Review: Avengers: Age of Ultron (Trevor)

by Trevor Kirkendall

★★★

Marvel Studios deserves a good bit of credit for concocting a grand plan and sticking to it. I’m not sure studio head Kevin Feige even realized how big of an empire they would build when they first drafted their plans. And everything just keeps getting bigger. The centerpiece of the Marvel Cinematic Universe is the mash-up adventures of all the stand-alone characters: “The Avengers.” The Summer Movie Season of 2015 begins with the second all-star film “Avengers: Age of Ultron.” The film features everything people loved about the first one with a much larger cast, but ultimately offers nothing new.

“Age of Ultron” opens with our team of heroes already assembled going after Loki’s scepter from the first film, which is being held and experimented with by the last holdouts of Hydra. Here, we meet two of Hyrda’s test subjects, the Maximoff twins Pietro (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen), whose backstory leads them to hate Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.).

With the scepter recovered, Stark and Dr. Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) use it to try and create a type of artificial intelligence Tony has been working on. He envisions this program being used for peacekeeping purposes that would one day render The Avengers as obsolete. Initial tests fail, but it ultimately takes hold within the computers at Tony’s house and puts itself into one of Stark’s iron robots. Thus, the birth of Ultron (James Spader). He learns from the Internet that humans are bad and must be destroyed. He enlists the help of the Maximoff twins to help with his diabolical scheme. Our team of Avengers must stop Ultron and the Maximoff’s before they destroy the world.

Of course, the movie wouldn’t reach its full two-and-a-half hour run time without tons of plotting exposition in between the highly stylized, CG-filled action sequences. There’s also a ton of bro moments with Stark, Captain America (Chris Evans) and Thor (Chris Hemsworth). We also get some more back-story on Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner) that seemingly comes out of nowhere. There’s even some dark back-story and a little love interest for Agent Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson).

“Age of Ultron” is loaded to the brim with so many characters and so many different stories that it feels like it might just break the hard drive it was created on. But from the early concepts behind these films, how could anyone have thought they were going to be clean, polished and concise? That’s what the stand-alone movies are for. “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” remains the best film Marvel has produced because it’s the only film in the studio’s history to work off a script with a complete beginning, middle and end, and actually pull off the high-octane action sequences effectively. It’s also the only film of the bunch that didn’t necessarily feel like a superhero film, but rather a political thriller with superhero as the protagonist.

“Age of Ultron” takes everything that Marvel has done in its past and doubles down. The action sequences are grander and longer. The in between sequences of exposition are more drawn out and detailed. The disposable army of clone soldiers – I mean, Ultron robots – is bigger and faster. Okay, now I’m just getting picky with that remark. Writer/director Joss Whedon actually has improved upon the things that flawed the first film. Yes, there’s a lot of down time he fills with exposition and back-stories, but there are some moments that genuinely do feel like a heart felt attempt. Are these moments necessary to advance the plot of the film? Not really, but he wants to give these characters a little more humanity. Suddenly, Hawkeye in particular doesn’t seem like just a waste of space with a bow-and-arrow. It ultimately feels forced and out of place, and increases the run time considerably.

Whedon has also cleaned up his direction of the combat sequences this time. I’d be worried if he didn’t. “The Avengers” was bogged down by moments where everything was happening so fast that you couldn’t tell what’s going on. “Age of Ultron” is that way too, but they’re not as prolonged. He doesn’t stick with the same moments for nearly as long, given everyone a little more time to process what’s happening. Christopher Nolan experienced the same thing when he got involved in the action genre. His fistfights in “Batman Begins” are so muddy compared to what he accomplished in “The Dark Knight.” Same thing applies here with Whedon. Remember, this is only Whedon’s fourth film. (And I may have just committed a cardinal sin by mentioning a DC film in a review about a Marvel film. Oops.)

As big and grand as “Age of Ultron” is, it never feels like it’s overwhelmingly crowded. There are always a lot of characters on screen and there’s different stories coming at you from different directions, but it’s never more than you can process. This isn’t the work or a filmmaker trying to completely mess with your mind and senses, but rather the work of studio and filmmaker actually working well together for a change. Whedon respects the source material so much that he doesn’t want to offend anyone by leaving anything out. (Although, I’m sure there are things people want to see included, but won’t.) Whedon and Marvel have gone hand-in-hand thus far in this highly successful experiment that is the Marvel Cinematic Universe. He leaves the film and story in good hands moving forward as he won’t be involved in the future films, at least not as a director or writer. He’s set up a lot of high expectations for fans of this studio’s work, and he leaves us with a film that will likely meet the expectations of almost all in attendance. It doesn’t offer up anything new or revelatory to the series, but it does offer us the same amount enjoyment that this studio has become famous for delivering.

Review: Avengers: Age of Ultron (Joe)

by. Joe Moss
★★½

Well, one thing is for certain...when you watch Avengers: Age of Ultron, if you desired to see a kick-ass, slam-bang, action montage after action montage--YOU HAVE FOUND IT!! Joss Whedon's latest entry into the Marvel Cinematic Universe hits all of those 'labels' and more. But my question is, "Did he hit too much more?" Was this movie forced to become too much to ready the Universe for all of the future film sequels and spin-offs that have been announced. Just a warning...Prepare yourself for INFORMATION OVERLOAD!!

The Avengers needing to regroup after a defeat in South Africa.

I will be the first to admit that this was one of my most anticipated movies of 2015, and I have been one of those fan-geeks who over-analyzed the theatrical trailers to the point of driving myself mad with plot speculation. Joss Whedon (touché, sir) did a masterful job of misdirection in the trailers--that much I will allow to slip in this review. Almost 50% of the speculations floating around the internet regarding what 'must happen' are wrong. Now, that being said, I found myself lost in what the POINT of this movie was supposed to be. There was too much information presented, plot twisting, new characters and back-story intertwining that the movie became lost in itself--for about 1/3 of the film run time.

The film opens where we last saw the Avengers, hunting down the scepter wielded by Loki in "The Avengers." They have finally traced it to a remote location in Eastern Europe (Sokovia) to Baron Strucker's castle where hold-overs of Hydra are at work unleashing the power within the scepter. Enter the Avengers doing their usual wherein they recover what they were after, but there is a twist--Hydra has been performing human manipulations once again. Unleashed are Maximoff Twins, Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen) and Quicksilver (Aaron Taylor-Johnson).

The Maximoff Twins

Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.), Dr. Banner (Mark Ruffalo) and the crew return to Avengers Tower in New York to regroup, heal [with the aid of Dr. Cho (Claudia Kim)], and relax until Thor returns to Asgard with the scepter to be locked away safely. Except we all know that when Tony Stark is involved, nothing every quite goes as planned when there is an 'untapped power supply' in the picture. Suffice to say that from this point on is where the movie gets TRULY INTERESTING.

After the farewell party gone awry, we see the introduction of Ultron (James Spader), Laura Barton (Linda Cardellini), Ulysses Klaue (Andy Serkis), Vision (Paul Bettany), F.R.I.D.A.Y. (Kerry Condon), and Thanos (Josh Brolin) for the 3rd time.

OK....the visuals were stunning. The cinematography was spot on; the editing was amazing as usual. What really bothered me about this movie was that I wasn't sure if it was supposed to be a revenge story, a love story, a revenge story about love, a love story intermingled with revenge...well, you get the picture here. With the introduction of the Maximoff's, we are handed a whole NEW story line regarding their background that is all new to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And their initial story centered around revenge against a member of the Avengers team. This is the entire reason they teamed up with Ultron. BUT...then there is one of about 25 plot twists that tweaks that plot line and morphs it into something else entirely.

Beauty and the Beast?

Also circumspect is the relationship between a few members of the Avengers team. There is love in the air that is alluded to MULTIPLE times throughout the film, but it seems to be as confusing to the characters as it is to the audience. AND we are privy to Hawkeye's background (Jeremy Renner) which nobody in the theater saw coming. That added an entire new plot twist and allowed a whole new emotional side of Hawkeye to be addressed by Renner as the film progresses. One that doesn't necessarily add to the plot as a whole.

Lastly, there is a lot of testosterone induced posturing throughout the film between Thor (Chris Hemsworht), Captain America (Chris Evans), and Tony Stark. This seemed overly ridiculous and wholly looked to be a forced add-in to introduce the plot for the next Captain America/Avengers/Thor set of films, wherein information has already been leaked about a "war" coming, and the death of an Avenger.

Overall, I liked the film. Would I watch it again? Sure thing. Was it as spectacular as I had hoped it would be. No. Maybe in a few years after I have watched the culmination of this purveyance of the Marvel Cinematic Universe I will be able to look back on "Avengers: Age of Ultron" and say, "ohhhhhhhh, so that's why that happened." But for now, I was unsatisfied with most of the plot/information overload.

Review: Lucy

by. Joe Moss
★★★

An existentialist trip with a twist, Luc Besson's "Lucy" easily reminds me why I love his movies. This movie may not be for everyone--like many Besson films--but if you are able to sit through 90 minutes of a scientific/theological discourse on humanity, evolution, the big-bang, the time-space continuum, and Einstein's Theory of Relativity all rolled into one, then you are in the right place. And, when you leave...MIND BLOWN!!

Lucy (Scarlett Johansson) finds herself involved with the wrong guy at the wrong time. He convinces her to take a "briefcase full of papers" to Mr. Jang (Min-Suk Choi) in a posh hotel in an unknown location in South Korea. An easy $500 turns into a nightmare afternoon of kidnap, implantation, and drug overdosing. Lucy is forced to be a mule for a new drug that will blow the minds of kids in Europe. But things get REALLY interesting when the drug implanted in her abdomen begin to leak into her bloodstream.

Simultaneously, as Lucy is getting the high of her life, at a science symposium concerning brain research and theory, Professor Norman (Morgan Freeman) is waxing philosophical on the advances and intrigue of the human brain. He is providing a well balanced theoretical discussion on what the human brain has done evolutionarily, while indicating the shortcomings of our existence compared to other species. The room is abuzz with resounding questions and philosophy fathoming how humanity would handle use of more than 10-15% of their cerebral cortex. Professor Norman feels that the key to truly understanding humanity and the

intricate workings of the mind lie in our ability to surpass 20% --the mark set by dolphins' cerebral usage.

The film is a metaphor for the progression though human life, and what we are supposed to do WITH said life. Why are we here? What is our niche on the planet...the universe....time? We see an innocent babe (Lucy....a beautiful homage to the first complete human-like Australopithicus skeleton uncovered in Ethiopia's Afar Triangle by Donald Johanson and Tom Gray) who is thrust into the evil world and has to learn to adapt and survive. She has been provided with the ultimate knowledge and has unlocked the mysteries of universe with the consumption of the apple (the drug) and is ostensibly thrust from the Garden of Eden to face the horrors of what life has become. Does she wallow in self pity, or does she right the wrongs committed and try and fix what humanity has become. No spoilers, but I will say that by using 100% of the cerebral cortex, Lucy transcends life as we know it and truly BECOMES...omnipotent (maybe not the right word...maybe more universally introspective) in her struggle against the devil (Mr. Jang).

This film never lost my interest. While the plot development is simple, and the characters are few, Luc Besson does an amazing job posing questions that make the audience interact with the film as it plays. There are plenty of the typical humorous moments mixed into to allow the comic relief, but immediately following he makes you THINK. I found myself questioning many things that I felt I have known for years to be true. While I understand that much of what he presents is pure conjecture and maybe even utter BS, it was a fun journey. He is able to provide hidden symbolism throughout the film that now...only hours after I have seen the film...I am beginning to understand. I have had to allow this film to digest in my mind before writing this review. There was not quick write here.

Luc Besson gathered his team of old for this project. He had Thierry Arbogast as the cinematographer (beautiful) and Eric Serra created the hauntingly melodic soundtrack. This trio made this feel like a Luc Besson film of old--innovative plot, great sound and great cinematography. AND the film was produced by Marc Shmuger who was responsible for one of mine and Trevor's top film of last year, The Spectacular Now.

As much as I loved this film, I can see that many may be put off by the subject matter. And I did not give it 4 stars simply because some of the action sequences did feel very Matrix-like in their progression and implementation (Thanks Wachowskis for affording me that adjective). But I hope that many of you will see this film and be reminded of The Fifth Element meets The Big Blue as was I.

Review: Chef

by Trevor Kirkendall

★★★½

After several years of directing big budget pictures – most notably the first two “Iron Man” films for Marvel – Jon Favreau returns to directing the small independent types of films that gave him his first big break. To me, “Chef” seems like it could be somewhat autobiographical as well. I’ve always wondered what the real reason Favreau had for dropping out of directing “Iron Man 3.” Could it be Marvel got too powerful and wanted to take away the creative control from the director? Maybe, maybe not, but Favreau never did direct the film so you can draw your own conclusion.

I think “Chef” may very well contain some parallels to Favreau’s real life as a filmmaker. He plays Carl Casper, a renowned chef in Los Angeles who runs the kitchen at a restaurant owned by Riva (Dustin Hoffman). He loves his work to the point where he almost always neglects his son Percy (Emjay Anthony). He does, however, have time to hit up the farmers market each day, and for his new girlfriend Molly (Scarlett Johansson), the head hostess of the restaurant.

Today, a well-known food critic, Ramsey Michel (Oliver Platt), will be reviewing the restaurant. Carl begins to put together a world-class menu for the review, but Riva insists that he cooks the usual menu because that’s the reason people come. Sure enough, Ramsey writes a scathing review of the food. This prompts Carl to call out Ramsey on Twitter, which ultimately costs Carl his job. But that also boosts his online following.

At the insistence of Carl’s ex-wife Inez (Sofia Vergara), Carl accompanies her and Percy to Miami. There, he meets with Inez’s first ex-husband Marvin (Robert Downey, Jr.) about acquiring a food truck. His former assistant in LA, Martin (John Leguizamo), is so excited about Carl’s new food truck that he flies to Miami right away to help him get it started. Together with Tony and Percy, Carl takes his new food truck back home serving up delicious Cubanos along the way.

“Chef” is a much smaller concept film than anything Favreau’s done in a long time, and it’s also the best film of his career. Everything about this movie is immensely engaging and rather charming too. And the food that Chef Carl cooks throughout the movie looks so delicious. It’s like watching Food Network with a delightful storyline between cooking scenes. You’ll want to being chowing down on a Cubano rather than that big bucket of popcorn.

It seems to me that Favreau needed to make this movie to keep his creative levels high after spending the last decade working with Marvel. Not that Marvel saps the creativity from its filmmakers, but they do have their own vision that may not necessarily line up with the individual film’s director. Perhaps Favreau had a different idea about how “Iron Man 3” was supposed to play out than what Marvel had envisioned. Conflict ensued, resulting in Favreau to leave the project. That might not be what happened, but it’s a thought. One that would make sense given the plotline of this film.

Favreau’s screenplay is exceptionally polished proving that he’s not lost his touch. The main plotline and all the intersecting subplots never feel out of place. Each subplot supports the others. The humor and wit is on par with Favreau’s earlier work of “Swingers” and “Made.” I would take this film over “Swingers” any day of the week.

He’s top notch in the role of Carl as well. He delivers this character with many different levels of emotion. Even if you’re not an employee of a restaurant, you’ll still find many different ways to identify with this character. The real star of this film, however, is young Emjay Anthony. He shares almost every scene with Favreau and steals just about all of them.

“Chef” is one of my absolute favorite movies of the year. I can’t say it’s going to be a highly decorated award winning film by year’s end, and it might not even end up on my Best Ten, but it is enormously gratifying and pleasant to watch. It’s a nice break from the big budget franchise pictures Favreau’s been making recently. He’ll go back to those some day soon I’m sure, but this just proves he can still tell a great story on his own when he wants.

Review: Captain America: The Winter Soldier

by Trevor Kirkendall

★★★½

I couldn’t have told you one comic book superhero from the next until Marvel launched its Cinematic Universe in 2008 with “Iron Man.” Today, I look forward to each new installment. However, most of their films have not lived up to the enormous expectations. The latest installment from Marvel is “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” and with that, Marvel may have finally figured out how to make these movies accessible to everyone.

“The Winter Soldier” takes place a couple years after the events of “The Avengers.” Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans) continues to work with S.H.I.E.L.D. helping them fight terrorists around the world. As we open, he’s on a mission with Agent Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) trying to rescue S.H.I.E.L.D. agents from a ship hijacked by pirates. One of the pirates is Georges Batroc, played by UFC fighter Georges St-Pierre, which turns into some fun and wild hand-to-hand combat between him and Cap.

Of course, Romanoff appears to have a separate agenda during this simple rescue mission. Rogers doesn’t like being left in the dark on missions when members of his team are given a separate mission. He takes it up with Director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). Fury decides he’ll let Rogers in on a little secret mission since he’s so upset about being left out of the loop. S.H.I.E.L.D. is working on something called Project Insight which consists of three upgraded Helicarriers (advanced models of the massive air/water vehicle S.H.I.E.L.D. used in “The Avengers”) which can patrol the globe indefinitely and eliminate threats to world security. Rogers doesn’t agree with this thought process. Fury shares Rogers’ doubts about the program with Secretary Alexander Pierce (Robert Redford) who is leader of the World Security Council (an active supporter of Project Insight).

Fury’s suddenly finds himself being targeted by a ruthless assassin called The Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan). He’s a Keyser Söze-type villain who’s more of ghost story character than anything else; many have heard of him, few see him and live to tell the tale. But here he is, in the flesh. Rogers and Romanoff take off running from him and those who hired him, trying to figure out why they’re being targeted all of a sudden. Thankfully, a new friend of Rogers, Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie), is trustworthy and proves very helpful.

“The Winter Soldier” is a huge win for Marvel and their ongoing Cinematic Universe. What they’ve done here is taken well known and beloved comic book heroes from this and previous generations and successfully blend them into a modern day setting. This isn’t a just a comic book/superhero movie; this is smart political action thriller more than anything else.

If you were to remove the superhero elements from the script, you’d be left with a tightly wound story about powerful and corrupt people with the good guys trying to bring them down. This, of course, despite many different antagonist elements sprinkled throughout the plot. I think this is the model Marvel has been working toward since they started making all these movies in the same Cinematic Universe. We’ve got the origin story out of the way, we’ve got “The Avengers” out of the way, so it’s time to really take this character and put him into a real world story arc.

While other Marvel movies have attempted this structure with little success, “The Winter Soldier” is the first film to really make it work. That credit should go to screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, who have worked with Marvel already on “Captain American: The First Avenger” and “Thor: The Dark World.” Third time’s a charm, I guess. The first “Captain America” was dead on arrival and no one was able to salvage that. It was a two-hour preview for “The Avengers” and had very little for the audience to identify with. It was an obligatory film that had to be made in order for “The Avengers” to be the success that it was. As for “Thor,” that’s a hard one to tell. The character isn’t well known outside the Marvel fan base and he’s not easy to relate to. Don’t get me wrong, I do like Chris Hemsworth in the role and Tom Hiddleston steals the show, but it seems to be a hard world to write and bring to life. But Markus and McFeely finally have it figured out with “The Winter Soldier.” It’s as if they wrote a political thriller first, and then stuck Captain America in there as the protagonist after they worked out the kinks in the story. And it’s got the right amount of wit and humor to accompany the story.

Of course, the film is not without its faults. There’s a lot of unnecessary development of the Rogers character despite this being the third time we’ve seen him. Additional development is okay in sequels (see Alvin Sargent’s masterful screenplay for “Spider-Man 2”) but it shouldn’t bog down the pace of the film. After an amazing opening series of scenes, this film grinds to a halt for the remainder or an overly long first act. There’s also plenty of spots where I wasn’t sure who was fighting who and who was on who’s side. When the climactic events occur in multiple locations all at the same time, things tend to get a little muddled. Joss Whedon figured that out, which is why the battle in New York at the end of “The Avengers” is so well put together.

But I can’t take anything away from directors Anthony and Joe Russo. For a couple of guys who’s credits include directing the pilot episodes to two cult television shows (“Arrested Development” and “Community”), they don’t seem to be intimidated by a complex plot, a big studio budget or operating within the realms of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Marvel was wise to lock these guys into another film. They handle the story well by letting the plot take center stage rather than the CGI. Sure, there are hundreds of effects shots in this film but they’re used to supplement the film, not steal the show.

The Russo’s have also guided their stars into excellent performances. Chris Evans seems right at home as Captain America. I know I’ve seen him in other films before (including two terrible films featuring another set of Marvel characters that shall remain nameless), but I can’t help but see Captain American every time I look at him now. He works well with Scarlett Johansson too. I felt her character got the short end of the stick in her other Marvel appearances, but her character really takes off here. And I really liked the way the Winter Soldier character is handled. He is the film’s namesake, but the plot doesn’t revolve around him. He intersects the plot at random times causing havoc whenever he appears. He does get some back story, but overall he’s just viewed as a menace. That might not work in some films, but it works great here.

“Captain America: The Winter Soldier” is the stand-alone film Marvel fans have been waiting for. I don’t think fans of the comics will be disappointed at all, especially with the way the characters and the source material are handled. Those who aren’t big into superhero movies should really enjoy it too, especially those who like political thrillers. Because that’s really all this film is. I know nothing of these characters as they appear in the comics, only from what’s in the movies and on the TV shows. But I have become a fan of what this studio is doing. And with everything that’s happened in “Iron Man 3,” “Thor: The Dark World” and now this, I’m excited to see where they’re taking these characters and these stories in the next “Avengers” movie next summer. Just over a year to go.

By the way, there is one scene in the middle of the credits and one after the credits. You’ll probably want to check out both.

Review: Her

by Trevor Kirkendall
★★★★

As a society, we’ve become completely dependent on technology to keep us connected to the world. Some would even suggest that we’ve become too dependent on it to the point that we’re missing out on life and everything that comes with it. Reading social networking sites when we should be enjoying the company of others around us. Taking pictures of things we’ll never look at again rather than just enjoying the moment as it happens. We all know we do it, and we all continue to do it. If it’s not socially acceptable at this moment in time, it will probably become that way one day. And every year, we’re given new enhancements to technology that could catch up to our level of intelligence at some point. This is what Spike Jonze looks at in his latest film “Her”.

“Her” is set sometime in the future when technology has completely taken over our daily lives. Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) is a slightly introverted man who works for a company that writes beautiful handwritten letters for people who can’t put their own expressions and emotions into words. He’s separated from his wife Catherine (Rooney Mara) but has not signed the divorce papers yet. It’s not a divorce he really wants either; it’s more her idea.

He’s not a total introvert, however. He has decent people skills, just not very good at handling relationships. He’s got a great friend at his work, receptionist Paul (Chris Pratt). His oldest friend is Amy (Amy Adams) who he sees quite often. She’s married to Charles (Matt Letscher) and all three get along well. That’s about it for everyone in this futuristic world. Everyone has become so dependent on technology that no one communicates face-to-face with people when they’re out in public. If you think it’s bad now, the vision that’s displayed here is almost unthinkable. People talk to themselves while they walk around during the day, but what they’re talking to is a much more polished version of Siri.

That is until one tech company comes out with a piece of software called OS One. This operating system uses artificial intelligence that’s so powerful and intuitive, it will almost seem like you’re talking with another human being. Theodore decides to try it out, not because he’s lonely and needs a new friend, but because he’s curious. The computer creates a female voice for him that calls itself Samantha (Scarlett Johansson). She’s smart, funny and has a very sensuous and fun loving voice. She learns all she can about Theodore from the contents of his computer and just listening to everything he says. Eventually, Theodore begins to develop feelings for her. Samantha even develops artificial emotions for him as well, and the two seemingly begin to fall in love with one another.

“Her” is definitely a unique take on the romance drama genre. Why would anyone expect anything less than unique given director Spike Jonze’s involvement? The man has built his enormously successful career on making things different than anyone else. “Being John Malkovich” was one of the most memorable films of the 1990s. Its follow up “Adaptation” was just as great. And who could ever forget Christopher Walken dancing around the lobby of the formerly known Marriott Hotel in the music video for Fatboy Slim’s “Weapon of Choice”? Yes, Spike Jonze has done many memorable and unique works in his career, but “Her” is his masterpiece.

This is one of the most polished and perfectly crafted screenplays of the year. Even with the little bizarre antics and strange scenes that occur throughout the movie, this film is a full on romance story. It shouldn’t matter that one doesn’t really exist in a human form. The voice on the other end is very real and the emotional bond that’s formed is genuine. Jonze has crafted one of the most real film relationships of the year with “Her” and you only ever see one person in that relationship.

Furthermore, the social subtext he explores is worth noting. We can walk around any public venue these days and constantly watch people walk around with their heads down staring into the screen of their smartphones. We can sit at a restaurant and watch a group of friends hang out or a couple on a date. What are they doing? Heads down, phones out. This is becoming prevalent in the highly connected society in which we live. Jonze explores the idea of this turning into a social norm at some point in the not-so-distant future. He doesn’t render judgment on whether or not this is acceptable; he’s just there to show you the vision he sees taking place.

Jonze’s vision includes people communicating to their smartphone devices via a Bluetooth-like ear piece. They communicate with a much more polished and much more helpful version of Siri. Theodore walks through the city listening to his emails. “Next. Next. Reply later,” he says. He stands on the subway as his phone reads the day’s news headlines. “Next. Next,” he continues until he hears one they piques his interest. And he’s not the only one. Everyone else is doing the exact same thing. No one is capable of having a human interaction in public.

Joaquin Phoenix is sensational in this role. He is one of the best actors working today and receives very little recognition (thanks to his little actor-turned-bearded-rapper gag a few years ago). Once again, he completely embodies this role and truly losses himself in it. He’s fascinating to watch. And since almost all of us have been in a relationship at one point or another, the stages are easily identifiable and relatable (even if you never dated your computer, which some of you reading this review probably do and don’t realize it).

But the most fascinating performance in this film comes from Scarlett Johansson. She was a late addition to this film and didn’t take part in any of the actual filming. Her role is never delivered in physical form, only in voice. Using only her voice, she is able to convey so much emotion and give this character a vast amount of depth that it’s easy to forget she’s never physically with Phoenix in this film. Even though you never see her, she delivers one of the finest performances of the year.

“Her” is nothing short of a masterpiece. It’s a creative gem delivered from one of the most visionary thinkers in Hollywood. Jonze delivers this film to us with a powerful story full of emotional depth, and is able to make an entertaining futuristic science-fiction film without hitting the overkill button on the visual effects. This is about as solid as filmmaking gets from all aspects. It’s films like this that should serve as a reminder to what movies used to be before technology killed the human interactions between the story and the audience.