Captain Phillips

Dustin: 4.5 of 5 stars Nick: 3 of 5 stars Average: 3.75 of 5 stars (Live canary)

Dustin: Captain Phillips is a movie based on a book based on a true story. It features a cast of unknown actors like Faysal Ahmed, a couple Barkhads (Abdi and Abdirahman), Tom Hanks and Michael Chernus.

What did you think of Captain Phillips, Nick?

Nick: This might be the best example of a trailer that actually represents the tone and theme of a movie, and for that I’m surely thankful. Though what the trailer shows didn't exactly appeal to me, and neither did the movie.

Dustin: That accounts for our differences in ratings because this is exactly the kind of story that appeals to me.

Nick: The story is appealing, but the way Captain Phillips interprets it is less interesting.

Dustin: How so?

Nick: The fact the film is called “Captain Phillips” is bothering as the only recognizable actor in the film is playing the title role. If anything, the film would have been more convincing with an unknown actor playing that part just because the ability to suspend disbelief is almost impossible when staring at Tom Hanks. This, plus the fact that if you know the story before going in almost all tension is taken away from the main character.  

Dustin:  It is unavoidable to have a well-known actor in a movie like this. Even I’m guilty of being uninterested in a film if it stars a bunch of nobodies.

Nick: Yes, but you could always put the stars in smaller roles and give the main role to a somewhat unknown actor, such as the film I wanted to see this week, 12 Years A Slave.

Dustin: I definitely want to catch that when it comes to Kansas City.

I disagree knowing the story going in took away from the tension. This was a widely publicized event, so I don’t think we’re giving away too much. All I really knew going in was what was in the news. I remembered when the story first came out of Navy SEALs gunning down Somali pirates, and Capt. Phillips was on a talk show, therefore he would live and the pirates would get shot. But at times I was gripping the seat in the theater, reminding myself the pirates would get shot at the end and the Rich Phillips would live.

NIck: I could have sworn that when we left the theater the first thing you said to me was that it killed your suspense since you already knew what was going to happen. Though the only thing I knew was the outcome of Capt. Phillips, because of his book based upon his happenings. The scenes that were fascinating were of the Somali pirates as they got ready to do some pirating! There should have been a few more minutes with the pirates in Somalia.

Dustin: I just wanted to sound brave. I agree there should have been more scenes of the pirates in Somalia, as I’ll probably never go there unless my job gets really brave and thinks I could find opportunities there. Those scenes could have been filmed more steadily with shots lasting longer than two seconds. Paul Greengrass must be an epileptic who doesn't bother refilming scenes he shot while having a seizure, which were undoubtedly triggered by his own jerky camera work.

Nick: There was probably only 45 minutes at most that should have been shot with a handycam, but Greengrass says “Fuck All” to that and shoots a scene of Hanks and Keener getting ready for the airport with the camera getting all crazy-like.

Dustin: Exactly. Not every shot needs to be jerky and exciting. The scenes on the lifeboat make sense to be shaky, but not Capt. Phillips packing a suitcase in his bedroom. Paul Greengrass is good at getting performances from his actors and creating tension in scenes, dragging out the suspense just as long as it should be, but he needs to hand the camera to someone who isn't hopped up on caffeine.

Nick: The film also did a good job of not relying on the score in order to define emotion, which makes the acting all the more necessary. Though at times, mostly towards the end, the score does become loud and overdramatic.

Dustin: Let’s get a little intellectual and talk about the theme. This is a very American movie in that it presented a problem that could be fixed by shooting it. It is very appealing in that sense. At times it does go deeper into the pirates’ motivation. They have to answer to greedier bosses and don’t feel like they have opportunities other than thievery. But the movie doesn't address the theme that the problem is economic inequality that can’t be fixed with bullets, but harder solutions like infrastructure investment and wealth distribution. Then again, a movie about an NGO in Puntland wouldn't be nearly as suspenseful, unless Paul Greengrass amped up the shaky cam and shortened up his shots, of course.

Nick: The film touches on that topic quite a lot, giving the viewer an idea that the pirates aren't evil, but are committing crimes in order to survive.

Dustin: The pirates were basically evil. They maimed and threatened to kill people. The young one and the driver were sympathetic at times, but the leader--Muse--and the fourth pirate were beyond help. Given the opportunity to walk away with an easy $30,000, no small fortune in Somalia, they turn down the offer, saying, “I want millions!”

Nick: Muse is not beyond help and he is completely sympathetic. The character has composure and the ability of listening before acting. You are right about the fourth pirate, but at the same time, the film tells you that they have no other option. Their bosses expect more than $30,000. They even call up their lackeys and tell them not to bother coming home if that’s all they would be coming back with.

Dustin: Muse and the fourth pirate, whose name I never caught, were both shown to be hopped up on some kind of stimulant the entire time. He wasn’t very clever, radioing Tom Hanks and saying, “This is your Coast Guard!” in a thick African accent. He considered everything before acting, but I don’t think he would have hesitated to kill everyone on board the ship if it suited his ends.

By the way, I do really like the actor who played him, Barkhad Abdi. Very interesting face, and he’s more attractive in real life than his character was. He played the part well, looking sinister and inscrutable closing his eyes half-way like James Franco.

Nick: Muse had many opportunities to kill people that might have benefited his ends, including the fourth pirate we keep talking about, Najee.

Abdi and the other actors portraying Somali pirates were absolutely the highlight and why I would have to recommend the film. Though that Tom Hanks kid wasn't bad either.

Dustin: I just remember the pictures of the real Muse smiling into the cameras as he was brought in in handcuffs. Not exactly a model citizen.

Nick: That's why we’re reviewing the character in the film, not the stand-up citizen he portrayed.

Dustin:  I guess that’s why it’s only “Inspired by actual events,” much like Paranormal Activity, and every other piece-of-shit horror film released in the past few years.

Nick: P.s. Tell me if you (the audience) thought Tom Hanks sounded like Randy Marsh from South Park at the end.

Dustin: I didn't notice until you mentioned it, but I did laugh when you said that.

By the way, you and Laura did a great job reviewing Don Jon in my absence. It’s a little discouraging to see I’m not needed after all.

Don Jon

Nick: 3.5 of 5  Laura: 3 of 5 Average: 3.25 of 5 (Woozy canary)

Nick: For a couple of weeks, Dustin will be off gallivanting around Asia for his real job. In his stead, I am rewarded with the lovely wit of Laura McGee.

Laura: Thank you, Nick! I consider myself to be mostly an expert on reality television, but I will try my best to live up to Dustin’s fine work in movie reviewing!

Nick: Don Jon is the writing-directing debut of Joseph Gordon-Levitt about Jon Martello whose life is perfect between his place, car, church, family, gals, friends and most importantly his obsession with pornography. What did you take away from Don Jon?

Laura: Well, the film was really enjoyable. When the commercials first aired, I figured it was a big screen version of Jersey Shore, which wasn't entirely accurate…

Nick: Which you thoroughly enjoy, right?

Laura: Ha, well yes, it is a guilty pleasure of mine. However, I’m genuinely intrigued by this idea of second and third generation Italians, who seem entirely self obsessed, particularly when it comes to their body and clothes. I’m not clear how realistic this is of young men in New Jersey, but after watching the reality show and now Don Jon, I must assume that this culture really does exist.

Nick: Normally I don’t read reviews before reviewing the film myself, but since it took us awhile to review (my fault entirely) I chose to in order to remember what happened in the film. In the review by Odie Henderson, he tore into the film for over exaggerating the stereotype of Italians in New Jersey. Henderson is an expert in this because he is from New Jersey and is insulted by what he sees on screen. In another article that I read yesterday, the Italian American One Voice Coalition spoke out against the film for the exact same reason. Haven’t films mostly been an exaggerated version of life? Look at most cop films where there is gun usage everyday in their lives, but in real life I’m sure that’s not the case. Must a film only exaggerate when it comes to violence as to not be taken seriously? Don Jon is a comedy after all.

Laura: There has to be a certain amount of truth to some of it, although some of these things can be exaggerated for a film or television show. However, one of the first things I noticed about this movie is how misogynistic it was. Early on in the film, Jon and his friends go to a club where they rate every woman on a scale of 1 through 10, calling a perfect 10 “a dime.” After finding someone that ranked high enough for them on the scale, the next move seemed to be some drinking, making out in the club and then getting said girl home for what was certain to be a one time hook-up. It was hard for me not to watch that and compare it with the guys on the Jersey Shore reality show whose main objective was always to find a girl who was ‘DTF’ (down to fuck).  

Nick: The difference between them is that Don Jon is not a misogynistic film, but has its main character grow from that into something that is considered an adult. So in no way does the film say the main character is right for thinking this way, but laughs at him and his OCD ways, especially when you see the true insides of “a dime.” While in the Jersey Shore the misogyny is “the show,” but is also justified by just how sexually perverse the women are too (at least in action). I must state I have never seen the show but have seen many clips on The Soup and I read many entertainment articles.

Laura: Haha, well I am going to stop drawing comparisons to the television show at this point, it is just a little bit hard not to associate the two. But anyway, yes, Jon does go from being a shallow guy, spending all his time on making the things he cares about look up to his standard. Early in the film he meets Barbara (a dime!) played by Scarlett Johansson and begins a monogamous relationship with her. He seems to adore her, although he seems motivated by her looks more than anything. She in turn, almost immediately begins to try and subtly change Jon, suggesting that he start night school and telling him he would be so “sexy” with a “real job.”

Nick: Barbara had amazing negotiating tactics! After withdrawing sex from the beginning of the relationship and then dry humping Jon while subtly giving her demands for their relationship to further itself. Something that irked me about the film was the writing whenever a character went through a transformation. Every time a character “transformed” it seemed abrupt instead of building steadily. Barbara with her reaction to the Swifer and Jon with any moment he has in the film.

Laura: The transformations did move quickly, although I felt like there were warning signs of the type of person she was right off the bat. A major theme in this movie is Jon’s pornography addiction. He claims to prefer porn to real sex and watches it all the time. Barbara has no idea the extent to which he watches it, but catches him looking at some the first night they spend together and tells him he can no longer watch it. She makes him promise. Granted, he did watch an awful lot of porn, but what did you think of her immediate demands that he stop?

Nick: It’s a somewhat ridiculous demand, but that is what some real relationships ask for. I have certainly heard of some that dealt with the watching of porn and other demands that are even crazier. Jon said he would stop just to calm her down and make her stay, although to his credit he tried to stop, but failed miserably. It was pretty funny that he insulted his father for not knowing what a TIVO was, but failed to recognize the irony of a search history, which shows all the porn he watches and has been around longer.

Laura: Ha, I didn't even think about that, but was surprised he didn't know how to clear his history, considering the amount of porn he watched. As the movie progressed, it became clear that he was attached to porn as he had never had a real relationship and tended to look at women as objects more than people.

Nick: Barbara was as much of an object to Jon as he was to her. Barbara saw him as a broken object that she could potentially mold into something better.  

Laura: Very true. They sort of used each other, although I did feel that Jon really wanted to make the relationship work, even when it became clear that Barbara wasn't an especially layered or even nice person. In his night school class though, he meets Ester (Julianne Moore), who is a bit older and very much the opposite of Barbara.

Nick: The film is very harsh on Barbara, who becomes more and more of a caricature the longer the film goes on. In her final scene she is brought back to show how ridiculous of a character she is while trying to make us think Jon is clear of all misdoings. Ester is another perfect person right from the start, but she never gets to have a downswing of emotion so the viewer never gets to know her well. This is OK because Jon’s name is in the title and the only purpose her character served is to be, as you said, a complete opposite of Babs.

In all the reviews I read before writing this, not one critic mentioned Jon’s possible obsessive compulsive disorder. Is this something I’m imagining or did you ever feel that way?

Laura: Jon was a controlling person and liked to have order in his life. He seemed like a man of routine. It never really occurred to me that it was affecting his life negatively.

Nick: Depends on how one looks at it. As you stated, all the times he did a routine in order to get a girl in bed, then he does a routine after he gets the girl in bed (jerk it, never call her again, and clean his place). These routines are negative and lead to his inability to give himself emotionally to another person because as he states in his voice over narration he has figured out the perfect formula for life.

Laura: This is a more enjoyable film than I thought it would be. In the beginning it looked as if it was going to be another movie that sort of objectifies women and promotes a certain type of lifestyle. However it was surprising how the characters grow and also, being forced to accept that their is some double standard in getting upset with men for focusing on looks and sex so much, when in fact women can do the same things, their focus tending to be on status and money.

Nick: Very well stated. Don Jon is a piece of edgy filmmaking with scenes from pornographies spliced throughout and showing sex between the characters as something that is not so special. The film never takes itself too seriously, but maybe should have in regards to making Jon start off as even more of a prick instead of just making him charmingly sleazy. Although it’s nowhere near perfect, Don Jon shows that the world of film has an interesting new voice that will make his main characters obsessed with masturbating!