Salmon Rushdie’s second novel, “Midnight’s Children” won the 1981 Booker Prize and solidified his reputation as a writer of note. Director Deepa Meta’s (“Fire,” “Earth,” “Water”) ambitious interpretation of the book begins telling Saleem Sinai’s (Satya Bhabha) story in India in 1917, 30 years before he is actually born.

We learn of his grandfather – a doctor – who woos and wins the daughter of a wealthy man. We meet the three daughters of that union, set against British India’s transition from a colony to an independent republic. We see something of the difficulties surrounding the partition of the country into India and Pakistan.

In Bombay, at midnight on August 15, 1947, as independence strikes, a son is born to one of the well-married daughters. At nearly the same moment, another boy is born to a poor street musician and his wife; she does not survive the birth.

A nurse in the hospital, Mary (Seema Biswas), switches the babies in an effort to equalize the forces of privilege and poverty. The boy raised by the wealthy family is named Saleem. The other child, who works the streets with his accordion-playing father, is called Shiva (Siddharth). Their paths will cross meaningfully in the future.

The term Midnight’s Children refers to all babies born on that monumental midnight in 1947. They have special powers that may help India succeed. Saleem, Shiva and Parvati (Shriya Haran) are only three of over 1,000 whose existence affects the years to come.

As an allegory for India’s situation before, during and after independence, “Midnight’s Children” is rich with symbolism and remarkably wide in scope. The story reaches all the way to the Pakistani civil war of 1971, the creation of Bangladesh, the politics of Indira Gandhi, and India’s nuclear tests of the mid-1970s.

For all of this to hang together well, continuity of time, tone and tale are imperative. Unfortunately, the many intimate personal stories do not blend well with the epic background. Vignettes fascinate, then evaporate. Motivation is muddy. Characters charm, then are forgotten. Events are implied without clarity.

What is left is a beautifully shot motion picture that takes a long, earnest look at India but lacks the cohesion of effective story telling.

To read more reviews by Kent and Carol, visit: http://www.websterkirkwoodtimes.com/SiteElist-1924.113117-Reelworld.html

These novels are the picked-over corpses on the pop culture landscape and only a filmmaker with a screw loose would even think about adapting one of these into a movie.

Enter Australian director Baz Luhrmann, a man without a tight screw to be found anywhere in his body, to take on the bane of 17-year-old stoners everywhere: “The Great Gatsby.”

I doubt F. Scott Fitzgerald ever thought his little book would still be dutifully read nearly a century later, mostly because he was too busy thinking “Why did I marry this crazy lady!?!”

Even still, there has probably never been a better director than Luhrmann to breathe life into Fitzgerald’s tale of love, loss and the life cycle of the American Dream set against the backdrop of the wanton excess of the Roaring Twenties.

Read the rest of the review at Mat’s Entertainment.com 

When Midwesterner Nick Carraway (Toby Maguire) moves onto Long Island, New York, he finds himself embroiled in a love triangle between old money Tom Buchanan (Joel Edgerton), new money J. Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio) and the debutante they love, Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan) amidst the extravagant backdrop of the Roaring Twenties.

Kent’s Take:

F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classic novel “The Great Gatsby” has never looked so good and appealed to so many as director Baz Luhrmann’s cinematic jewel.

Paralleling “Citizen Kane” in its epic quality and story of unrequited love, “The Great Gatsby” whisks audiences headlong into the opulent 1920s. America was riding WWI prosperity, prohibition was making bootleggers rich and many felt that this era of good fortune would never end.a

The seeming leader of the bandwagon is J. Gatsby, a man who collects power like an entomologist collects insects. That power is gathered legally and illegally, his reputation built on myth, deceit and bluster. His weekend parties are legendary and attract the young and old, wealthy, prominent and creative, but J. Gatsby cares only for one thing, his love – Daisy. Yet, by the end of this story Gatsby reveals himself to be the only genuine person in Nick’s eyes.

This classic story touts themes of prosperity, overindulgence and redemption, the corruption of the American dream and decaying social and moral values, exactly what you would expect from one of the great American novels. From its symbolism, through its characters, to its soundtrack and style, this film is as unique as the era in which it is set.

Following the main plot of the novel, Luhrmann succeeds in capturing the era, the themes and the novel, mixing effects with live-action shots to bring the Roaring Twenties, roaring into theaters, creating yet another piece of pure art and entertainment.

DiCaprio gives one of his best performances to date. His J. Gatsby is confident and powerful, but deep down, he is simply a lovelorn dreamer who is willing to spend millions building an empire for his only love . . . and is then willing to walk away from it. He looks the part of an old-fashioned movie star with his classic features and debonair charm.

“The Great Gatsby” is a vintage story that has been brought to life on the silver screen, harkening back to the Golden Years of cinema when people dressed up to attend the show, when men would try to hold their girls’ hand and they would go to insurmountable lengths to win the love of a woman.

Carol’s Take:

At an advance screening of “The Great Gatsby,” a viewer asked if “literature” could really be presented in 3-D. The answer is simple. Maybe.

“The Great Gatsby,” as interpreted by Baz Luhrmann, is really two movies. One of them, representing the Jazz Age, is in 3-D and it is a frenetic marvel.

Everything about the era is new – peace feels great, music innovates at every turn, dance is erotic, almost tribal, women are showing skin. Unknown prosperity is powerful, booze is cheap and a new, untameable morality is being tested by the masses.

The other movie within “Gatsby” is in 3-D, too, but it is disappointingly flat. The characters don’t work and, with the exception of Maguire, our indifference to them wounds the picture. This is an unforgivable mistake for viewers willing to believe that literature and 3-D can work in consort.

In the end, “Gatsby” is a remarkable visual achievement in which the background, unfortunately, becomes the foreground. The passions of Fitzgerald’s characters – Jay, Daisy, Nick, Tom, Myrtle, and Wilson – are sacrificed to the age they represent.

To read more reviews by Kent and Carol, visit: http://www.websterkirkwoodtimes.com/SiteElist-1924.113117-Reelworld.html

In Lahore, Pakistan, an American-national college professor has been kidnapped. Inside a café, an American journalist, Bobby (Liev Schreiber), asks to interview a Pakistani professor, Changez (Riz Ahmed) who may have answers that will result in the man’s release. As students outside protest about the situation, a clash between them and the authorities looms.

Changez, an advocate of social revolution, accuses Bobby of being with the CIA. He suggests the same of the missing professor. He and his admirers abhor America’s involvement in the area.

However, he cares about Pakistan’s future and agrees to tell his story, but only if he can begin years earlier and a world away.

As a top Princeton graduate and ardent believer in the American dream, Changez is hired by a major U.S. firm as a financial analyst. He is brilliant at what he does – helping businesses maximize profits – and quickly rises through the company.

His personal life is less satisfactory. A romance with an artist, Erica (Kate Hudson), is a source of frustration and eventual pain.

When the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 occur, Changez is out of the U.S. on business. When he tries to return, he is stripped, fully searched and subjected to ethnic slurs at the airport. The incident is only the first in a series of insults and degradations that isolate him within his adopted country.

When he fails to close a business deal due to ethical questions, he loses his job. With no further prospects, and a visa about to expire, he returns to his homeland and begins to teach finance.

But his understanding of how things work in the West leads him to want to fashion a Pakistani dream. His views attract young followers who feel the same.

“The Reluctant Fundamentalist” is based on the internationally best-selling novel of the same name by Mohsin Hamid. The movie’s complexities are intriguing, and it does a commendable job of showing how a man with no violent tendencies can be radicalized. Director, Mira Nair, deftly demonstrates how little space there is in the world for individuals of moderate view, while the need for that space is growing.

Appearing in virtually every scene of the film, Riz Ahmed is captivating as the sensitive Changez. He is a man fully capable of being of two cultures at once, but one for whom circumstances eventually deny that possibility.

To read more reviews by Kent and Carol, visit: http://www.websterkirkwoodtimes.com/SiteElist-1924.113117-Reelworld.html

Now I am certainly not opposed to the genre taking on some weightier issues and I still consider “The Dark Knight” to be the finest superhero movie ever made. But even still, thank goodness we have Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man to lighten things up.

It’s hard to imagine a better marriage of actor and character than Downey as billionaire-industrialist-turned-iron-clad-hero Tony Stark.

How hard of a pitch is this, “Hey, Robert, we want you to deliver rapid-fire dialogue all while being handsome and cocky and we will pay you literally millions of dollars to do it.” That would be like me getting paid to watch football and nap occasionally.

The first “Iron Man” was a great introduction to the character and really set the bar and the mood for Marvel’s ambitious slate of superhero movies to follow.

To read the rest of the review go to Mat’s Entertainment.com

Much like its title, the movie is perfectly pleasant and compelling, yet it is so slight that it drifts off leaving no trace after the credits roll.

The hero of our story is Robbie (Paul Brannigan), a Scottish thug short both in stature and temper. Robbie is serving the Gaelic equivalent of probation with community service for randomly beating the snot out of some unsuspecting citizen.

Realizing he needs to turn his life around after becoming a father, Robbie looks to set his life straight, but he finds his prospects are slim because he can’t land a job due to his criminal record and a gnarly scar that runs down the side of his face.

Things begin to change when Robbie’s kindhearted probation officer Harry (John Henshaw) takes his charges out for a bit of a field trip to a whiskey distillery.

To read the rest of the review go to Mat’s Entertainment.com

Reeling from his last adventure with the Avengers, Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) finds himself suffering from PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder).

As terrorist “The Mandarin” (Ben Kingsley) begins blowing up various targets in order to create U.S. unrest, Stark takes the bait, inviting Mandarin to find him – and does he ever, destroying his home/laboratory.

Now without his lab, his girlfriend and metal suit, Tony Stark must figure out if he is a man or machine.

Kent’s Take:

“Iron Man 3” continues this strong franchises run of fun, frenzied adventures.

Stark is troubled, shouldering the weight of the world. He fears he cannot protect those whom he loves, so when The Mandarin almost kills friend, Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau), he sets a course of pure revenge.

Superhero films have become so sophisticated that they have superseded many mainstream movies in production value, writing and characterization.

“Iron Man 3” exhibits these elements wonderfully. From a complex, subtle and pulse-pounding story, to the grade A+ special effects and top-calibre directing, this gem gives audiences an unforgettable experience.

Graphic novels are places of laughter and spectacle, excitement and thrills and this tale perfectly captures this mixture. Deftly mixing humor and danger, drama and charm, this film uses Stark’s Iron Man suit as an alter ego, foreshadowing the inevitable break between the man and hero. No longer are his inventions the muse of his overactive brain, but instead become as warped as his psyche.

You might say that “Iron Man 3” is a  “suitable” conclusion to this popular franchise and although the climax is a bit over-the-top, it certainly takes the high road to high art.

Carol’s Take:

Tony Stark is a worthy protagonist. Brilliant, arrogant, self-deprecating, and reckless, he fascinates from start to finish.

Like the best American movie heroes, he is a loner at heart. What seems to be a newer, gentler, reflective side comes out in fits and starts – foreign to him, but not unwelcome.

It’s hard to imagine anyone but Downey, Jr. in this role. The actor’s work always flirts with – and often achieves – greatness. Without him, “Iron Man 3” would be much less enjoyable.

And, while it may be odd to focus on acting in this 130 minute flick, other performances deserve a mention. As The Mandarin, Ben Kingsley is threatening and delightful. The always watchable Guy Pearce is suitably menacing. Rebecca Hall, James Badge Dale and Ty Simpkins contribute a lot in smaller roles.

Surely, “Iron Man 3” delivers what its fans want and need from the franchise: an evolving hero, a villain faced and foiled, and plenty of “boom, boom, boom.”

What it cannot make fresh is the surprise of the original – the intelligence, the wit, the audacity. Without that, what remains is an expensive piece of entertainment that’s a little too familiar.

Robert “Robbie” Emmerson (Paul Brannigan) sees his recidivism as a lifestyle as he continues an ongoing feud with a local hood. Yet, the courts see his behavior as hooliganism at its worst. However, because his fiancee’ is pregnant and has no record, instead of sending Robbie to jail, they sentence him to 300 hours of community service.

While serving his time, he befriends Albert (Gary Maitland), Rhino (William Ruane) and Mo (Jasmin Riggins), who are also serving community service sentences.

On a weekend trip to a local distillery, Robbie discovers that he has a nose for discerning whiskey. Excited about his newfound skill, Robbie begins studying whiskey in order to hone his craft, but soon his rivalry with the local thug threatens his freedom.

Bolstered by his promise to turn over a new leaf, Robbie convinces his friends to take a risk of a lifetime in order to secure a foundation for their futures.

Kent’s Take:

“The Angels’ Share” is a charming Scottish film about life decisions and their effects on one’s future.

Robbie narrowly escapes a long prison term only because of his impending fatherhood. When Luke is born, Robbie promises him that he will no longer fight – but others have a different idea.

The Community Service Director takes a shining to Robbie and introduces him to whiskey tasting, a very popular endeavor throughout Europe. On a local tour, they learn that while aging whiskey, the casks lose 2% of their volume, which is referred to as “the angels’ share.”

This light-hearted comedy uses the same formula as other European comedies such as “The Full Monty,” and “The Commitments.” In these films, a group of misfits get together to undertake a task that is a longshot for success, but through trial and error, stumbling and bumbling, cursing and insults, they somehow manage to find a certain degree of success.

This film follows that same formula, but is weak in a few areas. “The Angels’ Share” fails to develop a connection between its characters and its audience. Robbie and his motley crew of shallow oddballs simply spew a few funny lines and expecting that to create charm. Also, we never see these people do anything that we do. We witness their peculiarities and the penchants for law-breaking, but they are never humanized. Lastly, the one shot they create for a better future is quickly brushed over and lacks any real detail forcing us to witness a quick resolution to a detailed setup – a disappointment.

The high-end whiskey tasting shown in the film is, in itself, fascinating and would make an interesting film sans the crass Glasgow hoods, while the Scottish culture and landscapes are worth a look.

An important element to this film is the accents. The Scottish brogues used are spoken quickly and with colloquialisms, making the dialogue extremely difficult to understand, because of this, the film is subtitled.

“The Angels’ Share” is a film with lots of potential, but that potential is not fully realized leaving it a whiskey shot in the dark.

To read more reviews by Kent and Carol, visit:

http://www.websterkirkwoodtimes.com/SiteElist-1924.113117-Reelworld.html

Now don’t get me wrong, I love asteroid collisions, alien death rays and intergalactic battles as much as the next nerd, but there is still a lot to be said for the likes of “2001,” “Solaris” (which I still think would be a great name for a midsized Chevy sedan) and “Moon,” just to name a few.

Granted not a whole lot happens in those movies, but the best examples always seem to possess a haunting beauty and use the genre to chew on some of humanities’ weightier questions.

“Oblivion” is a boring science fiction film disguised as a Hollywood blockbuster, and while it should not be regarded as a member of the upper-echelon of this draggy subgenre, it still manages to bring a lot to the party.

Read the rest of the review at Mat’s Entertainment.com