The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)

Magnificent Story Told Magnificently Well

★★★★★

5 Stars; MPAA Rating: R
Director: Wes Anderson

I scratch my head at times wondering why a movie is nominated for the Academy Best Picture award . . . or maybe not realizing there are socio-political reasons within the Academy beyond artistic merit . . . but I cheered when this one showed up as a nominee. While it didn't take home the Oscar (losing it to Birdman, another superb movie), it was nominated for all the right reasons. Often touted a comedy I found it to be mostly a drama with major comedic elements. The movie starts with a teenage girl entering a cemetery and placing a hotel key onto a grave monument decorated with hundreds of other hotel keys. The grave is that of an author, and the girl is holding his published memoirs about The Grand Budapest Hotel, which she begins reading after decorating his grave marker. The story about the hotel begins, as told through the author’s memoirs she is reading.





The four time periods:

1. The present in 2.35:1 aspect ratio with the author's grave and the teenage girl reading his memoirs.
2. 1985, also 2.35:1 aspect ratio with the author writing his memoirs about a trip he made there 17 years earlier.
3. 1968 in 1.85:1 aspect ratio when the author traveled to the hotel and met Zero Moustafa, the hotel's owner.
4. 1932 in 1.33:1 aspect ratio when Zero first started working at the hotel as a boy.

The first provides a simple framework at the beginning and end within which the rest of the story is told. The movie proper periodically moves between the other three timelines. Unlike some non-linear films, the different time lines in this one are easy to follow with different characters in each, obviously different eras and the different aspect ratios. The hotel is a resort in the fictional Central European Republic of Zubrowka. When the author visits in 1968, it’s a run-down shell of its former glory with few guests. The author befriends the elderly owner, Zero Moustafa, and they agree to meet over dinner. Moustafa begins his tale of how he acquired ownership of the hotel and why he keeps it open. The tale then fades back in time from 1968 to 1932 when Moustafa was taken on as a lobby boy after his town was razed and his parents executed. Zubrowka is on the verge of war with a neighboring country, which has equally fictional symbols, flags and emblems, but all the trappings of being governed by a militaristic, fascist dictatorship.

The hotel’s concierge takes Moustafa under his wing, mentoring him. There is plenty of mystery, adventure and intrigue with a war looming, the mysterious death of the hotel owner and the machinations of the hotel owner’s cruel and evil son. The drama is generously peppered with wry comic relief throughout. Wes Anderson’s touch in the story and the directing is quite evident. Production design is lavish, with the hotel’s interior and exterior inspired by a combination of the Palace Bristol Hotel and Grandhotel Pupp in the Czech Republic, and the Grandhotel Gellért in Hungary.

A grandly executed production, with excellent pacing and unpredictability in the plot making for some suspense and numerous surprises. The non-linear author’s memoirs framework greatly enhances it. It’s a Wes Anderson triumph deserving five stars for a magnificent story told magnificently well.

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

The Emperor Has No Clothes

⋆☆☆☆☆

½ Star; MPAA Rating: R
Director: George Miller

Porn film formula:
Nonstop full nudity with raw unsimulated sex acts, tied together with little more than a few patches of duct tape, a half foot of baling wire and the producer's wad of old chewing gum for a story. Overload it with closeups of raw sex acts and the buyers of it won't see there's no plot (nor will they care). It sells DVDs by the rail car load.

Formula for some current Hollywood action films:
Use porn film formula. Substitute the raw sex with spectacular stunts, copious quantities of GFX and VFX, and cause permanent hearing loss  inducing tinnitus with the SFX, all at a nonstop ADHD breakneck pace. Make it spectacular and loud enough with a fast enough pace and the audiences won't realize there's no plot with any substance. It sells tickets by the theater load and popcorn in 5 gallon buckets by the rail car load.

So now we have the latest Mad Max movie, "Fury Road," using the Hollywood action film formula outlined above. It's little more than a two hour extended chase scene. There's just barely enough miniscule plot to launch and maintain the chase; less baling wire holding it together than the car they're using. Forget about story depth or character development. It's all about sensory numbing overload, including giving you permanent tinnitus. Take a good dose of Ritalin before watching and you might realize the emperor has no clothes. The original Mad Max had a real plot that provided background and character development that gave cause to care about the anti-hero. Its two sequels extended the original premise and further developed the Mad Max character. "Fury Road" does none of that. Why is it even called a "Mad Max" movie? The Max anti-hero has been reduced to supporting role, with the lead taken by a new character, "Furiousa." Should have been titled "Furiousa: Fury Road" which would be much more accurate. Oh, but wait, the studio and producers wouldn't be able to sell as many tickets as they could by invoking a past franchise's name recognition, so they add a "Max" supporting character and call it a "Mad Max" movie!

Buy or rent the original trilogy movies with (a very young) Mel Gibson and watch them. They contain substantially greater depth in their stories and principal character development. "Fury Road" gets ½ star because it's not the worst movie I've ever seen, which would get 0 stars.

Jurassic World (2015)

Behemoth Dinosaurs with Pea-Size Brains
Gargantuan Special Effects with Pea-Size Plot Originality
★☆☆☆☆

1 Star; MPAA Rating: PG-13
Director: Colin Trevorrow

The Jurassic Park franchise joins the ranks of the Paranormal Activity, Final Destination and Saw franchises in completely wearing out its formulaic plot until it's threadbare. The original directed by Spielberg with its story adapted from the Crichton novel was a creative achievement. Number four is neither creative nor original. It does nothing whatsoever to advance the original premise or further the story.  Pull out the original script, list its major plot points, characters and plot devices used, put new window dressing on it for a screenplay, crank it out in time for a Summer release, and wow audiences with a spectacular display of current technology visual and sound special effects. The strategy is maintaining sensory overload with the action and special effects at a continuous breakneck pace so the audience doesn't have any respite to realize there's absolutely nothing original in the plot. I'm dismayed Spielberg is one of the executive producers. I would have washed my hands of it until there was something creatively  original to further the Jurassic Park franchise story line.

The first two sequels were weak compared to the Spielberg original, and now there's a third Jurassic Park sequel that contains nothing new. They've been completely formulaic including this one: Dinosaurs on the loose dramatically munching up the people left and right who deserve a gruesome end for one karmic reason or another, all because a clueless moron ignores all the likely consequences for personal scientific glory or greed and does something incredibly stupid that eventually turns them loose. Let's not forget about the kids who need to be rescued, an estranged couple that need to be reconciled with each other, and an ending that has an obvious setting for yet another Jurassic Park movie. Compare the Jurassic Park franchise to Sam Raimi's Spiderman trilogy, or Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, or the Iron-Man trilogy, or George Lucas' Star Wars franchise, or even the live action series of Resident Evil movies. All of those franchises have sequels that build on the original movie with with original, creative story and principal character development. Just like its behemoth dinosaurs with pea-size brains, Jurassic World has magnificently impressive special effects and ADHD non-stop action on a gargantuan scale, with pea-size originality.

Rent the first Jurassic Park directed by Spielberg, or buy it used, and watch it instead (I recommend it over the first two sequels). Afterward you won't need to see this one. You'll have already seen it. I'm extremely disappointed with Jurassic World, the Jurassic Park franchise, and with Steven Spielberg as its producer. All three sequels have been great opportunity badly squandered. One star because at least it's got a little more character development than the latest Mad Max movie.