The Ides of March (2011, U.S.)

I went to see this with my mom because she wanted to see it, and it was better than my other option. Why did I not want to see a movie with the sexy and talented Ryan Gosling, you ask? Well, aside from the fact that I fluctuate between finding George Clooney passable and downright annoying, this subject matter just didn't interest me at all. The matter of politics is depressing enough in the real world without having to see it in a fictional world too. What kind of escapism is that, I ask?

Well, it went just about as expected. Gosling was stellar, of course. Clooney was actually pretty good. (This was not one of those movies when I wanted to yell "Shut up, you irritating man!") The supporting cast—Marisa Tomei, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Evan Rachel Wood, Jeffrey Wright—was obviously a strong one. I couldn't say one bad thing about the acting. I also learned a whole lot about the campaigning process, from logistics to worker motives to the sordid details of life on the road. The plot was complex and certainly engaging.

But. When it comes down to it, I left the movie feeling distinctly unhappy. Is there really any resolution? Did the characters grow? Why was this film made and why do we watch it? It wasn't unsettling exactly, or depressing, or entirely off-putting. But leaving a movie with that empty sort of feeling makes me feel all out of sync. It's one thing to be sobbing and depressed, but feeling out of balance with the world is something I just don't like.

Still, I think the movie has many things going for it, and it is the perfect movie for the right kind of viewer. I wouldn't be surprised if it got some Oscar nods.

Rating: 3.0

Source Code (2011, U.S.)

I have very mixed feelings about this one. It definitely had a very interesting concept for a science fiction thriller. And it had the one-of-a-kind, sweet, sexy, boy-next-door, unlikely-hero Jake Gyllenhaal. Some good special effects (exploding trains and the like). A hint of romance. A dash of (misplaced?) patriotism. Lots of promise, but it just didn't come together well.

It's not that it was confusing. At first it was a bit confusing, as I got the hang of the plot. In fact, it was a bit confusing for Coulter (Gyllenhaal), and the viewer figures out what's going on as he does, which was pretty good for the plot. As far as sci-fi action flicks go, this seemed pretty strong for the most part, especially considering it took place over and over again in the same 8 minutes with the same handful of characters on the same train.

I was mostly frustrated because the developing romance didn't make much sense, and the ending made no sense at all. It felt like they were going somewhere else with the story, but the original ending was too depressing so they rewrote it to be conveniently-ever-ever. (This is just a theory, but that's how it felt to me.) Both of these things made the whole thing feel forced and ruined the effect. I barely convinced myself to go up to 3.0 instead of 2.5.

I would recommend this to anyone who's desperate for a good sci-fi thriller (a somewhat under-used genre in today's market, it seems to me). Yes, even though I didn't rate it higher, the kernel of the story was very good; just the execution was lacking. I also recommend it to diehard Jake Gyllenhaal fans (like myself). He really carried this movie. He has a very quiet, underrated talent and plays the tough yet tender hero very well.

Rating: 3.0

Quantum of Solace (2008, UK)

I. Love. Daniel. Craig. There is no other Bond for me. To be fair, I've only ever seen the Brosnan and Craig films. And Casino Royale was my first Bond, and I already had a soft spot for it because I'd seen them filming it. But still.

The plot of Quantum of Solace was very typically Bond, probably more so than Casino Royale. Bad guys doing something extremely technologically complicated, creative, and deviously evil. (And as far as evil plots go, this one really takes the cake—but I don't want to give it away.) Sexy women getting in the way, sleeping with Bond, getting killed off. Car chases, shootouts, and explosions. Only this time, Bond had more than duty motivating him—he had revenge. And he very subtly reaches toward revenging Vesper's death. It's not an obvious plot point, but it nicely ties QofS with CR. I love continuity.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. Let's start with the beginning. I did not like the opening credits, nor the new theme song performed by Jack White and Alicia Keyes. (Surprising, because I do love Jack White.) I just don't think anything could touch "You Know My Name" and the clever gambling theme of the CR credits. I liked the "cut out" looking men more than the CGI women, even if it was less "Bond."

The opening scene of QofS is a car chase. I'm back and forth on car chases overall; they have to be really well done to get my attention. And while this one was pretty cool, the jerky camera movements were just a bit too much. It's hard to appreciate a scene when your eyes can't focus on it! It also took me awhile to figure out what was happening. Apparently the beginning of this film takes place directly after the end of the last film. Again, love the continuity—don't love that Bond was wearing a different suit. Confusing!

After that, it was all great. I'm still a bit confused on some of the plot points, but as far as I can tell, every Bond film takes at least two viewings to work out the kinks of who did what and why. The casting was fabulous. Of course I love Craig and Dench, so no surprises there. The actors who portrayed the main Bond girl and the main villian were both amazing. Olga Kurylenko was both fragile and tough, and she definitely held her own. Mathieu Amalric can only be described as "slimy." They were perfect.

The cinematography was well done (from gritty to stunning, depending on the . The score was understated and effective (though again, it didn't touch CR either). The choreography (I'm talking fight scenes here) was realistic and yet very dance-like (if that makes sense).

I'm pretty much dying to see it again.

Rating: 4.5