Today I saw Another Year, starring Jim Broadbent and Ruth Sheen.
Tom (Broadbent) and Gerri (Sheen) are one of those rare couples who have spent their whole lives married and still like each other. In fact, they seem genuinely happier when in the presence of the other.
Mary (Lesley Manville) is the saddest third wheel that has ever been portrayed in film. She is the secretary at the hospital where Gerri works as a counselor, and aside from Gerri and Tom, she doesn't appear to have any friends.
The couple are good to her—perhaps the reason she clings so tightly to them—but even they have their limits when Mary makes passes at their much-younger son, then treats his new girlfriend with disrespect on her first visit to the home.
There is also Tom's troubled friend Ken (Peter Wight), who drinks, eats and smokes too much, and Tom's brother Ronnie (David Bradley), who says so little that we have to wonder if his bitter son's anger is justified.
Despite all the ranges of personalities, no one in the group is hard to watch (though the girlfriend of their son is borderline annoying). In fact, the group seems so organic you often forget your watching actors on a screen.
I love screenwriters who give such depth to their characters that we ache for their uncomfortable silences. Mike Leigh is such a writer, and Another Year is such a film.
A beautiful look at the unbalance of fairness in life that leaves you pitying the lonely ones and sympathizing with the lucky ones.
~~~
Showing posts with label 2010. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2010. Show all posts
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Monday, January 03, 2011
The Fighter
Tonight I saw The Fighter, starring Mark Wahlberg and Christian Bale.
I won't shy away from any film that promises a shirtless Mark Wahlberg, though I must admit I wasn't excited to hear this film was about boxing. Good thing for me that there's very little boxing involved.
The story is a retelling of the true tale of two brothers who took the boxing world by storm.
Dicky Eklund (Bale) famously knocked down Sugar Ray Leonard (or, er...he slipped) in the late 70s and has been milking that spotlight ever since. He's a hero in the small Massachusetts town where they live.
Micky Ward (Wahlberg) is his only brother (though the two share seven—yes, seven—sisters) and looks up to him for this reason alone. There is not much else about Dicky to look up to. He has developed a crack habit, sleeps with whores and leaves his son with his family to be raised as an afterthought.
The training that he offers his brother would be valuable if he could stay clean long enough to see it through, but he can't, and the results are disastrous.
Lucky for Micky, he soon meets Charlene (Amy Adams) who has dropped out of college and works at the local bar. Yes, she is apparently the classiest broad in town.
Speaking of broads, the boys' mother Alice (Melissa Leo) is a real piece of work. Chain-smoking, foul-mouthed, hairspray-addicted and determined to make some serious cash off her sons, she is the very epitome of white trash. When she's not yelling at her beer-drinking, lounging daughters, she's organizing a fight to try to advance Micky to a Dicky level of spotlight.
It's just not working.
So Charlene convinces Micky to ditch his troubled family and the rest is pretty much as predictable as a Wheel of Fortune puzzle with only one letter missing.
It's not a terrible movie, and I'll admit I was entertained for the duration, but what's really bugging me is all the press that Christian Bale is getting for his performance.
I've always liked Bale, but here he seems to be playing this crack addict as a mentally challenged lunatic instead of a street guy who is high all the time. I grew up in a neighborhood of drug users and never once do I remember the crack users having perpetually popped eyes. They were jittery and nervous and hollow, but not exactly retarded.
On the flip side, Wahlberg's never been more understated and that was a welcome change from his usual too-angry portrayals.
And the women, well, they were fantastic.
Melissa Leo is a bit much as the annoying Alice, but I'm guessing the real woman was probably just as obnoxious; Amy Adams and her boobs aren't anything like the innocent Junebug and Enchanted characters we've seen her inhabit before, and it's hard to take your eyes off the screen when she's there. The seven sisters? Hilarious.
I had more fun with this movie than I expected to, but that's perhaps because my expectations were low.
~~~
I won't shy away from any film that promises a shirtless Mark Wahlberg, though I must admit I wasn't excited to hear this film was about boxing. Good thing for me that there's very little boxing involved.
The story is a retelling of the true tale of two brothers who took the boxing world by storm.
Dicky Eklund (Bale) famously knocked down Sugar Ray Leonard (or, er...he slipped) in the late 70s and has been milking that spotlight ever since. He's a hero in the small Massachusetts town where they live.
Micky Ward (Wahlberg) is his only brother (though the two share seven—yes, seven—sisters) and looks up to him for this reason alone. There is not much else about Dicky to look up to. He has developed a crack habit, sleeps with whores and leaves his son with his family to be raised as an afterthought.
The training that he offers his brother would be valuable if he could stay clean long enough to see it through, but he can't, and the results are disastrous.
Lucky for Micky, he soon meets Charlene (Amy Adams) who has dropped out of college and works at the local bar. Yes, she is apparently the classiest broad in town.
Speaking of broads, the boys' mother Alice (Melissa Leo) is a real piece of work. Chain-smoking, foul-mouthed, hairspray-addicted and determined to make some serious cash off her sons, she is the very epitome of white trash. When she's not yelling at her beer-drinking, lounging daughters, she's organizing a fight to try to advance Micky to a Dicky level of spotlight.
It's just not working.
So Charlene convinces Micky to ditch his troubled family and the rest is pretty much as predictable as a Wheel of Fortune puzzle with only one letter missing.
It's not a terrible movie, and I'll admit I was entertained for the duration, but what's really bugging me is all the press that Christian Bale is getting for his performance.
I've always liked Bale, but here he seems to be playing this crack addict as a mentally challenged lunatic instead of a street guy who is high all the time. I grew up in a neighborhood of drug users and never once do I remember the crack users having perpetually popped eyes. They were jittery and nervous and hollow, but not exactly retarded.
On the flip side, Wahlberg's never been more understated and that was a welcome change from his usual too-angry portrayals.
And the women, well, they were fantastic.
Melissa Leo is a bit much as the annoying Alice, but I'm guessing the real woman was probably just as obnoxious; Amy Adams and her boobs aren't anything like the innocent Junebug and Enchanted characters we've seen her inhabit before, and it's hard to take your eyes off the screen when she's there. The seven sisters? Hilarious.
I had more fun with this movie than I expected to, but that's perhaps because my expectations were low.
~~~
Sunday, January 02, 2011
I Love You Phillip Morris
Today I saw I Love You Phillip Morris, starring Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor.
Truth will always be stranger than fiction, and that's certainly the case in the story of Steven Russell, the man on which this film is based.
Russell (Carrey) had a normal upbringing (with the exception of finding out he was adopted), which led to a normal adulthood that saw him become a respected husband, father and cop.
His wife Debbie (Leslie Mann) was a Jesus-loving goody-two-shoes who only wanted the best for everyone. She was clueless to the double-life Steven was living as a gay man and shocked when she found out about it after he was in a car accident. His "epiphany" to tell the *cough* truth.
Russell moved to Florida, got a boyfriend and began living the high life. The problem was, he couldn't afford the lifestyle he desired, so he began devising cons to pay his way. Eventually the cons caught up with him and he landed in prison, where he met (maybe) the love-of-his-life, Phillip Morris (McGregor). Steven immediately falls for Phillip and eventually gets them both out of prison to live their dream life together, but can't seem to stop the deception. This, of course, causes problems.
The story itself is completely true and undeniably fascinating; the movie has its moments.
Though warned by one of my show's listeners that it was awful, I forged on determined to give it a chance, but I can't deny I was truly let down.
Jim Carrey's portrayal of Russell has too much In Living Color Jim Carrey and not enough Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Jim Carrey.
Though the real con man is arguably an exaggerated personality, the mannerisms in which Carrey represents him don't for a minute ring true. There's posing and hanging on words and extended glances. There's an ease to the vocal impersonations that can't possibly have been as natural for Russell as they were for Carrey.
I'm not sure it's the actor's fault—perhaps the director encouraged him to go full out—but whomever's decision it was made the wrong one.
Ewan McGregor, on the other hand, was pitch perfect. His naive, sweet Morris is just how the real gentleman is said to behave and not for an instant did I doubt he was in love with Russell. And that's not an easy set of emotions to convey.
Anyone who has fallen for a liar knows that it is the most painful relationship you'll ever endure. First, they convince you better than anyone that you are worthy of being loved in the highest regard, then when you catch on that most of what comes out of their mouth is false, you doubt that any of your previous time together was real. It's excruciating (trust me, I've been there) and often even the liar doesn't realize how much damage their doing to the other person because they only know what the easy way out is, and that's usually not the side of things that confronts devastating pain.
McGregor nails these conflicted feelings with expressions and body language that bear his scars.
Leslie Mann is a delight as the devout Debbie, and each time she would appear on-screen I would wish that her scenes lasted longer.
It's just that the film focused too long on spotlighting the comical side of Carrey and never addressed the weight of what really became of these folks (Russell's sentence is one of the most severe in Texas, though he never physically hurt anyone; Morris and Mrs. Russell's lives will never be the same).
I'd have rather seen a documentary.
~~~
Truth will always be stranger than fiction, and that's certainly the case in the story of Steven Russell, the man on which this film is based.
Russell (Carrey) had a normal upbringing (with the exception of finding out he was adopted), which led to a normal adulthood that saw him become a respected husband, father and cop.
His wife Debbie (Leslie Mann) was a Jesus-loving goody-two-shoes who only wanted the best for everyone. She was clueless to the double-life Steven was living as a gay man and shocked when she found out about it after he was in a car accident. His "epiphany" to tell the *cough* truth.
Russell moved to Florida, got a boyfriend and began living the high life. The problem was, he couldn't afford the lifestyle he desired, so he began devising cons to pay his way. Eventually the cons caught up with him and he landed in prison, where he met (maybe) the love-of-his-life, Phillip Morris (McGregor). Steven immediately falls for Phillip and eventually gets them both out of prison to live their dream life together, but can't seem to stop the deception. This, of course, causes problems.
The story itself is completely true and undeniably fascinating; the movie has its moments.
Though warned by one of my show's listeners that it was awful, I forged on determined to give it a chance, but I can't deny I was truly let down.
Jim Carrey's portrayal of Russell has too much In Living Color Jim Carrey and not enough Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Jim Carrey.
Though the real con man is arguably an exaggerated personality, the mannerisms in which Carrey represents him don't for a minute ring true. There's posing and hanging on words and extended glances. There's an ease to the vocal impersonations that can't possibly have been as natural for Russell as they were for Carrey.
I'm not sure it's the actor's fault—perhaps the director encouraged him to go full out—but whomever's decision it was made the wrong one.
Ewan McGregor, on the other hand, was pitch perfect. His naive, sweet Morris is just how the real gentleman is said to behave and not for an instant did I doubt he was in love with Russell. And that's not an easy set of emotions to convey.
Anyone who has fallen for a liar knows that it is the most painful relationship you'll ever endure. First, they convince you better than anyone that you are worthy of being loved in the highest regard, then when you catch on that most of what comes out of their mouth is false, you doubt that any of your previous time together was real. It's excruciating (trust me, I've been there) and often even the liar doesn't realize how much damage their doing to the other person because they only know what the easy way out is, and that's usually not the side of things that confronts devastating pain.
McGregor nails these conflicted feelings with expressions and body language that bear his scars.
Leslie Mann is a delight as the devout Debbie, and each time she would appear on-screen I would wish that her scenes lasted longer.
It's just that the film focused too long on spotlighting the comical side of Carrey and never addressed the weight of what really became of these folks (Russell's sentence is one of the most severe in Texas, though he never physically hurt anyone; Morris and Mrs. Russell's lives will never be the same).
I'd have rather seen a documentary.
~~~
Friday, December 31, 2010
Never Let Me Go
Today I saw Never Let Me Go, starring Carey Mulligan and Andrew Garfield.
Kathy (Mulligan) seems to be a classic goody two-shoes. She is smart, helpful and kind to her fellow students at the refined British boarding school where she lives.
Tommy (Garfield) has anger management problems. Scenes featuring him during youth would lead many to believe he was perhaps autistic due to his outbursts. This is never confirmed, but is implied.
Kathy and Tommy form a tender friendship, which leads Tommy to buy a cassette tape for Kathy. The song she listens to repeatedly is called "Never Let Me Go."
Ruth (Keira Knightly) is the prettier, less-honorable girl at school who sleeps with Tommy to keep him from realizing his love for Kathy. Pretty straightforward love triangle, right?
Not so much.
It seems that the boarding school is merely a breeding ground for beings that are born from a laboratory for no other purpose than to harvest and donate organs. When they reach a certain age, they get their 'notice' similar to a military draft, and begin surgeries to give up as many parts of their body as possible. Their obligation is "complete" only when they die.
Kathy gets lucky and becomes a "carer," which apparently buys her a few more years. In the meantime, she cares for those not so lucky, comforting them in between surgeries and signing the releases for their bodies when they don't make it.
The film is solid; the acting superb; the scenery perfect. But something about its quiet pace doesn't quite instigate the anger that we should feel for these poor, sacrificed souls.
No matter how they were created, it is clear the students share human emotions and feelings, and therefore they should be entitled to a life longer than early adulthood. This injustice should trigger a more intense response from the audience, but falls short of doing so.
That said, it was nice to watch a movie that had an original plot, mixing character studies and science fiction into the same fold.
~~~
Kathy (Mulligan) seems to be a classic goody two-shoes. She is smart, helpful and kind to her fellow students at the refined British boarding school where she lives.
Tommy (Garfield) has anger management problems. Scenes featuring him during youth would lead many to believe he was perhaps autistic due to his outbursts. This is never confirmed, but is implied.
Kathy and Tommy form a tender friendship, which leads Tommy to buy a cassette tape for Kathy. The song she listens to repeatedly is called "Never Let Me Go."
Ruth (Keira Knightly) is the prettier, less-honorable girl at school who sleeps with Tommy to keep him from realizing his love for Kathy. Pretty straightforward love triangle, right?
Not so much.
It seems that the boarding school is merely a breeding ground for beings that are born from a laboratory for no other purpose than to harvest and donate organs. When they reach a certain age, they get their 'notice' similar to a military draft, and begin surgeries to give up as many parts of their body as possible. Their obligation is "complete" only when they die.
Kathy gets lucky and becomes a "carer," which apparently buys her a few more years. In the meantime, she cares for those not so lucky, comforting them in between surgeries and signing the releases for their bodies when they don't make it.
The film is solid; the acting superb; the scenery perfect. But something about its quiet pace doesn't quite instigate the anger that we should feel for these poor, sacrificed souls.
No matter how they were created, it is clear the students share human emotions and feelings, and therefore they should be entitled to a life longer than early adulthood. This injustice should trigger a more intense response from the audience, but falls short of doing so.
That said, it was nice to watch a movie that had an original plot, mixing character studies and science fiction into the same fold.
~~~
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Nice Guy Johnny
Today I saw Nice Guy Johnny, starring Matt Bush and Edward Burns.
Johnny (Bush) is a California sports broadcaster a few weeks shy of getting married. His fiancé Claire (Anna Wood) is pressuring him to give up his current low-paying job and take one arranged by her wealthy father. He is a nice guy, so he agrees to it.
Enter Uncle Terry (Burns), an out-for-pleasure bartender who thinks his nephew is too young to be taking the plunge and attempts to set him up with a young tennis player. Her name is Brooke (Kerry Bishé), she is naturally beautiful and somewhat perfect for Johnny.
But Johnny's a nice guy, so he refuses to play his uncle's games and comes clean about being engaged. Brooke finds this to be noble, but doesn't completely give up on pursuing him.
After some time away at the beach, Johnny reconsiders the vast career move he's about to make and mistakenly expresses his concerns to Claire. She has an unreasonable, crazy reaction, which leaves him soul searching for the right answers.
What's so great about Burns' films, this one included, is that every character feels real. It helps that with the exception of Burns, that this is a cast of unknowns, but even if there were A-list actors playing each part, I dare say they'd still reek of authenticity. Everyone on screen behaves the way someone we've all known behaves.
My first response to the character of Claire was that she was too over-the-top and bitchy to be someone that Johnny would want to marry, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I know several couples like that. One person is lovely and sweet; the other not so much and no one knows why they're together.
I also like the role reversal of Johnny, the guy, being the good person. Sure, Terry's character more than satisfies our need for male sliminess, but our hero here is not a wounded or scorned woman chewing her way through bad men. Our hero is a good man trying to sustain a relationship with a bad woman.
I, despite my gender, find that refreshing.
And really, refreshing is a great word to sum up this whole rom com. There are well-developed characters to root for, there's pretty scenery to look at and a sense of closure when it all comes together, which left a smile on my face as the credits rolled.
Nice Guy Johnny is available now On Demand and via iTunes.
~~~
Johnny (Bush) is a California sports broadcaster a few weeks shy of getting married. His fiancé Claire (Anna Wood) is pressuring him to give up his current low-paying job and take one arranged by her wealthy father. He is a nice guy, so he agrees to it.
Enter Uncle Terry (Burns), an out-for-pleasure bartender who thinks his nephew is too young to be taking the plunge and attempts to set him up with a young tennis player. Her name is Brooke (Kerry Bishé), she is naturally beautiful and somewhat perfect for Johnny.
But Johnny's a nice guy, so he refuses to play his uncle's games and comes clean about being engaged. Brooke finds this to be noble, but doesn't completely give up on pursuing him.
After some time away at the beach, Johnny reconsiders the vast career move he's about to make and mistakenly expresses his concerns to Claire. She has an unreasonable, crazy reaction, which leaves him soul searching for the right answers.
What's so great about Burns' films, this one included, is that every character feels real. It helps that with the exception of Burns, that this is a cast of unknowns, but even if there were A-list actors playing each part, I dare say they'd still reek of authenticity. Everyone on screen behaves the way someone we've all known behaves.
My first response to the character of Claire was that she was too over-the-top and bitchy to be someone that Johnny would want to marry, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I know several couples like that. One person is lovely and sweet; the other not so much and no one knows why they're together.
I also like the role reversal of Johnny, the guy, being the good person. Sure, Terry's character more than satisfies our need for male sliminess, but our hero here is not a wounded or scorned woman chewing her way through bad men. Our hero is a good man trying to sustain a relationship with a bad woman.
I, despite my gender, find that refreshing.
And really, refreshing is a great word to sum up this whole rom com. There are well-developed characters to root for, there's pretty scenery to look at and a sense of closure when it all comes together, which left a smile on my face as the credits rolled.
Nice Guy Johnny is available now On Demand and via iTunes.
~~~
True Grit
This morning I saw True Grit, starring Hailee Steinfeld and Jeff Bridges.
I'll confess that I've never watched the original version of this film, but I'm bargaining that gives me an advantage at being objective here.
Mattie Ross (Steinfeld) is on a mission to avenge her father's murder in the old west, and hires the notorious Rooster Cogburn (Bridges) to help her track him down.
About five minutes into the film, the audience knows that Ross is the smartest person in town. Never mind the fact she's only 14 and has no experience chasing bad guys, etc. As my Cinebanter partner would say, there is nothing more annoying than a self-righteous, precocious child, but in this case, the character is not so bad.
The only problem with Mattie being so convincing is that all tension is removed. Everyone is aware that she will achieve her goal come hell or high water because her wit and determination will allow for no alternate result. Steinfeld plays the part earnestly and sincerely, and most likely has a bright career ahead of her, but that doesn't forgive the script for removing all surprise at the ending.
Bridges is absolutely believable as the boozy U.S. Marshal, but his speech is so slurred throughout the film that it borders on Sling Blade-like enunciation (or lack thereof). Less mumbling and more stumbling would've been preferred.
Matt Damon as a Texas Ranger in pursuit of the same criminal is another story.
Disclaimer: I love Matt Damon. I think he's one of the finest actors of my generation and I like him in nearly everything I've seen him in. But here, with a bushy mustache and a ridiculous accent, I just couldn't buy it.
He doesn't have the 'evil' or the 'anger' or the 'tough' I expect from gritty cowboys. He doesn't look like a ranger; he appears to be a young man playing dress-up in Western clothes.
I found this unfortunate casting to be distracting and disappointing, and his character to be annoying and forgettable.
The Coen brothers have always been hit (Raising Arizona) or miss (The Ladykillers) for me. Either I love them or I hate them.
In this film, I'm finally split down the middle.
I enjoyed watching Hallie Steinfeld steal the show, and Josh Brolin as a dimwit killer was a pleasure too. Yet Bridges' lack of articulation, Damon's cowboy impersonation coupled with the somewhat boring lapses of time in the middle of scenes kept it from being perfect.
The writer/directors may very well enjoy their customary Oscar nominations, but I truly doubt they have a prayer at winning.
~~~
I'll confess that I've never watched the original version of this film, but I'm bargaining that gives me an advantage at being objective here.
Mattie Ross (Steinfeld) is on a mission to avenge her father's murder in the old west, and hires the notorious Rooster Cogburn (Bridges) to help her track him down.
About five minutes into the film, the audience knows that Ross is the smartest person in town. Never mind the fact she's only 14 and has no experience chasing bad guys, etc. As my Cinebanter partner would say, there is nothing more annoying than a self-righteous, precocious child, but in this case, the character is not so bad.
The only problem with Mattie being so convincing is that all tension is removed. Everyone is aware that she will achieve her goal come hell or high water because her wit and determination will allow for no alternate result. Steinfeld plays the part earnestly and sincerely, and most likely has a bright career ahead of her, but that doesn't forgive the script for removing all surprise at the ending.
Bridges is absolutely believable as the boozy U.S. Marshal, but his speech is so slurred throughout the film that it borders on Sling Blade-like enunciation (or lack thereof). Less mumbling and more stumbling would've been preferred.
Matt Damon as a Texas Ranger in pursuit of the same criminal is another story.
Disclaimer: I love Matt Damon. I think he's one of the finest actors of my generation and I like him in nearly everything I've seen him in. But here, with a bushy mustache and a ridiculous accent, I just couldn't buy it.
He doesn't have the 'evil' or the 'anger' or the 'tough' I expect from gritty cowboys. He doesn't look like a ranger; he appears to be a young man playing dress-up in Western clothes.
I found this unfortunate casting to be distracting and disappointing, and his character to be annoying and forgettable.
The Coen brothers have always been hit (Raising Arizona) or miss (The Ladykillers) for me. Either I love them or I hate them.
In this film, I'm finally split down the middle.
I enjoyed watching Hallie Steinfeld steal the show, and Josh Brolin as a dimwit killer was a pleasure too. Yet Bridges' lack of articulation, Damon's cowboy impersonation coupled with the somewhat boring lapses of time in the middle of scenes kept it from being perfect.
The writer/directors may very well enjoy their customary Oscar nominations, but I truly doubt they have a prayer at winning.
~~~
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
How Do You Know
Tonight I saw How Do You Know, starring Reese Witherspoon and Paul Rudd.
George (Rudd) is a financial something-or-other in hot water because of his father's illegal dealings in the family business. As a result, his girlfriend leaves him, which allows him to pursue a woman by the name of Lisa (Witherspoon) who another friend attempted to set him up with.
Lisa, a professional softball player just cut from the team, is currently in a relationship with Matty (Owen Wilson), a pitcher living the high life and enjoying the perks that come with it.
Once she realizes that Matty isn't the most honorable of men, she treats their union with equal respect and goes out on a date with George. But the timing is bad—he's just been indicted and she's just lost her career, so neither of them is really in the mood for good conversation. They decide it would just be best to remain silent throughout the meal and that's how their entire date is spent—enjoying the peace and quiet.
Lisa decides to try to work things out with Matty and George's self-esteem convinces him to leave her alone (though he thinks about her constantly after their weird evening together).
What's interesting about this somewhat conventional romantic comedy is that the only person worth rooting for here is George.
His life has been turned upside down through no fault of his own and now he's falling for an unavailable girl who frankly isn't much fun to be around. Poor thing!
Witherspoon does a great job of communicating a neurotic, selfish, spoiled brat who appears to leave any situation she doesn't find totally hospitable. Sure, she's pretty; yeah, she's in great shape (though, oddly enough, we never see her on the softball field), but what about this woman's personality is so enticing? Nothing.
Matty is cute, rich and clueless. He has redeeming qualities in that he truly seems to care about Lisa, but a truer-to-life version of him would surely cheat on her.
Though the cast here is predictably great, the screenplay falls short of delivering any real romance or spark, and the laughs are too few and far between to be satisfying.
How do you know when you're in love? This movie won't provide the answer.
~~~
George (Rudd) is a financial something-or-other in hot water because of his father's illegal dealings in the family business. As a result, his girlfriend leaves him, which allows him to pursue a woman by the name of Lisa (Witherspoon) who another friend attempted to set him up with.
Lisa, a professional softball player just cut from the team, is currently in a relationship with Matty (Owen Wilson), a pitcher living the high life and enjoying the perks that come with it.
Once she realizes that Matty isn't the most honorable of men, she treats their union with equal respect and goes out on a date with George. But the timing is bad—he's just been indicted and she's just lost her career, so neither of them is really in the mood for good conversation. They decide it would just be best to remain silent throughout the meal and that's how their entire date is spent—enjoying the peace and quiet.
Lisa decides to try to work things out with Matty and George's self-esteem convinces him to leave her alone (though he thinks about her constantly after their weird evening together).
What's interesting about this somewhat conventional romantic comedy is that the only person worth rooting for here is George.
His life has been turned upside down through no fault of his own and now he's falling for an unavailable girl who frankly isn't much fun to be around. Poor thing!
Witherspoon does a great job of communicating a neurotic, selfish, spoiled brat who appears to leave any situation she doesn't find totally hospitable. Sure, she's pretty; yeah, she's in great shape (though, oddly enough, we never see her on the softball field), but what about this woman's personality is so enticing? Nothing.
Matty is cute, rich and clueless. He has redeeming qualities in that he truly seems to care about Lisa, but a truer-to-life version of him would surely cheat on her.
Though the cast here is predictably great, the screenplay falls short of delivering any real romance or spark, and the laughs are too few and far between to be satisfying.
How do you know when you're in love? This movie won't provide the answer.
~~~
Monday, December 27, 2010
Rabbit Hole
Today I saw Rabbit Hole, starring Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart.
Becca (Kidman) and Howie (Eckhart) have lost a son. Their beloved 4-year-old Danny chased their dog into the street and was struck and killed by a car. This was eight months ago.
Today their world is dismal. They don't make love, don't agree on ways to heal (he likes group therapy; she hates it) and have several problems communicating as a result. To top it off, Becca's irresponsible sister is knocked up and Becca can't help but be jealous and judgmental about the new baby.
Sound like fun? Well, of course not, but it's not quite as hard to watch as it sounds.
Sure, Becca is draped in depressing grays and exhibits the loss of energy any of us feel when experiencing pain of that magnitude, but there is a merit to what's happening on-screen.
The relationship Becca develops with Jason (Miles Teller), the teenager who was driving the car that killed her son, is tender and tragic—as if each time she looks at him she sees an age that her son will never reach.
Becca and Howie are angry, but they're not malicious toward one another, though their marriage is crumbling at every turn.
Gaby (Sandra Oh) is a friend Howie makes in group therapy and her presence seems appropriate and comforting in light of the circumstances. She's hurting too, and as the saying goes: misery loves company.
There is resolution without closure here, and it's done gracefully thanks to director John Cameron Mitchell. This 'slice of death' story could have been a blatant sob-fest if it had fallen into the wrong hands, but thankfully it did not.
Really, the only thing wrong with it is Kidman's inability to hold her American accent during outburst scenes. But that is forgivable in such a well-written, enveloping film.
~~~
Becca (Kidman) and Howie (Eckhart) have lost a son. Their beloved 4-year-old Danny chased their dog into the street and was struck and killed by a car. This was eight months ago.
Today their world is dismal. They don't make love, don't agree on ways to heal (he likes group therapy; she hates it) and have several problems communicating as a result. To top it off, Becca's irresponsible sister is knocked up and Becca can't help but be jealous and judgmental about the new baby.
Sound like fun? Well, of course not, but it's not quite as hard to watch as it sounds.
Sure, Becca is draped in depressing grays and exhibits the loss of energy any of us feel when experiencing pain of that magnitude, but there is a merit to what's happening on-screen.
The relationship Becca develops with Jason (Miles Teller), the teenager who was driving the car that killed her son, is tender and tragic—as if each time she looks at him she sees an age that her son will never reach.
Becca and Howie are angry, but they're not malicious toward one another, though their marriage is crumbling at every turn.
Gaby (Sandra Oh) is a friend Howie makes in group therapy and her presence seems appropriate and comforting in light of the circumstances. She's hurting too, and as the saying goes: misery loves company.
There is resolution without closure here, and it's done gracefully thanks to director John Cameron Mitchell. This 'slice of death' story could have been a blatant sob-fest if it had fallen into the wrong hands, but thankfully it did not.
Really, the only thing wrong with it is Kidman's inability to hold her American accent during outburst scenes. But that is forgivable in such a well-written, enveloping film.
~~~
The King's Speech
On Christmas Day, I saw The King's Speech, starring Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush.
It's not difficult to speculate that this may be the role that finally earns Firth the Best Actor Oscar.
Firth plays Bertie, otherwise known as King George VI of England, as he struggles to cope with his problem of stuttering. His wife, who we knew as The Queen Mum, played wonderfully here by Helena Bonham Carter, is supportive and loving—constantly trying to find a professional to help him with his speech.
Enter Lionel Logue (Rush), an offbeat, unconventional therapist who will only work under the conditions he creates. This doesn't immediately mesh with the spoiled royal's philosophies, but he learns to embrace the rule when Logue's exercises begin to improve his speech.
The bulk of the film is the relationship between Lionel and Bertie, but there are strong supporting performances in the side story of King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce) abdicating the throne to marry American divorcée, Wallis Simpson (Eve Best). Pearce resembles the real royal so closely, it's borderline eerie. Best nails the essence of the bold Simpson, even if she's almost too pretty to be believed.
Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill would be my only complaint in the film. He portrays the iconic man in an exaggerated, over-the-top way that does no justice to the integrity he truly possessed.
Otherwise, Geoffrey Rush is so perpetually appealing, and Colin Firth is so consistently brilliant illustrating the progression of speech that it would be difficult to find fault with any other portion of this masterpiece.
I was entertained and enthralled from start to finish by what could easily be considered a boring topic. That's a testament to the sharp writing, the balanced directing, and most of all, the amazing acting.
~~~
It's not difficult to speculate that this may be the role that finally earns Firth the Best Actor Oscar.
Firth plays Bertie, otherwise known as King George VI of England, as he struggles to cope with his problem of stuttering. His wife, who we knew as The Queen Mum, played wonderfully here by Helena Bonham Carter, is supportive and loving—constantly trying to find a professional to help him with his speech.
Enter Lionel Logue (Rush), an offbeat, unconventional therapist who will only work under the conditions he creates. This doesn't immediately mesh with the spoiled royal's philosophies, but he learns to embrace the rule when Logue's exercises begin to improve his speech.
The bulk of the film is the relationship between Lionel and Bertie, but there are strong supporting performances in the side story of King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce) abdicating the throne to marry American divorcée, Wallis Simpson (Eve Best). Pearce resembles the real royal so closely, it's borderline eerie. Best nails the essence of the bold Simpson, even if she's almost too pretty to be believed.
Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill would be my only complaint in the film. He portrays the iconic man in an exaggerated, over-the-top way that does no justice to the integrity he truly possessed.
Otherwise, Geoffrey Rush is so perpetually appealing, and Colin Firth is so consistently brilliant illustrating the progression of speech that it would be difficult to find fault with any other portion of this masterpiece.
I was entertained and enthralled from start to finish by what could easily be considered a boring topic. That's a testament to the sharp writing, the balanced directing, and most of all, the amazing acting.
~~~
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Love and Other Drugs
Today I saw Love and Other Drugs, starring Anne Hathaway and Jake Gyllenhaal.
Maggie (Hathaway) is a 26-year-old artist suffering from Parkinson's Disease. Jamie (Gyllenhaal) is a pharmaceutical salesman, peddling antidepressants who meets her one day as she's getting her breast examined. Seriously.
They banter back and forth about why he shouldn't have been in her exam room (he really shouldn't have) then consummate their attraction after their second encounter (this time, a coffee shop).
The sex is so good that both partners, who are anti-relationship, begin to crave more from one another. This scares Maggie, who doesn't want to tether anyone into being her caretaker for the rest of time, so she pushes Jamie away.
The two lead actors are phenomenal and share a very believable chemistry. Watching them become these two characters (forgetting they played a married couple in 2005's Brokeback Mountain) isn't remotely boring, and their spicy scenes keep us paying attention, if only for the skin.
What's wrong with the movie is everything else: the 'rich' brother that for some reason has to crash on Jamie's couch when his marriage falls apart; the waste of Hank Azaria (as a slimy doctor) and Oliver Platt (as a slimy salesman); the script discrepancies that throw us from a slapstick comedy to a depressing drama without warning.
I went into the theater thankful that this wouldn't be just another chick flick and came out disappointed that the result was almost worse.
At least Hathaway wasn't the only one who had to take off her clothes.
~~~
Maggie (Hathaway) is a 26-year-old artist suffering from Parkinson's Disease. Jamie (Gyllenhaal) is a pharmaceutical salesman, peddling antidepressants who meets her one day as she's getting her breast examined. Seriously.
They banter back and forth about why he shouldn't have been in her exam room (he really shouldn't have) then consummate their attraction after their second encounter (this time, a coffee shop).
The sex is so good that both partners, who are anti-relationship, begin to crave more from one another. This scares Maggie, who doesn't want to tether anyone into being her caretaker for the rest of time, so she pushes Jamie away.
The two lead actors are phenomenal and share a very believable chemistry. Watching them become these two characters (forgetting they played a married couple in 2005's Brokeback Mountain) isn't remotely boring, and their spicy scenes keep us paying attention, if only for the skin.
What's wrong with the movie is everything else: the 'rich' brother that for some reason has to crash on Jamie's couch when his marriage falls apart; the waste of Hank Azaria (as a slimy doctor) and Oliver Platt (as a slimy salesman); the script discrepancies that throw us from a slapstick comedy to a depressing drama without warning.
I went into the theater thankful that this wouldn't be just another chick flick and came out disappointed that the result was almost worse.
At least Hathaway wasn't the only one who had to take off her clothes.
~~~
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1
Today I saw Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1, starring Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson.
This movie was exactly what I expected—a faithful re-telling of the not-so-exciting portions of the final book in the Harry Potter series, sprinkled with enough charm to keep things interesting.
When this section of the story begins, Harry (Radcliffe) is by tradition leaving his aunt and uncle's house. Each book began this way with the young wizard heading off to Hogwarts for another year of school, but this final one has a twist: Harry is instead escaping to a safe house to elude the ever-so-evil Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes).
In the first chuckle-worthy scene in the film, a spell is cast on several of Harry's friends who have agreed to be turned into a replica of his likeness to throw the death eaters off the scent. Radcliffe shines, taking on the mannerisms of most of them while remaining in his own 'skin.'
Of course, he does survive this stunt, but that set-up launches the audience into over two hours of provoking, then escaping, only to provoke again.
Harry is naturally accompanied into this war by his two best friends, Hermione (Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint), who are preoccupied with their own chemistry, yet loyal to a fault.
It's difficult to squeeze even half of a book into a full-length film, but after a few meaningful scenes about the relationships between these three friends, I found myself wishing for more.
Sure, it's fun to see Helena Bonham Carter's Bellatrix throwing things around, and it's nice to see Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton) squirm instead of smirk, but the genuine camaraderie between the three lead actors is such a pleasure, I hope the final chapter devotes more time to their bond.
As for this installment, I thought it was appropriately dark and full of exposition, and I nearly went to pieces at the culmination of Dobby's big sacrifice. If ever the lesser class had a greater hero!
~~~
This movie was exactly what I expected—a faithful re-telling of the not-so-exciting portions of the final book in the Harry Potter series, sprinkled with enough charm to keep things interesting.
When this section of the story begins, Harry (Radcliffe) is by tradition leaving his aunt and uncle's house. Each book began this way with the young wizard heading off to Hogwarts for another year of school, but this final one has a twist: Harry is instead escaping to a safe house to elude the ever-so-evil Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes).
In the first chuckle-worthy scene in the film, a spell is cast on several of Harry's friends who have agreed to be turned into a replica of his likeness to throw the death eaters off the scent. Radcliffe shines, taking on the mannerisms of most of them while remaining in his own 'skin.'
Of course, he does survive this stunt, but that set-up launches the audience into over two hours of provoking, then escaping, only to provoke again.
Harry is naturally accompanied into this war by his two best friends, Hermione (Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint), who are preoccupied with their own chemistry, yet loyal to a fault.
It's difficult to squeeze even half of a book into a full-length film, but after a few meaningful scenes about the relationships between these three friends, I found myself wishing for more.
Sure, it's fun to see Helena Bonham Carter's Bellatrix throwing things around, and it's nice to see Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton) squirm instead of smirk, but the genuine camaraderie between the three lead actors is such a pleasure, I hope the final chapter devotes more time to their bond.
As for this installment, I thought it was appropriately dark and full of exposition, and I nearly went to pieces at the culmination of Dobby's big sacrifice. If ever the lesser class had a greater hero!
~~~
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Hereafter
This morning I saw Hereafter, starring Matt Damon and Cécile De France.
George Lonegan (Damon) is a retired psychic with a gift that won't stop giving. His brother Billy (Jay Mohr) is an enterprising businessman who convinces him to do just one reading for a Greek client going through a rough time. As a result of this spot-on reading, word gets out of George's abilities and Billy pressures him to return to his craft.
A few months prior, Marie (De France) survived what we must assume was the Sri Lankan tsunami, and has a tough time re-adjusting to life after her out-of-body experience during the tragedy.
As this is happening, Marcus (Frankie McLaren), a young British boy with a drunken mother, loses his twin in an auto accident.
Both Marie and Marcus go searching for answers following their respective events as George retreats into a solitary life of factory work.
Damon plays George so cold and guarded, he would be difficult to like if he weren't so appealing. That said, when faced with a burden of former fame, it's easy to sympathize with someone who doesn't want to confront death on a daily basis.
All of the stories are fleshed out well except the cameo by Bryce Dallas Howard, which still leaves me scratching my head. The overall topic of the film is engaging whether or not you're a believer in the afterlife, and the opening scene where the tsunami hits rivals any great action scene in recent memory.
But where director Clint Eastwood somehow misses the mark is in the quiet contemplation of each main character. Those suspended moments of thought and revelation don't need to be as long as he makes them, nor does the slow pace necessarily serve the screenplay well.
This film is like a beautiful piece of scenery captured by a camera that is just slightly out of focus, yet still pleasant to watch.
~~~
George Lonegan (Damon) is a retired psychic with a gift that won't stop giving. His brother Billy (Jay Mohr) is an enterprising businessman who convinces him to do just one reading for a Greek client going through a rough time. As a result of this spot-on reading, word gets out of George's abilities and Billy pressures him to return to his craft.
A few months prior, Marie (De France) survived what we must assume was the Sri Lankan tsunami, and has a tough time re-adjusting to life after her out-of-body experience during the tragedy.
As this is happening, Marcus (Frankie McLaren), a young British boy with a drunken mother, loses his twin in an auto accident.
Both Marie and Marcus go searching for answers following their respective events as George retreats into a solitary life of factory work.
Damon plays George so cold and guarded, he would be difficult to like if he weren't so appealing. That said, when faced with a burden of former fame, it's easy to sympathize with someone who doesn't want to confront death on a daily basis.
All of the stories are fleshed out well except the cameo by Bryce Dallas Howard, which still leaves me scratching my head. The overall topic of the film is engaging whether or not you're a believer in the afterlife, and the opening scene where the tsunami hits rivals any great action scene in recent memory.
But where director Clint Eastwood somehow misses the mark is in the quiet contemplation of each main character. Those suspended moments of thought and revelation don't need to be as long as he makes them, nor does the slow pace necessarily serve the screenplay well.
This film is like a beautiful piece of scenery captured by a camera that is just slightly out of focus, yet still pleasant to watch.
~~~
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Back to the Future
Today I saw Back to the Future, starring Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd.
As many of my readers know, Back to the Future is my favorite film of all time. I was 9-years-old when it debuted in June of 1985 and since then, I've seen it over 90 times. Yes, that's 9 - 0.
To me, it's a perfect film.
For those who have lived under a rock for a quarter century, Back to the Future tells the story of Marty Mcfly (Fox), a high school student in 1985 who befriends a 'mad scientist' named Doc Brown (Lloyd) and ends up accidentally being the first human traveler in his new invention: a time machine.
Marty goes back to the year 1955, when his parents were in high school, and unintentionally messes with the space time continuum, causing his mother to fall for him instead of his father. He spends the rest of the film trying to undo this error and get back to 1985.
The charming parts of the story re-visit what was cool about the 50s: the novelty of television (a new invention), bobby socks, poodle skirts and a universal innocence that has never been duplicated.
The serious parts of the story examine common themes that everyone can relate to: bullying, first loves, protective parents and rejection.
Combine those two major elements with excellent acting by the perfectly cast ensemble, a witty script by Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis, and good old-fashioned heart-stopping action at the end, and you have a film that stands the test of time.
As a child, I loved it primarily because of my crush on Michael J. Fox; as a teenager, I identified with the restrictions Marty's parents put on the kids; as an adult I enjoy witnessing the nostalgia of my parents' era and my own as a child of the 80s.
At the end of the 25th anniversary presentation of the film I saw today, everyone clapped and cheered. I gave it a standing ovation.
As many of my readers know, Back to the Future is my favorite film of all time. I was 9-years-old when it debuted in June of 1985 and since then, I've seen it over 90 times. Yes, that's 9 - 0.
To me, it's a perfect film.
For those who have lived under a rock for a quarter century, Back to the Future tells the story of Marty Mcfly (Fox), a high school student in 1985 who befriends a 'mad scientist' named Doc Brown (Lloyd) and ends up accidentally being the first human traveler in his new invention: a time machine.
Marty goes back to the year 1955, when his parents were in high school, and unintentionally messes with the space time continuum, causing his mother to fall for him instead of his father. He spends the rest of the film trying to undo this error and get back to 1985.
The charming parts of the story re-visit what was cool about the 50s: the novelty of television (a new invention), bobby socks, poodle skirts and a universal innocence that has never been duplicated.
The serious parts of the story examine common themes that everyone can relate to: bullying, first loves, protective parents and rejection.
Combine those two major elements with excellent acting by the perfectly cast ensemble, a witty script by Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis, and good old-fashioned heart-stopping action at the end, and you have a film that stands the test of time.
As a child, I loved it primarily because of my crush on Michael J. Fox; as a teenager, I identified with the restrictions Marty's parents put on the kids; as an adult I enjoy witnessing the nostalgia of my parents' era and my own as a child of the 80s.
At the end of the 25th anniversary presentation of the film I saw today, everyone clapped and cheered. I gave it a standing ovation.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Waiting for Superman
Today I saw the documentary Waiting for Superman, directed by Davis Guggenheim.
American public schools are in trouble and each day leaders like Geoffrey Canada and Michelle Rhee do their best to fight against a broken system that refuses to right its wrongs.
In this film we meet those reformers, along with a small sample of underprivileged children from across the nation who all have one thing in common: a desire to learn.
One girl's mom cleans hospitals while dad stays at home searching for a job; another boy's grandmother has stepped in to raise him because her son (his father) died from drug use. These aren't easy times for anyone.
But the children wake up each day, wash their face and head to school because they're determined to make a better life than the one they were born into. They all come from families who recognize the importance of education and for that reason we come to find out they're all entered into separate lotteries to try to gain acceptance into better schools.
The numbers are dismal: the US ranks near the bottom of the list for developed countries in nearly every subject. The cost of keeping a prisoner incarcerated for four years turns out to be more than the cost of an exceptional private education. Why can't our country do the math?
Waiting for Superman turns out to be more of a wake up call than a call for action (many of the situations seem hopeless from what they've shown us), and it has already succeeded in angering a large portion of the good public school teachers who feel they are getting a bum rap.
The presentation of the issues was engaging and well done, but proposed solutions for how to solve the problem would've been more powerful.
~~~
American public schools are in trouble and each day leaders like Geoffrey Canada and Michelle Rhee do their best to fight against a broken system that refuses to right its wrongs.
In this film we meet those reformers, along with a small sample of underprivileged children from across the nation who all have one thing in common: a desire to learn.
One girl's mom cleans hospitals while dad stays at home searching for a job; another boy's grandmother has stepped in to raise him because her son (his father) died from drug use. These aren't easy times for anyone.
But the children wake up each day, wash their face and head to school because they're determined to make a better life than the one they were born into. They all come from families who recognize the importance of education and for that reason we come to find out they're all entered into separate lotteries to try to gain acceptance into better schools.
The numbers are dismal: the US ranks near the bottom of the list for developed countries in nearly every subject. The cost of keeping a prisoner incarcerated for four years turns out to be more than the cost of an exceptional private education. Why can't our country do the math?
Waiting for Superman turns out to be more of a wake up call than a call for action (many of the situations seem hopeless from what they've shown us), and it has already succeeded in angering a large portion of the good public school teachers who feel they are getting a bum rap.
The presentation of the issues was engaging and well done, but proposed solutions for how to solve the problem would've been more powerful.
~~~
Saturday, October 02, 2010
The Social Network
Today I saw The Social Network, starring Jesse Eisenberg and Justin Timberlake.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #98, so tune in for our review (coming soon).
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Heartbreaker
Today I saw Heartbreaker, starring Vanessa Paradis and Romain Duris.
We all have loved ones with partners we'd like to trade. Whether they be adulterous or simply annoying, at some point we all fantasize about breaking said couples up, but seldom follow through.
However, if there were a breakup-for-hire third party who we could solicit to do our dirty work, would we take the risk?
Many would, according to the premise of this film.
Alex (Duris) makes a living seducing women out of their current relationships with the help of his sister and her dim-witted husband. He makes it a rule not to break up what he perceives to be "happy" couples and ends his pairings immediately after accomplishing his task.
The father of Juliette (Paradis) has commissioned him for a rush-project of sorts—her wedding to a Brit they're not fond of is due to take place in a matter of days, so Alex will have to work fast to win her over.
During his "research" of the client, he learns she loves George Michael music and quickly rigs the car with vintage Wham! hits (though the way he achieves it seems needlessly elaborate). He also begins memorizing her favorite movie, Dirty Dancing, to learn the dance moves of Patrick Swayze's character.
Alex poses as Juliette's bodyguard to gain 24/7 access to her, and like many formulaic romantic comedies, he doesn't like her at first. She is the pampered princess; he the working-class simpleton.
Of course that changes, and he begins to make progress on his mission, but this is where the movie lost me. Vanessa is model-beautiful and her husband-to-be is Prince Charming handsome. Alex is skinny, somewhat unclean and sloppy. His actions are so exaggerated he comes off as a buffoon and the way he conveys his "love" for the things she adores isn't terribly convincing.
Throw in the slapstick nature of the supporting characters (his sister and brother-in-law, and her sex-crazed best friend) and all of the sweetness of the idea here is gone.
I enjoyed the leading lady's performance, but without a believable match for her to have to decide between, this film just couldn't work as it was intended.
I may have to cleanse my palette and throw good-old Dirty Dancing into the DVD player.
~~~
We all have loved ones with partners we'd like to trade. Whether they be adulterous or simply annoying, at some point we all fantasize about breaking said couples up, but seldom follow through.
However, if there were a breakup-for-hire third party who we could solicit to do our dirty work, would we take the risk?
Many would, according to the premise of this film.
Alex (Duris) makes a living seducing women out of their current relationships with the help of his sister and her dim-witted husband. He makes it a rule not to break up what he perceives to be "happy" couples and ends his pairings immediately after accomplishing his task.
The father of Juliette (Paradis) has commissioned him for a rush-project of sorts—her wedding to a Brit they're not fond of is due to take place in a matter of days, so Alex will have to work fast to win her over.
During his "research" of the client, he learns she loves George Michael music and quickly rigs the car with vintage Wham! hits (though the way he achieves it seems needlessly elaborate). He also begins memorizing her favorite movie, Dirty Dancing, to learn the dance moves of Patrick Swayze's character.
Alex poses as Juliette's bodyguard to gain 24/7 access to her, and like many formulaic romantic comedies, he doesn't like her at first. She is the pampered princess; he the working-class simpleton.
Of course that changes, and he begins to make progress on his mission, but this is where the movie lost me. Vanessa is model-beautiful and her husband-to-be is Prince Charming handsome. Alex is skinny, somewhat unclean and sloppy. His actions are so exaggerated he comes off as a buffoon and the way he conveys his "love" for the things she adores isn't terribly convincing.
Throw in the slapstick nature of the supporting characters (his sister and brother-in-law, and her sex-crazed best friend) and all of the sweetness of the idea here is gone.
I enjoyed the leading lady's performance, but without a believable match for her to have to decide between, this film just couldn't work as it was intended.
I may have to cleanse my palette and throw good-old Dirty Dancing into the DVD player.
~~~
Monday, September 20, 2010
The Tillman Story
Tonight I saw The Tillman Story, a documentary about the late Pat Tillman.
It's a story that's far too familiar: a good American man wants to serve his country so he enlists in the military, goes on a tour of duty and is killed in the line of fire.
Only Pat Tillman wasn't just any soldier—he was a former football star who gave up millions of dollars and the promise of doing something he loved for the rest of his life to fight for the US.
Sent to Iraq (alongside his younger brother, who enlisted at the same time), Private Tillman was killed on Earth Day in 2004 by members of his own troop. First, the military claimed Tillman was a hero in combat against the enemy. Then, when word got out that it was truly friendly fire that got him, they billed it as an "accident." But the men who served alongside Pat knew better, and eventually, they spoke.
Tillman's mother, Mary, simply wanted the truth she was entitled to, and that's what this film is about.
It's about a family's struggle for answers, a group of soldiers who were friends of Tillman and wanted the truth to come out, and a collective of high-level government officials who covered up the real story so they could turn the Tillman death into a public relations stunt in favor of the war.
Talking head interviews with Tillman's family and fellow soldiers are the bulk of the film, but the commentary is never dull. We see footage of formal hearings, scenes from his memorial service in San Jose, and video from the actual day he died, in the area where he perished.
The movie is at once frustrating and devastating, but there is validity in its existence if only to expose the corrupt powers-that-be to anyone left who may mistake them for honorable.
Refreshing as well is the approach Tillman's mother has, which indicates she doesn't want her son to be thought of as a hero any more than any other soldier who traded his life for his country.
Though the lack of closure in the matter may make you angry as you leave the theater, you'll be proud to know that true Americans like the Tillmans still exist.
~~~
It's a story that's far too familiar: a good American man wants to serve his country so he enlists in the military, goes on a tour of duty and is killed in the line of fire.
Only Pat Tillman wasn't just any soldier—he was a former football star who gave up millions of dollars and the promise of doing something he loved for the rest of his life to fight for the US.
Sent to Iraq (alongside his younger brother, who enlisted at the same time), Private Tillman was killed on Earth Day in 2004 by members of his own troop. First, the military claimed Tillman was a hero in combat against the enemy. Then, when word got out that it was truly friendly fire that got him, they billed it as an "accident." But the men who served alongside Pat knew better, and eventually, they spoke.
Tillman's mother, Mary, simply wanted the truth she was entitled to, and that's what this film is about.
It's about a family's struggle for answers, a group of soldiers who were friends of Tillman and wanted the truth to come out, and a collective of high-level government officials who covered up the real story so they could turn the Tillman death into a public relations stunt in favor of the war.
Talking head interviews with Tillman's family and fellow soldiers are the bulk of the film, but the commentary is never dull. We see footage of formal hearings, scenes from his memorial service in San Jose, and video from the actual day he died, in the area where he perished.
The movie is at once frustrating and devastating, but there is validity in its existence if only to expose the corrupt powers-that-be to anyone left who may mistake them for honorable.
Refreshing as well is the approach Tillman's mother has, which indicates she doesn't want her son to be thought of as a hero any more than any other soldier who traded his life for his country.
Though the lack of closure in the matter may make you angry as you leave the theater, you'll be proud to know that true Americans like the Tillmans still exist.
~~~
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Going the Distance
This morning I saw Going the Distance, starring Drew Barrymore and Justin Long.
Erin (Barrymore) is a grad student interning at a New York newspaper when she meets Garrett (Long), a record label talent searcher, disgruntled with the changing industry.
They have a meet-cute over a Centipede arcade game and fall in love at first sight. The couple's chemistry is believable (perhaps because they're a real-life pairing) and we can't help it that we want them to be together.
But what happens when two people find perfect bliss and then have to part indefinitely?
At first, nothing. When Erin returns to the West Coast to finish her degree, we experience the romance of long distance. There are late night phone calls, webcam chats and surprise visits. Absence is making the heart grow fonder.
Then, there's the realization that when each of them wakes up in the morning, the other is not lying next to them. That can hurt, especially when one is at a point in there life where major decisions are going to need to be made.
Erin is faced with such a decision regarding her career and her living situation (she's 31 and still bunking with her big sis). Does she sacrifice relationship for career or vice versa? The question may be a no-brainer for those who already have families, but for the single folk out there (especially the women) it's a much tougher call.
The story in this film is a simple one, but the writing and delightful presence of the leads makes it more than watchable. It's an enjoyable representation of modern relationships that all of us Gen Xers can surely relate to in one way or another.
I felt special kinship with Erin when she told her lover that she did in fact like saying "I told you so" when he was wrong. Those words have come out of my mouth more than a few times with partners, and it was nice to see a fictional person behaving so honestly.
This movie avoids typical rom-com clichés with just enough reality to keep us invested and the laughs come easily.
A refreshing change from the status quo.
~~~
Erin (Barrymore) is a grad student interning at a New York newspaper when she meets Garrett (Long), a record label talent searcher, disgruntled with the changing industry.
They have a meet-cute over a Centipede arcade game and fall in love at first sight. The couple's chemistry is believable (perhaps because they're a real-life pairing) and we can't help it that we want them to be together.
But what happens when two people find perfect bliss and then have to part indefinitely?
At first, nothing. When Erin returns to the West Coast to finish her degree, we experience the romance of long distance. There are late night phone calls, webcam chats and surprise visits. Absence is making the heart grow fonder.
Then, there's the realization that when each of them wakes up in the morning, the other is not lying next to them. That can hurt, especially when one is at a point in there life where major decisions are going to need to be made.
Erin is faced with such a decision regarding her career and her living situation (she's 31 and still bunking with her big sis). Does she sacrifice relationship for career or vice versa? The question may be a no-brainer for those who already have families, but for the single folk out there (especially the women) it's a much tougher call.
The story in this film is a simple one, but the writing and delightful presence of the leads makes it more than watchable. It's an enjoyable representation of modern relationships that all of us Gen Xers can surely relate to in one way or another.
I felt special kinship with Erin when she told her lover that she did in fact like saying "I told you so" when he was wrong. Those words have come out of my mouth more than a few times with partners, and it was nice to see a fictional person behaving so honestly.
This movie avoids typical rom-com clichés with just enough reality to keep us invested and the laughs come easily.
A refreshing change from the status quo.
~~~
Sunday, September 12, 2010
I'm Still Here
Today I saw the documentary I'm Still Here about the Joaquin Phoenix's career transition.
Casey Affleck directs this sad film about the fall of a once-great actor through biased eyes (he married Phoenix's sister, Summer, in 2006) and as a result the story feels too calculated to be authentic, even if it's not a hoax.
The story begins with childhood footage of the famous Phoenix siblings performing a song-and-dance routine for a sidewalk full of gawkers. You get the sense perhaps you're supposed to pity these kids, as if they had no choice, but from all I've read of their commune-like upbringing, it's hard to believe that was the case.
Joaquin's older brother River was the true star of the family, and had it not been for his senseless fatal overdose, probably would've become one of the greatest actors of our time. Joaquin has never matched that magnitude of talent, but he's certainly displayed the potential to (he's been nominated twice for an Oscar).
In 2008, after receiving praise for his work in the critically acclaimed Two Lovers, Joaquin allegedly decided to quit acting once and for all, and begin a recording career in hip-hop. The fact that he commissioned Affleck to begin filing at precisely this time is why I say "allegedly."
He plays to the camera as someone who is "on" in every frame. Whether he's doing lines of cocaine (yes, I thought this was especially tasteless considering the manner in which his brother died), dancing and fondling hookers at his house, or ranting at one of his many pointless assistants, he's undoubtedly performing.
There are a series of funny exchanges between Phoenix and Sean "P Diddy" Combs, who is too smart not to notice that his entire genre of music may be mocked by Phoenix if he consents to produce him. Joaquin is disrespectful, showing up late and unprepared, and Combs gives it right back to him in the form of much-needed tough-love lecturing. It was the best part of the film.
In addition to that train wreck, there are plenty more (the now famous Letterman appearance; a scorned assistant retaliating in the most vile way imaginable), which makes this entire documentary nothing more than a meandering reality show. And no, I didn't appreciate the "bathroom" scenes.
I'm Still Here is meant to leave you wondering if it was all a hoax or if Phoenix was really delusional enough to think he could transition from being a serious, successful actor to a flashy, hip-hop star overnight.
I'm sure (and hopeful) it's probably the former, but whatever the case, I like Phoenix a hell of a lot less after seeing it.
~~~
Casey Affleck directs this sad film about the fall of a once-great actor through biased eyes (he married Phoenix's sister, Summer, in 2006) and as a result the story feels too calculated to be authentic, even if it's not a hoax.
The story begins with childhood footage of the famous Phoenix siblings performing a song-and-dance routine for a sidewalk full of gawkers. You get the sense perhaps you're supposed to pity these kids, as if they had no choice, but from all I've read of their commune-like upbringing, it's hard to believe that was the case.
Joaquin's older brother River was the true star of the family, and had it not been for his senseless fatal overdose, probably would've become one of the greatest actors of our time. Joaquin has never matched that magnitude of talent, but he's certainly displayed the potential to (he's been nominated twice for an Oscar).
In 2008, after receiving praise for his work in the critically acclaimed Two Lovers, Joaquin allegedly decided to quit acting once and for all, and begin a recording career in hip-hop. The fact that he commissioned Affleck to begin filing at precisely this time is why I say "allegedly."
He plays to the camera as someone who is "on" in every frame. Whether he's doing lines of cocaine (yes, I thought this was especially tasteless considering the manner in which his brother died), dancing and fondling hookers at his house, or ranting at one of his many pointless assistants, he's undoubtedly performing.
There are a series of funny exchanges between Phoenix and Sean "P Diddy" Combs, who is too smart not to notice that his entire genre of music may be mocked by Phoenix if he consents to produce him. Joaquin is disrespectful, showing up late and unprepared, and Combs gives it right back to him in the form of much-needed tough-love lecturing. It was the best part of the film.
In addition to that train wreck, there are plenty more (the now famous Letterman appearance; a scorned assistant retaliating in the most vile way imaginable), which makes this entire documentary nothing more than a meandering reality show. And no, I didn't appreciate the "bathroom" scenes.
I'm Still Here is meant to leave you wondering if it was all a hoax or if Phoenix was really delusional enough to think he could transition from being a serious, successful actor to a flashy, hip-hop star overnight.
I'm sure (and hopeful) it's probably the former, but whatever the case, I like Phoenix a hell of a lot less after seeing it.
~~~
Friday, September 03, 2010
Cairo Time
Tonight I saw Cairo Time, starring Patricia Clarkson and Alexander Siddig.
Juliette (Clarkson) travels to Cairo to meet her husband who works for the UN as a refugee camp organizer in Gaza. He is (not surprisingly) detained, so he sends a friend to entertain her in his absence.
Tareq (Siddig) is a handsome, never-married Egyptian who runs a café, yet appears wherever Juliette needs him, whenever she needs him.
With additional husband delays, the waiting gets to be too much and restless Juliette begins to explore the city on her own. She finds this to be unsafe and solicits the company of Tareq as her informal tour guide. They cruise along the Nile, taste the "best coffee in the world" and get to know one another in a sweet, innocent way. She teases him about the girl who got away; he flatters her with jokes about her foreign pronunciation. They fall in love.
As we witness their chemistry develop, the director puts us in the places they are visiting in an almost visceral way. When the noise of Cairo is too intrusive for Juliette speak with her husband on the phone or to sleep, we're annoyed right along with her; when she takes constant sips of her bottled water on a dusty bus to the desert, we become thirsty with dryness.
The two main actors are perfect in their roles and the few supporting characters who show up are like seasoning on a pleasantly spicy dish.
The pace of the film is unimaginably slow, yet never dull. Watching a friendship grow into something unexpected is both exciting and frightening. Contemplating what one would do in a similar situation and wondering which man deserves Juliette's love keeps our minds going as the landscape quietly draws us into its mystery.
Also to be appreciated is the way the pyramids are savored in minimal, powerful scenes. There are no obligatory helicopter perspectives of the landmarks, nor do they steal the show (though they are breathtaking as seen from the characters' perspectives).
I'd recommend seeing Cairo Time on your own time, when you have the luxury of lingering right along with it.
~~~
Juliette (Clarkson) travels to Cairo to meet her husband who works for the UN as a refugee camp organizer in Gaza. He is (not surprisingly) detained, so he sends a friend to entertain her in his absence.
Tareq (Siddig) is a handsome, never-married Egyptian who runs a café, yet appears wherever Juliette needs him, whenever she needs him.
With additional husband delays, the waiting gets to be too much and restless Juliette begins to explore the city on her own. She finds this to be unsafe and solicits the company of Tareq as her informal tour guide. They cruise along the Nile, taste the "best coffee in the world" and get to know one another in a sweet, innocent way. She teases him about the girl who got away; he flatters her with jokes about her foreign pronunciation. They fall in love.
As we witness their chemistry develop, the director puts us in the places they are visiting in an almost visceral way. When the noise of Cairo is too intrusive for Juliette speak with her husband on the phone or to sleep, we're annoyed right along with her; when she takes constant sips of her bottled water on a dusty bus to the desert, we become thirsty with dryness.
The two main actors are perfect in their roles and the few supporting characters who show up are like seasoning on a pleasantly spicy dish.
The pace of the film is unimaginably slow, yet never dull. Watching a friendship grow into something unexpected is both exciting and frightening. Contemplating what one would do in a similar situation and wondering which man deserves Juliette's love keeps our minds going as the landscape quietly draws us into its mystery.
Also to be appreciated is the way the pyramids are savored in minimal, powerful scenes. There are no obligatory helicopter perspectives of the landmarks, nor do they steal the show (though they are breathtaking as seen from the characters' perspectives).
I'd recommend seeing Cairo Time on your own time, when you have the luxury of lingering right along with it.
~~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)