Now this is an independent comedy that is worthy of positive press. You may be surprised by how the film is satirical, but “Frank” is as heartfelt as it can be with the quirky characters that are in this comedy by Magnolia Pictures. Michael Fassbender (as “Frank”) remains, serious, outspoken, and demanding as he was in “Shame” (2011). For Fassbender, this is a comedy that fits him, because he can incorporate his serious sense of humor and make it funny at moments that are so unexpected.

If filmmakers care about making comedies in the future, “Frank” is a good example of how comedies should be. The director Leonard Abrahamson (“What Richard Did,” “Adam and Paul”), one of the newest directors from Dublin, Ireland made this comedy based off the British comedian Frank Sievey and Sievey’s character “Frank Sidebottom” (1955-2010). “Frank” is an adaptation off someone who was well-known for being funny and shows the struggles of what it takes to be popular in the entertainment industry of music. 

We meet Jon (Domnhall Gleeson),a young wanna-be musician who wants to be in the music industry. All of a sudden, he realizes there is more in life that has to offer for him once he becomes part of an eccentric pop band. The funny thing about this pop-band is everyone has something that bothers them. Three of the band members have something against Jon. These rude members are Clara (Maggie Gyllenhaal), Nana (Carla Azar), and Baraque (Francois Civil). The only two members cool with Jon and like that he is aboard the band is the masked-leader “Frank” and Don (Scott McNairy).

“Frank” sees Jon as someone who is a talented keyboard player and songwriter, so he wants Jon to be in the band because he is familiar with what it takes for a band to receive popularity. Now I am sure we all have an idea of the face of Fassbender. What is an issue though, is that “Frank” always denies removing his mask. This agitation of “Frank” leaves Jon in frustration numerous times since he is never aware of the facial expressions or how “Frank” actually feels about him as a band member. “Frank” feels explaining his facial expressions helps but that is where people get annoyed (and that is what is hysterical about this movie).

The movie has the funniest moments at the weirdest moments but gets serious later on. “Frank” feels that with no one getting along with the band is making them not do as well and “Frank” is such a perfectionist. He wants every little element to be crystal clear perfect. My only question is how can it be perfect without an idea of how “Frank” feels? We cannot tell if he has the overrated face-mask on the whole time.

This movie is not amazing, but it stands as one of the best comedies I have seen. I liked its sense of seriousness because the slapstick comedies are getting kind of old. It has moments of dragging, but those moments tend to get better as the film progresses. Generally it is dragging, something is about to happen, and bam…something humorous just took place. It is a comedy with the funny moments that will make you laugh at very unexpected times.

Two and a half stars.

 

“The Hundred-Foot Journey” is a movie that is on the subject of cooking, but with a hint of culture. The two competing cultures are the French and the Indian. Both have some great knowledge of how to be top-quality when it comes to being a chef, but there are some disagreements along the way. If you want to see for yourself which food you in any particular group, go to a French restaurant and an Indian restaurant and see what fits for you. Follow Madame Mallory (Helen Mirren) in her restaurant or follow Hassan (Manish Dayal) in his restaurant and think to yourself what food seems captivating. “The Hundred-Foot Journey” is exquisite in food-quality, and vague with restrictions among the restaurant business.

Note: I am going to keep this review short.

The Plot: An Indian Family which is the Kadam family falls with Madame Mallory, proprietress of a well-known French restaurant. The Kadam family opens their own nearby restaurant, which results in undeniable chemistry and this influences Madame to take Hassan under her wing to work with him to become a professional chef.

Hassan, which serves as a talented chef, has actually got guts and would do what it takes become recognized by his cooking abilities. The only thing that is in his way is his strict and self-centered father Papa (Om Puri).

The movie drags a bit in the beginning but gets somewhat better. Hassan realizes that Madam helped him become a pro with cooking to work in higher-up businesses but there is a conflict with this. Does he want to cook for his family in the culture where he feels he belongs? Or does he just want to be at the top of his game all the time in a culture that is not his whatsoever?

Overall, this is a decent movie, but does it seem to be repeating the concept of the recent film “Chef” a little bit? I think it may be in small amounts. It is the subject matter that is creative but is the new trend in grabbing viewers attention when it comes to the subject of food.

I enjoyed this movie on a small chunk of it. The beginning was interesting, the middle tended to drag, but the ending (I am not going to give it away) the right ending but just was not revolutionary that much.

Therefore, three stars.

 

 

 

 

Director Ang Lee delivers a twisted, yet creative film that is incredibly artsy, but worth a viewing. It is “The Ice Storm.” Many twisted parents and kids of all sorts that make awful judgment and there are withdrawals by them. It stars Kevin Kline (as Ben Hood), Joan Allen (as Elena Hood), Tobey Maguire (as Paul Hood), Christina Ricci (as Wendy Hood), Sigourney Weaver (as Janey Carver), Jamey Sheridan (as Jim Carver), Elijah Wood (as Mikey Carver), and Adam Hann-Byrd (as Sandy Carver).

 

The plot: the year is 1973 in suburban Connecticut. There are two middle class families and that is the Hood family and the Carver family. Both families are fairly wealthy and luxurious. Both of the families are also extremely sneaky. The parents and their children participate in casual sex. Ben has a hidden relationship with Janey; Elena has a hidden relationship with Jim; and the teen Wendy has got a hidden relationship wit both Mikey and Sandy. The behavior of everyone does not only impair the judgment of everyone, but it spirals out everyone’s life to be out of control.

 

This film is an art-house film that is a must-see. I have watched and actually own a ton of art-house films that are spectacle, but “The Ice Storm” definitely takes the cake for being one of the most spectacular ones around. The chemistry between everyone in this drama is powerful and triumphant. You cannot help but wonder why it is titled “The Ice Storm.”

 

“The only big fight we’ve had in years is about whether to go back into couples therapy,” Ben says at some point in the film. Which may be one of the reasons for the obscene behavior. His wife Elena knows he is a liar and sees it as she says, “That sounds vaguely like an insult.”

 

The film moves forward. Both families still make harsh judgment. Then something tragic happens at a certain moment in the movie. Their judgment is like a routine, set to happen rarely between the parents, where it seems the children have tendencies to be a bit more horrid with the choices they make.

 

Lee is capable of enhancing the experience through the scenery with “The Ice Storm.” The color in the film is faded to have a hint of melancholy to the film. There is abundance of greenery in multiple exterior shots that makes viewers have the idea that the subject matter of “The Ice Storm” is not pleasant. Even though that may be the case, this is not a film to make people feel down. “It was 1973, and the climate was changing” (main tagline and noted on imdb.com).

 

Does the climate cause more issues? Is their any reconciliation? Or does the weather keep getting worse and does everything collide to sadness. Find out with “The Ice Storm”

 

Note: There is a Criterion Edition (For those of you who do not know what criterion is, it is an American video-distribution company that sells “important classic and contemporary films” to film aficionados”). Therefore if any of you are into art-house films or collect films, I would say give the Criterion edition of it a chance and go more beyond the film with its bonus features and interviews that are worth while to help us experience these art-house films as an art form. Thank you for reading.