Black Mass is the best kind of biopic. One that tells a very specific story. It doesn't just exist in order to tell about a person for the mere sake of retelling their life story. We've all seen those before. At the end, you say to yourself that you feel like you know the person, but you're not really sure why you needed to learn about arbitrary snippets from their life.
This film is about Whitey Bulger (Johnny Depp), a Boston crime lord, whom you can assume had some acquired some fairly heady anecdotes over the course of his reign. But Black Mass doesn't just start from his childhood. It focuses mainly on the latter half of his life--after he was already established as a feared man in the city of Boston. The film details how he becomes an FBI informant who helps end the Mafia invasion in his territory of rule. But it never really paints him as a saint. In fact, it shows him more as the villain he is. One who is ruthless and merciless and only cares about his own power. Towards the beginning, before a series of events happen that takes away most of the people he cares about, we see flickers of a loving person. It's after that when he becomes a monster.
There is a secondary lead, John Connelly (Joel Edgerton), who works for the FBI but also grew up with Bulger. He has always been enamored with the criminal and secretly wants to be like him. He is in denial. Things start to change in his life when the FBI becomes fed up with Connelly always creating excuses for Bulger--a trend that may prove to work against him rather than for him.
But Black Mass never chooses a protagonist for us. We root for certain characters, but then realize that they all may very well have faults of their own that make them unrootable.
Depp is seriously phenomenal in his portrayal of Bulger. It may very well be his best performance in years, maybe ever. You forget it's him because it is so far gone from the typical roles that he takes on.
The film is gripping from beginning to end. It proves how there are different levels of nefariousness and depicts Bulger's second tier of villain perfectly.
Twizard Rating: 97
I was really looking forward to watching this movie. How bad can a film about decrypting a Nazi war tool be? I failed to realize that it was more of a film about Alan Turing, himself.
It's a dual story, explaining how England government is secretly trying to decrypt the Nazi's Enigma code, while also acting as a character study of Alan Turing himself. My biggest issue with The Imitation Game is the filmmakers 'decision to put Turing's personal struggles and stopping Nazi Germany on the same importance level.
Throughout the film there are many chronological lapses back and forth in time. Although jumping around in the timeline may serve a grander purpose, we almost always prefer remaining at the time during the war when Enigma is being cracked. Maybe this is because the flashing back and forth is only there as testament to Turing as a person--not to parallel the issue with the Nazis.
When character studies are concluded we're meant to understand the character on a level that we thought not to be possible. But at the end of this film, we are still left at a cold distance away from him. And this is a trend, as there are no characters in this movie that we actually like--an issue that plagues many a potentially great film. While The Imitation Game is a great war drama, the character study is lacking that warmth, and ultimately this film, at times, becomes as hard to connect with as its main protagonist.
The script, although filled with superb dialogue, features confusing plot points, which aren't helped by the time-lapse narrative.
But this film does do many things right. Benedict Cumberbatch is terrific as Turing, and the supporting cast does a great job too. On the technical side, the set pieces and design are great to look at, and the score has heightened awareness. This film does everything correctly in those minute aspects. My biggest issues just come from within the script. However, overall, it isn't a bad movie by any means. It just isn't a great one.
Twizard Rating: 83
While the first Hobbit film doesn't feel like a story stretched too thin, the second film does a little bit. But the third film lets us figure out on our own how it could have been combined with the previous installment. However, it's a fairly entertaining stretched story. Even though the battle scenes were at ridiculous durations, I enjoyed watching them.
Smaug is a highlight. The movie's opening with him attacking the city is fantastic, but we don't see nearly enough of him. As someone who has not read the book, I wasn't aware that Golum wouldn't make an appearance--a realization that bummed me out because he's such a great character.
The last film of any series is exciting by nature, because we are anxious to see how they will conclude. However, for a small chunk of this film, between the two battles, we are bored. There is a lot of pre-battle setup which is easy to follow, but not easy to stay awake through. We are given a film that is sandwiched between two big battles. But at least they are both coherent and not just a big shaky-cam fest.
I wish to see a little more character depth--besides the internal conflict that Thorin goes through, which means nothing to the audience unless they strongly remember the events of the first two films.
At the end, I had to be reminded what all this was for. And once I remembered, I laughed--mostly because it seems like a whole lot of hassle for something that's not that big of a deal.
Realistically, I could watch these films over and over again without paying attention to the story because the visuals and the scenery are so amazing. You get lost in its world--an accomplishment in its own right.
Twizard Rating: 91
