Spolier Review - World Series

October is a month of full of franchises that have been long running.  Most of these are horror franchises such as Halloween, Saw, and most recently Paranormal Activity.  However, no franchise seems to have been longer running than World Series, now in its 111^th installment.  The franchise has certainly had its ups and downs, but you have to commend the producers for consistent putting a product out year after year.  World Series took some bold steps in casting decisions this year, and I think they ultimately paid off, even if the first few acts were a bit of a bore.

Overall, the producers did a great job with casting.  It was a bit of gamble to bring in a complete unknown like the Kansas City Royals as the underdog protagonist, but it paid off in spades.  The audience couldn’t help but root for these no-name kids from the Midwest.  Given the pool of talent the producers had to work with, I thought it was a fine choice having the San Francisco Giants as the hated juggernaut.  It was pretty uninspired casting, but given that several other big names were unavailable, they fit the bill and played their role well here.

World Series has always been known for excruciating run times manage to pay off the longer they go.  This year was no exception.  The first six acts were pretty uneventful for the most part, but the final act was a treat for all who stuck around.  One of the things I’ve always appreciated about this franchise is that you can drop in at any time and really not miss too much.  Besides the development of the Bumgarner character, you didn’t miss much if you skipped the first six acts. 

The end was pretty fantastic, and best of all, it felt REAL.  How often do we see these scrappy underdogs get just what they need at the very end against their greatest nemesis?  It’s almost a cliché.  I thought the producers took a bold stand by getting the Royals right there in the end against Bumgarner (of course they brought him back; I think everyone saw that coming) and ultimately falling short.  The end achieved something rarely seen in this franchise: respect and adoration for both sides.  You couldn’t help but at least appreciate what the Giants had done, even if it was at the expense of the fan favorite.

I thought the technical work was fine.  The director heavily relied on static shots over the pitcher’s shoulder, which has always been a solid tried-and-true method.  I thought there were some nice aerial shots as well.  There were some great close-ups in the last act that really showed the emotion everyone was going through.  It was solid work as always.

Overall, World Series 2014 was a solid entry into the franchise.  I don’t think it will have the same iconic status as other entries in the franchise though.  We had an underdog protagonist that was easy to root for, and an antagonist that we came to begrudgingly accept in an ending that felt earned.  I don’t know if I’ll come back to the franchise when it inevitably comes back next October, but if the cast looks interesting, I may catch some of the later acts yet again.

+ Fun characters

+ Genuine ending that felt earned

- Interminably long

Grade: B

Mediocrities Categories

The tentative list of categories is as follows:

Best Picture
Best Director
Best Actor
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Writing
Best Cinematography, or Prettiest
Best Score
Best Scene
Worst Movie
Worst Performance

I added a page on the spreadsheet that goes into more detail.  For the lead acting categories, I added everyone that qualifies.  For the supporting categories, I think I got anyone that received any praise in our reviews.  I added a bunch of best scene candidates on the spreadsheet.  Add personal favorites, if only to remind us that they exist.

Any other categories worth adding?

The Importance of Rewatchability

I’ve noticed more and more that people are mentioning whether or not they’d rewatch a movie, implying that it affects their grade.  I’ve touched on it before, but I’m curious now how much weight each of us puts on a movie’s rewatchability.  Personally, it means next to nothing to me.  There’s far too much easily accessible good media out there for me to ever factor this in.  Hell, the last movie I think I sat down to rewatch was The Two Towers, and that was two years ago.  (Not counting movies for MMC of couse.)

Like I said, with so many options out there, what is the appeal to rewatching anything?  I know it helps a little with comedy, as some jokes are better the second time around, but with a Western like Butch Cassidy or a documentary like Dear Zachary, does a rewatch really help?  And isn’t that experience powerful enough especially with Dear Zachary to stand on its own?  And at the same time, why would you choose to rewatch any movie when you could watch something like The Graduate or Apocalypse Now for the first time?  I loved Apocalypse Now and gave it an A – I have no desire to ever watch it again.  I had a great experience with it; why change how that went with another viewing?

I’m also getting to the point where the need to rewatch a movie is becoming a negative for me.  This is why I bumped my Major League grade down to a B after watching it recently, and I should probably revise my Anchorman grade, b/c it has this same dilemma.  Saying a movie needs watched again is almost an apology for the content.  90% of a typical movie’s audience will only see the movie once.  I see it as a small failure of the director that their movie needs to be consumed multiple times in order to “get it.”  That’s what makes a movie like Inception so impressive – the plot is nuts and complicated, yet you can catch everything in a single viewing so long as you’re paying attention.

Now, that being said… My next pick is a movie we’ve all seen, so I’m definitely bucking the trend whenever I get to pick again.

Spoiler-free Gone Girl Review

As I watched the previews for “Gone Girl,” I couldn’t help thinking that 2014 has blessed us with a stacked Awards’ Season.  With “Interstellar,” “Fury,” “American Sniper,” and “Exodus: Gods and Kings” coming soon (yes, I’m sucker and am cautiously optimistic for Exodus) as well as some fun big-budget stuff like “Mockingjay” and “The Battle of the Five Armies” out there too, I was thinking that Gone Girl might be good, but I doubted I would walk away thinking it was going to be a guaranteed multi-Oscar winner… And lo and behold, that’s exactly how I felt.

If you’ve seen “The Social Network,” you should know what you’re getting into stylistically with Gone Girl.  The movie looks like a David Fincher movie, and that’s a good thing.  It wasn’t over-directed in any sense, but we get several great shots, particularly during a pivotal scene near the end of the movie that I won’t get into.  Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross are on music like in Social Network, and they did a fantastic job of using the score to lead the audience to the exact emotions Fincher is trying to portray.  Reznor and Ross are probably the early frontrunners for Best Original Score in what is the first of many nominations this movie will garner come Oscar time.

Gone Girl will likely also walk away with Best Adapted Screenplay without any real competition.  The movie is 145 minutes long, but it’s a VERY quick 145 minutes.  Gilllian Flynn wrote the movie as well as the novel it’s based on, and she did a fantastic job bringing the story through a very dense plot with quite a few events to stuff in.  Best of all, unlike a previous Fincher film we’re all familiar with, “The Game,” this is a movie that stands on its own even after knowing the twists.  I credit that to the story Flynn wrote and, more importantly, the characters in that story.

Kissel said on the Facebook group that he was worried about this movie being spoiled if he doesn’t see it soon.  He’s probably right; I give it about two more weeks before SNL does something involving Amy Dunne, amazingly portrayed by Rosamund Pike.  Pike is getting a Best Actress nomination for her work here.  Pike plays Dunne through several stages of her disastrous five-year marriage with Nick, and she nails all of them with flying colors.  Based on everything else coming out this year, I don’t know how she gets beaten for the award. 

Pike’s performance overshadows the rest of the cast, but I also wanted to call out Carrie Coon and Nick’s sister Margo.  Coon has had a breakout 2014, playing the sympathetic and nutty Nora on “The Leftovers” as well.  This will probably be where most people discover Coon, and she’s very good as Margo.  Ben Affleck as Nick does a good job as the bumbling straight man for a large portion of the movie.  He will probably not get any accolades, but he was good.

I have no real qualms with this movie other than the historical inaccuracies that no one was talking about quinoa in 2007 and Nick is seen playing Battlefield 4 in a 2010 flashback (game came out in 2013).  Ugh, fact check fools.  Ok, I do have one thing I didn’t like, but it’s a semi-spoiler that I will not get into now.

As you can tell, I loved Gone Girl.  If it came out in 2013, it would have definitely given “12 Years a Slave” a run for its money (haven’t seen 12 Years yet, so I can’t definitively comment, but considering “American Hustle” was so talked about, I think my statement is fair).  It’s David Fincher at his best, masterfully creating a dark and creepy thriller that will stick with you.

+ Rosamund Pike

+ Carrie Coon

+ Great Script that makes 145 minutes fly by

+ Fincher doing really good Fincher stuff

+ Reznor and Ross with another awesome score

- [REDACTED – SPOILER]

Grade: A+

Please do not post spoilers in the comments!  Once enough of us have seen it, we can start a separate spoiler thread.