Tag Archives: film critic

“Snowden” movie review

Posted on by
Reply

snowdenA political docudrama that only Stone could pull off so effectively! Once again, acclaimed director Oliver Stone brings another socio-political issue and figure to the screen. Whether you’re of the school of thought that Edward Snowden should be charged with espionage or heralded as a hero, this film will definitely challenge your point of view. But, isn’t that what Stone is known for??? More than a docudrama of the life of Snowden, Stone’s film is a dramatization of the state of government surveillance. One could argue that surveillance is the star of the film, not Snowden. The intent of the film is not to cast blame on either Snowden or the U.S. Government, but to cast doubt. The simple placement of doubt can be far more powerful than blatantly passing judgment or blame. If there was any ‘doubt’ that Stone is one of the most important filmmakers covering modern historic events, then this film will cast aside any remaining doubt. Few directors, have been so successful in taking cold, hard facts and transforming them into a story fit for cinema. The success of this film is attributed to the incredible lead talent. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Shailene Woodley have excellent chemistry on screen. Accompanied by a strong cast of supporting players such as Zachary Quinto, Nicholas Cage, Scott Eastwood, Tom Wilkinson, and Melissa Leo, this film’s cast will have your attention until the final fade to black.

Oliver Stone’s Snowden takes you on a journey through the significant events of Snowden’s life from 2006 to 2013 when he was finally granted temporary asylum in Russia. The reason why his name is so famous or infamous–that depends on which school of thought you are from–is not new and even blasé at this point; but, the events of his professional and personal life that culminated in the leak and disclosure of NSA (National Security Administration) surveillance secrets and programs are not as widely known. Disillusioned with his career as a highly sought after top digital media and intelligence contractor, Edward Snowden (Gordon-Levitt) begins to wrestle with being able to justify and reconcile the rampant surveillance data that the NSA is collecting and how it affects both private citizens as well as those who are being hunted for crimes against humanity and the U.S. After deciding that it was best to go public with the information, he is then on the run of his life. A traitor to some and a hero to others, this film will prompt you to perhaps rethink the actions of Snowden.

Although this film has slow pacing, for those who are interested in the life of the–to borrow from J. Jonah Jameson–hero or menace, Stone’s docudrama will successfully hook you and draw you into this world of intelligence. Snowden is a particularly interesting docudrama because this film essentially contains three smaller movies–a three legged stool if you will. There is the most dominant story of Snowden discovering the copious amount of secret government surveillance data being collected by his software. Next, we have the personal romantic story of the ups and downs of his relationship with the liberal, artistic, amateur photographer Lindsay Mills (Shailene Woodley) and how his professional life gently affected their relationship. And finally, the story that made Snowden a household name: his leaking and dissemination of top secret NSA surveillance methods and everything else Snowden knew about questionable NSA methods of collection. For most people, that third story is all anyone knows. But, in order to truly get an idea of the pressure Snowden must have been feeling, it is imprint to take the other two stories into account. That is precisely what Stone did with this film. Stone’s version of the life and times of Snowden takes the other Snowden film Citizen Four a step further to truly be able to analyze all the known elements.

There are many excellent qualities in the writing and visual storytelling in this film, but there are two areas that appear to falter or suffer in the translation of these now historic events. The focus of the movie is definitely on what led Snowden to leak the NSA secrets, but there is a significant amount of time spent on the relationship between Snowden and Mills. One could argue that the strain of his relationship with Mills contributed to his eventual disclosure of the NSA secrets. Cinematically speaking, the strategic placement of the personal life of Snowden is important because the audience needs a break from the flat panel displays, computer code, and “geek-speak.” Unfortunately, Stone and his co-writer Kieran Fitzgerald did not carefully contract and craft the personal dialog as well as they did the info tech and military dialog. In many ways, the forced personal story of the relationship between Snowden and Mills comes off as a forced element from producers to make the film more relatable to those who are not AS interested in the military side of the story and more interested in the outside/personal influences that affected Snowden’s actions. It’s not unlike fans wanting to know the personal details of a celebrity’s life. Unfortunately, this human interest subplot does not play out as well as the two dominant stories at the forefront of this film. That being said, both Gordon-Levitt and Woodley are extremely committed to the characters/historic figures they are portraying. I cannot think of two other actors who could have been better suited to play these roles. Gordon-Levitt nailed Snowden’s voice, body language, and nuances.

The other area of this film that appears to suffer is the structure–the map, if you will. Any first year film student can tell you that flashback movies can be dangerous. Often times, the flashback is used as a copout plot device that simply plays off as lazy writing. From a technical perspective, a movie that uses the flashback as a means to tell the story is referred to as a nonlinear film. Now, I am not stating that Stone’s movie is lazily written and structured; however, I do not feel that the constant back and forth between the past and then-present were handled delicately or strategically enough. Most of the time, one of the comments I have about movies that rely upon the flashback as a plot device to tell the story is ‘Why is there a need for a flashback? Just let the main story BE the main story.’ The flashback concept works for some films like The Notebook, Fried Green Tomatoes, or IT; but it does not work for others such as Ladder 49 or The Weight of Water. Most of the time, a flashback is used out of convenience to fill runtime; meanwhile, the audience usually doesn’t care about the past as much as what is going to happen next in the present. Stone and Fitzgerald are mostly successful as keeping the audience entertained, caring about, and longing for what happens next in BOTH the past and present; however, I found the movie to go between both the present and past too much, almost to the point that it was a little confusing. Opening with Snowden and the small group of journalists was a great way to begin, but I feel that the story of Snowden would have been a little more gripping if we were able to watch the events from 2006 to 2013 unfold without present-day interruptions. Still, the ending that was selected for the film was both effective and strategic.

Oliver Stone’s Snowden is not a film for everyone. For those who enjoy socio-political movies or docudramas of historic figures, then you will likely enjoy it! If you are looking for an action-packed spy thriller, then is this not for you. Unlike some movies that truly ARE better experienced on the big screen, this is one that is equally experienced as well on the big or small screen.

“The Secret Life of Pets” movie review

Posted on by
2

SecretLifePetsWhen well-developed setups lead to brilliantly executed gags, throw in some adorable house pets and endearing street animals and you get Universal Pictures and Illumination Entertainment’s answer to what toys do when the owners aren’t around, The Secret Life of Pets. More precisely, this movie could be described as Toy Story meets Oliver and Company meets Homeward Bound. Backed by an exquisitely talented cast of voice actors and excellent writing, The Secret Life of Pets could be what ushers Illumination Entertainment (an NBCU company) into the ring with Disney-Pixar. Prior to this movie, Illumination/Universal certainly created some fantastic animated films including The Lorax, Despicable Me, and others; but this film is the first to really be on par with the Disney-Pixar quality that many of us have come to love and expect. Fast-paced and comedically timed very well, this movie is sure to entertain and warm the hearts of anyone who sits down to watch it. Is it quite as endearing as Toy Story? Not exactly; but it is very close and serves as evidence that we should come to expect this quality and higher of animation from Universal/Illumination. Although the movie is marketed to kids and teenagers, there is certainly enough comedic subtext, easter eggs, and nods to films that adults will greatly appreciate as well. One of my personal favorites is in the Millions short film before the feature. One of the minions is wearing a hat that states “let it grow” while he’s cutting the grass.

When Max (Louis C.K.), a spoiled terrier living in a New York City apartment building with a beautiful view meets his new roommate, his perfect world is rocked. New roommate Duke (Eric Stonestreet), a giant rambunctious dog, mixes as well with Max as oil does with water. They are complete opposites in nearly every way. Max soon gets the idea to set Duke up for failure by sabotaging the house. Unfortunately that idea backfires and just serves to stoke the fire of animosity. After a prank in the park takes a turn for the worst, both Max and Duke are lost in the seedy underbelly of New York City. One step forward and two steps back is exactly the pace of the journey home for both canines. Following a run-in with a street gang led by the ferocious but cute bunny Snowball (Kevin Hart), Max and Duke find themselves in Brooklyn after escaping the hoard of animals bent on their destruction. Along the journey home, Max and Duke are forced to work together and support one another in order to have any hope of returning to their comfy apartment.

The Secret Life of Pets‘ success is in-part due to the successful setup and payoff of gags. This can be a dangerous platform on which to build an animated comedy because there is a high risk of the narrative primarily resting upon the gags instead of the gags enhancing the diegesis. Fortunately for audiences, this film successfully pairs a well-developed and paced narrative that will keep your attention and deliver laughs for the entire runtime. Sometimes comedies, whether animated or live action, can spend too much time in the development of gags rather than on the visual storytelling. For instance, some movies write the gags first and then try to integrate a story that attempts to tie all of them together. What I appreciate about The Secret Life of Pets is the strong story inclusive of sight gags and double entendre humor to satisfy a diverse audience from different backgrounds and ages. In addition to the writing, the vocal talents are also instrumental in the success of this animated feature. Leading the “pack” are of course comedians Louis C.K. and Kevin Hart, but the entire cast is perfectly pairs with his or her animated persona. For the cat lovers out there (and yes, I am one of them), there are deftly come good comedic jabs at dogs. But the dogs also get in some good ones on the cats. Haha.

The setting of the movie is New York City, or an idealistic surreal New York City slightly augmented to fit the pacing, genre, and feeling of the film. I’d like to know what job Katie has to be able to live by herself in an apartment with such a beautiful view. But I suppose it’s just as well that we don’t since the focus is on the dogs. On the view from the apartment, though. Much like the view from Frasier’s upscale urban trend-setting apartment in Seattle faced a view of the Seattle skyline that doesn’t actually exist, unless you are looking at downtown from the surrounding mountains and hills, I am not entirely sure the view from Katie’s Manhattan apartment exists either. The view of the city seen from Frasier’s apartment was selected in order for the Space Needle to have a prominent placement in the skyline. In the same vein, I believe that the unrealistic view from Katie’s apartment was selected in order for the Freedom Tower to have a strong presence. I know, I am analyzing an element that doesn’t really have an affect upon the film; but since the film is actually very well done, I thought it would be fun to look at the setting of the movie.

Although I can almost guarantee you that his film won’t see an Oscar nom in the animated feature category, much less a win, since the Academy believes that only Pixar can create Oscar-worthy animated films, I find The Secret Life of Pets to be a fantastic animated feature filled with action, adventure, comedy, and some touching moments as well. All around, it is enjoyable for the whole family and will cause many owners to wonder what their pet does while he or she is away at work. One of my favorite parts of the movie is the musical sequence at the sausage factory. So much symbolism to discuss. Haha. So, yes. This movie even includes a musical number worthy of–I am sure–many memes to come over the next few months.

“Finding Dory” movie review

Posted on by
1

Finding_DoryA cute but ultimately emotionally static sequel to a beloved animated film. Disney-Pixar’s highly anticipated sequel Finding Dory makes a splash this week. Following the critically acclaimed success and continued popularity of Finding Nemo, Finding Dory hopes to find a place in your heart as well. Unfortunately, this film struggles to leave as lasting an impact as the first movie. Many film and Disney enthusiasts, approaching this film, knew that it was most likely going to be either a Cars 2 or a Toy Story 2; it falls somewhere between the two, but closer to the former. Not straying too far from from the plot of its predecessor, Finding Dory‘s message about disabilities turned strengths get a little lost in the emotionally static feel and somewhat forced turning points and dialog. The film certainly has its moments of laughter and surprise, but those are few and far between. Using its predecessor as an example, it is highly unlikely that Ellen DeGeneres could have been replaced by any other voice actor and the character of Dory still remain as endearing; however, honestly in this film, not just Ellen, but any of the other voice actors could have been replaced and the characters and plot play out just the same. A film needs to be a roller coaster of sorts–have its ups and downs–but Finding Dory pretty well stays rather somber the entire time. But yes, it does have some funny and pull-at-your-heart-strings moments. All in all, this movie feels like a forced sequel that wasn’t entirely necessary but produced in response to the high demand for a return to the world of Dory, Marlin, Nemo, and their friends.

Many years before Dory (Ellen DeGeneres) and Marlin (Albert Brooks) bumped into each other, Dory was just a baby fish with two loving parents. Struggling with short-term memory loss from an early age, Dory’s parents worked with her everyday to learn and grow. One day, she found herself all alone and couldn’t find her parents. And over the course of years searching, she found her way to the reef where she encountered a frantic dad searching for his son; and well, the rest is history. Moving up to present day. With an inability to shake the feeling that she keeps forgetting something really important, Dory finally remembers that she lost her parents. Although the memories are vague and spotty, she knows for certain that she needs to find them. After begging Marlin to go on another adventure out past the drop off, Marlin and Nemo agree to partner with Dory in search of her parents. From one side of the ocean to the other, nothing will stop Dory from locating her long lost parents to reunite as a family.

Like with Zootopia as well as other Disney films, there is usually a message in the subtext of its animated features and shorts. Finding Dory clearly has a message about perceived disabilities. Perceived in that, what is otherwise a physical or emotional disability, can be used to develop strengths. Most of the characters that you will encounter in this movie have some kind of disability. Dory and her memory is the main one, but there are definitely others. I don’t want to give much away, so we’ll just leave it at that. Although I feel the approach to writing this message into the diegesis of the film was a bit forced or heavy-handed, it doesn’t take away from the fact that it was handled very well and is mostly seamlessly integrated into the plot and mild character development. The two characters who offer the audience the most, in terms of character arc and development are Dory and her septopus friend Hank (Ed O’Neill). What’s a septopus? Just watch the film and find out. Both characters are mildly entertaining but lack that magical spark that was so much a part of Finding Nemo. One area that sequins sometimes find themselves in, is pulling from the first movie so much that you leave the sequel wondering why it was even necessary. Thankfully, that really isn’t the case with Finding Dory. But you’ll be happy to know that you will see some familiar faces from the first one, including everyone’s favorite sea turtle and stingray. Among the new characters in the movie, my absolute favorite was Becky!! Such a hot mess and quite possibly a little disturbing. Those eyes, though. She was so instrumental in my enjoyment of the movie!

I had the fortune of screening the film with one of the lead vocalists from Disney’s Animal Kingdom’s Finding Nemo the Musical. And I won’t disclose who it was, but he “totally” eats, breaths, and sleeps Nemo and his friends. This was a fantastic opportunity to include an analysis of, not only my point of view on the film, but someone else’s who has a lot of time and energy vested in this property. I half expected him to disagree with me after the movie ended when we began discussing it. But, it turns out that he feels very much the same as I do. He was able to point out some elements that were actually taken from the show at Animal Kingdom, which was really cool! It’s a show that I watch fairly often as well, as I am a former Cast Member myself and current Annual Passholder. Having the ability to discuss Finding Dory in regards to how it fits in with not only its predecessor but the live show was fantastic! He echoes many my same opinions on the movie, but also adds that the kid behind us told their mom that it was amazing. So, in terms of how well this film plays out for children, it does a great job. Many of the young people are about the same age I was when I saw the first one. I think what I missed most in Finding Dory as opposed to Finding Nemo is the lack of comedy. There is definitely some funny moments in the film but the comedic timing and structure simply doesn’t hold a candle to its predecessor. Reminds me of a quality just above a straight to DVD/BluRay or a commercial-free Disney Channel Original Movie. Let’s remember this: Toy Story 2 was also a fairly week sequel–albeit entertaining and heartwarming–and then it came back with the phenomenal tear-jerker Toy Story 3, so it is entirely possible that the Nemo property will go through the same evolution.

Competing against Central Intelligence and a handful of limited releases, Finding Dory is sure to beat out the competition this weekend. And for what it’s worth, it is a fun movie that warms those of us in our 20s and 30s with childlike nostalgia of when we first saw Nemo. Is this destined to be the next great Disney-Pixar film? Probably not. However, that doesn’t mean that you cannot enjoy it with your friends or family. Certainly, it is a wonderful movie to be enjoyed with those who love seeing familiar characters and meeting new ones. I just wouldn’t go into the movie looking for an excellent and dynamic story.

“The Conjuring 2” movie review

Posted on by
1

Conjuring2Outstanding horror film! Director James Wan has once again provided audiences with a brilliant work of the macabre and supernatural. From the writing to the directing to the acting and cinematography, Conjuring 2 is on par with, if not better than the first. Sometimes the best stories are true ones. And, although elements of the story have to be fictionalized in order to construct a cinematic narrative, grounding the Conjuring movies in the real work of Ed and Lorraine Warren (Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga) infuses a dynamic emotional response that directly impacts the increased frightening nature of these films. One of the observations that I appreciate most about, not only this but the predecessor, is not relying upon the jump-scare to curdle the blood. Are jump scares part of the movie? Well, of course! What fun would a horror film be without the entire theatre gasping for breath, jumping, or screaming together??? But Wan goes beyond the jump scare and channels his inner Hitchcock to build suspense and intrigue. The horror film is best appreciated in a group setting. It is a genre that specifically engages the audience on a visceral level. Wan is truly a master at his craft; and I love witnessing how he continues to prove his ability to develop creative horror films.

Ed and Lorraine Warren are back; and have been called upon, by the Catholic church, to investigate the, what’s been dubbed as the “Amityville” of London. Following a self-imposed sabbatical after the investigation of the infamous Amityville haunting on Long Island, Ed and Lorraine fly to London’s Enfield neighborhood to evaluate a reported haunting and possession. Struggling single mother of four Peggy Hodgson hopes that Ed and Lorraine will be able to drive the evil out of her home, and more specifically her youngest daughter Judy. In an effort to discover the truth behind the well-documented alleged demonic haunting and possession, Ed and Lorraine find that they have also become a target. Facing their most challenging case, Ed and Lorraine are determined to help the Hodgson family and drive the evil from the house.

Following the increasing trend for a film, including but not limited to horror, to begin with an elaborate prologue, Conjuring 2 starts with a fantastic moving shot of the famous eyelet windows of the 112 Ocean Avenue house in Amityville. Often filmed from the outside, this shot sequence takes place inside the attic. A much more intimate feel, this was an excellent choice for establishing the case that launched Ed and Lorraine Warren into the public eye. There have been numerous movies and documentaries based on the arguably most infamous haunting in the United States, so it was not necessary for Wan to spend too much time on it. It is, however, a very important scene because the plot/case of Conjuring 2 is directly related to the experience that the Warrens went through during the Lutz investigation. Beyond the establishing a connection between the Amityville and Enfield cases, beginning with the Warrens in the middle of the 112 Ocean Avenue investigation allows for Wan to visually show how and why the Warrens would seek a self-imposed sabbatical from supernatural and demonic investigations. Moreover, this sequence of events that provides copious amounts of plot development material are also instrumental in significant contributions to character development. Although this prologue lasts less than ten minutes, it contains prolific information vital to the plot of Conjuring 2.

It should not be of surprise that Wan uses the camera very strategically to tell this visually driven story. From the rule of thirds to lighting to creative use of angles and movement, the camera is instrumental in setting the macabre mood of the film. One of the visual storytelling elements that Hitchcock was most known for, especially in Psycho, is using the camera’s placement and angle to foreshadow something or someone. Wan takes a page from the Hitchcock handbook and utilizes the camera movement in such a way that you are predisposed to feeling certain that something or someone is about to appear or emerge from the shadows but your game is thrown off when that doesn’t happen–but then totally happens when you least expect it! Throughout the diegesis, you will encounter moment when the characters are faced with inner demons that parallel or symbolize the actual evil entities in the film. Having this subplot concurrent to the foreground aids in creating and maintaining an emotional connection to the characters. Shocking the audience both emotionally and physically. By eliciting dynamic and comprehensive responses to the horror on screen, the film becomes an immersive experience–that is the brilliance behind this dark and sinister tale.

Beyond the exceptional direction by Wan, part of what makes the Conjuring franchise so successful is the exquisite casting. Patrick Wilson (Insidious) and Vera Farmiga (Bates Motel) are perfectly cast in these films. From what I have read about the real Ed and Lorraine Warren, Wilson and Farmiga respectively stay true to the real-life people they are portraying while adding in the necessary acting skills necessary to increase the impact and believability of the film. The quality of the acting that Wilson and Farmiga bring to the film is outstanding. Sometimes, a horror film can have an compelling plot but the actors are so uninteresting that it prohibits the story from making the impression that it should. Wilson and Farming make the characters of Ed and Lorraine Warren interesting to watch and add a performance quality to the film that keeps your attention the whole time. The degree to which they add a sincere care for the victims of hauntings to their respective characters is refreshing and will stay with yowling after the movie closes. As the Warrens are reoccurring characters in the Conjuring franchise, it is vitally important that they are as interesting to watch as the plot itself since their cases are the inspiration for the whole franchise, at least put to this point.

If there is one negative element in the film, it is the weak showdown. Not weak in that it was anticlimactic or uninteresting, but that it felt a little rushed. At 2hrs and 15mins, the film is longer than the average horror film, so it was not necessary to rush the climax of the film. It certainly does not mitigate the experience of the movie, but I feel that it could have been a little more intense. That being said, if you are looking for an excellent movie to kickoff your weekend, then this one is it! At last check, it out-performed both Now You See Me 2 (which should’ve been entitled Now You Don’t) and Warcraft. Even if you have not seen the first Conjuring, you will still enjoy this installment. However, seeing the first one will help you to better understand the Warrens and their unconventional line of work. Can’t wait to see where James Wan and the Warrens take us next!

“Pawn Sacrifice” movie review

Posted on by
Reply

Pawn_SacrificeOf chess and men. Pawn Sacrifice is based on the true story of chess prodigy Robert “Bobby” Fischer and his quest to become the world’s greatest chess player. The game at the center of the movie takes place during the height of the cold war against the USSR. Director Edward Zwick crafts a gripping story complete with beautiful cinematography and a brilliant cast. Toby Maguire brings a neurotic charisma and acute anger to the infamous chess player that few could have done so successfully while staying true to the real life Bobby Fischer. Although watching a chess game sounds like it would make for a dreadfully boring and static story, screenwriter Steven Knight (et al) provides a screenplay reeling with intense psychological “chess” moves while remaining focussed on the game that “captured” the eyes of the world. Not surprisingly, the pretentious and unrevealing title kept general audiences from watching it, even though it was initially released during the autumn movie graveyard of September. If there was ever a mystery as to why Fischer’s mental stability greatly suffered as a result of the tournament, this movie sheds light on the obsessive compulsive struggles of a man who was focussed on beating the Soviets at their own game.

American and world-renown chess legend Bobby Fischer faces his greatest challenge yet: the world’s best chess grandmaster Soviet Boris Spassky. From the time he was 12 years old, Fischer began to capture the attention of the chess community of New York and soon the whole country. It was clear that Fischer was truly a prodigy who was destined for greatness in the strategic calculating game. In addition to having a brilliant mind for planning, predicting, and observation, he equally suffered because of his strength. Finding it nearly unbearable to tolerate anything that even slightly aggravated him, Fischer became as notorious as he was talented. Representing the United States, Fischer sees this as a strategic opportunity to outsmart and beat the Soviets, as the game is symbolic of the actual cold war that both countries were involved in. Follow his personal journey of triumph and defeat as he must play the most important game of his life with millions of people watching–some wanting him to succeed while others want him to fail.

The greatest strength in this bio pic is that it takes an otherwise boring game to watch; and creates an atmosphere of intrigue and suspense that parallels both the Cold War itself and the personal/interpersonal relationships between Fischer and his staff, family, and the public. What’s even more astonishing is that this somewhat fictional counterpart to the documentary on Bobby Fischer was able to be sourced for a feature-length narrative film. Unlike the documentary, Pawn Sacrifice goes back to the childhood and adolescent years of the prodigy in order for the audience to make a better connection with his character than can typically be done in a documentary. While the famous 21-match game takes up nearly half the screen time, there is still sufficient material, focussing on the development of Fischer, that it creates an atmosphere that draws you into the game in the latter half of the movie. Although the movie is about Fischer and chess, the degree to which Fischer shows dedication, immense passion, and uncompromising intellect can serve to make a connection with anyone who is passionate about a lifelong dream or aspiration.

One of the elements of Fisher’s upbringing that played a huge role in his anti-communistic paranoia is his mother’s communist activism. Sadly, that part of his life is merely touched upon and not explored very much. Spending more time on his mother’s activism and his hatred of anything remotely communistic could have provided more support for his bizarre behaviors during the tournament against the Soviets. While Fischer is at the center of the movie, he has two excellently written side kicks: (1) a patriotic attorney who attempts to keep Fischer on the right track as an American symbol and (2) a chess grandmaster priest who coached Fischer when he was younger and one of the only players to ever beat him. The character dynamics make the group intriguing to watch. Each so very different, but require the other in order to journey towards the chess world championship. It took amazing determination and long-suffering resilience to attempt to contain the unpredictable and extremely temperamental Bobby Fischer.

If you are looking for a movie to inspire you to be a better chess player, then you may be a little disappointed because you will see much more slapping of the time clocks than the movement of the pieces on the board; however, Zwick does cinematically work in some movements and strategy into the diegesis of the film. Thankfully the movie is shot beautifully and possesses an excellent pacing with strong diegetic structure. There is also some wonderful production and set design that will likely get overlooked since the game is really the focus and mostly occurs in very nondescript rooms. Pawn Sacrifice highlights one of the most famous chess games in all of modern history while getting a glimpse into the mind of a genius turned expat in the end.