Today I saw Newlyweds, starring Edward Burns and Caitlin Fitzgerald.
Full disclosure: I follow Edward Burns on Twitter and was actively watching/participating in the collaborative Tweets he sent out while scripting and shooting this film.
That said, even if I new nothing of his process, I'd still have walked away from this movie with a smile on my face.
Buzzy (Burns) and Katie (Fitzgerald) are newlyweds. They've both been married before and are determined to get it right this time.
They are close to Katie's sister Marsha (Marsha Dietlein) and her husband Max (Max Baker). Marsha is annoying in an older-sister kind of way; Max is clearly tired of being married to Marsha. It happens, you know.
When Buzzy's younger sister Linda (Kerry Bishé) arrives unexpectedly to stay with the couple until she finds permanent housing, their wedded bliss comes to a screeching halt.
Linda, to put it simply, is a handful. An immature, irresponsible, ungrateful handful. But Buzzy defends her to Katie and vice versa, and soon finds himself embroiled in drama (something he thought he was leaving behind when he married Katie).
As they navigate this storm of external influences, some of the ideals they had about their marriage (as told to us in earlier scenes) begin to dissolve.
We see first-hand how fragile relationships really are (not that we didn't know, but...) and how important it may be to define certain "agreements" when making a commitment as serious as marriage.
When you say that you'll tell each other everything, does that include things that you know will hurt your partner?
This is one of the questions the film asks of its characters and it seems like a good one to ask whomever you choose to spend your life with as well.
No union can be perfect, but serious damage can be done by family and friends—even those with good intentions. At the same time, no couple should have to isolate themselves from everyone to enjoy a healthy relationship.
Newlyweds is anchored by sharp dialog and well-developed characters who illustrate this point. Like Burns' other films, there isn't a lot of clutter to get in the way of telling a good old-fashioned story.
There's also an organic method in which the scenes are shot that allows us to feel as if we've just knocked on a friend's door after they've had a fight with their lover. We're there to observe and listen and react as they do in their most raw moments.
Isn't that what great filmmaking should make us feel?
~~~
Showing posts with label 2011. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2011. Show all posts
Saturday, May 05, 2012
Sunday, February 05, 2012
A Separation
Today I saw A Separation, starring Peyman Maadi and Sareh Bayat.
Nader (Maadi) and Simin (Leila Hatami) are a happily married Iranian couple headed toward divorce because Nader refuses to leave his Alzheimer-stricken father to move to a foreign country. Simin wants to go because she thinks better opportunities will be available for their adolescent daughter elsewhere.
Simin temporarily moves in with her parents as they negotiate, which forces Nader to hire help to take care of his father while he's at work all day. The woman he hires is pregnant and complains after just one day that the work is too much for her. They make arrangements for her currently incarcerated husband to take her place as soon as she can get him out of jail.
Unfortunately, he isn't released as quickly as hoped, so she continues to do the work of the house and take care of the elder.
Things take a turn for the worse with everyone when Nader and his daughter return home one evening to find the woman gone, some money missing and grandpa on the floor, having fallen out of bed despite being tied to it.
He is understandably furious, and when the woman returns he asks her to leave. She tries to explain she had to go somewhere just briefly, but the condition he found his father in shakes him up too much to allow her to continue care, so he again asks her to leave. She doesn't, and he also accuses her of stealing the missing money, which greatly insults her.
Finally, there is a physical scuffle (the audience only sees one side of it) and the next day, Nader and his wife find themselves at the hospital checking in on the woman.
I'll refrain from spoiling this any further, but the rest of the movie is a clever test of morals, religious faith and basic human decency.
It asks a question any of us could be someday faced with: when things escalate due the actions of everyone involved, whose fault is it when someone gets hurt?
The actors are fantastic in this film—if I didn't know better, I'd think they were all just folks from a typical Iranian neighborhood, giving us a taste of what life is like there.
As an American I found myself thinking about how the situation would've been different if it had taken place in an American household. As the daughter of an immigrant, I could relate all too much to the importance of honor, and traditional male and female roles.
At the end of the day, it's not the second-coming of film (as many have prematurely anointed it), but it is a phenomenal slice-of-life exploration in the same vein as 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days.
~~~
Nader (Maadi) and Simin (Leila Hatami) are a happily married Iranian couple headed toward divorce because Nader refuses to leave his Alzheimer-stricken father to move to a foreign country. Simin wants to go because she thinks better opportunities will be available for their adolescent daughter elsewhere.
Simin temporarily moves in with her parents as they negotiate, which forces Nader to hire help to take care of his father while he's at work all day. The woman he hires is pregnant and complains after just one day that the work is too much for her. They make arrangements for her currently incarcerated husband to take her place as soon as she can get him out of jail.
Unfortunately, he isn't released as quickly as hoped, so she continues to do the work of the house and take care of the elder.
Things take a turn for the worse with everyone when Nader and his daughter return home one evening to find the woman gone, some money missing and grandpa on the floor, having fallen out of bed despite being tied to it.
He is understandably furious, and when the woman returns he asks her to leave. She tries to explain she had to go somewhere just briefly, but the condition he found his father in shakes him up too much to allow her to continue care, so he again asks her to leave. She doesn't, and he also accuses her of stealing the missing money, which greatly insults her.
Finally, there is a physical scuffle (the audience only sees one side of it) and the next day, Nader and his wife find themselves at the hospital checking in on the woman.
I'll refrain from spoiling this any further, but the rest of the movie is a clever test of morals, religious faith and basic human decency.
It asks a question any of us could be someday faced with: when things escalate due the actions of everyone involved, whose fault is it when someone gets hurt?
The actors are fantastic in this film—if I didn't know better, I'd think they were all just folks from a typical Iranian neighborhood, giving us a taste of what life is like there.
As an American I found myself thinking about how the situation would've been different if it had taken place in an American household. As the daughter of an immigrant, I could relate all too much to the importance of honor, and traditional male and female roles.
At the end of the day, it's not the second-coming of film (as many have prematurely anointed it), but it is a phenomenal slice-of-life exploration in the same vein as 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days.
~~~
Monday, January 30, 2012
Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close
Tonight I saw Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, starring Thomas Horn and Sandra Bullock.
The title of this film just begs its audience to rename it, so I will happily oblige:
Extremely Annoying & Incredibly Awful
Oskar (Horn) is a kid—possibly on the autism spectrum—who lost his best-friend-of-a-father on September 11. His mother, Linda (Bullock), is a grieving widow who will never be as close to her son as her deceased husband was.
There's also a grandma across the street (who communicates with Oskar via Walkie Talkie) and a possible grandpa shacking up with her, who may or may not have been a concentration camp at some point. And a gaggle of strangers—472 of them, I think—who little Oskar will encounter on his search to find a lock that fits a key that he found in his dead dad's bedroom.
That's pretty much the movie. In a nutshell.
And although that is all pretty straightforward, I came out of the film with dozens of questions:
Who thought it was okay to show a kid (I don't care if he's fictional) freezing photos he finds on the Internet of what could be his dead father jumping to his death on that terrible day? I may not have lost anyone personally in 9/11, but seeing the real people jumping on that day will be burned into my memory forever. I can only imagine how those who actually lost someone must feel seeing a such a reenactment.
Why did they have to make "The Renter" mute?
If he was from the old country, how could he understand/write English so well?
Why did Abby and William Black have to be actively separating when the already-disturbed boy shows up? And are we to believe his reappearance caused their reconciliation?
If Oskar knows not to mingle with strangers, why is he so comfortable barging into their homes to search for his answers?
How did they talk some of Hollywood's greatest A-list actors into doing this film?
What the hell was the Academy thinking nominating this for Best Picture?
I'm just baffled.
~~~
The title of this film just begs its audience to rename it, so I will happily oblige:
Extremely Annoying & Incredibly Awful
Oskar (Horn) is a kid—possibly on the autism spectrum—who lost his best-friend-of-a-father on September 11. His mother, Linda (Bullock), is a grieving widow who will never be as close to her son as her deceased husband was.
There's also a grandma across the street (who communicates with Oskar via Walkie Talkie) and a possible grandpa shacking up with her, who may or may not have been a concentration camp at some point. And a gaggle of strangers—472 of them, I think—who little Oskar will encounter on his search to find a lock that fits a key that he found in his dead dad's bedroom.
That's pretty much the movie. In a nutshell.
And although that is all pretty straightforward, I came out of the film with dozens of questions:
Who thought it was okay to show a kid (I don't care if he's fictional) freezing photos he finds on the Internet of what could be his dead father jumping to his death on that terrible day? I may not have lost anyone personally in 9/11, but seeing the real people jumping on that day will be burned into my memory forever. I can only imagine how those who actually lost someone must feel seeing a such a reenactment.
Why did they have to make "The Renter" mute?
If he was from the old country, how could he understand/write English so well?
Why did Abby and William Black have to be actively separating when the already-disturbed boy shows up? And are we to believe his reappearance caused their reconciliation?
If Oskar knows not to mingle with strangers, why is he so comfortable barging into their homes to search for his answers?
How did they talk some of Hollywood's greatest A-list actors into doing this film?
What the hell was the Academy thinking nominating this for Best Picture?
I'm just baffled.
~~~
Thursday, January 26, 2012
War Horse
Tonight I saw War Horse, starring Jeremy Irvine and Emily Watson.
It's been a long time since I've made it through an endurance test like this. I had a feeling it wouldn't be my cup of tea, and sadly, it wasn't.
Albert (Irvine) is the young son of a drunken farmer who promises his mother, Rose (Watson), that he will train and care for the horse his dad paid too much for at auction. The horse's name is Joey, and he's—of course—beautiful and smart.
By the time Albert and Joey bond, drunken papa has sold the horse to the Army. Though all signs point to the horse being lost/killed in WWI, Albert claims he will see him again. He's not kidding.
Calling them a series of unfortunate events would be a gross understatement. Let's just say, poor Joey goes through hell. In fact, the only scene that got me misty-eyed was the one where the horse tries to escape the human horrors of war only to get completely tangled in barbed wire. This prompts soldiers from both sides of the fight to take a time out from combat and help the poor animal break free. The bit was wonderful and reminded me of another film where soldiers pause in war to share one another's company peacefully during a holiday called Joyeux Noel. But I digress.
Joey gets passed off to several owners during his journey, and his journey (along with ours) is a long one.
The redeeming moments of the film have everything to do with the beautiful cinematography, the excellent score (seldom does Spielberg ever get that wrong) and the acting from the horse. Yes, the horse.
I'll admit to loving the closing shot—something that reminded me of Gone With the Wind, and was most likely intended to.
It's just a shame that the majestic, amber sunset didn't arrive before I got bored.
~~~
It's been a long time since I've made it through an endurance test like this. I had a feeling it wouldn't be my cup of tea, and sadly, it wasn't.
Albert (Irvine) is the young son of a drunken farmer who promises his mother, Rose (Watson), that he will train and care for the horse his dad paid too much for at auction. The horse's name is Joey, and he's—of course—beautiful and smart.
By the time Albert and Joey bond, drunken papa has sold the horse to the Army. Though all signs point to the horse being lost/killed in WWI, Albert claims he will see him again. He's not kidding.
Calling them a series of unfortunate events would be a gross understatement. Let's just say, poor Joey goes through hell. In fact, the only scene that got me misty-eyed was the one where the horse tries to escape the human horrors of war only to get completely tangled in barbed wire. This prompts soldiers from both sides of the fight to take a time out from combat and help the poor animal break free. The bit was wonderful and reminded me of another film where soldiers pause in war to share one another's company peacefully during a holiday called Joyeux Noel. But I digress.
Joey gets passed off to several owners during his journey, and his journey (along with ours) is a long one.
The redeeming moments of the film have everything to do with the beautiful cinematography, the excellent score (seldom does Spielberg ever get that wrong) and the acting from the horse. Yes, the horse.
I'll admit to loving the closing shot—something that reminded me of Gone With the Wind, and was most likely intended to.
It's just a shame that the majestic, amber sunset didn't arrive before I got bored.
~~~
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Take Shelter
Tonight I saw Take Shelter, starring Michael Shannon and Jessica Chastain.
Curtis (Shannon) is a family man. He works hard at his construction job each day to provide for his sweet wife Samantha (Chastain) and their young daughter Hannah (Tova Stewart).
Hannah is deaf and needs surgery to try out a cochlear implant. Samantha is relieved when they finally receive word that the insurance will cover it.
But Curtis begins having terrible nightmares predicting an apocalyptic storm. This takes his attention away from his family and his work. He grows paranoid about the supposed impending doom and decides to renovate the storm shelter in their backyard.
At the same time, he's keeping his elaborate (expensive) plans for the shelter from Samantha and beginning to investigate mental illness (since it runs in his family).
As we watch his obsessive paranoia increase, we feel sorry for his patient wife, and even sorrier for him. After all, he may be bearing witness to his own descent into craziness. Or is he?
Michael Shannon plays this role so convincingly, he's more fragile than frightening. His fear is written on his face, but contained in the presence of those he holds dear. And although he is the least reasonable person on-screen at all times, he has the audience rooting for him in spite of it.
I'll be surprised if Shannon doesn't get an Oscar nomination for this role.
Chastain is also good, as are the rest of the supporting cast. Granted, they have a lot less to do, but they are all very believable as simple, Midwestern folks just trying to live their lives. Kudos to writer/director Jeff Nichols for creating 'real' characters.
And I may be in the minority, but I loved the ending. The fact that it wasn't predictable or wrapped up in a big red bow made me smile.
As did the possibility it implied.
~~~
Curtis (Shannon) is a family man. He works hard at his construction job each day to provide for his sweet wife Samantha (Chastain) and their young daughter Hannah (Tova Stewart).
Hannah is deaf and needs surgery to try out a cochlear implant. Samantha is relieved when they finally receive word that the insurance will cover it.
But Curtis begins having terrible nightmares predicting an apocalyptic storm. This takes his attention away from his family and his work. He grows paranoid about the supposed impending doom and decides to renovate the storm shelter in their backyard.
At the same time, he's keeping his elaborate (expensive) plans for the shelter from Samantha and beginning to investigate mental illness (since it runs in his family).
As we watch his obsessive paranoia increase, we feel sorry for his patient wife, and even sorrier for him. After all, he may be bearing witness to his own descent into craziness. Or is he?
Michael Shannon plays this role so convincingly, he's more fragile than frightening. His fear is written on his face, but contained in the presence of those he holds dear. And although he is the least reasonable person on-screen at all times, he has the audience rooting for him in spite of it.
I'll be surprised if Shannon doesn't get an Oscar nomination for this role.
Chastain is also good, as are the rest of the supporting cast. Granted, they have a lot less to do, but they are all very believable as simple, Midwestern folks just trying to live their lives. Kudos to writer/director Jeff Nichols for creating 'real' characters.
And I may be in the minority, but I loved the ending. The fact that it wasn't predictable or wrapped up in a big red bow made me smile.
As did the possibility it implied.
~~~
Monday, January 02, 2012
The Artist
Today I saw The Artist, starring Jean Dujardin and Bérénice Bejo.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a huge Charlie Chaplin fan. In fact, aside from the Harold Lloyd comedies I would watch with my parents as a small child, and an especially good version of The Scarlet Letter I caught a few years back at SIFF, I can't say I've ever really 'loved' silent films.
That made the delight of The Artist all the more satisfying.
It's 1927 and George Valentin (Dujardin) is a silent film star in the prime of his career. Peppy Miller (Bejo) is an up-and-coming actress he's enamored with, and as a result, helps jump start her career. Things are fine for a split second until talking pictures come along.
George is completely resistant to switching over to the 'dark side' of this new trend and inevitably makes himself obsolete. He sells his belongings and retreats into a terrible cloud of depression. At the same time, Peppy embraces the change and becomes an even bigger star.
Though the supporting cast is easily recognizable (John Goodman, James Cromwell, etc.), it's an added bonus for the American audience that the two leads are French. I can't say I would have been so easily convinced by a Clooney or a Damon in the main role for the simple fact that I know what their true demeanors are like (and hamming it up could've seemed false).
But here, I was won over by the heart and the soul of the experience. The love letter to a Hollywood many of us seem to forget. The simplicity of a love story intertwined with that of a person descending into their own man-made failure.
The various winks to the audience and the perfectly placed loyal dog could have been annoying if not worked into the story properly—luckily they were, and that's a credit to the screenwriter/director (Michel Hazanavicius).
All in all a fresh change from the popcorn action flicks, endless sequels and ho-hum dramas presently permeating our theaters.
~~~
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a huge Charlie Chaplin fan. In fact, aside from the Harold Lloyd comedies I would watch with my parents as a small child, and an especially good version of The Scarlet Letter I caught a few years back at SIFF, I can't say I've ever really 'loved' silent films.
That made the delight of The Artist all the more satisfying.
It's 1927 and George Valentin (Dujardin) is a silent film star in the prime of his career. Peppy Miller (Bejo) is an up-and-coming actress he's enamored with, and as a result, helps jump start her career. Things are fine for a split second until talking pictures come along.
George is completely resistant to switching over to the 'dark side' of this new trend and inevitably makes himself obsolete. He sells his belongings and retreats into a terrible cloud of depression. At the same time, Peppy embraces the change and becomes an even bigger star.
Though the supporting cast is easily recognizable (John Goodman, James Cromwell, etc.), it's an added bonus for the American audience that the two leads are French. I can't say I would have been so easily convinced by a Clooney or a Damon in the main role for the simple fact that I know what their true demeanors are like (and hamming it up could've seemed false).
But here, I was won over by the heart and the soul of the experience. The love letter to a Hollywood many of us seem to forget. The simplicity of a love story intertwined with that of a person descending into their own man-made failure.
The various winks to the audience and the perfectly placed loyal dog could have been annoying if not worked into the story properly—luckily they were, and that's a credit to the screenwriter/director (Michel Hazanavicius).
All in all a fresh change from the popcorn action flicks, endless sequels and ho-hum dramas presently permeating our theaters.
~~~
Sunday, January 01, 2012
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
This morning I saw Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
That's the last time I'll see a film without reading the source material first.
It's the Cold War—early '70s. George Smiley (Oldman) is a recently retired British spy brought in to investigate a possible Russian mole. Ricki Tarr (Tom Hardy) is the rebel spy, in love with the wife of a Russian operative, convinced of the mole. Bill Haydon (Firth) may or may not be the mole. Roy Bland (Ciaran Hinds) may or may not be the mole. Percy Alleline (Toby Jones) may or may not be the mole.
And... they lost me!
This isn't a typical spy film that features people hanging from buildings or being tortured in heart-stopping, tense scenes. It's a moody, quiet interpretation of what real spy stuff is probably really like. And let's face it, a bit of that is undoubtedly boring.
Amidst the endless conversations and glimpses of what goes down are beautifully framed shots of a soggy London in the past. Once I had completely lost track of the story, I found myself focusing on how lovely the cinematography was and how many expressions Goldman could muster without ever getting excited.
It's really too bad, because fans of the BBC version of the story and the original book seem to be loving the hell out of this.
I can safely say I did not, but that doesn't mean the acting was bad or there weren't clever bits of dialog that woke me up from time to time.
It just wasn't for me—at least not without knowing the story and characters in advance to be able to follow along coherently.
~~~
That's the last time I'll see a film without reading the source material first.
It's the Cold War—early '70s. George Smiley (Oldman) is a recently retired British spy brought in to investigate a possible Russian mole. Ricki Tarr (Tom Hardy) is the rebel spy, in love with the wife of a Russian operative, convinced of the mole. Bill Haydon (Firth) may or may not be the mole. Roy Bland (Ciaran Hinds) may or may not be the mole. Percy Alleline (Toby Jones) may or may not be the mole.
And... they lost me!
This isn't a typical spy film that features people hanging from buildings or being tortured in heart-stopping, tense scenes. It's a moody, quiet interpretation of what real spy stuff is probably really like. And let's face it, a bit of that is undoubtedly boring.
Amidst the endless conversations and glimpses of what goes down are beautifully framed shots of a soggy London in the past. Once I had completely lost track of the story, I found myself focusing on how lovely the cinematography was and how many expressions Goldman could muster without ever getting excited.
It's really too bad, because fans of the BBC version of the story and the original book seem to be loving the hell out of this.
I can safely say I did not, but that doesn't mean the acting was bad or there weren't clever bits of dialog that woke me up from time to time.
It just wasn't for me—at least not without knowing the story and characters in advance to be able to follow along coherently.
~~~
Friday, December 30, 2011
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Tonight I saw The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, starring Rooney Mara and Daniel Craig.
It would be impossible not to compare this film to its Swedish predecessor or to the book where the story originated, so I won't pretend I'm trying not to; that said, I'll do my best to focus less on the differences and more on the core quality of the film.
Mikael Blomkvist (Craig) is a Swedish journalist being brought down in the court of public opinion for a story he wrote that turned out to be less than factual. He was most likely set up by the subject of the story, but that is beside the point now that his and his magazine's reputations are ruined. To remove himself from the public eye, he takes a job with a wealthy family to investigate a murder that happened several decades ago.
Lisbeth Salander (Mara) is the damaged, disturbed, unconventional investigator brought in to act as Blomkvist's research assistant. Because of her past mental health issues, she is forced to report to a guardian who is responsible for dispensing her allowances. Unfortunately, her caring guardian becomes hospitalized and she is assigned to a sadistic, horrible guardian who demands sexual favors in return for her own money. She devises a way to prevent this from happening, but in the meantime is brutally raped by the man.
Christopher Plummer plays Henrik Vanger, the wealthy member of a troubled family with a nazi past, desperate to find his niece's killer. As usual, Plummer gives a superb, believable performance in the role, but unfortunately his screen time is too brief.
I think the same of Robin Wright, who makes a fantastic Erika Berger, Mikael's boss and married lover. She's pitch perfect in the scenes she appears in, but they are few and far between.
Overall, the story stays somewhat close to the novel, though a few ridiculous details make me groan with American shame (the McDonald's product placement is blatant; there is a somewhat predictable mention of Ikea). I also agree with other critics who have mentioned that Mara's version of Lisbeth is far too feminine.
Aside from making Lisbeth 'pretty' in certain intimate scenes, she also appears to register emotion with Mikael, which is something the true character never would have done. They aren't a couple, but here, they behave like one.
Daniel Craig is also too good looking and too physically fit to be playing the smoking, eating Mikael. And far to few cups of coffee were consumed to stay true to the native text.
However, Fincher does work his magic in many ways.
The lighting and the shadows and the mood of the film are always spot on. Whether Liseth is blazing down the street on her motorcycle or watching a night vision camera to see who is prowling about the property, the aura of the story is captured in a more spiritual way than that of the original film.
The more linear script by Steven Zaillian also manages to put the sequence of events in layman's terms for the intended American audience, which is probably a good thing for those who became too frustrated and abandoned the book, or are afraid of films with subtitles. The story deserves to be seen, even if digested in a more obvious way.
The violent scenes are no less horrific (especially a post-rape glimpse of Liseth in the shower); the chases no less tense.
All in all, a satisfying, if not yet as accurate retelling of a classic mystery that will certainly be shared for years to come.
~~~
It would be impossible not to compare this film to its Swedish predecessor or to the book where the story originated, so I won't pretend I'm trying not to; that said, I'll do my best to focus less on the differences and more on the core quality of the film.
Mikael Blomkvist (Craig) is a Swedish journalist being brought down in the court of public opinion for a story he wrote that turned out to be less than factual. He was most likely set up by the subject of the story, but that is beside the point now that his and his magazine's reputations are ruined. To remove himself from the public eye, he takes a job with a wealthy family to investigate a murder that happened several decades ago.
Lisbeth Salander (Mara) is the damaged, disturbed, unconventional investigator brought in to act as Blomkvist's research assistant. Because of her past mental health issues, she is forced to report to a guardian who is responsible for dispensing her allowances. Unfortunately, her caring guardian becomes hospitalized and she is assigned to a sadistic, horrible guardian who demands sexual favors in return for her own money. She devises a way to prevent this from happening, but in the meantime is brutally raped by the man.
Christopher Plummer plays Henrik Vanger, the wealthy member of a troubled family with a nazi past, desperate to find his niece's killer. As usual, Plummer gives a superb, believable performance in the role, but unfortunately his screen time is too brief.
I think the same of Robin Wright, who makes a fantastic Erika Berger, Mikael's boss and married lover. She's pitch perfect in the scenes she appears in, but they are few and far between.
Overall, the story stays somewhat close to the novel, though a few ridiculous details make me groan with American shame (the McDonald's product placement is blatant; there is a somewhat predictable mention of Ikea). I also agree with other critics who have mentioned that Mara's version of Lisbeth is far too feminine.
Aside from making Lisbeth 'pretty' in certain intimate scenes, she also appears to register emotion with Mikael, which is something the true character never would have done. They aren't a couple, but here, they behave like one.
Daniel Craig is also too good looking and too physically fit to be playing the smoking, eating Mikael. And far to few cups of coffee were consumed to stay true to the native text.
However, Fincher does work his magic in many ways.
The lighting and the shadows and the mood of the film are always spot on. Whether Liseth is blazing down the street on her motorcycle or watching a night vision camera to see who is prowling about the property, the aura of the story is captured in a more spiritual way than that of the original film.
The more linear script by Steven Zaillian also manages to put the sequence of events in layman's terms for the intended American audience, which is probably a good thing for those who became too frustrated and abandoned the book, or are afraid of films with subtitles. The story deserves to be seen, even if digested in a more obvious way.
The violent scenes are no less horrific (especially a post-rape glimpse of Liseth in the shower); the chases no less tense.
All in all, a satisfying, if not yet as accurate retelling of a classic mystery that will certainly be shared for years to come.
~~~
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Hugo
Today I saw Hugo, starring Asa Butterfield and Ben Kingsley.
When I think of Martin Scorsese, the first images that come to mind are those from brilliant-yet-violent Taxi Driver and Goodfellas. Never did I think I'd be attending a 'family film' (in 3D, no less) directed by this legend. But that's what I did today.
Hugo (Butterfield) is a young boy who loses his father in a fire and is taught how to run the Paris train station clock by his uncle. When his uncle disappears, he is left to fend for himself, stealing breakfast pastries to eat and tools to make sure the clock keeps working.
There is a nasty station inspector (played annoyingly by Sacha Baron Cohen) who is anxious to send Hugo (and any other unaccompanied children) to the orphanage; there's also a true friend found in Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moertz), a girl who is being raised by a nearby toy booth owner Georges (Kingsley) and his wife.
In this small cluster of characters, through a museum piece Hugo is working hard to fix (it was his dad's last pet project before his passing), we are taken back to the beginning of film and the importance of not letting go of our passions.
To explain how it happens would be to give too much away, but I will say that though I was never bored, I didn't quite see the need for 3D with this story. The heart of the screenplay was strong enough that the few 'wow' effects that were showcased were merely icing on an already yummy cake.
Hugo is sweet and sincere and great for the whole family, but save yourself the extra dollars and see it sans 3D. You'll surely love it all the same.
~~~
When I think of Martin Scorsese, the first images that come to mind are those from brilliant-yet-violent Taxi Driver and Goodfellas. Never did I think I'd be attending a 'family film' (in 3D, no less) directed by this legend. But that's what I did today.
Hugo (Butterfield) is a young boy who loses his father in a fire and is taught how to run the Paris train station clock by his uncle. When his uncle disappears, he is left to fend for himself, stealing breakfast pastries to eat and tools to make sure the clock keeps working.
There is a nasty station inspector (played annoyingly by Sacha Baron Cohen) who is anxious to send Hugo (and any other unaccompanied children) to the orphanage; there's also a true friend found in Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moertz), a girl who is being raised by a nearby toy booth owner Georges (Kingsley) and his wife.
In this small cluster of characters, through a museum piece Hugo is working hard to fix (it was his dad's last pet project before his passing), we are taken back to the beginning of film and the importance of not letting go of our passions.
To explain how it happens would be to give too much away, but I will say that though I was never bored, I didn't quite see the need for 3D with this story. The heart of the screenplay was strong enough that the few 'wow' effects that were showcased were merely icing on an already yummy cake.
Hugo is sweet and sincere and great for the whole family, but save yourself the extra dollars and see it sans 3D. You'll surely love it all the same.
~~~
Monday, December 26, 2011
We Bought a Zoo
Yesterday I saw We Bought a Zoo, starring Matt Damon and Scarlett Johansson.
Benjamin (Damon) just wants to make life better for his family. He recently lost his beloved wife and his teenage son is suffering from a horrible depression. He quits his job and decides to move the family to the country—to a zoo—and begin a new chapter of life.
Crazy? Absolutely. But sincere and genuine too, which Damon conveys almost painfully well.
Soon Benjamin is fighting the crush he has on his zookeeper, Kelly (Johansson), and trying to scrape together enough money to re-open the zoo, all the while dealing with his angry son and his sweet little daughter, who seems to be the most balanced of the entire bunch.
The kids who play the children, Colin Ford and Maggie Elizabeth Jones, are wonderful. Sure, they're cute, but they're in no, way, shape or form annoying (which often happens in these family flicks).
And did I mention this is a family flick that was directed by Seattle stud Cameron Crowe?
Were it not for the cool music that accompanied key scenes of the film, I dare say I would not have recognized his style at all. This film is a far cry from Almost Famous, but maintains the same heart and honesty that's at the core of his best films.
Is it predictable? Sure. Does it stray from the real-life story maybe a little too much? I'd say so.
But that doesn't mean it's not a satisfying, sweet departure from some of the heavier films out this season.
~~~
Benjamin (Damon) just wants to make life better for his family. He recently lost his beloved wife and his teenage son is suffering from a horrible depression. He quits his job and decides to move the family to the country—to a zoo—and begin a new chapter of life.
Crazy? Absolutely. But sincere and genuine too, which Damon conveys almost painfully well.
Soon Benjamin is fighting the crush he has on his zookeeper, Kelly (Johansson), and trying to scrape together enough money to re-open the zoo, all the while dealing with his angry son and his sweet little daughter, who seems to be the most balanced of the entire bunch.
The kids who play the children, Colin Ford and Maggie Elizabeth Jones, are wonderful. Sure, they're cute, but they're in no, way, shape or form annoying (which often happens in these family flicks).
And did I mention this is a family flick that was directed by Seattle stud Cameron Crowe?
Were it not for the cool music that accompanied key scenes of the film, I dare say I would not have recognized his style at all. This film is a far cry from Almost Famous, but maintains the same heart and honesty that's at the core of his best films.
Is it predictable? Sure. Does it stray from the real-life story maybe a little too much? I'd say so.
But that doesn't mean it's not a satisfying, sweet departure from some of the heavier films out this season.
~~~
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Young Adult
Today I saw Young Adult, starring Charlize Theron and Patton Oswalt.
Mavis Gary (Theron) got out of the small town she was raised in, moved to the big city, got married, became a young adult author and got divorced. Convinced she can find happiness with her high school sweetheart, she returns to said small town to break up his marriage and re-claim him as her own.
When she arrives in Mercury, Minn., the first person she sees is Matt (Oswalt), a former classmate who was permanently injured in an attack he endured during high school. True to stereotypical form, Mavis is not exactly kind to Matt, just as she wasn't when they were kids, but soon realizes he makes a good confidant (and drinking buddy). He entertains her perhaps because he enjoys the attention, or the puzzle of trying to figure her out.
Her pursuit of Buddy Slade (Patrick Wilson) is desperate, sad, devious and unfortunately completely believable. We all know women like this; we all know how it feels to suffer for the one who got away.
While the film's subject matter could be depressing for a variety of reasons, the sharp writing of Diablo Cody, thankfully dialed down from the cuteness of Juno, makes it sarcastic and funny, rather than tragic.
Now, that's not to say the audience isn't given an opportunity to cry near the end (I'll admit I did), but when the emotion arrives we've all earned it because we genuinely care about all of these people.
Theron is wonderful as this multi-dimensional mess; Oswalt delivers his best dramatic performance as the wounded soul who doesn't waste his time being bitter. They're one of the most real pairs, with the most real chemistry, to hit the big screen in a long time.
Reitman does right by his viewers, nailing the authenticity of a small town without making its residents stupid or simple. The Memorex yellow and pink cassettes that Mavis rocks out to are also a nice touch (every musical thirtysomething girl will remember those from childhood).
The only place this film fails is in the marketing—before seeing it, I assumed it would be a romantic comedy-catch-phrasey romp. Instead, I was pleasantly surprised with a dramedy full of heart.
~~~
Mavis Gary (Theron) got out of the small town she was raised in, moved to the big city, got married, became a young adult author and got divorced. Convinced she can find happiness with her high school sweetheart, she returns to said small town to break up his marriage and re-claim him as her own.
When she arrives in Mercury, Minn., the first person she sees is Matt (Oswalt), a former classmate who was permanently injured in an attack he endured during high school. True to stereotypical form, Mavis is not exactly kind to Matt, just as she wasn't when they were kids, but soon realizes he makes a good confidant (and drinking buddy). He entertains her perhaps because he enjoys the attention, or the puzzle of trying to figure her out.
Her pursuit of Buddy Slade (Patrick Wilson) is desperate, sad, devious and unfortunately completely believable. We all know women like this; we all know how it feels to suffer for the one who got away.
While the film's subject matter could be depressing for a variety of reasons, the sharp writing of Diablo Cody, thankfully dialed down from the cuteness of Juno, makes it sarcastic and funny, rather than tragic.
Now, that's not to say the audience isn't given an opportunity to cry near the end (I'll admit I did), but when the emotion arrives we've all earned it because we genuinely care about all of these people.
Theron is wonderful as this multi-dimensional mess; Oswalt delivers his best dramatic performance as the wounded soul who doesn't waste his time being bitter. They're one of the most real pairs, with the most real chemistry, to hit the big screen in a long time.
Reitman does right by his viewers, nailing the authenticity of a small town without making its residents stupid or simple. The Memorex yellow and pink cassettes that Mavis rocks out to are also a nice touch (every musical thirtysomething girl will remember those from childhood).
The only place this film fails is in the marketing—before seeing it, I assumed it would be a romantic comedy-catch-phrasey romp. Instead, I was pleasantly surprised with a dramedy full of heart.
~~~
Monday, December 12, 2011
Coming Soon - Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory
One of the most powerful set of documentaries I've ever watched are Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hills and Paradise Lost 2: Revelations, about the unfair murder convictions of three teenagers, which the media dubbed the "West Memphis 3."
Earlier this year, the convictions were overturned and the three boys (now men in their 30s) walked free. The filmmakers who told the first two parts of the story continued filming and have completed the conclusion to this real-life trilogy, Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory.
It debuts on HBO January 12 at 9:00 p.m.
Here's a sneak peek:
Earlier this year, the convictions were overturned and the three boys (now men in their 30s) walked free. The filmmakers who told the first two parts of the story continued filming and have completed the conclusion to this real-life trilogy, Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory.
It debuts on HBO January 12 at 9:00 p.m.
Here's a sneak peek:
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
I Wrote for Drink Tank 300
Yep, the Hugo-award winning Ezine recently published volume 300 and I wrote a piece for it in the 'My Favorite Movie Theatre' section.
You can check it out here.
My story is on page 172 (entry 240/241) and my bio lands on page 260.
I couldn't be more honored that I was asked to participate!
Saturday, December 03, 2011
The Descendants
Today I saw The Descendants, starring George Clooney and Shailene Woodley.
Matt (Clooney) is a distant dad, married to his work. He has a tough time relating to his daughters, and an even tougher time relating to his wife in the midst of a huge property sale. The land in question has been in his family for several generations and he is tasked with acting as the trustee of that land on behalf of several cousins.
When his wife Elizabeth (Patricia Hastie) ends up in a coma following a boating accident, Matt's life is turned upside down. Aside from his grief, his youngest daughter, Scottie (Amara Miller), is spiraling out of control, while his eldest daughter, Alexandra, may have a drug (or at least drinking) problem. He does the best he can under the circumstances.
Alexandra soon reveals a family secret that devastates Matt further. This leads to a witch hunt field trip and further distress for all involved.
Oh, and all of this happens in beautiful, paradise-like Hawaii (which they do a very good job of normalizing in this context).
Doesn't sound like fun? Well, no—but the characters are so well-written, and the actors are so great in their roles that it is actually a very pleasurable film to watch. Satisfying if not happy; but witty all the same.
A small but key role is nailed by the oozing-with-charisma Matthew Lillard, who is perfectly cast as an ambitious realtor. Also charming is the fantastic Judy Greer, who plays his wife.
Clooney will certainly be leading the Oscar race for his understated, powerful work in the film, and I for one won't be sorry if he prevails.
Though it may be a tough story to see (especially if you've had to decide whether or not to leave a loved one on life support) it is a genius exploration of family dynamics as they often play out in real life: complicated, loving, painful and revealing all at once.
~~~
Matt (Clooney) is a distant dad, married to his work. He has a tough time relating to his daughters, and an even tougher time relating to his wife in the midst of a huge property sale. The land in question has been in his family for several generations and he is tasked with acting as the trustee of that land on behalf of several cousins.
When his wife Elizabeth (Patricia Hastie) ends up in a coma following a boating accident, Matt's life is turned upside down. Aside from his grief, his youngest daughter, Scottie (Amara Miller), is spiraling out of control, while his eldest daughter, Alexandra, may have a drug (or at least drinking) problem. He does the best he can under the circumstances.
Alexandra soon reveals a family secret that devastates Matt further. This leads to a witch hunt field trip and further distress for all involved.
Oh, and all of this happens in beautiful, paradise-like Hawaii (which they do a very good job of normalizing in this context).
Doesn't sound like fun? Well, no—but the characters are so well-written, and the actors are so great in their roles that it is actually a very pleasurable film to watch. Satisfying if not happy; but witty all the same.
A small but key role is nailed by the oozing-with-charisma Matthew Lillard, who is perfectly cast as an ambitious realtor. Also charming is the fantastic Judy Greer, who plays his wife.
Clooney will certainly be leading the Oscar race for his understated, powerful work in the film, and I for one won't be sorry if he prevails.
Though it may be a tough story to see (especially if you've had to decide whether or not to leave a loved one on life support) it is a genius exploration of family dynamics as they often play out in real life: complicated, loving, painful and revealing all at once.
~~~
Sunday, November 27, 2011
My Week with Marylin
Today I saw My Week with Marylin, starring Michelle Williams and Eddie Redmayne.
Colin Clark (Redmayne) is a starstruck twentysomething who will do anything to work in the movie business. Sir Lawrence Olivier (Kenneth Branagh) is beginning production on a new film starring Marylin Monroe (Williams). Colin is in the right place at the right time and scores himself a job as a 3rd director, which (as is repeated ad nauseum in the film) is basically an errand runner.
We are shown the fanfare when Marylin arrives in England as a newlywed (in her third marriage). We are shown how she is babysat around the clock by various handlers with various purposes. We see immediately that Marylin is a very unhappy, high maintenance woman.
But that doesn't stop Colin from developing a debilitating crush on her like many of the men of his time.
Colin's low-on-the-totem-pole role and polite nature make him attractive to the Hollywood starlet, and she soon begins requesting his presence at the home where she's staying for the duration of the film shoot.
If she wants to talk, he talks to her; if she wants to be held, he holds her. All the while we can see she is about to chew him up and spit him out.
But it's hard to hate a woman so desperate to be loved, no matter how much of a pain in the ass she turns out to be. Colin doesn't seem to resent her for using him, so why should we?
The film does a good job of conveying her circumstances, and Williams nails her mannerisms and speaking rhythms. Redmayne is a believable lost-puppy-in-love and all of the supporting cast does fine too. But for a movie so predictable, the story doesn't move very fast.
Also annoying is the padding they have on Williams to create the illusion of Monroe's curves. Williams is anything but voluptuous, and anytime they have her moving seductively, it looks like a teenager who has padded her bra acting out in front of a mirror. Williams face is too thin to be convincingly attached to the allegedly curvy body, and the nude scenes don't come close to showing a 140 lb. woman (that was the real Marylin's last reported weight).
All in all, this true tale plays out for what it is: one man's favorite story to tell, though he doesn't come out looking particularly smart or better for it.
~~~
Colin Clark (Redmayne) is a starstruck twentysomething who will do anything to work in the movie business. Sir Lawrence Olivier (Kenneth Branagh) is beginning production on a new film starring Marylin Monroe (Williams). Colin is in the right place at the right time and scores himself a job as a 3rd director, which (as is repeated ad nauseum in the film) is basically an errand runner.
We are shown the fanfare when Marylin arrives in England as a newlywed (in her third marriage). We are shown how she is babysat around the clock by various handlers with various purposes. We see immediately that Marylin is a very unhappy, high maintenance woman.
But that doesn't stop Colin from developing a debilitating crush on her like many of the men of his time.
Colin's low-on-the-totem-pole role and polite nature make him attractive to the Hollywood starlet, and she soon begins requesting his presence at the home where she's staying for the duration of the film shoot.
If she wants to talk, he talks to her; if she wants to be held, he holds her. All the while we can see she is about to chew him up and spit him out.
But it's hard to hate a woman so desperate to be loved, no matter how much of a pain in the ass she turns out to be. Colin doesn't seem to resent her for using him, so why should we?
The film does a good job of conveying her circumstances, and Williams nails her mannerisms and speaking rhythms. Redmayne is a believable lost-puppy-in-love and all of the supporting cast does fine too. But for a movie so predictable, the story doesn't move very fast.
Also annoying is the padding they have on Williams to create the illusion of Monroe's curves. Williams is anything but voluptuous, and anytime they have her moving seductively, it looks like a teenager who has padded her bra acting out in front of a mirror. Williams face is too thin to be convincingly attached to the allegedly curvy body, and the nude scenes don't come close to showing a 140 lb. woman (that was the real Marylin's last reported weight).
All in all, this true tale plays out for what it is: one man's favorite story to tell, though he doesn't come out looking particularly smart or better for it.
~~~
Friday, November 25, 2011
Arthur Christmas
Tonight I saw the animated holiday film Arthur Christmas.
Arthur (James McAvoy) is the youngest of Santa's children. He wears Christmas sweaters we'd only wear as a joke and painstakingly answers Santa's miles and piles of mail.
Steve (Hugh Laurie) is Arthur's older brother, trusted with the operation of getting gifts to kids successfully across the world on the big day.
Santa (Jim Broadbent) is getting old; Grandsanta (Bill Nighy) is already 139. They're both not up to what they used to be.
When it is discovered on Christmas Eve that little Gwen (Ramona Marquez) of Cornwall, England, has accidentally been skipped, Arthur and Grandsanta set out to deliver her pink sparkly bike themselves.
It's a very classic story about doing the right thing that's infused with modern-day humor (there is more than one laugh at the expense of lead toys; they use a GPS to try to locate Gwen's home).
But what's so refreshing about the movie is the lack of 'potty' jokes that seem to permeate 99% of the kids' flicks made today. I was so glad to have chosen to see one that is in the 1%.
The voices are all famous Brits (save for a few of the supporting characters, who are American) and their presence only makes the characters more endearing. Arthur is an inherently sweet soul; Mrs. Santa (Imelda Staunton) is a classic, comforting mum; Bryony (Ashley Jensen) is an elf charmingly obsessed with package bows.
This is one for the whole family—there are enough clever adult references to keep the grown-ups smiling and plenty of holiday action to delight the children.
Seeing this is a great way to kick off the 2011 holiday season.
~~~
Arthur (James McAvoy) is the youngest of Santa's children. He wears Christmas sweaters we'd only wear as a joke and painstakingly answers Santa's miles and piles of mail.
Steve (Hugh Laurie) is Arthur's older brother, trusted with the operation of getting gifts to kids successfully across the world on the big day.
Santa (Jim Broadbent) is getting old; Grandsanta (Bill Nighy) is already 139. They're both not up to what they used to be.
When it is discovered on Christmas Eve that little Gwen (Ramona Marquez) of Cornwall, England, has accidentally been skipped, Arthur and Grandsanta set out to deliver her pink sparkly bike themselves.
It's a very classic story about doing the right thing that's infused with modern-day humor (there is more than one laugh at the expense of lead toys; they use a GPS to try to locate Gwen's home).
But what's so refreshing about the movie is the lack of 'potty' jokes that seem to permeate 99% of the kids' flicks made today. I was so glad to have chosen to see one that is in the 1%.
The voices are all famous Brits (save for a few of the supporting characters, who are American) and their presence only makes the characters more endearing. Arthur is an inherently sweet soul; Mrs. Santa (Imelda Staunton) is a classic, comforting mum; Bryony (Ashley Jensen) is an elf charmingly obsessed with package bows.
This is one for the whole family—there are enough clever adult references to keep the grown-ups smiling and plenty of holiday action to delight the children.
Seeing this is a great way to kick off the 2011 holiday season.
~~~
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Martha Marcy May Marlene
Today I saw Martha Marcy May Marlene starring Elizabeth Olsen and John Hawkes.
Finally, something Oscar-worthy in this dismal year of film.
Martha (Olsen) is a lost soul. Her father abandoned her family; her mother died. In light of these tragedies, she somehow finds her way to a commune, apparently craving a sense of place. At first, the hardworking family of people who make up the community seem nice, but we later learn that rape and violence are acceptable behaviors. The leader, Patrick (Hawkes), thinks it disloyal if members disagree.
We're not sure what pushes Martha over the edge, but our first introduction to her is when she is escaping the tribe. She calls her only sister, Lucy (Sarah Paulson), for help.
Once in the safe confines of Lucy's summer lake house, Martha attempts to re-acclimate to regular society despite an impatient brother-in-law (Hugh Dancy) and no professional help.
We see the abuse and brainwashing she suffers through flashbacks, woven brilliantly into her present-day experiences. It's somewhat like experiencing PTSD once-removed, and the amazing Elizabeth Olsen does an Oscar-worthy job of conveying it.
Also great, but painful to watch, is John Hawkes as the menacing patriarch of the cult. He appears so gentle at first, it's believable that he could weave new recruits into his web of oppression.
What's clever about the film is that the community isn't blamed on any religious sect, and Martha's wandering spirit is sad, but not completely lost. Every moment of what transpires could happen. In fact, it probably has, many times over.
Though few will relate to brainwashing or communal living, everyone who sees this has certainly searched for belonging at some point in their life, whether it be in a relationship or a friendship or a career.
Watching this tortured soul navigate her way back into a life that she never had isn't easy, but it's so well done, you can't look away.
~~~
Finally, something Oscar-worthy in this dismal year of film.
Martha (Olsen) is a lost soul. Her father abandoned her family; her mother died. In light of these tragedies, she somehow finds her way to a commune, apparently craving a sense of place. At first, the hardworking family of people who make up the community seem nice, but we later learn that rape and violence are acceptable behaviors. The leader, Patrick (Hawkes), thinks it disloyal if members disagree.
We're not sure what pushes Martha over the edge, but our first introduction to her is when she is escaping the tribe. She calls her only sister, Lucy (Sarah Paulson), for help.
Once in the safe confines of Lucy's summer lake house, Martha attempts to re-acclimate to regular society despite an impatient brother-in-law (Hugh Dancy) and no professional help.
We see the abuse and brainwashing she suffers through flashbacks, woven brilliantly into her present-day experiences. It's somewhat like experiencing PTSD once-removed, and the amazing Elizabeth Olsen does an Oscar-worthy job of conveying it.
Also great, but painful to watch, is John Hawkes as the menacing patriarch of the cult. He appears so gentle at first, it's believable that he could weave new recruits into his web of oppression.
What's clever about the film is that the community isn't blamed on any religious sect, and Martha's wandering spirit is sad, but not completely lost. Every moment of what transpires could happen. In fact, it probably has, many times over.
Though few will relate to brainwashing or communal living, everyone who sees this has certainly searched for belonging at some point in their life, whether it be in a relationship or a friendship or a career.
Watching this tortured soul navigate her way back into a life that she never had isn't easy, but it's so well done, you can't look away.
~~~
Sunday, October 30, 2011
From The Sky Down
Today I saw From the Sky Down, a documentary about U2.
Directed by Davis Guggenheim, who previously worked with The Edge on the spectacular It Might Get Loud, the film centers around the band's time at Hansa Studios in Berlin during the making of their album, Achtung Baby.
I can see why diehards are disappointed in this and the masses are impressed.
Folks like me, in the diehard category, will see a lot of footage they've seen in the past. Some is from The Unforgettable Fire documentary; more is from Classic Albums: The Joshua Tree. Granted, it's weaved well within the context of the exploration Guggenheim needs to setup the 'drama' that was the Berlin sessions, but for those of us who have followed the band for three decades, it's old news.
There are also no 'big reveals' here that tell us anything we didn't already know.
The hats vs. the haircuts; the dance rythms vs. their signature sound; the drum machine vs. Larry. Old news.
That said, the production is beautiful.
Having the band go back (literally) to their old haunt and re-visit the songs and history that were created there is the perfect landscape for good documentary storytelling. You can tell from the present-day interviews that the memories still bring up a dose of pain for the group (for those not in-the-know, the band came close to breaking up during that time), but also a source of pride in the sense that they got through it and emerged stronger.
It will always be a pleasure to hear how "One" (arguably the song that sounds the most like their former selves) cracked the code of despair and allowed them to move forward with writing the rest of the album. And it will always be fun to look back to the time when the band was reinventing themselves (whether or not you think Achtung Baby was their career masterpiece).
But for an honest, raw look at that period of strained, tense creativity, I prefer to re-read the hilarious book, U2 At the End of the World, by Bill Flannigan. It reveals so much more.
~~~
Directed by Davis Guggenheim, who previously worked with The Edge on the spectacular It Might Get Loud, the film centers around the band's time at Hansa Studios in Berlin during the making of their album, Achtung Baby.
I can see why diehards are disappointed in this and the masses are impressed.
Folks like me, in the diehard category, will see a lot of footage they've seen in the past. Some is from The Unforgettable Fire documentary; more is from Classic Albums: The Joshua Tree. Granted, it's weaved well within the context of the exploration Guggenheim needs to setup the 'drama' that was the Berlin sessions, but for those of us who have followed the band for three decades, it's old news.
There are also no 'big reveals' here that tell us anything we didn't already know.
The hats vs. the haircuts; the dance rythms vs. their signature sound; the drum machine vs. Larry. Old news.
That said, the production is beautiful.
Having the band go back (literally) to their old haunt and re-visit the songs and history that were created there is the perfect landscape for good documentary storytelling. You can tell from the present-day interviews that the memories still bring up a dose of pain for the group (for those not in-the-know, the band came close to breaking up during that time), but also a source of pride in the sense that they got through it and emerged stronger.
It will always be a pleasure to hear how "One" (arguably the song that sounds the most like their former selves) cracked the code of despair and allowed them to move forward with writing the rest of the album. And it will always be fun to look back to the time when the band was reinventing themselves (whether or not you think Achtung Baby was their career masterpiece).
But for an honest, raw look at that period of strained, tense creativity, I prefer to re-read the hilarious book, U2 At the End of the World, by Bill Flannigan. It reveals so much more.
~~~
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Moneyball
Last night I saw Moneyball, starring Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill.
The story chronicles the rise of Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane (Pitt) after he adapted the concept of choosing players based on statistical analysis of their abilities.
Beane was faced with a potential losing team in 2002 and a lack of budget to rectify the situation—he caught wind of an analyst, Peter Brand (Hill), who had a theory about recruiting talent based on mathematical equations and hired him. In real-life, “Peter” is really “Paul” and he went to Harvard, not Yale. But who really cares, right? A good story is a good story and this one happens to be well-told on the big screen.
Aside from the slow beginning, the film’s pace will keep you watching even if you could care less about baseball. The magic of Aaron Sorkin (who co-wrote the screenplay) is evidenced in the clever dialog; the bromance between Pitt and Hill adds a spark to the rest of the story, which is alternately nail-biting tense and satisfying.
Phillip Seymour Hoffman is great as the understated team manager Art Howe and Robin Wright makes a great cameo as Beane’s ex-wife, Sharon. All of the players are also well-cast, some truly resembling their real-life counterparts, and no one jumps out as unrealistic or cartoonish (except perhaps Sharon’s second husband, but his appearance is so brief it’s not too annoying).
There’s also a healthy balance of on-field (real life and reenacted) footage and locker room chatter. Really, there’s not much wrong with this film.
If you want a somewhat lighthearted, engaging two hours of entertainment, go see it.
~~~
The story chronicles the rise of Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane (Pitt) after he adapted the concept of choosing players based on statistical analysis of their abilities.
Beane was faced with a potential losing team in 2002 and a lack of budget to rectify the situation—he caught wind of an analyst, Peter Brand (Hill), who had a theory about recruiting talent based on mathematical equations and hired him. In real-life, “Peter” is really “Paul” and he went to Harvard, not Yale. But who really cares, right? A good story is a good story and this one happens to be well-told on the big screen.
Aside from the slow beginning, the film’s pace will keep you watching even if you could care less about baseball. The magic of Aaron Sorkin (who co-wrote the screenplay) is evidenced in the clever dialog; the bromance between Pitt and Hill adds a spark to the rest of the story, which is alternately nail-biting tense and satisfying.
Phillip Seymour Hoffman is great as the understated team manager Art Howe and Robin Wright makes a great cameo as Beane’s ex-wife, Sharon. All of the players are also well-cast, some truly resembling their real-life counterparts, and no one jumps out as unrealistic or cartoonish (except perhaps Sharon’s second husband, but his appearance is so brief it’s not too annoying).
There’s also a healthy balance of on-field (real life and reenacted) footage and locker room chatter. Really, there’s not much wrong with this film.
If you want a somewhat lighthearted, engaging two hours of entertainment, go see it.
~~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)