American Sniper - Review

Well the Oscars are only a few weeks ago now, and I've spent very little time actually discussing many of the nominees, so let's take a look at American Sniper. This film is directed by Hollywood legend Clint Eastwood and based on the true story of Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle. For those who aren't aware, Chris Kyle became the deadliest marksman in US Military history while serving in Iraq before tragically being killed by a fellow veteran suffering from PTSD in 2013 after returning home. In addition to being nominated for multiple Oscars and becoming a massive success at the box office... American Sniper became 2014's movie that people judge you based on whether you liked it or not. Interesting... I was expecting Selma take that distinction (that's too bad, because I really liked Selma). Now I really shouldn't have to do this, but I'm going to start this review with a disclaimer. I am strictly reviewing the movie American Sniper and that alone... I'm not making any statements either the military or Chris Kyle himself. I never met the guy, I don't know what he was really like. His story certainly seems interesting and his ironic death is incredibly sad and tragic, but aside from what was stated in the movie itself... I don't have much to say about him.  And despite whatever my feelings are toward war itself, I have nothing but respect for the troops that so bravely serve and defend our country. So with that said... here's my review of American Sniper.

Chris Kyle (Bradley Cooper) was born and raised in Texas, who while deer hunting as a young boy, discovered he was a gifted marksman. A devout patriot and raised with a sense of duty, he decided to enlist in the Navy after the 1998 US Embassy bombings. He excels through the training, and eventually becomes a Navy SEAL sniper. After 9/11, he was shipped overseas to Iraq, where due to his pinpoint accuracy racks up enemy kills and protects his fellow troops from attacks. The war, however, takes a toll on his psyche, and when returning home, suffers from PTSD and finds re-adjusting to his home-life difficult. Much to the chagrin of his long suffering wife Taya (Sienna Miller) and two children, he continues to re-enlist and return to active duty overseas.

So I'm just going to come out and say this... I didn't care much for America Sniper. In fact, especially given the talent on display and a director that has proven himself time and time again, it's a shockingly inept film that fails on multiple levels and makes a number of fairly amateur mistakes. I saw this movie a few weeks ago, and I've had to spend some time thinking about exactly why it doesn't work. Is it because of the lack of solid subject matter? No, war or military films (especially those about recent events) offer plenty of themes and stories with which to work. Is it for the lack of interest? Maybe... I get the feeling that Bradley Cooper was nothing but dedicated (he also co-produced the film), though Clint Eastwood seems like he might have fallen asleep at the wheel. Was it because Chris Kyle's story just didn't have enough material for a biopic. Hmmm... I can't really answer that one right now. I haven't read his book, and like I said, my knowledge about his story is fairly limited. That said, based on what was presented here, I think maybe this material would have been better utilized as a documentary rather than a narrative. Still, you can make a good movie out of anything, so I sure somehow the movie could have worked.

American Sniper tries to be many things... a biopic, a drama, a character study, a suspense/thriller, an action movie, and a war movie... while getting virtually none of them right. The movie has been accused of being a propaganda film, but personally I don't think that's fair. Admittedly, while Clint Eastwood's political affiliations might have caused some commotion, it really does feel like he wasn't trying to make any political statements with this and rather just present the facts... and that's commendable. And it's not like every war film needs to have some overt anti-war message (or even pro-war for that matter) to be considered good. Classics like Platoon or Patton are excellent movies but don't exactly have any agendas (at least not really). So the film doesn't have a political agenda, which is fine, and instead opts to just detail Chris Kyle's personal struggles with the psychological effects of war. That sounds great in theory... it just doesn't get it right. The scenes in Iraq are so lazily directed, that they leave very little emotional impact. With one or two exceptions, they're not particularly suspenseful, and the emotional impact of these scenes is so glossed over you could practically write them out. That said, the infamous scene you've all seen in the trailer where Chris Kyle is forced to kill a young boy and his mother, and the emotional torment that followed, is one of the few somewhat effective moments. The rest just don't work all that well. There's a subplot involving a rivalry between Kyle and an enemy Iraqi sniper, that feels tacked on and extremely underdeveloped. Also, there's a story involving Kyle's unit pursing a vicious enemy known as The Butcher, a murderer who keeps the body parts of his victims. Throwing in a character that feels like a rejected 24 villain in an otherwise straightforward movie feels kind of out of left field, but I might be a little more forgiving toward that had it not felt so tacked on. Also, like many films or shows with similar subjects, the Iraqi or Middle Eastern characters are mostly portrayed as evil savages while the Americans as more upstanding... UGH!!! THIS IS ONE EXTREMELY RACIST TROPE THAT NEEDS TO GO AWAY!!! And before you give me the "But this is a true story Chris"... well, apparently A LOT of this movie was totally fabricated, or at least greatly exaggerated.

About half of the film is set in Iraq, while the rest details Chris Kyle's struggle to adjust to home life. To my biggest surprise, this is where the movie truly fails. The film's main focus is, of course, Bradley Cooper as Chris Kyle (as it should be), but his wife Taya also plays a major role in the story, but seems like she got shafted a bit. Her role is basically Chris's supportive wife struggling to care for her troubled husband. There's nothing particularly wrong with that, but she does feel like a shell of a character, and I would have liked to see a bit more from her end. Basically she shows up once in a while after Chris's time overseas, they get into an argument about him returning to active duty, he leaves for Iraq again, rinse and repeat a few more times. They're generally well-acted, Sienna Miller in particular shows some real dramatic range while Bradley Cooper gives a better than expected understated performance, even if the script doesn't give him nearly enough material to showcase any true acting ability. I really do like Bradley Cooper, but he still leaves a lot to be desired in his dramatic ability... honestly his best performances are still as Phil in The Hangover and Rocket Raccoon in Guardians of the Galaxy (I'm actually being totally serious, those two films show off his best acting chops) because he's allowed to go nuts and truly explore his characters unlike this where he isn't given much. Plus, this might seem a bit nit picky, but there's one scene in particular where Chris and Taya have what should be an important discussion while Chris consoles his crying newborn baby daughter... only any dramatic momentum is COMPLETELY undercut by the fact that Bradley Cooper is holding an obviously plastic doll instead of a real child (seriously Clint... you're an Oscar winning director, that was an Ed Wood level mistake)! Yes, the scenes of Chris Kyle struggling with with his PTSD have some emotional moments, but they're often glossed over or quickly abandoned without ever really taking the time to develop Chris Kyle as a character. Basically, it's little more than a series of tropes and war movie cliches, but with little to give them any real weight, originality, or emotional impact. Ugh... what a letdown.

I know I'm in the minority here, but American Sniper really was one of the biggest letdowns of 2014. It has all the ingredients of a well-made war film, but none come together. Maybe it's because it stands in the shadows of similar or better made war movies. If you want a better "War is Hell" movie that focuses on the exploits of a particular troop, watch Oliver Stone's Platoon. For a movie that explores the post-war effects on the soldiers that served, watch Born On The Forth of July (also by Oliver Stone) or Coming Home. Or maybe The Hurt Locker for a better "War is a Drug" movie (The Hurt Locker ain't perfect, but it's a far better made movie.) Probably the best movie to do all of these things, might still be Apocalypse Now... an insightful, thrilling, and all around brilliant war movie that will likely forever stand the test of time. American Sniper... it just comes off as empty and kind of flat... and that could not be more disappointing.

I give American Sniper 2 out of 5!

Guardians of the Galaxy - Review

I hate to sound all negative here... but is anyone else getting the feeling that Marvel's bubble is about to burst? I mean, since they kicked off their cinematic universe back in 2008, they've churned out hit after hit like clockwork, with movies ranging from good to pure awesome. Even what is arguably their weakest film, Iron Man 2, is at the very least an enjoyable action flick while The Avengers is probably going to be seen as one of the best summer blockbusters to ever hit theaters. Ugh... leave it to me to start out a review for what is easily the most enjoyable movie of the summer (hell, one of the most enjoyable movies of the last decade even) in such a negative way. Really not joking about that folks, I can't remember the last time I've had this much fun in a theater. How fun is it? Let's take a look...

Guardians of the Galaxy opens with Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) aka Starlord (well... at least he calls himself that), a human abducted by aliens when he was only child, stealing a mysterious orb on a distant planet. While his succeeds in his theft, he becomes marked as one of the most wanted men in the galaxy. First, he becomes the target of bounty hunters Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper), a genetically engineered raccoon, and Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel) a tree-like humanoid alien, who are attempting to cash in on the hefty bounty placed on Quill's head. Also after Quill is alien assassin Gamora (Zoe Saldana), a skilled killer trained by the evil Thanos, who has other uses in mind for the mysterious orb in Quill's possession. When they all end up in prison after a scuffle for the orb, they meet Drax the Destroyer (Dave Bautista), a vengeful warrior who lost his family at the hands of Ronan The Accuser (Lee Pace). While the group's initially meeting is filled with hate and tension, they all must reluctantly band together when they discover the truth behind the orb and Ronan's thirst for power grows stronger and more dangerous.

Guardians of the Galaxy is easily the strangest film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe... it's also one of the strangest big budget blockbusters to come around in recent memory... and it's just plain awesome! I've mentioned before in previous reviews that with all of the movies I watch and the general declining quality of Hollywood creativity, it gets harder and harder for me to get hyped and excited. Guardians of the Galaxy though peaked my interest from the get-go, not just because I thought it looked good (though it did), but rather because any film that has weird space aliens, a humanoid tree being, and a talking raccoon all fighting some epic war in space is so out there that even if it turned out to be bad, at least it would be interesting or different. Plus, this film also makes the big budget debut of cult film director James Gunn... a mainstay of the Troma school of filmmakers who's worked steadily directing some underrated low budget genre films (go watch Slither if you haven't seen it yet.. because it's awesome). So yeah... obscure comic series, weird space creatures, catchy soundtrack, and a cult filmmaker... that's what it takes to generate some interest.

It's tricky to truly describe what kind of film Guardians of the Galaxy is. It's something of a space opera, but it's also heavily inspired by the sci-fi serials of the 1950s and earlier (the same kind of films that inspired George Lucas to make Star Wars), and it's something of a bromance comedy. It's almost even a live action movie of Futurama... yeah, that's probably the best comparison since it's really more of a comedy than it is an action movie. It finds it's greatest strength in it's characters, and the actors playing them. Chris Pratt as Peter Quill leads the team, playing Quill as something like an 8-year-old's interpretation of a Han Solo like space hero mixed with a douchebag frat boy. Actually, he's basically a slightly more competent version of Phillip J Fry (like I said, Futurama). Pratt's natural comic timing and his better than expected execution of the action scenes all work to his advantage as the reluctant leader to a group of misfits. Zoe Saldana is predictably solid as Gamora... who at this point probably feels right at home in her usual role as the ass-kicking sci-fi heroine. Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel find a surprising amount of range in their voice over performances as Rocket and Groot respectively. It's especially impressive for Vin Diesel when you consider just how much emotion comes through his line readings of the phrase "I Am Groot" (that's all his character knows how to say). WWE superstar Dave Bautista turns out to be the biggest surprise, with a shockingly effective performance as Drax the Destroyer. While I knew he would kick ass in the action scenes (he's a wrestler after all), his believable, funny, and even sometimes moving performance as this vengeful brute is hands down one of the best athlete-turned-actor performances in recent memory. I also have to give a shout out to Lee Pace as the villainous Ronan the Accuser, playing off his role as something like Emperor Palpatine if he was a James Bond villain. Even if the story occasionally stumbles, the cast always manages to keep it afloat.

Based purely on visual terms, this is definitely one of the most impressive looking films I've seen in quite some time. The locals and production design all have a unique look while still paying tribute to the cult sci-fi B-Movies and serials of the 1950s. Plus, the vast array of colorful aliens and creatures all realized through top notch makeup and computer effects are as creative as they are impressive. On that note, the film is also a great example of just how far cgi technology has come in recent years. The effects used to render Rocket and Groot especially are easily the most impressive effects from this summer's barrage of blockbusters. Plus the action is constantly entertaining, whether it be a chase scene, fight scene, space battle... you name it, it's there, and it's awesome. Script-wise, this isn't exactly high caliber screenwriting. The story itself is creative if not fairly generic, in fact most of it's plot points ring a little too close to The Avengers. Fortunately it redeems itself through solid pacing, the aforementioned enjoyable characters, and it's witty sense of humor. The banter between the cast is full of some hilarious laugh out loud moments, plus it's scattered with frequent chuckles throughout the movie as well. It's really more of a comedy first and an action film second, and I have absolutely no problem with that. If nothing else, it was such a relief to see another comic book movie that was so bright, vibrant, diverse, and colorful... I am so sick of the dark and drab aesthetic plaguing so many films these days (I liked Nolan's Batman films too... but seriously it's okay to have some fun once in a while).

So Guardians of the Galaxy... so far the most enjoyable film I've seen this year. It's diverse, it's funny, and it's a blast to watch. If you haven't seen it yet, definitely check it out before it's run in theaters comes to an end.

My Score: 4.5 out of 5!

American Hustle - Review

Now that the 86th Academy Awards have come and gone, I realized that I never reviewed any of the Best Picture nominees. Don't really have any excuses this time, just kind of dropped the ball. Well, now that I know who won and lost, I don't have to make any pleas about who I hope will win, instead I get to complain about the films that took home awards they didn't deserve and the more deserving films that went home empty handed. So, first up is American Hustle, director David O. Russell's crime thriller/drama/comedy (it has bits and pieces from many genres) and what I consider the most overrated film of 2013. I already discussed this one a little bit in my Oscar predictions stating that despite receiving critical praise and ten Oscar nominations (though it didn't win any), I was somewhat befuddled by the film's immense acclaim. I know I'm in the minority here, but despite the efforts of a talented cast, a previously successful director, and worthy subject matter, there was just something missing from American Hustle and as a result, it failed to click. Maybe there's some irony in that title, because after watching it, I genuinely felt hustled by the filmmakers.

In a a loose dramatization of the real-life ABSCAM scandals, the year is 1978 and Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale), while nothing particularly impressive to look at, is one of the best con-artists in the game. With a number of seemingly legitimate businesses, Rosenfeld is an expert at the craft of scamming, whether through counterfeit art deals, illegal merchandise, shady loans, or many other means. While attending a friend's party, he meets the sultry Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams), a stripper/business clerk who takes an interest in Rosenfeld's business. The two form a partnership in Rosenfeld's con-games and start a casual relationship (despite Rosenfeld being married to a woman who, even though she hates him, refuses a divorce). When Rosenfeld and Sydney are caught by FBI agent Richie DaMaso (Bradley Cooper), he offers them a chance to avoid a prison sentence if the two cooperate with the FBI to help them track down and catch some other big-name criminals and con-artists. What follows is essentially a clusterfuck of mishaps involving cons, scams, swindling, friends becoming enemies, enemies becoming friends, the mafia, corrupt politicians, and shady FBI agents.

Now, American Hustle is not necessarily a "bad movie" but after watching it, I couldn't deny the fact that there was just something missing from it, and for a while, I couldn't put my finger on what that was. It certainly wasn't for lack of ambition, effort, talent, or decent subject matter. On the contrary, with a director like David O'Russell, subject matter as interesting as the ABSCAM scandles, and a cast consisting of immense talents like Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Jennifer Lawrence, Bradley Cooper, and Jeremy Renner selling the hell out of their roles, I had pretty high hopes for this flick. Maybe it was the raised expectations that killed this one's potential for me, but even after a second viewing, my thoughts hadn't changed. It's hard not to draw comparisons to Goodfellas while watching American Hustle, as it seemed like O'Russell was going for the style of "bleak/dark drama with comedic undertones" that Martin Scorsese has made a career out of. While there's nothing wrong with a filmmaker drawing inspiration from a near-perfect masterpiece like Goodfellas, American Hustle ultimately feels like an average imitation of a quality product, a thought only supported by the fact that there actually was a Scorsese film in 2013 with similar themes. It's like David O'Russell showed Martin Scorsese his film, and Marty responded by saying, "Nice try kid... but let me show you how the pros do it" and then proceeded to show him The Wolf of Wall Street.

With all that said, it's not fair to criticize a film for not being as incredible as Goodfellas (few are) or to throw David O'Russell under the bus for not being Scorsese (again... very few possess even a fraction of Scorsese's filmmaking talents). I will say this much, there are a few things about the movie that I like. With David O'Russell's sharp eye for visuals, the filmmakers did a commendable job recreating the 1970s. Everything from the outfits, the sets, the soundtrack, the makeup, and the hair (actually the hairstyles are probably the best part of the film) are accomplished with some stylish flair and a nice attention to detail. The actors are generally well-cast too, with the standouts being Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence (though both have done far better work in previous films). At the very least, you can't deny the absolute commitment each actor brought their respective role. The same could be said for director David O'Russell, who clearly put every once of his energy and talent into trying to deliver a quality product. Plus, the pacing is generally solid, the film finds a decent rhythm, and the script manages to throw in a chuckle-worthy scene once in a while. At the very least, the film isn't without any merit.

So like I mentioned before... I was originally quite perplexed as to why a film with so many positive elements could feel so unfulfilling. The cast, the direction, and the concept are, for the most part, generally solid. So what happened??? Well, despite the good individual parts, nothing really comes together all that well. It tries to be three things at once, a dramatic character study, a screwball comedy, and a heist/grifter film (with some socio-political undertones). Unfortunately, it doesn't really get any of those three parts right. The comedic elements are the only parts that come close to working, as I did get a few chuckles out a couple scenes, despite the humorous moments being very hit or miss. The characters, however, are probably the most disappointing part of the film, because they come close to working but not quite. They're mostly just comedic archetypes with little depth or personality that fail to rise above generic cliches. I won't dock the film points for it's characters not being likable or for being egotistic, narcissistic, or shallow (since that was clearly the point), but I will dock them for not being interesting. The basic set-up and heist story starts with promise but it culminates throughout a confusing and convoluted narrative yet still in ends with an outcome that I predicted five minutes into the damn film. Plus, the tone is all over the map and the style is never consistent. Because the film tackles so many ideas and stories, it continuously looses focus and by the time is over over... it just felt lifeless. A film with multiple plots and stories can work, but it takes one hell of a filmmaker to make it work... clearly David O'Russell was not up to it. The main problem, however, despite it's sheer energy, is that it lacks bite. It doesn't really much to say about the insanity of it's story aside from "we live in a messed up world", which is true but I was expecting more.

As I've mentioned, I know I'm in the minority here, but no matter how I look at American Hustle, it just doesn't do much for me. Maybe it's because I've seen so many films do exactly what American Hustle was trying to do, only so much better. If the movie sounds like it's up your alley you could check it out, or you could watch similar yet far more compelling films like Goodfellas, or more engaging movies like The Sting, or funnier flicks like A Fish Called Wanda... all of which are similar to American Hustle just better. If you're looking for a more recent film, then watch Scorsese's The Wolf of Wall Street. I wish I liked this movie, I WANT to like this movie, but no matter what American Hustle is nothing more than mediocre.

My Score: 2.5 out of 5!

Silver Linings Playbook - Review

Every so often, a decent or otherwise good film makes it's way into theaters, and for some reason, seems to take the world by storm. Silver Linings Playbook is one of those movies, a hit of the film festivals, showered with awards, praised by the critics, and embraced by audiences as a new classic... yeah, I'm wondering if I watched the same movie as everyone else. Wait wait wait! Don't freak out, let me make one thing clear... I liked Silver Linings Playbook, I just didn't quite love it. The film is good and has some really strong qualities, I'm not denying that, but the numerous flaws are what's keeping me from understanding just why it's being touted as some kind of new masterpiece. Is it because of the subject matter, or maybe that it features Bradley Cooper broadening his acting ability, or is it because Jennifer Lawrence is kind of a big deal right now? It's hard to say exactly where the hype lies, but either way Silver Linings Playbook has received quite the response. What works and what doesn't? Let's take a look...

Silver Linings Playbook opens with Pat Solitano (Bradley Cooper), being released from a mental institution after an 8 month stint. Pat was diagnosed with bi-polar disorder after witnessing his wife having an affair, an event which triggered a mental episode where he nearly beat his wife's lover to death. He is released into the care of his parents, Pat Sr (Robert De Niro) and Delores (Jacki Weaver), where he begins a long journey of piecing his life back together and hopefully reconciling with his wife (who, after the assault, placed a restraining order against Pat). Soon after arriving home, Pat is introduced to Tiffany Maxwell (Jennifer Lawrence), a recently widowed woman with issues of her own. Despite some initial hostility between the two, both Pat and Tiffany form a love/hate friendship as they help each other work through their issues, accomplish each other's respective goals, and find the silver lining in their unfortunate circumstances.

David O'Russell (the film's director) is a very talented filmmaker, let's get the out there right now. I've also heard he's kind of a maniac, but I'm not going to worry about that right now. Though he hasn't made a movie that I've quite fallen in love with yet, his work in films like Three Kings (quite good), I Heart Huckabees (took some time to appreciate this one, but I do admire it), and The Fighter (also quite good) has been impressive. Silver Linings Playbook actually reminded me a bit of The Fighter. Both films were family-based dramas that dealt with themes of bonding over sports (be it football or boxing) and health-related issues (drug addiction in the case of The Fighter and mental illness in the case of Silver Linings Playbook). It was through Russell's slick direction and the subtleties of the script that elevated The Fighter from being just another inner city boxer turned champion fighter flick (like all of the Rocky imitators). Silver Linings Playbook tries to recapture the success of that technique... albeit with mixed though still overall positive results. The cast is game, there are some truly compelling scenes, and the subject matter is worthy. That said, by the time the third act roles around, it looses a bit of it's edge and falls victim to one too many predictable and formulaic beats.

Let's start where most of the film's shining attributes abide... the cast! Bradley Cooper has been mainly regarded, up until this point, as a comedic actor with well-received roles in films like The Hangover and Wedding Crashers. His non-comedic movies have been at best average (I'm being nice), though often not the fault of Cooper. His role as Pat finally gives him a chance to showcase his true skill, both through comedic and dramatic means. He gets a few hearty laughs over the course of the film and sells every one of his heavier scenes... that's talent right there. The most talked about performance, however, is probably Jennifer Lawrence as Tiffany. With her Oscar victory for this role, she has officially crossed the line of promising up-and-comer, to full blown superstar. Make no mistake, she is damn good in this role, taking what could have been a fairly one note character and making it into something very impressive. Most of the film's best moments come from Lawrence, and it's clear that she is one hell of an actress who deserves the success that has come to her. Both Cooper and Lawrence have a great chemistry, and ultimately contribute to most of the film's success.

The supporting cast has received some attention as well. Robert De Niro is always a welcome presence to any movie, whether it be a drama, comedy, action, or horror flick... he's just one of those actors who can play anything. While his part of Pat Sr isn't one of his most memorable roles (though that's hardly a criticism when your filmography consists of Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Cape Fear, The Godfather Part II, etc.), De Niro does a good job playing the"bad ass with a heart of gold" kind of parts. He's funny, he's intense, he's dramatic, he's likable, he's De Niro... what more can I say? Australian actress Jacki Weaver is great as Pat's mom Delores, in a more understated but still impressive performance. She's quite convincing as the torn but loving mother caught in the middle of this madness and who wants nothing more than to see both her husband and son both be happy with their issues resolved. Her role in this isn't quite as impressive as her previously Oscar nominated performance in the underrated 2009 flick, Animal Kingdom, but it works. I also have to give a shout out to Chris Tucker, who up until now, has always been one of the most annoying comedic actors to walk the Earth, actually give a more grounded and surprisingly heartfelt performance as Danny, Pat's buddy from the mental hospital. Overall, this was a very well assembled cast, and without them, the movie wouldn't have been nearly as effective.

Now we come to the story... and this is where I'm most divided. The individual parts are all solid, and the seeds planted could have amounted into a new classic. The idea is good, the characters are mostly well developed, and family drama is genuine. The first two-thirds of the film are quite good, with little to no flaws. There are some very funny scenes that managed to get a few decent laughs out of me, and when it came to the heavier scenes, yeah I got legitimately invested in those too. The two tones were well-balanced, it was both funny and dramatic in equal parts with neither feeling forced. Once the final third rolled around... eesh, this is where I'm torn. I can't really discuss it without spoiling parts of the ending, so I'm going to put a spoiler warning up.

SPOILER WARNING!!! I AM REVEALING PARTS OF THE FILM'S ENDING!!! SKIP TO THE LAST PARAGRAPH IF YOU DON'T WANT ANYTHING REVEALED!!!

Okay, so film ends with some of the most cliched and predictable story elements I have ever seen.
Up until the third act, most of the movie avoided a lot of the typical romcom formula. Even though I had a hunch it might end copping out, I held out hope that it would not... I was wrong. It ends with Pat's consensual break up with his wife so that he and Tiffany could be together. After Pat Sr gives his son the obligatory "go get her" speech, Pat chases down Tiffany, they reveal their love for each other, the kiss, blah blah blah, happily ever after. It's not just the ending either, by the time the third act rolled around, it was completely obvious that the movie was going to resort to the typical Hollywood formula. This wouldn't bother me too much, except for the fact that the movie had so much going for it. Once again though, we get the typical Hollywood message that the cure for mental illness is to hook up with an equally messed up, though still conventionally attractive, partner. Kind of a letdown, not gonna lie.

SPOILERS END HERE!!!

And there is Silver Linings Playbook. Despite my gripes and complaints, I will say that the movie is worth seeing. Up until the end, most of it works quite well, and while I do think the movie, as a whole, is a bit overrated, it's definitely not bad. If you haven't seen it yet, check it out.

My Score: 3.5 out of 5!