In traipsing Old-Hollywood comedy Hail, Caesar!, sibling duo Joel and Ethan Coen reflect on the cyclonic nature of showbiz, much like its spiritual predecessor, Barton Fink. That movie (which, my god, is now 25 years old) is nastier and more idiosyncratic, skewering the film industry with voracious (and incredibly funny) disdain. The Coens’ 2016 offering is more relaxed and lighthearted, but what it lacks in crackling energy and forward momentum it makes up for with finely tuned, detail-oriented jokes and an overabundance of charm.

The charm factor is in effect no more than during one of the film’s several movie-within-the-movie, genre-parody scenes, in which Channing Tatum (playing Burt Gurney, a Gene Kelly-like hoofer) performs a jaunty tap number in a sailor suit. (Few current screen actors can move like this man, and the Coens don’t squander the chance to let him tear up a song-and-dance routine.) The movie’s set in 1951, predominantly unfolding on the grounds of Capitol studios (the same fictional studio from Barton Fink), and Gurney’s ditty is one of the many movies being filmed on the sunny studio grounds, including a glittery synchronized-swimming production (starring an Esther Williams-channeling Scarlett Johansson) and “Hail, Caesar!,” a Ben Hur-style epic starring self-involved, strong-chinned leading man named Baird Whitlock (played by George Clooney in the vein of Charlton Heston).

While most of the characters we see are cleverly-packaged homages to the stars of Dream Factory heyday, one is taken straight from the Hollywood history books. Capitol is absolutely bustling with chaotic activity on a daily basis, and one man is responsible for holding the whole operation together: Eddie Mannix, a real-life, legendary studio exec who put out fires at MGM for years. He’s embodied by Josh Brolin, who leads the charge as the main focus and anchor of the otherwise scattered story. Mannix is a bulldozing man on a mission, zooming around the lot and around town making unblinking threats and using cool-headed negotiation tactics to keep all of his pictures running on schedule and in harmony. There’s no one better, and a lucrative job offer from Lockheed has him considering leaving the loopy microcosm of Capitol to make a bigger buck, albeit for dirtier work.

Much is made of Mannix’s soul searching; the film opens with him repenting in a confessional, a place we see him return to twice more as he considers the Lockheed offer and reflects on the more questionable facets of his moral make-up and career choices. Brolin and the Coens have always had a fruitful partnership, and while Mannix isn’t as monumental a creation as Llewelyn Moss, for instance, he’s still interesting enough to stand out amid the crowd of larger-than-life personalities running around the rest of the film.

One such personality (my favorite, in fact) is Hobie Doyle (Alden Ehrenreich), a singing cowboy star who can perform eye-popping, impossible feats on horseback and has a gift for lasso acrobatics, but can’t read proper dialogue for squat. When he’s shoehorned into a production that calls for him to wear a tuxedo and walk into a room full of aristocrats speaking in Mid-Atlantic accents, it makes for one of the funniest scenes I’ve seen in recent memory (watching the baby-faced buckaroo do his involuntary cowboy strut in a tuxedo nearly killed me). The comedy’s all in the details, like how the stuffy production is under the hilariously named “Laurence Laurentz Presents” banner. Hobie isn’t a mere caricature, though; later on, he plays a key role in the film’s plot that shows us that he’s a true hero (which explains why he’s so awkward on a proper movie set; he’s too genuine to fake anything).

The dilemma at the center of the story that keeps the movie from being a randomly arranged series of unrelated scenes involves the kidnapping of Baird Whitlock by a stable of scorned communist screenwriters. As Mannix tries his best to handle the situation, he’s bombarded by a litany of on-set issues: Johansson’s starlet is looking to avoid a pregnancy scandal; the great Laurence Laurentz (Ralph Fiennes) refuses to tolerate Hobie’s atrocious line-reading skills. On top of that, he’s stalked by the film’s resident Hedda Hopper-esque columnists, persistent twin sisters played by a fantastic Tilda Swinton.

Mannix’s plate-spinning is involving enough, but I couldn’t help but yearn for more time with the rest of the cast. Johansson, Swinton and Tatum are super entertaining and part of me thinks it would have been nice to make Hail, Caesar a true ensemble piece, downsizing Mannix’s screen time a bit to give the others more room to do their thing. The Coens seem to be having a lot of fun stepping into the shoes of filmmakers from classical Hollywood and drinking in its grandiosity all while skewering the absurdity and silliness of its inherent artifice. They’ve become such assured storytellers and filmmakers that, even when they take it easy, we’re on the edge of our seats, grinning from ear to ear.

FoxSearchlight has shared a video of Wes Anderson and other cast members of The Grand Budapest Hotel discussing the singular inspirations Anderson culled from when forming his latest film. Nominated for 9 Academy Awards, Anderson discusses especially being inspired by Ernst Lubitsch’s (Shop Around the Corner) hilarious, fast-talking, European comedies.

While The Grand Budapest Hotel’s nominations fall mainly within technical categories along with prestigious Best Picture and Best Director nominations, his cast is strangely not nominated for their work. The way they discuss Anderson throughout the video proves however that as wonderful as the performances of the cast are, their inspired and exceptional leader really is the force behind this fantastic film.

We’ve been hearing a lot about 2014 as a blah year for movies, a notion seemingly supported by a lack of gut-wrenching and heartrending heavy hitters like last year’s 12 Years a Slave, Dallas Buyers Club, and Gravity. And the performances from those films were just so much more obviously weighty, it wasn’t hard to pick out the ones that gripped us, because, well, they gripped us pretty hard.

But that’s why this year has been so wonderful. Instead of somber dramas, some of 2014’s best films have been comedic (Birdman), scary (The Babadook), and filled with unlikeable characters (Whiplash, Nightcrawler). And this is where the fun of nuancing and parsing out the best performances of this year begins. Because this year we felt different emotions than we did last year, but oh boy did we feel them, and that has all to do with some seriously good acting.

Our list of 2014’s best performances considers all actors as equals regardless of lead or supporting role and with no division of male or female actors. Listed in no particular order is our list of the performances Way Too Indie staff found most compelling this year.

Way Too Indie’s 15 Best Performances of 2014

Dan Stevens – The Guest

The role Stevens plays in Adam Wingard’s The Guest is much more difficult than is usually required for this type of flashy genre film. In the film, “David” must appeal to every character he is trying to dupe in different ways. When he springs himself on the family of a fallen comrade, he has to be a sensitive young man to Laura, an ultra cool badass to Luke, a beer-drinking everyman with Spencer and a hunky protector to Anna. He also, though, has to be all of that (and more) to the viewer, even when we know something is up. The characters in the film may take a while to figure him out (indeed, some of them too late), the nature of this genre throwback sets up the viewer from the start to know “David” isn’t who he says he is, though we may not know the extent of his capabilities. The Guest is one of the funnest movie-going experiences of the year because we love seeing “David” fit all of these roles. We revel in his lie, cheering him on as he beats up high school kids and somehow survives an intense shootout with special forces. But we also genuinely like him. Deep down, he tricks us, too. [Aaron]

Eddie Redmayne – The Theory of Everything

Regardless of your stance on James Marsh’s Stephen Hawking biopic The Theory of Everything, one thing almost everyone can agree on is Eddie Redmayne’s outstanding performance. The film begins during the early stages of Stephen’s declining physical abilities, the occasional coffee spilling and pen fumbling are chalked up to general clumsiness. While this foreshadows the tragedy ahead, it more importantly allows viewers to witness the famous physicist before the disease takes away his ability to walk and communicate. What’s impressive to watch is the transformation into this physically demanding role, which required limiting all of his body movements while still containing his charming personality. The fundamental testament to Redmayne’s work occurs near the end when he emerges from his wheelchair in a dream sequence. It’s a stunning moment, watching him actually walk and then be subsequently reminded that Redmayne is indeed acting, which speaks volumes to his extraordinary performance. He’s sure to gather notice during this award season. [Dustin]

Essie Davis – The Babadook

There’s a level of fatigue only parents know; it comes with raising a child and it is calculated using the denominators 24, 7, and 365. Still, most parents wouldn’t trade it for all the Sandman’s sand. There are a few who might, though, if given the chance, and one of those parents can be found in Jennifer Kent’s The Babadook. Her name is Amelia, and how Essie Davis gasps life into this desperate single mother is staggering. Long before Mr. Babadook wreaks the havoc that spirals Amelia into near-madness, her son Samuel brings a little terror of his own. He is six years’ worth of boundless energy with a volume that Spinal Tap would envy, all complicated by an obsession with a monster that doesn’t (yet) exist. This first half of the film is where Davis mesmerizes. She’s not just the tired single mom with the full-time job and the hyper kid. She’s that woman, plus the one whose husband was killed while taking her to give birth to Samuel six years prior. This background introduces resentment into a mother/child relationship that shouldn’t have such a thing. Davis keeps that resentment one slivery layer below the surface, which puts normal parental fatigue deep in her rearview mirror and has her speeding down the road of emotional exhaustion. With every tired sigh a defeated cry for mercy and with every momentary slouch a little less resistance against the weight of regret, Davis portrays defeated like no one before her. And then the Babadook shows up. [Michael]

J.K. Simmons – Whiplash

Irredeemable. That’s Terence Fletcher in a nutshell. He’s the meanest, nastiest, most abusive jazz instructor on earth in Damien Chazelle’s Whiplash, and he will never, ever apologize for calling his students “limp-dick fucks” or giving them valuable performance tips like, “That’s not your boyfriend’s dick; don’t come too early.” Playing Fletcher is the incomparable J.K. Simmons, who’s an absolute force of nature in the drummer drama, the veins on his bald head pulsing as he berates his poor students, muscles bulging under his tight black shirt. He calls them faggots, too. Again, no apologies.

What Simmons brings to the role that lesser actors wouldn’t is utter remorselessness: this is who Fletcher is, and you either take it up the ass or he’ll kick you the fuck out. That’s the deal. He’ll make you tremble and weep because he’s not human; he’s evil incarnate, and he doesn’t care about redemption or the happiness of himself or others. He exists for a single purpose, letting nothing stand in his way, least of all sympathy or morality. It’s an unflattering role, and Simmons embraces it without ego. No one could have done better. [Bernard]

Jake Gyllenhaal – Nightcrawler

It’s not entirely surprising that Nightcrawler received comparisons to Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver. Despite the differences between those two movies, the hard to resist likability of both films’ psychotic leads makes it hard to root against them completely even as they commit their most vile acts. What makes Gyllenhaal’s Lou Bloom even more frightening than De Niro’s Travis Bickle is Bloom’s ability to exist within the system. He embodies many of the characteristics of a model employee in a modern, competitive, capitalist climate. His ghostly pale complexion serves to accentuate the dark shadows created on Bloom’s emaciated face (Gyllenhaal lost 20 pounds to help give Bloom that hollowed-out appearance) and make his presence even more unsettling. As Bloom, Gyllenhaal exploits people’s ugliest indulgences to get ahead in the world of freelance crime journalism and is rewarded for his lack of empathy, particularly in people’s darkest moments. The actor brings Bloom to life through an unhinged, masterful performance. Delivering lines of dialog with an unnaturally chipper tone, Gyllenhaal gives Bloom the social acumen of an alien that’s slipped on human clothing. The actor has never been better and the character is hauntingly familiar. [Zachary]

Marion Cotillard – Two Days, One Night

As Sandra, the worker desperately fighting for her job over the course of one weekend, Marion Cotillard pulls off her best performance to date. After taking time off work due to severe depression, Sandra finds out her bosses have given her the boot through a borderline sadistic method: by letting her coworkers vote on either letting Sandra keep her job or receiving their yearly bonus. After convincing her superiors to hold a re-vote after the weekend, Sandra visits each one of her 16 coworkers to ask them to give up their bonus in order to save her job. Cotillard, whose face could act as the definition of sympathy, fully embodies Sandra, and her raw emotions put the viewer right with her when she goes from hopelessly despondent to joyously optimistic. As clichéd as it sounds, Cotillard simply is Sandra. Sometimes it’s hard to watch an A-list star on-screen and separate the performance from the celebrity; that’s never the case with Cotillard, who does it with so much ease it’s no wonder why she’s considered one of the greatest actors working today. [C.J.]

Michael Keaton – Birdman

Acting within the constraints of Birdman’s captivating long-takes would be a challenge for any actor, but as Riggan Thomson, Michael Keaton bears the brunt of the film’s heavy lifting. Without the benefits of traditional film editing pulling together the best parts from several takes, Birdman’s stars are required to be at their best for the duration of every long-take scene they’re in. This is doubly true of Keaton as the film’s lead, guiding the audience and the camera through claustrophobic Broadway backstage hallways during quick-tongued Sorkin-esque walk-and-talks. Riggan teeters on the brink of sanity, and in Keaton’s embodiment of the character you can almost see the threads coming loose. When the tone abruptly shifts, Keaton demonstrates an enviable flexibility as an actor, turning a belly laugh into an unexpectedly poignant confession within only a few lines. As the character facing a series of obstacles that threaten to prematurely end his self-mounted comeback before it can begin, Keaton clutches to whatever empathetic strings are left for Riggan, while also allowing the character to slip further away from lucidity. His performance is simultaneously among the funniest and most heartfelt of 2014. [Zachary]

Patricia Arquette – Boyhood

While Ellar Coltrane grows up in front of our eyes as Mason, the boy in Richard Linklater’s everyday-epic Boyhood, sitting on the periphery throughout the coming of age journey is Patricia Arquette, as the boy’s mom. Mason’s moral makeup is shaped as he watches his single mom face stiff adversity (“a parade of drunken assholes” he once calls it), endure and adapt. We always see her from a distance, the same distance most boys keep from their mom.

She’s his anchor, but what’s special about the character is that she isn’t anchored to the ground herself; she’s on her own life journey, parallel to young Mason’s, and grows as much as he does. Over the colossal 12-year production, Arquette managed to form the most beautiful character arc in the film. Her performance is so rounded, so natural, so cogent, that at times Boyhood feels more like a home movie than a marketable Oscar contender. [Bernard]

Reese Witherspoon – Wild

We all have that friend, the one we watch go through life making incomprehensible decisions and reaping the obvious and inevitable consequences. In Wild, Reese Witherspoon is that friend, walking us through the steps that led to one woman’s particularly devastating life choices. And walking the literal steps that lead to her redemption. Witherspoon evokes our compassion, compelling us not to leave this woman for dead, to sleep in the bed she’s made. Perhaps it is how well Witherspoon helps us identify with Cheryl in the little things: her simple humanity in wrestling with her monster of a hiking bag, the fear in her eyes running into mostly men alone on the trail, her rage-filled meltdown when she loses a boot in the opening scene. All of our interactions with Witherspoon throughout the film are intimate and raw; showing us the heart of Cheryl open and vulnerable. Even her thoughts and muttered curses echo what ours might. Despite the depths that her darkness had reached, Witherspoon has us cheering for her to climb out. Her achievement in this is quite incredible: showing us the humanity in the hopeless. [Scarlet]

Rosamund Pike – Gone Girl

Rosamund Pike’s maliciously delicious turn as Amy Dunne in David Fincher’s Gone Girl stands at the very top of the breakthrough 2014 performance pile for me, precisely because it comes from an actor who’s been around for years. Though making a noticeable presence in every role, Pike has always been in the background. For what feels like her entire career, she’s been playing second fiddle to the likes of Pierce Brosnan (Die Another Day), Tom Cruise (Jack Reacher), Keira Knightley (Pride and Prejudice) and Edgar Wright’s Cornetto boys (The World’s End). But all of those roles were worth their trials and errors because they led her to Amy, the part of a lifetime and one that will assuredly change Pike’s career (she’s looking pretty locked for a deserved Oscar nomination at this point). Amy Dunne is the kind of character that takes the fiddle and in an act of magic, snaps it in half and turns it into a saxophone with enough gusto to lead an entire orchestra. Thanks to the story’s structure, Amy is a bundle of multiple personalities (the charmed girlfriend, the doting daughter, the victim, the victor, the bitch, the cool girl, the wife from a modern nightmare), which Pike unpacks like a pro. “There is before Fincher, and after Fincher,” Pike has said on the Gone Girl campaign trail, so it’s pretty clear where the inspiration comes from, but the talent is hers and hers alone. She captures every complex facet of this satirized monster with such precision, charm, and presence; it’s impossible to root against her even when recoiling from her actions and certain personality traits. She’s a revelation, and here’s hoping strong female roles are written with her in mind from now on. [Nik]

Scarlett Johansson – Under the Skin

Johansson has already had a slew of breakout performances that have put her in the current acting elite (Vicky Christina Barcelona, Her, etc.) but none have been as commanding as her nameless character in Under the Skin. She dons a more-than-passable British accent and often dons no clothing. She has to be realistically enticing without overplaying sexuality. The film is borderline incomprehensible, but it doesn’t matter with the strong force at its center. And the more that has been revealed about the film’s strange production, the more interesting and incredible her performance seems. Many of her nameless invader’s conversations and confrontations happen with non-actors who don’t know they are being filmed. Improvisation is a difficult skill for any actor, but usually improvisation in film is done in a fairly controlled setting – everyone knows their general part and are working together to get the heart of the scene right. Here, though, the environment is unpredictable and Johansson proves she’s always ready for what may come. Not to mention pulling off being one of the world’s most recognizable movie stars slipping about incognito. [Aaron]

Stacy Martin – Nymphomaniac

There are a lot of stars that adorn the sensual confines of Lars Von Trier’s newest controversial film, Nymphomaniac. Charlotte Gainsbourg, Stellan Skarsgard, Christen Slater, Shia LaBeouf, Uma Thurman and Willem Dafoe are just some of the names that headline. But surprisingly none of them take the spotlight (Thurman comes close) away from film debutant Stacy Martin who makes a big statement as an actress with her role here. It’s been years since we’ve seen a début from a young actress like the one that’s on display here (at the moment, I can’t recall one). Martin is fearless as she portrays a teenage version of Joe (Gainsbourg) who goes from one sexual escapade to another. Von Trier puts her in all sorts of scenes that require contrasting emotional levels. Sometimes she needs to be vulnerable. Sometimes weak, other times powerful. Sometimes even shameless. Sometimes she needs to be more than one at once and never does she shy away. The role would be demanding enough in the hands of any filmmaker but the fact that it’s helmed by Von Trier (who is known for being tough on his leading ladies) only amplifies how impressive her performance is. Mark my words, Martin is going to be a star. [Blake]

Steve Carell – Foxcatcher

When Steve Carell first appears in Bennet Miller’s Foxcatcher, his based-in reality character, John du Pont, invites Channing Tatum’s Mark Schultz into an extravagant trophy room to talk about the business proposal he has. And at first its hard to focus much on what he says because his nose and teeth are so obviously not Carell’s. And then it becomes clear nothing of what we see on that screen is Carell. His slow manner of speech and the strange way he looks down his nose at people and sometimes doesn’t bother to look at them at all. The way he speaks with a pompous pretense, always trying to throw in some tidbit or fact of little circumstance in a weak attempt to prove his superiority. His stiffness, both arrogant and insecure simultaneously. And under it all a boiling tension, an internal battle of psychosis. Carell gives us this in every single scene he’s in. As the spoiled and unloved heir to a massive fortune, his misguided attempts to build love out of the sportsman around him are more than pathetic, they are disturbing. Carell provides layers upon layers to what could easily have been a simple story of mental breakdown and murder. It’s the sort of performance that stays in your head and demands you go home and watch a few episodes of The Office to calm down. [Ananda]

Tilda Swinton – Snowpiercer

To quote Amy Schumer at this year’s Gotham Awards: “Tilda. Fucking. Swinton.” It’s been an amazing year for the Scottish actress, who played three truly memorable roles. It’s just as easy to talk about her amazing turns in Only Lovers Left Alive and The Grand Budapest Hotel, but for us it’s her role as Minister Mason in Snowpiercer that left the biggest impression. Originally written for a man, Swinton came on board and turned the character from a sinister, mild-mannered character to a garish, over the top figure. The absurdity of her character, from the giant glasses to the fake teeth and Yorkshire accent, also gives the film’s gritty first act a bit of levity, while hinting at the bizarre, distorted moments to come as the characters make their way to the front of the train. This is why Tilda Swinton is one of the best; it’s a showy, distinctive role, but it singlehandedly supports and elevates the film to an even better place. [C.J.]

Timothy Spall – Mr. Turner

Mike Leigh has always been something of an ‘actor’s ’ director, often giving his leads opportunities to improvise and find their characters, and in Mr. Turner this approach has been rewarded by a superb performance by Timothy Spall. There are few actors who can inhabit a role quite like Timothy Spall. Spall channels the vivid life of Turner’s paintings into the character, injecting Turner with boundless energy, enthusiasm and a lust for life. Yet Spall also delicately reveals Turner’s flaws; his stubbornness, his lack of empathy for his estranged family and, as he reaches the end of his life, his frustration at his own fragility. What is particularly impressive about Spall’s performance is the sheer array of emotions he conveys non-verbally throughout the film, often saying a thousand words with a simple grunt. Despite being surrounded by a talented cast Spall outshines them all and bears the weight of the film on his shoulders. It is a role that has already earned him the Best Actor award at the Cannes Film Festival and there is a strong chance that he could be in the running for Best Actor at next year’s Oscars. [Eddy]

We Can’t Help But Mention:

We could never include everyone we’d like, but some honorable mentions include: Uma Thurman (Nymphomaniac), John Lithgow (Love is Strange), Jonathan Pryce (Listen Up Philip), Rene Russo (Nightcrawler), David Oyelowo (Selma), Sheila Vand (A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night), Julianne Moore (Still Alice), Jessica Chastain (Miss Julie), Laura Dern (Wild), the cast of Winter Sleep, the cast of We Are The Best!, the cast of Leviathan, cast of Fury, cast of Interstellar, and Agata Kulesza and Agata Trzebuchowska of Ida.

Universal Studios announced that the next Coen Brothers project, Hail, Caesar! has been slotted for February 5, 2016, according the EW.

The film looks to be a return to pure comedy for the Coens, their first since 2009’s A Serious Man, and stars George Clooney as a Hollywood fixer in the 1950s. The overall cast is very strong, including Scarlett Johansson, Ralph Fiennes, Tilda Swinton, Josh Brolin, Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill.

On first thought, the February date is a bit surprising and disappointing, considering the month is typically reserved for films that studios decide to dump while people are still focused on the upcoming Oscars. Also considering the film was initially thought to be released in 2015, this may be a bit of a bad sign. However, since the Coen Brothers are behind the project I wouldn’t be too concerned yet.

It’s hard to watch Snowpiercer without thinking about the last several months of controversy surrounding it. The film, an international production by Korean director Bong Joon-Ho (Memories of Murder, The Host, Mother), had its distribution rights bought up by Harvey Weinstein for the US. The trouble started when it was revealed that Weinstein, feeling the film wouldn’t be understood by midwestern audiences, wanted to cut at least 20 minutes from Bong’s preferred cut. After months of small updates on the matter, an agreement was finally made. Weinstein would release the final cut of Snowpiercer without any alterations, but it would be a limited release instead of a wide one.

The story behind Snowpiercer‘s release, despite having a happy ending, unfortunately changed the way people approach the film. After months of battles over editing, viewers will quietly debate over whether or not Weinstein’s suggestions weren’t exactly so out of line. It’s a shame because, tossing all surrounding controversy aside, Snowpiercer is quite entertaining. It’s a blockbuster in a single location, with enough quirks and artistry to remind audiences how a film like this could only be made outside of the Hollywood studio system. It’s a flawed and sometimes messy film from time to time, but in a manner that’s more risky and exciting instead of frustrating and incompetent.

In the near future, a chemical intended to lower the world’s temperatures ends up working so well that it brings about a new ice age. It’s impossible to live outside, and the small number of remaining survivors live on the titular train. The Snowpiercer travels around the world endlessly, and a highly enforced class system is in place on the train to maintain order. The story starts in 2031, 17 years after the train began running, in the tail section. The tail is reserved for the lower class citizens, with its inhabitants living in squalor with nothing to eat but gelatinous protein bars. Curtis (Chris Evans) and Edgar (Jamie Bell) are in the process of leading a revolt against the oppressive forces from the front of the train, which we only get brief glimpses of from the bizarre characters that visit the back of the train from time to time (this includes a brilliant Tilda Swinton in a performance that single-handedly elevates the entire film).

Curtis and his cohorts (including Octavia Spencer, John Hurt and Bong Joon-Ho regular Song Kang-Ho) successfully overpower security forces in the tail section, thus beginning their journey to confront Wilford, the mysterious engineer making sure the train operates smoothly. Bong, who’s known for his masterful ability to throw abrupt tonal shifts into his work without losing audiences, thrives in his film’s setting. Each train car acts as its own little universe, giving Bong an excuse to change the film’s dynamic while expanding its scale. A huge action sequence can be followed with a bizarre, expository visit to the train’s school, followed by a tense fight scene with almost no dialogue. These sequences, which also show off the incredible set design, are handled with aplomb, and make sure that Snowpiercer never spares a stale moment.

Snowpiercer isn’t without its flaws though. The script, adapted from a French graphic novel by Bong and Kelly Masterson, isn’t exactly subtle with some of its ideas (Early on Curtis says “I’m not a leader”, a line that stamps LEADER in big letters on his forehead), and some elements are introduced for no apparent reason (one character’s clairvoyant abilities is ignored almost immediately after it’s introduced). Still, Bong’s political commentary on the need for oppression to survive is far more interesting of a topic for this kind of film, and the way he expands his film’s scope toward the end is quite entertaining. Snowpiercer may not be the masterpiece that people were hoping for, but that shouldn’t take away from the fact that it’s a hell of a fun ride.

Snowpiercer trailer

The 20th Los Angeles Film Festival has begun! Despite its location in the heart of the film industry in downtown Los Angeles, and the now 20 years it has under its belt, the LA Film Fest hasn’t yet joined the ranks of Sundance, Cannes, and Toronto. But this year’s offerings prove the LA Film Festival can hold it’s own with 35 premieres, 23 of those World Premieres. Put on by Film Independent, who also stage the annual Independent Spirit Awards, the film festival has a distinct indie feel, and first time and emerging artists are given deserved exposure. The festival kicked off with the North American premiere of Joon-Ho Bong’s dystopian flick, Snowpiercer. Despite its rocky entry and noted squabbles over editing for the North American release, the film is here and it’s magnificent.

Set in 2031, the future of the world is cold and bleak. Literally. The world has been frozen over when an attempt to counter global warming backfired and the world is now a snow-covered tundra. The last few survivors live aboard the Snow Piercer, a train that travels along a worldwide track at breakneck speeds powered by a perpetual-motion engine. Over the past 17 years that the train has traveled on its endless loop, a class system has emerged. Those up front near the engine live in luxury, those at the tail live in destitution. Led by elderly Gilliam (John Hurt), a revolution begins to form and at its forefront is Curtis (Chris Evans playing a decidedly darker hero than the recent Captain America), along with his doting friend Edgar (Jamie Bell). They’ve been receiving messages from someone at the front, encouraging their revolution. After several of their children are taken and yet another innocent man is punished, they decide the time has come to fight back. Their first mission: rescuing an ex-security man from the jail section, Namgoong Minsu (Kang-ho Song), who can open the gates as they make their way to the front of the train.

The film pays sincere homage to its comic roots. Based on the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige by Jacques Lob, many of the film’s sequences play out in well formed sequences that could easily have been taken directly from frames on the novel’s pages. The exaggerated characters feel the most cartoonish at times, but always to excellent effect, the standout character easily being Tilda Swinton’s Minister Mason, a first class train citizen in charge of representing the almighty Wilford, he who built the train and runs its engine. Mason, with her large lipstick stained teeth, school-girl bob, and her stylized Yorkshire accent is excellent material for Swinton’s skills.

The film is well paced, fleshing out its characters as they level-up to each new section of the train. And the train! An ingenius setting for a revolution, each section narrow and yet wholly original in its purpose. Food manufacturing. Water source. Sushi bar. Sauna. School room. Night club. Each of them bringing some new insight into the train’s hierarchy, and each building to what awaits beyond the final gate: the engine room. Art Director Stefan Kovacik continually impresses with each subsequent scene.

The end threatens to weigh the film down. While Chris Evans easily impresses wielding an axe, shooting a gun, and looks damn good with bruises and blood covering him for most of the film, his wide-eyed wonder during the film’s complicated ending is entirely out of character for the action-oriented Curtis. The final 20 minutes are easily where the Weinsteins could have insisted on some editing and the film would have been all the better for it. But as drawn out and self aware as it is, each revelatory moment in the ending adds to the epic feel of the film and Ed Harris’s portrayal of the enigmatic Wilford, while somewhat expected, is still worth the film’s build.

By far the best sci-fi film I’ve seen yet this year, and proof that international films make for more interesting dynamics, Snowpiercer is easily the original action film a summer full of big budget explosions needs.

After a lengthy battle with film distributor Harvey Weinstein, director Bong Joon-Ho’s Snowpiercer‘s not only has an upcoming June 27th release date, but a new red-band trailer to show off its particular brand of craziness. This cut of the film nearly never saw the light of day as after Weinstein’s purchase of the movie in 2012, he and the filmmaker (whose previous efforts include Mother and The Host) began a dispute over the final cut of the movie that was ultimately resolved by Weinstein downgrading the release from a wide one, to a more limited rollout.

In Snowpiercer, an ice-age has forced all of humanity indoors, on a globe-spanning train that contains within it classrooms, armies, and classism. A man of the people, Chris Evans (Captain America), stars as the leader of a revolt on a train in what promises to be a uniquely claustrophobic and bloody Asian-import.

Snowpiercer Red-Band Trailer

Wes Anderson’s highest-grossing film to date, The Grand Budapest Hotel, has been officially announced for a Blu-ray & DVD street date of June 17th. The film not only pleased moviegoers, but critics were also enamored with Anderson’s film ever since its premiere in Berlin. And rightfully so. The Grand Budapest Hotel dazzles with plenty of Anderson’s usual visual flair, but the film doesn’t compromise substance for style. As always, each character has their own quirky personality and the cast is full of Anderson regulars including; Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, Tilda Swinton, Jude Law, Owen Wilson, and Adrien Brody.

The Grand Budapest Hotel releases on Blu-ray and DVD on June 17th

The Grand Budapest Hotel Special Features

• Bill Murray Tours The Town
• Kunstmuseum Zubrowka Lecture
• The Society of the Crossed Keys
• The Making of the Grand Budapest Hotel
• Mendl’s Secret Recipe
• Promotional Featurettes – “Cast” and “Wes Anderson”
• Stills Gallery
• Theatrical Trailer

The Grand Budapest Hotel Blu-ray + Digital HD

• Street Date: June 17, 2014
• Screen Format: 1.85:1
• Subtitles: English/French/Spanish
• U.S. Rating: R
• Total Run Time: 100 minutes

Trailer

The Grand Budapest Hotel Blu-ray cover

You couldn’t ask for two actors better suited to play a couple of sharp-featured, hipster vampire lovers than Tilda Swinton and Tom Hiddleston, two actors who’ve hit the absolute peak of coolness at this point in their respective careers. And who better to direct them than Jim Jarmusch, the indie godfather who always seems to be ahead of the curve stylistically, speeding down the roadway we call cinema in his own lane? Sadly, Jarmusch falls behind the curve in Only Lovers Left Alive, a tiresome love story that’s too fascinated with cleverly subverting (it thinks) vampire lore to say anything truly interesting. Is Jarmusch’s exercise in aimless chatting a unique take on bloodsucker cinema? Yes. But he so aggressively concerns himself with subverting the myth that film becomes burdened by it.

Hiddleston plays Adam, an underground indie musician who lives in the forgotten American wasteland of Detroit, swimming in vinyl records, antiquated electronics, and vintage guitars dropped off at his grungy house by his innocent “zombie” (human) stoner buddy named Ian (a perfectly casted Anton Yelchin). His lover of centuries, Eve (Swinton), lives in Tangier, stuffing her nose in piles of dusty old books in every language and meeting with her old friend Marlowe (John Hurt) at a late-night cafe. (Yes, you can actually see hipster-stench wafting off of the screen.) Marlowe is irritated that he never got credit for writing Shakespeare’s plays, one of many obnoxiously presented wink-wink jokes about immortality aimed at fans of vampire fiction who have probably heard this stuff a million times.

Eve flies to Detroit to reunite with her precious Adam, and a steamy reunion it is–their passion for each other hasn’t dwindled a bit over the hundreds of years they’ve been canoodling all over the world. Hiddleston and Swinton sizzle, and their fiery scenes in close proximity are the film’s most engaging. The film slyly suggests that the world’s greatest artists were all members of a sort of vampire aristocracy, with Adam’s wall adorned with a gallery of portraits of supposed vamps (Buster Keaton, Joe Strummer, Mark Twain, Claire Denis, and others). Jack White even gets a shout out, as Adam and Eve drive by his childhood home on a nighttime drive through the city. The marriage of vampire lore with artistic icons is unique and intriguing at first, but it’s prodded and poked to death by incessant referencing.

It seems as if Jarmusch thought long and hard about how to represent vampire life in ways never seen before. He finds new angles. Adam and Eve get their blood in purified packets from doctors (the great Jeffrey Wright) and friends–human blood is so packed with impurities these days that sucking straight from the throat is a health risk. Their taste in the arts is so hyper-sophisticated because they’ve soaked up several lifetimes worth of music, books, and stage performance. Makes sense. Eve makes tasty Type-O blood popsicles, a culinary invention that seems pulled from the vampire section of Pinterest. These plays on the genre are clever, but add very, very little to the story at hand. Light chuckles at best.

But there isn’t much story to sink your teeth into, anyway. That’s not what Jarmusch is aiming for; leave that stuff to Stephanie Meyer. He’s defining the attitude of a culturally refined, endangered generation so repulsed by the vapid state of young people that they’re driven to the brink of suicide. (Adam has the eager Ian fetch him a wooden bullet, which he intends to off himself with. That is, until Eve shows up to perk him up and rekindle his will.) The film is perhaps more interesting as a piece hipster fiction, using vampirism as a metaphor to explain their endless love for old, tattered things.

As a hangout movie, Only Lovers is sometimes great, with Hiddleston and Swinton’s seductive repartee slipping off their tongues like melted butter. But again, vamp references distract and derail scenes often. The production design by Marco Bittner Rosner is luscious and brilliantly captured by Jarmusch (he’s a master at that). There are loads of edgy, stylish images throughout the film, like the opening shot of a starry night sky spinning and spinning until it takes the shape of a spinning vinyl record in Adam’s abode. Only Lovers Left Alive is one of Jarmusch’s most alluring films stylistically, but the self-conscious, often silly script makes it hard to fully indulge in its sensual wonders.

Only Lovers Left Alive trailer

Partway through The Grand Budapest Hotel, there’s an argument between Dmitri (Adrien Brody, looking brilliantly evil) and his deceased mother’s lawyer (Jeff Goldblum). The lawyer refuses to hand the dead woman’s fortune over to her son as the details of her murder haven’t been cleared up. Dmitri angrily leaves, and his henchman (Willem Dafoe) casually tosses the lawyer’s cat out of a window on his way out. It’s a cruel act, and a funny visual gag, until the lawyer peers out his window and the camera cuts to his cat’s splattered body below.

Writer/director Wes Anderson uses these shock moments of sudden violence more than once throughout the film. The dead woman (Tilda Swinton, unrecognizable with pounds of old age makeup) is Madame D., an old rich countess who frequented the titular hotel. Located in the mountains of the Republic of Zubrowka, a made up European nation, the hotel is a gorgeous and highly popular establishment. Gustave H. (Ralph Fiennes) is the hotel’s concierge, a charming man who was also taking Madame D. to bed during her visits (one of Gustave’s many duties as concierge included sexually satisfying the rich old ladies who visited). When it’s revealed that she put Gustave in her will as the recipient of a priceless painting, Madame D.’s family frames him for her murder.

Gustave receives help from Zero Moustafa (Tony Revolori), a young lobby boy that Gustave has taken a shine to. The story, taking place in 1932 during some unnamed war ravaging the country, is narrated to us by an older Moustafa (F. Murray Abraham) in the 1960s. He’s telling his tale to a young author (Jude Law) over dinner at the hotel, now well past its glory days. Law narrates the 1960s segments, which are actually from a novel being read to viewers in the 1980s by (presumably) a now much-older author (Tom Wilkinson). The nesting-doll structure may seem frivolous, but Wes Anderson’s films thrive on frivolity.

The multi-layered narrative also establishes Anderson’s attempts to comment on memory and nostalgia. Moustafa’s story in the 1930s, shot gorgeously in 1.33:1, is stylistically Anderson’s best work to date. The set design, meticulous framing, whip pans, quick zooms, and use of animation and miniatures, among Anderson’s other visual trademarks, operate at a level that more than matches his story’s large scale. Anderson and cinematographer Robert D. Yeoman are clearly having a field day, and it shows. The charming style also shows Moustafa’s nostalgia for this period of his life, as if these “good ol’ days” represent something that’s never to return.

Anderson is aware of how dangerous this way of looking at the past with rose-coloured glasses is, which is why he throws in scenes like the one with Goldblum’s cat. He is purposely breaking the spell his film casts, reminding viewers that the time period was still a tumultuous one. The hotel is not so much a shining example of long-lost civility and politeness as it is an escape from the harsh realities of wartime and poverty. These two worlds of fantasy and reality eventually come together, but through Anderson’s lens the stylistic flourishes still remain. The final scene of the ‘30s timeline, also the bleakest part of Moustafa’s story, switches to black and white, showing how Anderson still finds a way to fill his heavier moments with aesthetic quirks.

While Anderson’s toying with memory and nostalgia is interesting, it fails to make any impact to the film overall. The handling of violence makes for an awkward juxtaposition, one that’s more admirable in its intent than execution (I never thought I’d say this, but Anderson should take some tips from Quentin Tarantino in this area). The war going on in the film’s background is wiped of any details, save for some vague allusions to the SS. The obscuring of these elements only muddy the water, and the dense plotting of Anderson’s screenplay make his thematic points get swallowed up by the film’s aesthetics.

Not that the aesthetics are a bad thing; The Grand Budapest Hotel is still a treat to watch. Fiennes is perfect as Gustave, and Anderson’s script is filled with plenty of hilarious moments. The massive ensemble, where seemingly every role is filled with a well-known actor (supporting cast includes Edward Norton, Harvey Keitel, Saorise Ronan, Jason Schwartzman and Owen Wilson just to name a few), work together perfectly. While The Grand Budapest Hotel works well, it only does up to a certain point. What the film amounts to is nothing more than a well-done and admirable piece of fluff.

The Grand Budapest Hotel trailer

Wes Anderson, known for his distinctive visual and narrative style in such films as Moonrise Kingdom, Fantastic Mr Fox and The Darjeeling Limited, will be releasing his latest quirky comedy The Grand Budapest Hotel.

The adventures of an infamous concierge at a well known and well frequented hotel between the world wars and Zero Moustafa, who becomes his confidant and trusted friend are detailed with this all star cast. Anderson loves to work with familiar faces and The Grand Budapest Hotel is no exception; Jude Law, Bill Murray, Tilda Swinton, Willem Dafoe, Owen Wilson, and Adrien Brody are all listed as cast members. The film looks to be quite the dramatic comedy with the charm and flare we know Wes Anderson films to behold.

The Grand Budapest Hotel trailer

Going back to TIFF my day was filled with catching up yet again. While everyone was abuzz for Gravity (review coming soon!) and The Double, I was out viewing some leftovers from Cannes earlier this year yet again.

Only Lovers Left Alive

I have to respectfully disagree with my great overlord and editor Dustin on some of his Cannes reviews. Earlier this year, he caught Only Lovers Left Alive and disliked it. While it’s easy to understand why Only Lovers isn’t beloved (it is Jarmusch after all), I was in love with what he was doing here for the most part. Vampires Adam and Eve (Tom Hiddleston and Tilda Swinton) have been together for centuries, but are currently on opposite sides of the world. Adam, a former rockstar, mopes around in his dilapidated Detroit mansion hiding from the public, and Eve spends her time in Tangier with Christopher Marlowe (John Hurt, and yes he is playing that Christopher Marlowe).

Adam’s disdain of humans, or “zombies” as he calls them, begins driving him to the point of suicide, which makes Eve travel by night to meet up with him again. The first hour focuses almost entirely on Adam and Eve lounging around as they listen to old music and discuss the brilliant artists throughout their lives. Jarmusch’s portrayal of immortality as one obsessed with nostalgia and consuming art feels realistic, and I couldn’t help but live vicariously through Adam and Eve. With time removed as a factor in people’s lives, who wouldn’t spend all of their nights absorbing as much as they can about different cultures? Watching Jarmusch, Swinton and Hiddleston go around geeking out over so many things, from antique instruments to awesome soul singles, is a joy to watch.

It’s also nice to see that, after the sombre but gorgeous The Limits of Control, Jarmusch is more playful again. Swinton and Hiddleston deadpan plenty of killer lines, and the addition of Mia Wasikowska as Eve’s problematic sister Ava brings a lot of laughs. The final part of the film, which shifts the narrative back to Tangier, doesn’t work entirely since it puts too much weight on a film that works because of its flighty nature. It’s only a small issue in a truly enjoyable film, and one of Jarmusch’s most entertaining in a while. I recommend sitting back, letting the amazing soundtrack work its magic and wonder about how great it could be to live like the two main characters.

RATING: 7.8

Like Father Like Son

Next up is yet another big disagreement between Dustin and myself. Steven Spielberg and the Cannes jury gave Like Father, Like Son the Jury Prize this year, and despite the endless raves for it (including one from our own site) I personally did not care for it.

Ryota (Fukuyama Masaharu) is a rich architect who, as the saying goes, seemingly has it all. He has a supportive wife, Midori (Ono Machiko), and they have a 6 year old son named Keita. Ryota is hard-working and strict on Keita, who is struggling to get admitted into a prestigious primary school. Everything changes when they get a phone call from the hospital telling them something terrible; their son was switched with another couple’s baby. The DNA tests confirm the mistake, throwing Ryota and Midori into a major crisis. Do they keep Keita, raising him as they already have been for the past 6 years, or switch him with their real son?

Conceptually it’s a fascinating and tough moral debate on nature versus nurture, but Kore-Eda doesn’t explore this issue much. It’s very obvious from the beginning that he sides with love over blood, and for the next 2 hours he simply hammers this point home repeatedly. Some interesting dynamics are introduced into the story, like the class difference between the two families (Keita’s ‘true’ parents are working class but more affectionate towards their children), but the bulk of the film is simply waiting for its characters to reach the same conclusion Kore-Eda has made.

With the film’s central question and debate answered for, there really is no work for the audience left to do. That resulted in me being bored out of my mind for much of Like Father, Like Son. Ryota’s arc would be a fascinating one to watch if it wasn’t so predictable, and the way he’s painted as a villain at times is frustrating. Especially after watching The Past, where the subtleties of the film’s dramatic content are explored in such a thought-provoking way, Like Father, Like Son‘s simplistic handling of such a morally complex situation just looks lazy.

RATING: 5.8

The Strange Colour of Your Body’s Tears

As I said in my last TIFF update, I was trying to get into The Double. As you can tell by the title, I sadly did not get into the film. I decided to run across town and catch The Strange Colour of Your Body’s Tears, the newest film from Hélène Cattet and Bruno Forzani. Cattet/Forzani directed Amer, which I was a big fan of. Theoretically Strange Colour should work just the same, as it uses the overload of style and Giallo influences that made their last film such a treat to watch. That theory proves to be correct for the first 30 or so minutes, as the simple story of a man looking for his missing wife in their labyrinthine apartment building has every stylistic trick in the book thrown at it, but eventually the charm wears off.

It wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t for the fact that the film’s ear-piercingly loud soundtrack and attempt at a narrative are so grating that by the hour mark I was ready for the credits. Instead I had another 40 or so minutes to go, and by the finale I found a lot of Strange Colour to be insufferable. The style is still magnificent when it works, and some of the random segments (including a cop’s explanation of how he got a scar on his neck and a woman being haunted by a murderer in her walls) are plenty of fun on their own. It’s just too bad that, as a whole, The Strange Colour of Your Body’s Tears is torturous.

RATING: 4.5

Next up:

It’s horror day at TIFF! I start off with Eli Roth and Ti West’s new films, then cap it all off with a midnight screening of Oculus.

When you first watch this story of trickery and deceit, you may perceive it quite differently as you would following a second viewing. After seeing Burn After Reading for the first time in 2008, I was compelled to hate everything about it. I found it hard to enjoy the events that occurred, I was unhappy with the character arcs that Joel and Ethan chose and I was dissatisfied with the ending. Having recently watched it again, however, I was willing to retract my previous judgement and declare that I was quite taken with the quirky, deceitful scenarios that rolled out.

Burn After Reading is a story based upon the idea that when people want something badly enough, they can sometimes go to extreme measures in achieving it; and the Coen Brothers once again demonstrate different ridiculous outcomes to the everyday circumstances these characters endure.

Academy Award Winner, Frances McDormand (Fargo) – a Coen Brothers/Amy favourite, plays as Linda Litzke, a woman who is absolutely determined to undergo plastic surgery to reshape her body and uplift her life. The whole film is molded around Litzke’s unwavering focus on her desire to reinvent herself, and mishap after mishap ensues as her schemes become increasingly reckless (and as a result a lot more dangerous). Initially disheartened by her insurance company refusing to cover the surgery; Chad (Brad Pitt), discovers a disc containing what he believes to be “high quality information” that he presumes will help her money issues. What unfolds thereafter is a series of events that leads up to you finally thinking “so what did we just watch?” It is not a bad movie as a result of this, I enjoyed the fact it gave me time to reflect on what I had just sat through: a story full of real feelings, real emotions and a narrative that never leaves you wanting to drift off face first into your popcorn.

McDormand’s character portrayal is not the only one I wish to comment on, as Brad Pitt’s character Chad, was one of his most versatile performances to date. Playing an energetic yet comically naive personal trainer for a fitness centre, it gave Pitt a chance to step back from his alter ego Rusty Ryan/Tyler Durden persona. Chad’s simplicity gets him in a lot of trouble during the course of the film, but his optimism for life never falters.

Each scene leaves you thinking “what is actually happening” as the story continues to take us in many different directions. Subplots divide and multiply as the film unfolds, yet all are interwoven. You’re not necessarily confused with what the characters are up to, but more so why they’re perhaps building a reclining sex chair or chasing fitness instructors with an axe. There are characters that you’ll come to love or hate, but on some level you’ll secretly empathize with each and every one of them.

Joel and Ethan Coen have such a rich history in filming excellent and unforgettable movies, such as Raising Arizona (1987), Fargo (1996), The Big Lebowski (1998) and more recently No Country for Old Men (2007) and True Grit (2010), that anything they make is classed as unique and creative; and Burn After Reading ticks both those boxes. Because of how interesting the storylines for each character are and how entertainingly painful they are to watch, after every scene you’re constantly questioning yourself as to whether or not you love or hate the film.

The quote that the movie went for, “Intelligence is Relative”, fits perfectly to the references to the CIA, where “Intelligence” is paramount, every character, including those government officials, are clueless as to what is happening within their own lives let alone anyone else’s. It’s a great quote to summarize the plot and the characters alike – that there can be no stupid questions, only stupid answers; cue Burn after Reading.

Moonrise Kingdom is unmistakably a Wes Anderson film. It features presumptuous children who seem to be more intelligent and mature than the adults and a simple but whimsical storyline that is completely overshadowed by its presentation. Everything is exaggerated and deadpan humor is in abundance. That is what often makes his films so fascinating to watch and Moonrise Kingdom is no exception. It is a fun adventurous fantasy that only he is able to create.

In the opening sequence, the camera paces through the house of the Bishop’s, introducing us to the three young boys listening to their precious record player and their older sister Suzy (Kara Hayward) who always has a pair of binoculars around her neck. Their mother Laura (Frances McDormand) is always yelling into a megaphone to call after the children and sometimes even her husband Walt (Bill Murray).

Also located on the fictitious island of New Penzance is a camp belonging to Khaki Scout Group Number 55. On what seems to be a routine morning, Scout Master Ward (Edward Norton) emerges from his tent then proceeds to do his daily check-ins to make sure his troop members are doing their duties. Finally he notices at the dinner table that one of its members is absent. He rushes to 12 year old Sam Shakusky’s (Jared Gilman) tent to find out that he has “flown the coop”.

Through a flashback a year earlier we see how Sam and Suzy met. During a play of Noah’s Ark Sam wonders around the building and stumbles into a dressing room full of girls dressed as birds. One of the birds catches his eye, the raven, which was played by Suzy. Soon after that run in, they exchanged many love letters back and forth over the course of a year. In their last letters, which brings us to the present time, they agree to run away together.

It is not long before the island’s local policeman Captain Share (Bruce Willis) receives a call from Suzy’s parents that puts the entire island on a manhunt to find the two. Due to Sam’s survival skills learned from being a Khaki Scout, the two young lovers are prepared and seem to not be in any harm. Suzy did bring several reading materials and a battery operated record player after all.

Our narrator (Bob Balaban) informs us that this is set in September of 1965. He also lets us know that in three days time there will be a massive rainstorm that will result in a flood unlike one the island has seen in hundreds of years. This information adds to the urgency of finding Suzy and Sam.

Each scene is meticulously designed with props and a matching color scheme which is a very common feature for a Wes Anderson film. I noticed it early on in Moonrise Kingdom when we see a primary yellow toned kitchen, in the very back of the shot there is a fan that even its blades we’re yellow to match. The little things like those that are often overlooked in other films that are done to perfection.

In addition to the amazing visual style, the other key element in Moonrise Kingdom is the fantastic cast. First you have Bill Murray, who seems to be born to play Wes Anderson films with his deadpan tone (he has been in five of his last six films). Another Anderson veteran is Jason Schwartzman whose sarcasm fits perfectly with his role as one of the Scout Leaders.

Then you have Anderson newcomers such as Bruce Willis, who I was concerned may stick out like a sore thumb in this role but was proven wrong. Edward Norton as the always serious and enthusiastic leader did not miss a beat either. Last but not least, the two young lovers played by Kara Hayward and Jared Gilman were outstanding together.

It is hard to walk away from a Wes Anderson film with a firm opinion, you must first let it soak in for a bit. It does not help that there is not as much substance in his films. But what Moonrise Kingdom lacks in substance it more than makes up for with plenty of style and quirky but lovable characters.

Moonrise Kingdom, for better or for worse, totally has Wes Anderson written all over it. If you were a fan of his films before, you will love Moonrise Kingdom. On the flip side, if you were not a fan of his work before, I do not think this will change your mind on the matter. Over the years I have come to accept the fact that the plot in his films does not seem to matter as much as the picturesque scenery and development of his quirky characters. It is hard to deny that he is one of the most original American filmmakers in the field today.

In order to celebrate the release of Wes Anderson’s latest film Moonrise Kingdom in theaters this Friday, Way Too Indie is giving away two special “Moonrise Kingdom Survival Packages”. It is undoubtedly one the most anticipated indie films of the summer as it has been three long years since Wes Anderson has put out a new film.

We are giving away two (2) “Moonrise Kingdom Survival Packages” which include:

How do you enter the giveaway?

• Leave a comment below and Like our Facebook page. Tell us what your favorite Wes Anderson movie is in comments below. Then click here to Like Way Too Indie on Facebook. Simple as that.
• Winners will be selected at random. Two (2) winners will win one (1) “Survival Package”.
• If you are chosen, you will be notified by email. Winners must respond within three days of being contacted. If you do not respond within that period, another winner will be chosen. Must be in the United States to win.
• Entries can be submmited until May 27th, 2012 at 11:59PM CT. Good luck!
• Giveaway closed, winners were notified.

Moonrise Kingdom is in select cities May 25th. Wide release is June 29th.

Official trailer for Moonrise Kingdom:

Wes Anderson’s latest film Moonrise Kingdom will open the 65th Cannes Film Festival on May 16 2012. Some of the cast members in the film should come as no surprise such as Billy Murray, Jason Schwartzman, and Bruce Willis who have all appeared in Wes Anderson film’s previously. Joining them are other big names; Tilda Swinton, Edward Norton, and Frances McDormand.

Synopsis from the official site:

“Set on an island off the coast of New England in the summer of 1965, MOONRISE KINGDOM tells the story of two twelve-year-olds who fall in love, make a secret pact, and run away together into the wilderness. As various authorities try to hunt them down, a violent storm is brewing off-shore — and the peaceful island community is turned upside down in more ways than anyone can handle. Bruce Willis plays the local sheriff. Edward Norton is a Khaki Scout troop leader. Bill Murray and Frances McDormand portray the young girl’s parents. The cast also includes Tilda Swinton, Jason Schwartzman, and Jared Gilman and Kara Hayward as the boy and girl.”

UPDATE: Check out our review of Moonrise Kingdom

Check out the official trailer for “Moonrise Kingdom” below:

We Need to Talk About Kevin is haunting and chilling thriller that was based on a book by Lionel Shriver that rehashes the classic debate of nature-versus-nurture in an uncompromising art-house style. It marks the third feature film Lynne Ramsay has directed. The film is an unsettling view of a mother who must deal with her troubled son and the trouble he causes. Through the use of many flashbacks, the non-linear narrative reveals piece by piece how something is not right about Kevin.

Eva Khatchadourian (Tilda Swinton) waits patiently in the lobby awaiting her job interview while nearly the entire office of workers seems to be silent and starring at her. Not because she is just an outsider of the company but because of who she is. When her name is called the air out of the building has been sucked out. The interviewer says to Eva, “I don’t really care who you are or what you have done so long as you can type and you can file you can have this job.” Eva is relieved and thanks her.

As she walks out of the building she interviewed in with a half-smile of relief an older lady walks up to her verbal assaults her and then punches her in the face. A man who witnesses the incident asks if he should call the police on the lady, Eva responses no and takes the blame herself. At this point in the film we are not sure what has happened exactly. But we know whatever it is it is obviously not good.

Kevin was ornery his entire life. As a baby he was almost always screaming, except when held by Franklin (John C. Reilly). He would not participate in rolling back a ball to his mother. Eva was concerned that perhaps something was wrong with her son so she brings him to a doctor. First she thought he may have damaged hearing but a doctor said he could hear just fine. Because he was not talking as other children his age have by now, she thought maybe he had autism. But the doctor insisted that there is nothing wrong with Kevin.

As Kevin grows older so does Eva’s frustration with Kevin. She cannot get him to do anything she wants him to do. She had to change his diapers well past the point that a child should wear them because he refused to cooperate. But Kevin has always been receptive of Franklin, even before he could remember as a baby, which has always bothered Eva. Franklin does not see what all the fuss is about with Kevin.

It appears that only Eva notices the dangers of the problem child while everyone else around her thinks he is just a typical teenage boy. Something about the satisfaction he gets when doing something wrong is disturbing to her. I will not reveal what ends up happening, not that it would completely ruin the film but because the film does such a good job showing you bits and pieces of what happens.

Eva believes she deserves the blame for what Kevin has done. Her punishment is not moving away and dealing with people that treat her like dirt. At one point in the film she buys broken eggs and does not ask for a refund in order to not being seen in the grocery store, then eats an omelet filled with broken shells. She even believes that she will go to hell for all eternity.

The use of the color red is liberally used throughout the entire film to symbolize blood and danger. Everything from vibrant close-ups of an alarm clock, curtains in their home, ketchup on a plate of eggs, Kevin’s toys, aisle of tomato soup cans, red is found in almost every scene. You do not even have to be paying close attention, it is so wonderfully overwhelming that you cannot miss it.

You know an actor has done their job when you cannot imagine anyone else playing their role. Tilda Swinton went beyond that, it was if the role was written for her. She says so much with her body language and expressions alone, her best scenes require no speaking on her part.

We Need to Talk About Kevin is like a train wreck, you do not necessarily enjoy what you are watching but yet it is so compelling that you cannot turn away. It is wonderfully shot with symbolism in abundance, a score by Jonny Greenwood that is as eerie as the film itself and stellar acting performances. As the title suggests, once the film is over you will need to talk about Kevin.