Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy // Gary Oldman {Movie}

Why I'm watching
Okay, the Cumberbatch kick inspired me to finally borrow it, and it came on my radar because of Tom Hardy... but I’m really watching this for Gary Oldman. And, y'know, because it looks like a legitimately interesting movie.

Where I got the movie
Greenwich. What what.

Expectations
A great spy thriller.

So how was it?

Oh my god, this was the best spy thriller… and absolutely not what you probably want or expect when looking for a spy thriller. It’s quiet. It’s desperate. There are zero gun fights, kung-fu fights, crazy surprise plots -- but if you have the attention span, it will keep you on the edge of your seat.

Basically, it follows the interpersonal drama of a spy agency in the 70s, on the tail end of the Cold War. Yeah, I said interpersonal. That’s real espionage, folks: finding out which one of your trusted allies is the mole. George Smiley (Gary Oldman) is the main character, brought out of retirement to find the mole among his former peers -- peers who forced him into retirement in the first place. He enlists two younger spies (Hardy and Cumberbatch) to quietly sort everything out.

The timeline jumps all over the place, which makes it a little hard to follow, but pulls the mystery together beautifully.

Recommendation
Fans of quiet suspense. Not for anyone expecting Bond or Bourne.

Feels
Sly. Thrilling, but realistic. Quiet.

Favorites
Gary Oldman, oh my lord, that creepy-sly-good poker face.

Least favorites
Getting ahold of the timeline was a struggle -- especially because I wasn’t expecting it.

Dorian Gray // Oscar Wilde {Movie}

Why I'm watching
I liked the short novel by Oscar Wilde -- and okay, let’s face it, the lead actor is adorable.

Where I got the movie
Browsing the ‘new’ section at the Greenwich library. I always thought my RA classes overemphasized browsing for discovery, but it turns out it’s surprisingly effective. Not only do I run into titles I forgot I wanted to see -- I also find stuff I’ve never heard of, and it’s interesting to just pick something up without any expectations.

Expectations
...not high. Something about the pretty-boy lead actor, and the fact that I’ve never heard of this new adaptation of a very famous short story, makes me think this was a flop, although a high-budget flop.

So how was it?

Surprisingly, the movie doesn’t wander too far from the original plot. It begins with Dorian Gray sitting for an oil painting for his friend Basil, listening to Basil’s hedonistic friend Lord Henry. He becomes convinced that beauty and pleasure are the most important things in life, and sells his soul so that the portrait ages in his place. Dorian pursues a sexual and ultimately sinful lifestyle, staying young and beautiful while his portrait ages and becomes disfigured.

It was actually a fairly good interpretation of the story, with excellent supporting actors and a surprisingly good performance from the lead. They found a pretty-boy actor (a must, for Dorian Gray) who can act. The supporting actors had a lot of… character? They stood out as complex and individual personalities, rather than “Rich friend #1 with black hair,” “rich friend #2 with beard,” and “attractive woman #1.”

The movie did a great job showing the seedy underbelly of high society, too. Instead of getting heavy handed -- or worse, outright explaining it in dialog -- there were interesting moments woven in, and a pretty cool artsy montage blurring the lines of high society, public image, sex, murder, etc.

Feels
Victorian without being a caricature of the era. Dark, but maybe a little to neat and tidy for the subject matter. No pulled punches when it comes to the hedonistic subject matter, but not a lot of actual nudity. Felt a little too clean.

Favorites
Casting for Dorian -- for all of the characters, actually. I was also incredibly impressed by the subtle but strong cultural differences between the Victorian society Dorian leaves, and the one he returns to some 18 years later.

Least favorites
The painting CGI was okay, but I would have preferred a more subtle approach with no CGI at all. The rest of the movie had some idea of subtlety, and then you’ve got some hissing squirming crypt-keeper looking thing going on in the frame. If they left that as more of a subtle, mysterious danger, it would have gotten rid of the B-movie vibes.

So what did I really think?

Click "read more"... massive spoilers ahead!

Sherlock Holmes I & II // Robert Downey Jr. {Movie}

Why I'm watching
I've been meaning to see it for a while, and it just so happened to come back in while I was at the circ desk.

Where I got the book
Berlin-Peck Library, returns cart :)

Expectations
Fun, relatively mindless action-adventure.

So how was it?

Fun, relatively mindless action-adventure. Holmes and Watson take on a case with dark magic, mysterious deaths, and politics. The sequel is about the same.

It's not groundbreaking, but the plot was fun, the characters were great, action was good, good cinematography and pacing. It had some bromance and great female characters and no annoying romantic subplots. Sure, there's some drama over Watson being engaged, but it's bromance drama.

Recommendation
If you like Psych, House, or any mostly-humorous interpretation of Sherlock Holmes, you'll love this.

Feels
Fun, a little goofy, interesting without trying to be too twisty or dramatic.

Favorites
Mary being super cool about everything.