From director, Sam Mendes, comes an emotionally charged and exhilarating World War I drama that is brilliant and resilient. That film is 1917 and will hold audiences’ attention due to the action throughout this two-hour rollercoaster ride of darkness, danger, and many unexpected emotional events. The cinematography is breathtaking with realism that made me feel it was happening right in front of me. It is nominated for ten Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Original Score, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, and Best Cinematography. It deserves to win in all those categories, but it is not just the technology and the writing that make 1917 Oscar-worthy.  It is also remarkable because of the deep characterization acting by actor George Mackay throughout the film.

The film is geared on two British Soldiers, Lance Corporal Schofield and Lance Corporal Blake (played by George Mackay and Dean-Charles Chapman). They are given a task that puts them in danger. They need to deliver a message that is far into the enemy territory of the war. The two soldiers are told to find a way to stop an attack because it will put thousands of men into danger. And, if they keep attacking, they are walking into a deadly trap. Schofield is the one with most of the responsibilities as he gets further into the territory where the massacres are occurring. There are unexpected guns firing, soldiers hiding poised to attack, and hidden bombs waiting to explode. The film pans on one shot throughout most of the horrid journey that Schofield is embarking on.  Honestly, 1917 is just a beautiful film based on its continuity and I was more enticed in this war movie than I have been in one for years.

I found 1917’s intensity and emotional acting by Mackay to be the reason why the movie captures many award-winning elements. The acting is dramatic, the technology embraces the impactful moments, and the film does a fantastic job at showing what life was like back in the era where there was no technological support. What I mean is that the film shows how hard it was to heal wounds or to stabilize those suffering injuries. The movie also illustrates how soldiers navigated with maps and compasses and why that was confusing and often made matters worse. The element of showing that soldiers in those times had to think more logically to figure out strategies to solve a conflict made 1917 so intriguing. And we see Mackay going through those struggles, however he continues to be brave and persistent with the mission he has been assigned.

1917 is by far the best movie I have seen in years. It will make viewers jump with excitement, it will make them cry, and it will leave them wondering who will survive. This movie deserves to win the awards it is nominated for. I hope it wins many of them, because I was simply blown away by 1917. This unquestionably makes Sam Mendes’ mark for a film that is pure adrenaline. Four stars.

Ten years ago, Christopher Nolan brought us a visually stunning work of art with an array of interesting elements and fictional theories that were pure brilliance. That movie blew its audience away. And, it was not just because of its amazing cinematography and sharper image, but also due to way it enthralled viewers with the missions that are completed in the minds of both the antagonist and protagonist characters. I got the chance to reexperience Inception while it was playing for a limited time in IMAX. I took advantage of this opportunity because previously I only saw Inception in a regular format movie theater. This IMAX experience took my viewing experience to a whole different level and I did not want the movie to end. Inception has so many moments where the scenes are mazes mixed with conflicts in people’s minds and their inner thoughts. It was a rollercoaster ride that had both sides of my mind thinking, and with the giant IMAX screen I felt like I was in the mind of the characters.

To recap the plot of Inception, the film is set on a fictional concept of corporate secrets (a fictional element that is meant to be known as dream-sharing technology). The goal is to steal dreams from a wealthy CEO. boss. The man who is skilled at this technology and is fluent with its mathematical factors, including the outcomes of what is right and wrong, is Cobb (played by Leonardo DiCaprio). However, with this talent and craft he has in this fictional setting, Cobb has taken many risks with the dream-sharing technology. These risks have caused Cobb to be a labeled as a fugitive. Due to his challenges, Cobb needs more assistance with his missions and the help of only Arthur (his assistant and played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt), Miles (played by Michael Caine), and Eames (played by Dileep Rao) does not seem enough. This leads Cobb’s skillset to go awry and his once successful missions with the inner minds of himself and others lose their focus.

When I experienced Inception this time around (now being a decade later) this made me realize that Nolan is one of those directors that knows how to use the high-end cinematic technology to make his audience feel like they are on the journey of the conflicts of his movies. He does this in all his blockbuster movies after Memento (2020). With the IMAX experience of Inception, the parallel cross scenes between walls, buildings, rooms and people’s minds made me think, “Wow this scenario is perceptibly radiant!”  One of the scenes that did this for me is when DiCaprio is training Paige to take part in what his missions entail. He starts with her sketching a maze and keeps having her try again until it looks accurate. She eventually draws a maze that works for him and then they start walking through a city. As he explains many of the obstacles and changes (what his mind entails), the patterns of how the streets are put together start to move around and change, along with how the people around them walk. In that moment, I was dazzled because I realized the way the characters think can lead to mistakes or serious consequences. In IMAX that felt like falling into a deep and dark hole with stunning visuals that make an unforgettable experience.

Nolan is one of those directors where I feel there is no way to experience his filmmaking without experiencing them in IMAX. All his IMAX films have been impressive and include Batman Begins (2005), The Dark Knight (2008), The Dark Knight Rises (2012), Interstellar (2014), and Dunkirk (2017). I recently saw the opening sequence for his new film Tenant set to open this summer and he is doing what he always does best which is using the IMAX technology to embrace his audience technologically with his thrillers. If fans can find Inception on an IMAX screen it is a worthy watch. I am glad I had the chance to re-experience it.

Clint Eastwood is one of those directors whose films are very realistic. His most recent film, Richard Jewell is a true story and Eastwood directs this drama in a way that shows how corrupt crime investigations can get. The film includes all the details that illustrate Richard Jewell’s strengths and weaknesses. It seems to be clear in this case that he is a hero, however a variety of media views him as the exact opposite. Richard Jewell is a two-and-a-half-hour movie filled with the logistics and background of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics bombing.  Much of what the investigators uncover is misleading that negatively impacts Richard Jewell. The question that I found myself asking is, “Why would the authorities shine the harsh spotlight on Richard Jewell?”

Paul Walter Hauser plays Richard Jewell, a security guard who works security jobs in a variety of places.  Due to some career challenges, he is not at the top level of authority and is viewed as a rent-a-cop. Despite being underemployed, he takes following the law very seriously and is not a pushover.  After being terminated from his full-time position, he lands a job working security for the Olympics.  During one of the entertainment events, Jewell comes across a suspicious bag that is full of explosives and he alerts higher levels of security who were able get many of the people in the event evacuated. Initially, Jewell is considered a hero, but soon thereafter certain government investigators, press officials and security experts begin to view the bombing as terrorism and believe Richard Jewell is responsible.

Government security officials, Tom Shaw and Dan Bennet (Jon Hamm and Ian Gomez), review the scenario and paint Jewell as the enemy. Journalist Kathy Scruggs (played by Olivia Wilde) is trying to figure out the background evidence to determine if Jewell is guilty as charged. Jewell’s attorney, Watson Bryant (played by Sam Rockwell), is trying to help coach Richard learn how to speak during the investigations and figure out how to make the authorities understand he is not the terrorist. And Jewell’s mom, Bobi Jewell (played by Kathy Bates), is worried about her son due to the stress and tension caused by the unwanted negative attention.  Jewell’s world is spiraling downhill as he is pulled between those who view him as their hero and those who view him as a villain.

Richard Jewell had me perplexed at various moments throughout the movie. I kept asking myself, “Why blame Richard?” “Is it because he is socially awkward?” “Is it his appearance?” These questions and many others go unanswered. The audience does, however, get to witness Jewell questioned by the authorities and his attorney and see just how difficult the entire legal process was for him.

I felt the performances in Richard Jewell were top-notch. The script is slow at moments, but intentionally slow to help viewers have a better idea of what happened during the investigation process. Watson conducts many practice interviews with Richard and goes into deep detail with him about why honesty is important. In addition, he explains how Jewell can be manipulated by the people investigating him to help make him out to be a terrorist. Watson even goes through Jewell’s home to see if any items or apparel might raise questions with investigators.  During this mock search, Rockwell’s dialogue is artistic demonstrating his agitation with all the potential negative repercussions of what Jewell has in his home. The sad part is that Jewell has no intent of harming anyone whatsoever, his only intent is for the world to be safe. Viewers see that positive intent in the beginning of the movie and know it throughout the film.

Richard Jewell is one of those movies that I define as “almost” a masterpiece. I found it to be what I would expect in a Clint Eastwood film. It includes an opening that is slow and not that positive. The kind of opening that Eastwood used in Million Dollar Baby (2004) mixed with a serious subject and tons of curiosity. However, the conflicts in this story are quiet and not action-packed, but are presented in the correct context.  The film’s dialogue is attention-grabbing and makes Richard Jewell a captivating ride of truth vs. deceit. Therefore, I would give Richard Jewell three and a half stars.