Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Movie Review: "Ferdinand" (2017)

Director: Carlos Saldanha
Year: 2017
Rating: PG
Running Time: 1 hour, 48 minutes

A flower-loving bull named Ferdinand is mistaken for a dangerous fighter after he is stung by a bee. He is then taken to a camp where matadors select bulls to be their competition. He may be forced to fight but will do everything in his power to prevent that from happening.

Ferdinand may have been the original 'flower child.' Don't believe us? He held strong beliefs in 'flower power' and non-violent resistance. Okay, maybe he just really liked the smell of flowers. "Ferdinand" is the latest film from Blue Sky Studios, which is known for producing animated features like the "Ice Age" franchise and the "Rio" franchise. The story itself is based on a 1936 children's book "The Story of Ferdinand" by Munroe Leaf, which was adapted once before by Disney into the 1938 Oscar-winning short film "Ferdinand the Bull." This film stars John Cena as the voice of Ferdinand, who, despite being the strongest and mightiest bull in the yard, is far happier sniffing flowers under a tree and spending time with his friend Nina, voiced by Julia Saldanha as a little girl and Lily Day as a slightly older adolescent girl. When the flower festival comes to town, Ferdinand is supposed to stay home now that he's a giant bull. He likes flowers so much that he can't stay away. After getting stung by a bee makes him accidentally rampage through town in pain, Ferdinand is captured and sent to a camp where matadors select bulls to fight. Now, he must find a way to escape or fight for his life in an arena for the entertainment of an audience. Joining Cena in the film are Kate McKinnon, Bobby Cannavale, Anthony Anderson, Gina Rodriguez, Daveed Diggs, David Tennant, Gabriel Iglesias, and even Peyton Manning of all people.

We weren't exactly looking forward to "Ferdinand" and put off watching it for quite some time. We were wondering what Blue Sky could possibly do to stretch a 36-page illustrated kids book into a 100-minute feature. We feared it would lose the general sweet-natured sentiment of the original story. Luckily, "Ferdinand" does a good job of staying relatively true to the spirit of the story. There is a lot of heart in the movie, and Ferdinand is an extremely likable character. It does have the standard kid's movie message of "you can be true to who you are and be what you want to be in life, even if what you want to be is a flower-sniffing bull." There is also a bit of a tragic undertone to the whole thing as the young bulls watch their fathers going off to fight in the arena and never come back. Later, we see the bulls who don't have what it takes to be fighters get shipped off to the chop house. It may be a bad idea to take your kids out for a burger after seeing "Ferdinand."

Overall, this movie is way funnier than we thought it would be and brings about several big laughs here and there, which luckily far outnumber the eye-rolling, groan-worthy moments. John Cena does an excellent job playing a timid, sympathetic, lovable main character and his supporting cast does a great job alongside him. Kate McKinnon does a good job as Lupe the goat, though it is a very McKinnon-like character with all the bizarre eccentricities we see from her silly style of comedy. Chances are, if you don't like her, you won't like the goat, and the goat is in a lot of the movie. Others like Gabriel Iglesias, Gina Rodriguez, David Tennant, and Bobby Cannavale each get their moment to shine and round out a wonderful ensemble cast. In the end, "Ferdinand" is an above average kids film. It is one of the better animated features of the year. It's full of heart, silliness, and decent animation.

My Rating: 7.5/10
BigJ's Rating: 7/10
IMDB's Rating: ~6.8/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: ~70%
Do we recommend this movie: Yes!

Monday, January 15, 2018

Movie Review: "Darkest Hour" (2017)

Director: Joe Wright
Year: 2017
Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 2 hours, 5 minutes

The story of Winston Churchill from his appointment as Prime Minister to his famous parliamentary speech after the evacuation of Dunkirk.

Dunkirk was a common cinematic topic last year. "Darkest Hour" is the third film from 2017 to have a central focus on the Dunkirk evacuation, the other two being the drama "Their Finest" and Christopher Nolan's "Dunkirk." "Their Finest" focused on the public perception and propaganda of bolstering public support for the war through the use of film. "Dunkirk" focused on the details of the actual event and the grand spectacle of it all. Finally, we have "Darkest Hour." This film looks at the politics and decisions of those behind the scenes, mainly Winston Churchill, regarding the best way to handle the situation and whether or not he should cave to pressure from his own party to negotiate with Hitler for peace, though doing so would mean letting most of Europe fall under Nazi rule. The film is directed by Joe Wright, who has helmed other projects such as "Pride & Prejudice" and "Atonement." He also directed "Pan," but hey, we all make mistakes, right? The film stars Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill, who was reluctantly made Prime Minister when his successor Neville Chamberlin, played by Ronald Pickup, was forced to resign by the Opposition. Churchill was chosen by his conservative party because he was the only person they thought the Opposition would accept. Much to their chagrin, Churchill didn't exactly fall into party lines when making his decisions about the war.

Ever since its release, we have heard that "Darkest Hour" contained a brilliant performance by Gary Oldman, but not much else. BigJ and I are not history buffs and, on any given day, would rather watch a sci-fi or horror film than a war picture. Luckily, we don't listen to critics and audiences and make it a point to develop our own decision, and by god, we were blown away by this film. It is a remarkable piece of cinema. Now that we have seen it, we can confirm Gary Oldman offers a magnificent, incredible, Oscar-worthy performance. It is certainly our favorite "Best Actor-worthy" performance of 2017. As Winston Churchill, he can be funny, confident, commanding and powerful, yet he also displays a certain level of insecurity here and there. He is able to cover a range of emotions that allows Oldman to fully explore what he is capable of as an actor.  As we watched this film, we didn't see Gary Oldman, not once, not ever. He is Winston Churchill. We were fully brought into the story and honestly believed we were watching Churchill himself. His performance is aided by brilliant makeup work that is also very deserving of awards attention. The makeup is so pristine and natural looking that it is hard to believe it's makeup at all. Beyond Oldman's performance and appearance, the rest of the cast does a great job, including but not limited to Kristin Scott Thomas, who plays Churchill's wife Clemmie, Lily James as Churchill's assistant/typist Elizabeth Layton, Ben Mendelsohn as King George VI, and Stephen Dillane as the wonderfully detracting and semi-despicable Viscount Halifax.

Writer Anthony McCarten and director Joe Wright have found a way to make WWII feel interesting and fresh and supremely engaging despite it being a subject that has been written about and filmed about for decades. The story itself is utterly enthralling. We personally found ourselves glued to the screen and hanging on every word despite knowing the outcome of it all. We felt massive amounts of supportive emotion and were roused by Churchill's speeches as if we were citizens of the UK during WWII being called to rise up against Nazism. We laughed at Churchill's wit and candor knowing other politicians might not have been considering the circumstances. Some may like their historical war-time movies to be about bombs and explosions. For us, the behind-the-scenes politics being debated about the big decisions of a war as the lives of hundreds of thousands of soldiers hang in the balance is just as riveting as big, noisy explosions and bullets whizzing through battlefields. This is a fantastic movie that is definitely worth your time, even if you're not really into watching political or war movies. Sure, it's Oscar-baity, but who cares? We have seen many awards-baity films this year and every year. Several have missed their mark for us and others have been utter letdowns. "Darkest Hour" fires on all cylinders as a historical biopic and rarely, if ever, lets up.

My Rating: 8.5/10
BigJ's Rating: 9/10
IMDB's Rating: ~7.4/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: ~85%
Do we recommend this movie: ABSOLUTELY YES!!!

Saturday, January 13, 2018

Movie Review: "Mudbound" (2017)

Director: Dee Rees
Year: 2017
Rating: R
Running Time: 2 hours, 14 minutes

The lives of a black sharecropper and his family intersect with the white family who owns the land they work on, leading to friendship, hardship, and conflict in the Jim Crow south.

It is always good to remember there was a time when America was a really shitty place to live for a lot of people, that it wasn't always such a great example of the idea that "All men are created equal." While our country still isn't perfect, movies like "Mudbound" bear painful reminders that it's a little better than it used to be. This movie is directed by Dee Rees, who also wrote the screenplay along with Virgil Williams. It is adapted from the novel of the same name by Hillary Jordan. The film stars Jason Clarke, Carey Mulligan, Garrett Hedlund, and Jonathan Banks as the members of the McAllen family. Joining them are Rob Morgan, Mary J. Blige, Kennedy Derosin, Frankie Smith, Joshua J. Williams, and Jason Mitchell, who make up members of the Jackson family. Henry McAllen, played by Clarke, owns a large plot of farmland in Lousiana. The Jackson family rents a piece of that land from the McAllens and use it to tend their own crop. There are times when the families get along as the Jacksons offer assistance to the McAllens on several occasions. Jamie McAllen, played by Hedlund, and Ronsel Jackson, played by Mitchell, eventually become good friends as they bond over their time served in WWII. The relationship between these two families starts out peaceful, at the very least tolerable. Unfortunately, the eldest McAllen, Pappy, played by Banks, is an awful scumbag piece of shit racist KKK member who makes it his business to let the Jacksons know that he is an awful scumbag piece of shit racist KKK member whenever the opportunity presents itself.

It's hard not to notice right off the bat that "Mudbound" is a beautifully shot piece of cinema. Cinematographer Rachel Morrison has done a brilliant job with her stunning, breathtaking, award-worthy camerawork. This is an extremely powerful and emotional story that can elicit anger and tears at the same time. The acting is great. Garrett Hedlund and Jason Mitchell are fantastic as two WWII veterans battling moments of PTSD and the constant memories of their fallen fellow soldiers. These two fine actors are not getting their proper dues and recognition, and we believe their performances in any other year would garner award-worthy praise. Mary J. Blige is also wonderful as she offers a very strong presence even in her moments of silence. Really, the whole cast is nothing short of tremendous. With all that being said, there are a few problems with "Mudbound" that happen mostly in the first act. Dee Rees takes a lot of time to build each character, and though this makes the audience feel for them, it also causes the pacing in the first half of the film to be dreadfully slow. It isn't until Jamie and Ronsel return from their tour of duty that we really started to become engaged with what was happening in the film. Luckily, what winds up occurring will draw you in so you are completely enthralled, saddened by, and outraged with the entire second half of the movie. It is in this latter half where all of the hard-hitting moments will swallow you up and take you through a gamut of emotions until you lose control of them completely at the film's climactic moments.

Despite a slow start, "Mudbound" makes the wait worthwhile. This is definitely one of the better movies to come out on Netflix in 2017. It is full of spectacular performances, harrowing scenes, and iconic, award-worthy cinematography.

My Rating: 8/10
BigJ's Rating: 8/10
IMDB's Rating: 7.5/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 96%
Do we recommend this movie: Yes!

Friday, January 12, 2018

Movie Review: "No Stone Unturned" (2017)

Director: Alex Gibney
Year: 2017
Rating: NR
Running Time: 1 hour, 51 minutes

The families of the victims of a mass shooting that took place at a pub in Loughinisland, Northern Ireland search for answers to this decades-old unsolved crime.

There was a time in Northern Ireland known as The Troubles. During this period, terrorists from the IRA (Irish Republican Army) and terrorists from loyalist groups like the UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force) would go "tit for tat," or eye for an eye, killing each other and civilians during a period of vicious conflict. If a member of the IRA was murdered, there was no question that a Protestant would be killed in retaliation. If a member of the UVF was murdered, Catholic civilians would be killed in retaliation. Such was the case one evening, June 18, 1994, at a small pub in Loughinisland, Northern Ireland, where a group of people, all of whom were Catholic, happened to be watching Ireland competing in the World Cup on television when a group of masked men entered the pub and gunned them all down. These men were said to be members of the UVF and the killing was a retaliation for the death of one of its members who was killed by the IRA. Though a preliminary investigation was conducted and the police found an abundance of evidence from potential suspects, nobody was ever charged with a crime. Acclaimed documentarian Alex Gibney, who has made other hard-hitting pieces like the Oscar-nominated "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," the Oscar-winning "Taxi to the Dark Side," and "Going Clear: Scientology & the Prison of Belief," takes a look at this unsolved case and tries to explore what went wrong during the investigation.

We are huge fans of Alex Gibney's work and have liked many of his past films. In many ways, "No Stone Unturned" is a fairly standard true crime documentary. He speaks with family members of the victims who were killed in the '94 terrorist attack, as well as the only survivor of the massacre. Gibney attempts to piece together clues as he talks to police and other investigators. He also interviews a former member of the UVF, the terrorist group which took responsibility for the shooting. As Gibney sets the stage with his narration, there are reenactments of the event and crime scene photos shown in graphic, grizzly detail. We learn a brief but thorough history of Northern Ireland, how it remained part of Great Britain when Ireland declared its independence and The Troubles that started because of it. These are facts I can't say I remember learning about in school. The battle between separatists and loyalists raged on for years until a peace agreement was met that exonerated most terrorists of the crimes they committed during this troubled period. Gibney scrutinizes police investigations, uncovers why they failed, and seeks to find if there was a conspiracy or cover-up by the British government to protect informants and others who may have committed this heinous act.

Though all of these historical events are examined, at its core, "No Stone Unturned" is a story about a family looking for closure for the loss of a son and father. It is a damning story, one we had no knowledge of prior to watching this film. It is full of emotion and sorrow, and it has the ability to make you angry and baffled at the same time as piece by piece the mystery is revealed. That being said, we were not as gripped by this documentary as we hoped we would be and we must admit, we were far more engaged by Gibney's other award-worthy pieces than this one. It is clear that a painstaking amount of time and effort is taken to catch everyone in the audience up on the history of this story, but we think the film as a whole could have been streamlined a bit. If you are intrigued by true crime, government conspiracies, and unsolved mysteries, chances are, this documentary will still be worth your while.

*"No Stone Unturned" is now available to watch on all major VOD platforms, including iTunes, Amazon, Google, Vudu, Vimeo, etc.*

My Rating: 7/10
BigJ's Rating: 6.5/10
IMDB's Rating: ~8.0/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: ~75%
Do we recommend this movie: Sure, why not?

Movie Review: "Downsizing" (2017)

Director: Alexander Payne
Year: 2017
Rating: R
Running Time: 2 hours, 15 minutes

Not happy with their current situation, Paul and Audrey Safranek decide to shrink themselves to about five inches tall in a procedure known as "Downsizing" when they discover their rather modest level of equity will translate to an extravagant wealth when they are shrunken. When Audrey backs out at the last minute, it leaves Paul tiny and looking at the world in a whole new way.

The world is in trouble, the human race is in trouble, and we are all too lazy to do anything about it unless there is some form of economic benefit in it for us. There, we just saved you two hours so now you don't have to watch any hamfisted storytelling. "Downsizing" is directed by Alexander Payne, who has a tremendous track record up until now, directing such films as "Nebraska," "The Descendants," and "Sideways." He also wrote the screenplay along with Jim Taylor, who has worked with Payne numerous times in the past on films like "Election" and "About Schmidt." This film stars Matt Damon as Paul Safranek, an occupational therapist at Omaha Steaks. He and his wife Audrey, played by Kristen Wiig, want to get a better home and improve their situation in life but are struggling to afford it. Some years back, a Norwegian scientist, played by Rolf Lassgård, developed a process called "downsizing," which can reduce the size of organic matter exponentially. This was done as an effort to combat environmental issues caused by the human race, such a global climate change and food shortages due to overpopulation. In reality, most people go through the downsizing process simply to better their station in life since a dollar stretches much further when you're only five inches tall. Everything looks good for Paul, but his plan is turned upside down when his wife backs out at the last minute, leaving him single, unsure, only five inches tall.

We have liked many of Alexander Payne's previous films. Many of the movies listed above turned out to be in our top 10 or 20 the years they were released. Because of this, it is all the more disappointing that "Downsizing" winds up being a boring slog of a film. We are fine with movies that contain messages about saving the environment, and we even agree with the sentiment being put forth in this film. That being said, it is delivered in a very clumsy, dull, inept manner that the longer we sat in the theater, the more we wanted to buy an F-250 out of spite. "Downsizing" sort of hid its actual themes and agenda from the public in its marketing material. It was sold as a light comedy about the wonders of "getting small" and how people adjust to a miniature world while finding out even the small world has its problems. What it actually is is a satire meant to critique the laziness of those with good intentions and the fact that people won't do anything unless there is a financial benefit. As expected, the arguments around downsizing fall into partisan politics of the "big" versus the "small" and how small people hurt the economy of the big people and so forth and so on. The argument is never what's best for mankind and the planet, but rather how will a person's actions impact another person's wallet. All of these are good ideas in theory, but the execution is handled so very, very poorly. Add that to a less than stellar performance on the part of Matt Damon and you've got a recipe for disaster. As Paul Safranek, Matt Damon is essentially the "every-man" character, but he does so as lazily as possible, making his character devoid of wit, charm, or interest. The talents and charisma of actor Christoph Waltz are stifled in favor of a terrible French accent and boring characteristics. And Hong Chau, don't even get us started on Hong Chau's Ngoc Lan Tran, a Vietnamese dissident with an accent so stereotypical it gives Mickey Rooney's a run for its money. Though she brightens the mood with a couple of well-timed jokes, it's painfully obvious her only on-set direction was something to the effect of "be more Asian." It was painful to watch. Having heard Chau on talk shows hyping the movie in preparation for the Golden Globes and her nomination for Best Supporting Actress, we know she sounds nothing like her character here. If we're being honest, we had major secondhand embarrassment knowing this sort of thing still manages to happen in 2017 (but then again, this has been a crazy f**king year, so we guess we shouldn't be surprised).

When a filmmaker is trying to deliver a message, they can't make it look like they are on a soapbox. It's like trying to feed a dog a pill it doesn't want to swallow. You have to wrap it in something enticing, like a piece of cheese. Unfortunately, the cheese Alexander Payne wrapped his "Downsizing" message in is old, dry, and covered in mold. Despite some great visuals, the film is an utter disappointment full of banal dialogue, uninteresting characters, an overlong runtime, and a pseudo-smart plot.

My Rating: 3/10
BigJ's Rating: 3.5/10
IMDB's Rating: ~5.8/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: ~51%
Do we recommend this movie: AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE!!!

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

Movie Review: "Marshall" (2017)

Director: Reginald Hudlin
Year: 2017
Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 1 hour, 58 minutes

The story of NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall, who works with local attorney Sam Friedman to defend a black man who has been accused of raping and trying to kill his white socialite employer.

Thurgood Marshall was an attorney for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and was the first African American to serve on the United States Supreme Court. What better way to pay tribute to the incredible works of Mr. Marshall than by focusing on a case where he was primarily relegated to being a background player? "Marshall" is directed by Reginald Hudlin, who is known for directing films like "House Party," "Boomerang," and "The Ladies Man." The film stars Chadwick Boseman as the titular Thurgood Marshall, who as a young lawyer worked for the NAACP arguing civil rights cases all the way to the US Supreme Court. Joining him is Josh Gad as Sam Friedman, who winds up being the reluctant lead counsel in the latest case the NAACP has taken on. The two lawyers are defending a black man named Joseph Spell, played by Sterling K. Brown, who has been accused of raping and trying to murder the wife of his employer Eleanor Strubing, played by Kate Hudson, a wealthy socialite. Of course, Spell says he is innocent, so Marshall and Friedman must establish enough doubt in the case to allow him to go free.

Thurgood Marshall was an important figure in American history. As mentioned above, Marshall was not only the first black Supreme Court justice, but he also argued many crucial civil rights cases, including Murray vs. Pearson, Smith vs. Allwright, Shelley vs. Kraemer, and most notably, Brown vs. Board of Education. So, one has to wonder why those responsible for writing, directing, and producing "Marshall" chose to focus on a case where Thurgood Marshall was relegated to playing second fiddle. The film does, however, paint him as a puppet master pulling the strings of the reluctant and supposedly inexperienced defense attorney Sam Friedman. This is a point that has greatly offended Friedman's living relatives considering he was actually a very seasoned trial lawyer by that time and had been practicing law longer than Marshall himself. Thurgood Marshall deserves to have his story told, and quite frankly, we would have rather seen a movie that covered a greater spectrum of his accomplishments as opposed to focusing on a trial where he was little more than a glorified consultant.

Despite this odd choice, "Marshall" is still a decent, very polished, very pristine biopic that is saved by its excellent performances. Chadwick Boseman has never disappointed us. We have loved him in just about every movie he has been in and he is great once again in this project. Josh Gad also continues to impress us the more we see him act. He does a good job as Sam Friedman, the hesitant and worried insurance lawyer who eventually comes to see the importance of his involvement in the Spell case. Finally, Dan Stevens, who plays the slimy, bigoted district attorney representing Kate Hudson's Mrs. Strubing, is wonderfully reprehensible. This film marks another fine performance from Stevens. Unfortunately, despite the efforts from everyone in front of the camera, "Marshall" is a rather paint-by-numbers courtroom trial drama as we watch the jury hear one side of the story versus the other in a dramatic fashion complete with all the twists and turns you'd expect from a film of this nature. As the trial moves along, more evidence is uncovered. As stories change, we finally get to the verdict about 20 minutes too late. We aren't sure if this paints a wholly realistic picture of Thurgood Marshall or Sam Friedman, and though it is still a somewhat entertaining movie, it does have its massively slow points that drag the entire thing down from time to time. In the end, this may be worth watching for fans of courtroom dramas or of Chadwick Boseman or Josh Gad, but it won't really be a movie we remember in the long run. It is a little too glossy, a little too long, and a little too familiar.

My Rating: 6.5/10
BigJ's Rating: 6.5/10
IMDB's Rating: 7.1/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: 83%
Do we recommend this movie: Sure, why not?

Tuesday, January 9, 2018

Movie Review: "Molly's Game" (2017)

Director: Aaron Sorkin
Year: 2017
Rating: R
Running Time: 2 hours, 20 minutes

The story of the self-made "Poker Princess" Molly Bloom, who ran high stakes poker games for rappers, Hollywood celebrities, and the business elite.

We aren't ones to read gossip magazines (obsessively). We also have little interest in poker, so we really weren't all that familiar with the name Molly Bloom. That being said, we were still pretty excited to see "Molly's Game," a biopic written by Aaron Sorkin, who has penned brilliant screenplays for "Steve Jobs," "The Social Network," and "Moneyball." This time around, however, Sorkin didn't just write the screenplay, he stepped into the director's chair for the first time and directed this adaptation of Molly Bloom's biography "Molly's Game: From Hollywood's Elite to Wall Street's Billionaire Boys Club, My High-Stakes Adventure in the World of Underground Poker." The film stars Jessica Chastain as the titular Molly Bloom, the ambitious former competitive skier turned "poker princess," or so she was dubbed by the media. Joining her is Idris Elba, who plays her attorney Charlie Jaffey, as well as Kevin Costner, who plays her father Larry, whom Molly butted heads with throughout her life. The film follows Bloom's life from the end of her skiing career through her meteoric rise as head of her own poker empire that catered to celebrities and Wall Street billionaires, all the way to her eventual arrest and criminal hearing.

We know exactly what to expect from an Aaron Sorkin-penned screenplay: fast-paced, punchy, rapid-fire dialogue, and we certainly get that in spades in "Molly's Game." There is no better actor to deliver Sorkin's words than the marvelous Jessica Chastain. The two-time Oscar-nominated actress could really justify getting a third nomination for her performance in this film. As Molly Bloom, Chastain is strong, powerful, and in command, but also has moments of deep emotion, vulnerability, and chaos. She hits each of these notes with precision-point accuracy, proving yet again she is one of the best actresses working in Hollywood at the moment. With Sorkin's dialogue and Chastain's delivery of the voiceover that runs throughout the movie, we become completely captivated by what is happening from beginning to end, even if we don't know all of the card game terminologies being expressed. Idris Elba does a wonderful job as Bloom's lawyer Charlie Jaffey. He approaches Molly in the same way the audience might. Those who know anything about Bloom got their facts from the tabloids, leading many to wonder why they should care about her or empathize with her. Molly convinces Charlie that she deserves a fair shake and shouldn't be judged, and at the same time, she convinces the audience to look past what they think they know and learn about the real Molly Bloom.

"Molly's Game" is a story that could be loaded with scandal and intrigue if the names of all the players involved were ever fully revealed. It plays it safe at times but still managed to pack some explosive moments and exchanges. The movie is long, but it doesn't feel that way due to its expert pacing and ultra-engaging story. Maybe it could have lost a few minutes here and there, but it does cover a lot of time and a lot of information, so it's hard to say if it could have been any shorter than it was. This may not be a perfect film, but we enjoyed the hell out of it and definitely recommend checking it out, especially if you are a fan of Sorkin or Chastain's past work.

My Rating: 9/10
BigJ's Rating: 8.5/10
IMDB's Rating: ~7.7/10
Rotten Tomatoes Rating: ~82%
Do we recommend this movie: ABSOLUTELY YES!!!