as the backdrop for some deeper themes than we're used to. And perhaps most refreshing of all, it stands alone as a singular movie. Yes, it's part of a franchise, but it doesn't just feel like it's building to another movie. It's not just advertising for a brand.  

The Congress (2013)

Ari Folman's follow-up to his acclaimed animated documentary once again delves into the world of animation, this time using animation as a plot device.  The latter half of the film is animated in a style that is notably different from the cut-out comic book animation style of Waltz with Bashir.  It starts out sort of psychedelic in a Yellow Submarine-esque feel, preparing the audience for a funky ride through cuckoo town.  This is a seriously wacky movie.  Folman animates recognizable figures in pop culture and art--the animated scenes genuinely look like something straight from Cartoon Network.

The premise of the movie is very interesting, but there is simply too much going on.  The first premise of the film is Robin Wright playing a version of herself, an aging actress who is getting less work, and resorts to selling her image.  Her likeness is captured by computers and the computers make movies starring their manipulation of Robin Wright.  In exchange she promises to quit acting, so the computerized version of her can be used in movies.  The movie is a critique of Hollywood and the studio system.  Folman clearly supports actors and their art, which cannot be replaced by computers.  But this is not just mere theory--recently the Hunger Games director decided to not use a computerized Philip Seymour Hoffman in the final film, opting to simply remove him from their unfinished scenes.  Marlon Brando attempted to preserve his head and emotions digitally for use in performance in the future, as detailed in the documentary Listen to Me Marlon.

But this storyline, which could stand alone to make a formidable movie, is seemingly abandoned in the second half of the movie.  The plot gets more convoluted and the movie moves on to explore other issues about denying reality and living in a fantasy of one's own kooky creation.  There's just so much going on, that it is easy to get confused.  But the movie is very interesting and its a pleasure to watch the animations.  Robin Wright is excellent acting live and voice-acting.  She reveals her mastery of her emotions in the scene in which the computer is capturing her range of facial expressions.  This movie is less personal and less powerful than Waltz with Bashir, but it is a brave foray into narrative film.

Big Eyes (2014)

Tim Burton's latest is a little out of the norm for him.  Tim Burton's dark and creepy aura is seen only in the paintings of Margaret Keane.  The little children with the big eyes are inherently spooky and yet full of emotion.  There is only one scene that really evokes what we expect from a Tim Burton movie, and that is when Margaret starts seeing real people with her signature big eyes. The other dark element to the movie is Lana Del Rey's haunting songs.  Otherwise, the film is quite bright, certainly not cheery, but bright. The atmosphere captures a genuine sense of 1950s Northern California.

I do think the courtroom scene towards the end is a little awkward. Waltz as his own attorney makes for an unusually comical scene in an otherwise dramatic film.  I cannot be sure if that actually happened in real life, but the point is that it abruptly culminates in the infamous paint-off.Amy Adams is excellent as always as the secretive artist Margaret Keane.  Christoph Waltz as her husband is a fantastic foil.  Amy Adams is one of the best actresses out there, and yet, the perennial bridesmaid, she has zero Oscars to show for it.  Waltz, on the other hand, has two. Both give award worthy performances, but unfortunately the film failed to rack up any nominations.