Tonight I saw the documentary Prom Night in Mississippi.
In this day and age, it's hard to believe there are still places in America that segregate blacks and whites. For God's sake we have a black president (or at least, a 1/2 black one). But unfortunately, those places do exist.
The place in this case is Charleston, Mississippi—hometown of Morgan Freeman—and the annual prom at Charleston High School. Since the beginning of days, there have always been two proms. One for blacks; one for whites, though all of the kids go to classes together. Morgan Freeman had offered in years past to pay for the prom if it were to be integrated, but the town (read: the parents) wasn't interested.
Enter Director Paul Saltzman and a camera crew, and the school finally agrees to do it in the ripe old year of 2008.
But not everyone is on board. In fact, some of the parents are so put off by the concept, they arrange a white prom anyway. And they follow through with hosting it days before the integrated prom (the schadenfreude for those of us who live and breathe in modern times was that there was violence at THAT prom). But I'm getting ahead of myself.
The first 1/3 of the movie is talking head interviews and frustrating school meetings that only show how ignorant this poor town is (and I do mean poor—most kids live in trailers). The majority of the families (including the students) are obese, their language is simple and their minds are unfortunately small (one parent speaks of God making us into separate races to represent different classes and I almost threw my laptop at the television).
But it's not all bad.
There is a rebellious girl who digs her black boyfriend and won't give him up though her father is furious; another white girl considers her black friends more loyal than her parents, who are mortified that she would even mingle with such folks. And of course, many of the kids could care less what color their classmates are—they just want to party!
So we see kids of both races going to the beauty parlor, washing their cars, choosing their dresses and posing on the lawn for awkward photos as they all pile into a white limo (you get the sense there may not have been any black limos available in that town). The ride to the prom with both blacks and whites in the same vehicle seems peaceful.
The school has amped up security for the festivities (and we are told his by a clearly concerned black cop), but there is no need for it. The kids get to the dance and they...dance. They laugh, they eat, they choose a king and queen. Blacks dance with whites and blacks dance with blacks and whites dance with whites. Everyone has a great time and from the post-prom interviews it sounds as if some new friendships were born.
Lesson learned? I don't know.
Until they can have an integrated prom without an all-white prom in the same week, they're still unacceptable in my book.
~~~
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Tonight I saw Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, starring Daniel Radcliffe and Michael Gambon.
I re-read the book this last week to refresh my memory and prepare for the film, but part of me wishes I hadn't, for the film leaves out so much of the text it's somewhat maddening. But it's still an incredibly enjoyable ride.
In this installment, Harry (Radcliffe) is taken under Professor Dumbledore's wing like never before to solve the mysteries behind the Dark Lord. The relationship between them is tender and convincing, but I can't help but miss the actor who originated the Professor's role, Richard Harris, who died a few years back. He was more like a Grandfather than a Merlin, which the current actor (Gambon) evokes.
Anyway, to dig deeper into Lord Voldemort's past, they must solicit the help of retired Professor Slughorn (played delightfully by Jim Broadbent) and coax some buried memories of Tom Riddle's time at Hogwarts out of him. For those playing catch up: Tom Riddle was Voldemort's childhood name. Riddle is coincidentally played by Hero Fiennes-Tiffin, who is the real-life nephew of Ralph Fiennes, who plays Lord Voldemort. The resemblance is both helpful and staggering (and hey, the kid can act too).
So, to get access to these memories, Harry has to manipulate Slughorn by becoming a star student in his Potions class, which he achieves by using the old textbook that once belonged to the Half-Blood Prince. Though no one knows the identity of the Half-Blood Prince, his potions seem to work wonderfully, which angers Harry's close friend Hermoine, because she sees using the book as cheating.
Aside from that, Hermoine's fallen in love with their mutual friend Ron, who has a new girlfriend he keeps snogging in front of her. And Harry's fallen for Ginny, Ron's sister, but doesn't know how to confront those feelings.
Combine this with some extremely scary Death Eaters (yes, it should be PG-13, but it's not) and you have a jam-packed film of teenage lust, good vs. evil, historical continuity and supernatural tricks.
Alan Rickman again stands out as Severus Snape, while all of the children have not only matured with their roles, but become better actors in the process. The final scenes are among the saddest and heaviest of the series.
When it's over, you'll be wishing it had a few more hours to go, even as you blink back tears.
```
I re-read the book this last week to refresh my memory and prepare for the film, but part of me wishes I hadn't, for the film leaves out so much of the text it's somewhat maddening. But it's still an incredibly enjoyable ride.
In this installment, Harry (Radcliffe) is taken under Professor Dumbledore's wing like never before to solve the mysteries behind the Dark Lord. The relationship between them is tender and convincing, but I can't help but miss the actor who originated the Professor's role, Richard Harris, who died a few years back. He was more like a Grandfather than a Merlin, which the current actor (Gambon) evokes.
Anyway, to dig deeper into Lord Voldemort's past, they must solicit the help of retired Professor Slughorn (played delightfully by Jim Broadbent) and coax some buried memories of Tom Riddle's time at Hogwarts out of him. For those playing catch up: Tom Riddle was Voldemort's childhood name. Riddle is coincidentally played by Hero Fiennes-Tiffin, who is the real-life nephew of Ralph Fiennes, who plays Lord Voldemort. The resemblance is both helpful and staggering (and hey, the kid can act too).
So, to get access to these memories, Harry has to manipulate Slughorn by becoming a star student in his Potions class, which he achieves by using the old textbook that once belonged to the Half-Blood Prince. Though no one knows the identity of the Half-Blood Prince, his potions seem to work wonderfully, which angers Harry's close friend Hermoine, because she sees using the book as cheating.
Aside from that, Hermoine's fallen in love with their mutual friend Ron, who has a new girlfriend he keeps snogging in front of her. And Harry's fallen for Ginny, Ron's sister, but doesn't know how to confront those feelings.
Combine this with some extremely scary Death Eaters (yes, it should be PG-13, but it's not) and you have a jam-packed film of teenage lust, good vs. evil, historical continuity and supernatural tricks.
Alan Rickman again stands out as Severus Snape, while all of the children have not only matured with their roles, but become better actors in the process. The final scenes are among the saddest and heaviest of the series.
When it's over, you'll be wishing it had a few more hours to go, even as you blink back tears.
```
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Summer Hours
Last night I saw Summer Hours, starring Juliette Binoche and Charles Berling.
The audience is brought into the film as if they are meeting the friends of the person they're dating for the first time. Immediately there is conversation, food and laughter in a setting that holds sentimental value for the attendees, but none of the witnesses.
Helene (Edith Scob), the family matriarch, is hosting a reunion of sorts for her three adult children: Frederic (Berling), Adrienne (Binoche) and Jeremie (Jeremie Renier) at their beautiful summer house. There is an elaborate garden where they cut fresh flowers for the tables, an elegant patio for entertaining, and an interior that features pricey works of art that Helene has collected throughout the years. The house is the main character in this film--and rightfully so.
In one of the earliest scenes, Helene takes Frederic on a 'tour' of the inside, pointing out items he'll want to sell when she expires. This rattles him, but she's intent on preparing him for life as the family's default leader (and let's face it, when elderly parents pass on, there's always one sibling that does all of the work).
When the children and grandchildren depart, we're only shown a brief hint of Helene's lasting depression, which confines her to a chair by the window. A few scenes later, she's gone.
When the children reconvene to make decisions about her estate, their needs and opinions differ. The artsy daughter is content leaving her childhood in the past and making a new life for herself in America; the enterprising younger son is happy to move his family to Asia to make more money; the eldest wants to keep the house and its contents to maintain a sense of continuity, which is already rapidly deteriorating. They all go about these negotiations peacefully.
The refreshing part of this story is that none of the children need the money from the sale of the house to live a good life. With this group, it's not about the money, or even about the material possessions. It's about doing right by their mother, who was a bit like a museum piece herself--visited infrequently, more valuable the older she got and desperately lonely, save for her caretaker.
The pace is slow, but the organic feel of the life lived by the film's characters keeps the audience wanting to know how it will all turn out.
It's a slice of life with a dash of depth.
The audience is brought into the film as if they are meeting the friends of the person they're dating for the first time. Immediately there is conversation, food and laughter in a setting that holds sentimental value for the attendees, but none of the witnesses.
Helene (Edith Scob), the family matriarch, is hosting a reunion of sorts for her three adult children: Frederic (Berling), Adrienne (Binoche) and Jeremie (Jeremie Renier) at their beautiful summer house. There is an elaborate garden where they cut fresh flowers for the tables, an elegant patio for entertaining, and an interior that features pricey works of art that Helene has collected throughout the years. The house is the main character in this film--and rightfully so.
In one of the earliest scenes, Helene takes Frederic on a 'tour' of the inside, pointing out items he'll want to sell when she expires. This rattles him, but she's intent on preparing him for life as the family's default leader (and let's face it, when elderly parents pass on, there's always one sibling that does all of the work).
When the children and grandchildren depart, we're only shown a brief hint of Helene's lasting depression, which confines her to a chair by the window. A few scenes later, she's gone.
When the children reconvene to make decisions about her estate, their needs and opinions differ. The artsy daughter is content leaving her childhood in the past and making a new life for herself in America; the enterprising younger son is happy to move his family to Asia to make more money; the eldest wants to keep the house and its contents to maintain a sense of continuity, which is already rapidly deteriorating. They all go about these negotiations peacefully.
The refreshing part of this story is that none of the children need the money from the sale of the house to live a good life. With this group, it's not about the money, or even about the material possessions. It's about doing right by their mother, who was a bit like a museum piece herself--visited infrequently, more valuable the older she got and desperately lonely, save for her caretaker.
The pace is slow, but the organic feel of the life lived by the film's characters keeps the audience wanting to know how it will all turn out.
It's a slice of life with a dash of depth.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Moon
Tonight I saw Moon, starring Sam Rockwell.
Films about loneliness will always keep our attention because no matter what our background, finances, marital status or age, we can all at times be vulnerable to it.
In Moon Sam (Rockwell) has reached the end of his lonely rope. He is in the final days of his three-year corporate mission to the moon (yes, THE moon) to help mine clean energy, and is desperate to return to his wife and daughter on earth.
We witness him going about his daily tasks—eating, working out, tending to 'house' plants, etc. We even see him watching the obligatory obviously-not-live television as he barely pays attention to a classic episode of Bewitched. If the TV technique weren't so over-used (i.e. Wall-E and I Am Legend), it would help reinforce the isolation, but it doesn't need to in this film. The cold white of the walls and surroundings mixed with the industrial nature of just about everything (right down to Sam's helpful robot Gerty, voiced by Kevin Spacey) tell us we're in a place devoid of love and warmth.
As Sam gets closer to his return date, his health begins to deteriorate and hallucinations materialize (or at least they appear to). One of these sightings causes him to wreck the vehicle he's using to complete his work "outside" on the surface of said moon. Next thing he knows, he's awake in the moon station infirmary seeing himself outside of his body. But he's not dead—and for me to say anymore would be to spoil, so I'll have to stop there.
What I can say is that Director Duncan Jones (coincidentally also David Bowie's son) creates a very realistic exterior for what the moon must somewhat be like. The quiet darkness he invokes results in a strange feelings of peace contrasted by hollowness. When the tires of the work vehicles scrape across the dirt, you can almost feel grains of dust in your mouth.
Also, the performance by Sam Rockwell, who plays against no one else, is all of the things it should be: funny, confusing, heartbreaking, life-affirming and frustrating. He's well cast and well-played. Of course, something should also be said about Kevin Spacey's voicing of Gerty. It sounds like an easy task, but to evoke emotion from a screen that registers different emoticons based on what it's saying can't have been that simple. His intonation and soothing tones make the ideal "humanized" machine.
All in all it's a very classic science fiction journey wrapped up in a modern-day pod. What makes it good is its exploration of people needing people, no matter where or when they are.
~~~
Films about loneliness will always keep our attention because no matter what our background, finances, marital status or age, we can all at times be vulnerable to it.
In Moon Sam (Rockwell) has reached the end of his lonely rope. He is in the final days of his three-year corporate mission to the moon (yes, THE moon) to help mine clean energy, and is desperate to return to his wife and daughter on earth.
We witness him going about his daily tasks—eating, working out, tending to 'house' plants, etc. We even see him watching the obligatory obviously-not-live television as he barely pays attention to a classic episode of Bewitched. If the TV technique weren't so over-used (i.e. Wall-E and I Am Legend), it would help reinforce the isolation, but it doesn't need to in this film. The cold white of the walls and surroundings mixed with the industrial nature of just about everything (right down to Sam's helpful robot Gerty, voiced by Kevin Spacey) tell us we're in a place devoid of love and warmth.
As Sam gets closer to his return date, his health begins to deteriorate and hallucinations materialize (or at least they appear to). One of these sightings causes him to wreck the vehicle he's using to complete his work "outside" on the surface of said moon. Next thing he knows, he's awake in the moon station infirmary seeing himself outside of his body. But he's not dead—and for me to say anymore would be to spoil, so I'll have to stop there.
What I can say is that Director Duncan Jones (coincidentally also David Bowie's son) creates a very realistic exterior for what the moon must somewhat be like. The quiet darkness he invokes results in a strange feelings of peace contrasted by hollowness. When the tires of the work vehicles scrape across the dirt, you can almost feel grains of dust in your mouth.
Also, the performance by Sam Rockwell, who plays against no one else, is all of the things it should be: funny, confusing, heartbreaking, life-affirming and frustrating. He's well cast and well-played. Of course, something should also be said about Kevin Spacey's voicing of Gerty. It sounds like an easy task, but to evoke emotion from a screen that registers different emoticons based on what it's saying can't have been that simple. His intonation and soothing tones make the ideal "humanized" machine.
All in all it's a very classic science fiction journey wrapped up in a modern-day pod. What makes it good is its exploration of people needing people, no matter where or when they are.
~~~
Sunday, July 12, 2009
The Hurt Locker
Today I saw The Hurt Locker, starring Jeremy Renner.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #75, so stay tuned for our review.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #75, so stay tuned for our review.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Julie & Julia
Tonight I screened Julie & Julia, starring Amy Adams and Meryl Streep.
Don't go see this film on an empty stomach. The amount of food on display throughout is enough to feed a small country and because most of what the characters talk about is food, you won't be able to put it out of your mind.
This true story begins with New Yorker Julie Powell (Adams) approaching her 30th birthday. She's married to a wonderful man (Chris Messina), but dislikes their new apartment in Queens and her dead-end job. She finds solace in cooking because there is a certainty in what will result from the mixing of the ingredients.
When one of her self-absorbed friends begins a blog, her husband encourages her to start her own—about cooking—and she decides to make a go of it. But to force herself to follow through with it (something she has trouble with), she creates her own plan to cook all of the recipes in Julia Child's famous French cookbook in one year's time.
In addition to showing us Julie's journey, the film also revisits Julia Child's path to glory with an expectedly transforming Meryl Streep. The acting phenom not only nails Child's famous accent, she captures the unique spunky spirit that make the world fall in love with her. If only Director Nora Ephron had shown us more of exterior France, perhaps it would have been perfect.
And Adams as the amateur cook, hungry for fame and validation, comes across as genuinely ordinary, which can't have been easy for the Enchanted beauty. Here, she's barely a housewife, and she plays it so convincingly, you almost don't see the sparkle of her eyes behind the dishes.
All in all, the movie will make you hungry, and make you smile, but at the end of the day—it was just a blog.
Don't go see this film on an empty stomach. The amount of food on display throughout is enough to feed a small country and because most of what the characters talk about is food, you won't be able to put it out of your mind.
This true story begins with New Yorker Julie Powell (Adams) approaching her 30th birthday. She's married to a wonderful man (Chris Messina), but dislikes their new apartment in Queens and her dead-end job. She finds solace in cooking because there is a certainty in what will result from the mixing of the ingredients.
When one of her self-absorbed friends begins a blog, her husband encourages her to start her own—about cooking—and she decides to make a go of it. But to force herself to follow through with it (something she has trouble with), she creates her own plan to cook all of the recipes in Julia Child's famous French cookbook in one year's time.
In addition to showing us Julie's journey, the film also revisits Julia Child's path to glory with an expectedly transforming Meryl Streep. The acting phenom not only nails Child's famous accent, she captures the unique spunky spirit that make the world fall in love with her. If only Director Nora Ephron had shown us more of exterior France, perhaps it would have been perfect.
And Adams as the amateur cook, hungry for fame and validation, comes across as genuinely ordinary, which can't have been easy for the Enchanted beauty. Here, she's barely a housewife, and she plays it so convincingly, you almost don't see the sparkle of her eyes behind the dishes.
All in all, the movie will make you hungry, and make you smile, but at the end of the day—it was just a blog.
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Food, Inc.
Today I saw the Robert Kenner documentary Food, Inc.
You may want to put down that bucket of fast food chicken before you head out to the theater to see this film. I'm not saying it won't still taste good, but you'll probably regret it after the fact.
This documentary tells us all what we would already know if folks toured chicken farms as often as they do chocolate factories: some of the stuff in our food supply is bad. Real bad.
None of this came as a shock to me. As huge fan of Bill Maher, I hear him bark about high fructose corn syrup and the dangers of over-processed food on an almost weekly basis. For the past 10 years I've either driven to Canada to purchase my Coca-Cola, or picked up the Mexican version at my local Costco (our non-American friends use sugar instead of corn syrup to make their Coke, so it tastes like the good old stuff we used to get as kids). I also seldom eat trans fats, buy organic, and have greatly reduced (but I'll confess, not eliminated) my trips to fast food restaurants. I do it more for my own health than any political reason.
But is it enough?
I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that I don't agree with the way animals are being treated before they're taken to slaughter. This film shows us evidence that chickens are usually kept out of daylight for the duration of their very short lives (just over a month in most cases) and cows are fed corn when they really should subside on grass. In the early days of farming and meatpacking, when the business was smaller, the practices were actually quite decent. But when the processing plants grew larger to accommodate the rapidly successful fast food enterprises, all of the standards went out the door.
That's not to say there aren't still ethical farmers using humane methods of farming and processing, but I'm afraid they all may be in this movie. All three of them.
Really, corn is taking over the world (seriously—it's in everything from diapers to batteries) and really should just be enjoyed in its original form: on the cob.
The other big problem is the lawmakers who make special exceptions for the food industry (did you know it's a felony to trash beef in Colorado?) by neglecting to establish stricter food safety practices and not adequately labeling genetically altered food.
What can we do to turn this all around? The filmmaker says: Buy local. Buy organic. Vote with your wallet.
I think I will.
You may want to put down that bucket of fast food chicken before you head out to the theater to see this film. I'm not saying it won't still taste good, but you'll probably regret it after the fact.
This documentary tells us all what we would already know if folks toured chicken farms as often as they do chocolate factories: some of the stuff in our food supply is bad. Real bad.
None of this came as a shock to me. As huge fan of Bill Maher, I hear him bark about high fructose corn syrup and the dangers of over-processed food on an almost weekly basis. For the past 10 years I've either driven to Canada to purchase my Coca-Cola, or picked up the Mexican version at my local Costco (our non-American friends use sugar instead of corn syrup to make their Coke, so it tastes like the good old stuff we used to get as kids). I also seldom eat trans fats, buy organic, and have greatly reduced (but I'll confess, not eliminated) my trips to fast food restaurants. I do it more for my own health than any political reason.
But is it enough?
I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that I don't agree with the way animals are being treated before they're taken to slaughter. This film shows us evidence that chickens are usually kept out of daylight for the duration of their very short lives (just over a month in most cases) and cows are fed corn when they really should subside on grass. In the early days of farming and meatpacking, when the business was smaller, the practices were actually quite decent. But when the processing plants grew larger to accommodate the rapidly successful fast food enterprises, all of the standards went out the door.
That's not to say there aren't still ethical farmers using humane methods of farming and processing, but I'm afraid they all may be in this movie. All three of them.
Really, corn is taking over the world (seriously—it's in everything from diapers to batteries) and really should just be enjoyed in its original form: on the cob.
The other big problem is the lawmakers who make special exceptions for the food industry (did you know it's a felony to trash beef in Colorado?) by neglecting to establish stricter food safety practices and not adequately labeling genetically altered food.
What can we do to turn this all around? The filmmaker says: Buy local. Buy organic. Vote with your wallet.
I think I will.
Friday, July 03, 2009
Away We Go
Tonight I saw Away We Go, starring Maya Rudolph and John Krasinski.
Burt (Krasinski) and Verona (Rudolph) are a couple in love who have just made a baby and don't want to go it alone. When they learn Burt's parents are moving to a foreign country before their baby's arrival, they set out on a cross-country journey to find a desirable place to live, near people they love.
Who knew such a task would be so grueling?
And I don't necessarily mean for the couple—I mean for the audience.
From the moment they couple decides to 'go exploring,' everything around them turns from reality to caricature and each stereotypical human annoyance is met along the way. First it's an obnoxious former co-worker, then it's an uber hippie who you can't imagine they'd want to be friends with in the first place. Even the folks at the airport accuse Verona of being further along in her pregnancy than she is and deny her flying rights. Travesty!
Amidst all of the blatantly flashing signs that Life Isn't Easy: Especially With Kids—there is a somewhat tender, genuine relationship between the couple. It's a shame even that is overshadowed by Krasinski's distracting beard and unwashed hair.
Am I being picky? I don't think so. I'm just highly disappointed that two very gifted actors and a director I'd previously loved would make such a mess of what could have been a fresh concept.
Burt (Krasinski) and Verona (Rudolph) are a couple in love who have just made a baby and don't want to go it alone. When they learn Burt's parents are moving to a foreign country before their baby's arrival, they set out on a cross-country journey to find a desirable place to live, near people they love.
Who knew such a task would be so grueling?
And I don't necessarily mean for the couple—I mean for the audience.
From the moment they couple decides to 'go exploring,' everything around them turns from reality to caricature and each stereotypical human annoyance is met along the way. First it's an obnoxious former co-worker, then it's an uber hippie who you can't imagine they'd want to be friends with in the first place. Even the folks at the airport accuse Verona of being further along in her pregnancy than she is and deny her flying rights. Travesty!
Amidst all of the blatantly flashing signs that Life Isn't Easy: Especially With Kids—there is a somewhat tender, genuine relationship between the couple. It's a shame even that is overshadowed by Krasinski's distracting beard and unwashed hair.
Am I being picky? I don't think so. I'm just highly disappointed that two very gifted actors and a director I'd previously loved would make such a mess of what could have been a fresh concept.
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Public Enemies
Tonight I saw Public Enemies, starring Johnny Depp.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #74, which is available here.
To learn more about John Dillinger, click on the sidebar link that will take you to the National Crime Museum, where they are hosting a special exhibit about him.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #74, which is available here.
To learn more about John Dillinger, click on the sidebar link that will take you to the National Crime Museum, where they are hosting a special exhibit about him.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Talhotblond
On June 15, I saw the documentary talhotblond at the Seattle International Film Festival.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
Monday, June 15, 2009
North
On Saturday I saw North at the Seattle International Film Festival.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
Friday, June 12, 2009
My Life in Ruins
Tonight I saw My Life in Ruins, starring Nia Vardalos and Richard Dreyfuss.
As a half-Greek girl with a father from the Old Country, and a big fan of the star's former film My Big Fat Greek Wedding, I felt it was my civic duty to give this shameless chick flick a chance. Boy, was I wrong.
When we meet Georgia (Vardalos) she's already miserable—she's moved to Athens to teach at the University and been laid off. To make ends meet she took a job as a tour guide and now tries to impart her infinite architectural and historical wisdom on groups of tourists who would rather just get a cone of ice cream.
After naming off the stereotypical people that come on her tours (the "ugly" Americans, the divorcées, the old people, etc.) they all load on to the bus and from there on out, we know what's coming at every turn.
There's the not-so-funny guy Irv (Dreyfuss) that annoys everyone, a British couple with an angst-filled teenager who wants to go to the beach, drunken Australians who are there to just be...drunk, and a bus driver that gets more handsome as the tour progresses.
Nia is charming, and the gorgeous shots of Greek ruins and seascapes are lovely to see, but the love story was too predictable to be satisfying, and the jokes throughout just weren't very funny.
It would've been better had they shown instead of told.
As a half-Greek girl with a father from the Old Country, and a big fan of the star's former film My Big Fat Greek Wedding, I felt it was my civic duty to give this shameless chick flick a chance. Boy, was I wrong.
When we meet Georgia (Vardalos) she's already miserable—she's moved to Athens to teach at the University and been laid off. To make ends meet she took a job as a tour guide and now tries to impart her infinite architectural and historical wisdom on groups of tourists who would rather just get a cone of ice cream.
After naming off the stereotypical people that come on her tours (the "ugly" Americans, the divorcées, the old people, etc.) they all load on to the bus and from there on out, we know what's coming at every turn.
There's the not-so-funny guy Irv (Dreyfuss) that annoys everyone, a British couple with an angst-filled teenager who wants to go to the beach, drunken Australians who are there to just be...drunk, and a bus driver that gets more handsome as the tour progresses.
Nia is charming, and the gorgeous shots of Greek ruins and seascapes are lovely to see, but the love story was too predictable to be satisfying, and the jokes throughout just weren't very funny.
It would've been better had they shown instead of told.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
The Brothers Bloom
Last night I saw The Brothers Bloom, starring Rachel Weisz and Adrien Brody.
The brothers in the title are Bloom (Brody) and Stephen (Mark Ruffalo). They've made their livings as scheming con artists and now Bloom is ready to retire and "go straight." But Stephen, who is more addicted to the thrill of the lifestyle than perhaps the money, doesn't want to stop and convinces Bloom to embark on one last job. This assignment is where we meet Penelope (Weisz)—an eccentric rich girl who seems to have no friends or acquaintances.
Sounds fun, right? Well, it starts out that way...and even shows promise in the spirited introduction of our heroine (and her many quirks), but unfortunately fizzles after we see the same story played out over and over again. You think you're on to the con, but you're not—but wait you are! Repeat. And again.
It does get old.
There's also a minor love story between Penelope and Bloom that could've developed into something much more intense if given ample attention, but since it doesn't it's hard to care about whether or not they're really in love or whether or not they'll live happily ever after.
Ruffalo's Stephen is charming, but he's almost too charming and you'd think that a con man as successful as he would be less (overtly) slimy.
All in all, the film was a disappointing attempt from a promising filmmaker (Brick's Rian Johnson) and a great cast of characters.
```
The brothers in the title are Bloom (Brody) and Stephen (Mark Ruffalo). They've made their livings as scheming con artists and now Bloom is ready to retire and "go straight." But Stephen, who is more addicted to the thrill of the lifestyle than perhaps the money, doesn't want to stop and convinces Bloom to embark on one last job. This assignment is where we meet Penelope (Weisz)—an eccentric rich girl who seems to have no friends or acquaintances.
Sounds fun, right? Well, it starts out that way...and even shows promise in the spirited introduction of our heroine (and her many quirks), but unfortunately fizzles after we see the same story played out over and over again. You think you're on to the con, but you're not—but wait you are! Repeat. And again.
It does get old.
There's also a minor love story between Penelope and Bloom that could've developed into something much more intense if given ample attention, but since it doesn't it's hard to care about whether or not they're really in love or whether or not they'll live happily ever after.
Ruffalo's Stephen is charming, but he's almost too charming and you'd think that a con man as successful as he would be less (overtly) slimy.
All in all, the film was a disappointing attempt from a promising filmmaker (Brick's Rian Johnson) and a great cast of characters.
```
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
American Collectors
Last night I saw the documentary American Collectors.
Everyone collects something—for me it's U2 magazines, Beatles memorabelia, movie postcards and Coca-Cola branded items for the kitchen. When I was younger it was seashells, anything with dolphins on it, and Garbage Pail Kids cards. "It" was always important to me at the time.
The degree of which I collect these things is what would have excluded me from being a subject in this film. I don't have enough volume or enough passion for the merchandise to remotely qualify.
The folks here have an incurable compulsion to gather as many of—whatever—as their pocketbook will allow. They all have different reasons for doing it (toys bring back happy memories from childhood; loves the artistic aspect of antique handbags), but the common thread that you hear throughout the narrative is the thrill of the hunt. The joy of finding something you've never been able to find before or making an altogether new discovery.
I must confess, I was first drawn to this film because one of its stars is a personal pal of mine. One who happens to call himself "Durandy" because of his love of the band Duran Duran. I'm also fond of the fab five, and I'm somewhat of a groupie in other circles, so once our paths crossed we became fast friends. Over the past few years, I watched Andy (I usually call him by his real name) continue to build the most impressive collection of Duran Duran posters in the world. He takes meticulous care of them, organizing them into a climate controlled storage unit dedicated to their purpose. Because of his desire to share his treasures with others through public exhibits and showings, the passion has led him to personal encounters with the band, who applaud him for his dedication and spirit. Durandy maintains a full-time job, has a loving girlfriend, and a comfortable home, so his "collection" doesn't rule his life, it only enhances it.
In some of the other cases, the audience has to wonder if the collectors aren't sacrificing basic needs to satisfy their cravings. One gentleman cannot conduct the interview inside his trailer because the camera crew wouldn't fit inside—his collection takes up too much space. Another man has hundreds of musical instruments, yet he doesn't know how to play any of them.
What the film really ends up saying is that collecting is like any hobby. If it begins to interfere with the productivity of your life (putting food on the table, paying rent, having relationships), the obsession has gone too far. If not, you're just eccentric (and probably fascinating to talk to).
```
To learn more about American Collectors, click here.
Everyone collects something—for me it's U2 magazines, Beatles memorabelia, movie postcards and Coca-Cola branded items for the kitchen. When I was younger it was seashells, anything with dolphins on it, and Garbage Pail Kids cards. "It" was always important to me at the time.
The degree of which I collect these things is what would have excluded me from being a subject in this film. I don't have enough volume or enough passion for the merchandise to remotely qualify.
The folks here have an incurable compulsion to gather as many of—whatever—as their pocketbook will allow. They all have different reasons for doing it (toys bring back happy memories from childhood; loves the artistic aspect of antique handbags), but the common thread that you hear throughout the narrative is the thrill of the hunt. The joy of finding something you've never been able to find before or making an altogether new discovery.
I must confess, I was first drawn to this film because one of its stars is a personal pal of mine. One who happens to call himself "Durandy" because of his love of the band Duran Duran. I'm also fond of the fab five, and I'm somewhat of a groupie in other circles, so once our paths crossed we became fast friends. Over the past few years, I watched Andy (I usually call him by his real name) continue to build the most impressive collection of Duran Duran posters in the world. He takes meticulous care of them, organizing them into a climate controlled storage unit dedicated to their purpose. Because of his desire to share his treasures with others through public exhibits and showings, the passion has led him to personal encounters with the band, who applaud him for his dedication and spirit. Durandy maintains a full-time job, has a loving girlfriend, and a comfortable home, so his "collection" doesn't rule his life, it only enhances it.
In some of the other cases, the audience has to wonder if the collectors aren't sacrificing basic needs to satisfy their cravings. One gentleman cannot conduct the interview inside his trailer because the camera crew wouldn't fit inside—his collection takes up too much space. Another man has hundreds of musical instruments, yet he doesn't know how to play any of them.
What the film really ends up saying is that collecting is like any hobby. If it begins to interfere with the productivity of your life (putting food on the table, paying rent, having relationships), the obsession has gone too far. If not, you're just eccentric (and probably fascinating to talk to).
```
To learn more about American Collectors, click here.
Monday, June 08, 2009
Drag Me to Hell
Last night I saw Drag Me to Hell, starring Alison Lohan and Justin Long.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #73, which is available here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #73, which is available here.
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Mommy Is at the Hairdresser's
Tonight at SIFF I screened Mommy Is at the Hairdresser's, a Canadian drama.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Prodigal Sons
Last night I saw Prodigal Sons, a documentary by Kimberly Reed.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
The Garden
Tonight I saw the documentary The Garden at the Seattle International Film Festival.
Listen to Cinebanter in the coming months for my take on it.
Listen to Cinebanter in the coming months for my take on it.
Rembrandt's J'Accuse
Last night I saw Rembrandt's J'Accuse, documentary from The Netherlands.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Fear Me Not
Last night I screened Fear Me Not at the Seattle International Film Festival.
Listen to Cinebanter in the coming months for my take on it.
Listen to Cinebanter in the coming months for my take on it.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
The Cove
Last night I saw the documentary The Cove at the Seattle International Film Festival.
Listen to Cinebanter in the coming months for my take on it.
Listen to Cinebanter in the coming months for my take on it.
This Charming Girl
Yesterday I screened the South Korean drama This Charming Girl at the Seattle International Film Festival.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
To read my review, visit Cinebanter.com.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Shrink
Today at SIFF I screened Shrink, starring Kevin Spacey and Robin Williams.
I will speak about it on an upcoming episode of Cinebanter, so stay tuned!
I will speak about it on an upcoming episode of Cinebanter, so stay tuned!
A French Gigolo
Last night I screened A French Gigolo at the 35th Annual Seattle International Film Festival.
To read my review, please visit Cinebanter.com.
To read my review, please visit Cinebanter.com.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Baby Love
Last night at SIFF I saw Baby Love, a charming French comedy.
For my full review, visit Cinebanter.com.
For my full review, visit Cinebanter.com.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Angels & Demons
Last night I saw Angels & Demons, starring Tom Hanks and Ewan McGregor.
When we begin this film, the follow-up to commercially successful-yet-critically hated Da Vinci Code, Professor Langdon (Hanks) is being summoned to Vatican City because four cardinals (who are in the running to become the next Pope) have been kidnapped by a group claiming to be the Illuminati, an angry sect of scientists that have revived an ancient anti-church secret society.
Langdon is sent to crack the code behind the letter they sent detailing what they're going to do (execute said cardinals AND blow up Vatican City with some stolen antimatter). But of course, the Vatican doesn't like his academic approaches to life and disdain for their church, so they deny him entry to their archives. Because he needs information in the archives to figure out the puzzle, he appeals to the Camerlengo in charge (McGregor) who appears to have a soft spot for Langdon and grants him access. Oh, and there's a pretty physicist that tags along because she knows how to A) translate Latin and B) change the battery on the contraption that's keeping the antimatter from blowing up the country.
To go any further in the plot would be to spoil, so I will just say this: yes, it is better than the prior film. The action carries the audience through the scenes much faster this time, and the clever one-liners are actually kept to a minimum. Hanks also has a less annoying haircut, which makes it easier to take his ever-serious lines, well... seriously. And the supporting players in McGregor and Stellan Skarsgard, who plays a stern Commander, are phenomenal in their roles. A major scene at the end has amazing special effects too.
On the minus side, the film is very bloody and the main "bad guy" is incredibly sexy, which makes it very difficult to believe he's all that bad.
But the tension is there, and the acting is solid, and it's nice to see so much of Italy in the many exterior scenes the movie holds.
Not a bad kickoff to the popcorn season of summer films.
When we begin this film, the follow-up to commercially successful-yet-critically hated Da Vinci Code, Professor Langdon (Hanks) is being summoned to Vatican City because four cardinals (who are in the running to become the next Pope) have been kidnapped by a group claiming to be the Illuminati, an angry sect of scientists that have revived an ancient anti-church secret society.
Langdon is sent to crack the code behind the letter they sent detailing what they're going to do (execute said cardinals AND blow up Vatican City with some stolen antimatter). But of course, the Vatican doesn't like his academic approaches to life and disdain for their church, so they deny him entry to their archives. Because he needs information in the archives to figure out the puzzle, he appeals to the Camerlengo in charge (McGregor) who appears to have a soft spot for Langdon and grants him access. Oh, and there's a pretty physicist that tags along because she knows how to A) translate Latin and B) change the battery on the contraption that's keeping the antimatter from blowing up the country.
To go any further in the plot would be to spoil, so I will just say this: yes, it is better than the prior film. The action carries the audience through the scenes much faster this time, and the clever one-liners are actually kept to a minimum. Hanks also has a less annoying haircut, which makes it easier to take his ever-serious lines, well... seriously. And the supporting players in McGregor and Stellan Skarsgard, who plays a stern Commander, are phenomenal in their roles. A major scene at the end has amazing special effects too.
On the minus side, the film is very bloody and the main "bad guy" is incredibly sexy, which makes it very difficult to believe he's all that bad.
But the tension is there, and the acting is solid, and it's nice to see so much of Italy in the many exterior scenes the movie holds.
Not a bad kickoff to the popcorn season of summer films.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Take you to my castle far away...
I love it when music stops me in my tracks.
I was shopping at a local discount store (Burlington Coat Factory, if you must know) on Sunday, mindlessly sifting through racks, when a bright burst of piano came over the sound system and I immediately envisioned a perfectly coiffed Peter Cetera standing in front of an Asian panel. Tonight it's very clear began the song, one of my favorites from the 80s, called "Glory of Love" and from that moment I was paralyzed with nostalgia.
I began freely singing along (despite the fact there were other shoppers, workers, etc. nearby), challenging myself to remember every word (I did) and managing my visions, which were random bits and pieces of a video I must have watched at least a thousand times in 1986.
It was all about Karate Kid II. I remembered Mr Miyagi looking proudly on as the Karate Kid fought for his life. I remembered the beautiful Asian girl he was sweet on, appearing from behind a fan to entice him. I also remembered the way the doors of the panel would burst open as Peter led up to the chorus (standing alone, as he sang).
And then I thought to myself: that video was so much better than the movie.
And then it occurred to me that there were dozens of 80s videos that were far superior to the movie of the soundtrack on which they appeared.
Immediately I was flooded with memories of beloved songs that positively carried the films they promoted.
Exhibit A: "Against All Odds" by Phil Collins
Again, we have a lone man who semi-recently had left a successful band (Cetera had abandoned Chicago; Collins had taken leave from Genesis), standing on a stage that doesn't pretend to be part of the film set, but dares its singer to conjure up the emotion of what's going on in the film (in this case, adultery). We see the "happy" couple dancing around, sharing cocktails, getting close. We see an ancient pyramid and a scary little head that sometimes takes the place of Phil's. Then we see The Evil Other Guy (James Woods), who happens to be light years sexier than the alleged husband, and well, all hell breaks loose. All the while Phil is singing a heartbreaking, beautiful song about his real-life wife—who was the only one who really knew him at all—breaking his heart with an unexpected divorce. The song lives on. I doubt anyone has seen the mediocre film since the summer the song was selling it on MTV.
Exhibit B: "St. Elmo's Fire (Man in Motion)" by Jack Parr
Keeping up with the pattern, we have an older single man doing the singing, happening upon a group of recent graduates that are getting themselves into all sorts of trouble. Throughout the video he acts as somewhat of a stalker, witnessing all of the cool scenes from their movie. They flirt their way through a bar; we see meaningful close-ups of each cast member (Judd Nelson! Rob Lowe! Mare Winningham!); we see a fire scene correspond to the "burning up" part of the lyrics. And then the bridge comes: it's a montage of the coolest of cool things these cats do. Andrew McCarthy laying on his back as he dances on the bed, Emilio Estevez bravely kissing Andie MacDowell. Then that thing happens where the singer becomes "part of the gang" and Jack Parr is all of a sudden having a jukebox conversation with Demi Moore. The song rocks. And the film is a teenage classic—but not because it's good.
Exhibit C: "Live to Tell" by Madonna
Note to all young persons who may be reading this: Madonna was in her prime in these years. This was pre-Madge, pre-Guy, pre-Malawi babies, etc. and the sister could sing. She had snagged Sean Penn and had yet to produce a book called "Sex."
Anyway, the video starts with our Lone (Fe)male sitting vs. standing in a dramatic, dark room. We can only see her perfectly coiffed blonde hair, the top of her floral dress and her face, which features her mouthing the words somewhat softly (despite the perfect lipstick). We soon cut to slices of the film At Close Range, which stars Christopher Walken and her first husband. They appear to be "shooting" buddies and we see them doing buddy things until the song takes a creepy turn (really, it is somewhat creepy—she could actually WRITE MUSIC back then) and we see Sean (who unfortunately looks 13) with a terrifying, evil look on his face, holding a gun to Christopher's head. Yikes. I can't remember exactly how the movie turns out (it was long ago that I saw it), but I know it didn't create as much tension as that brilliant 80s video did.
The moral of the story: it's a shame these videos (or at least the songs for them) outlasted the actual films they sought to promote. But it's more of a shame in the music video world that they just don't make 'em like they used to.
```
I was shopping at a local discount store (Burlington Coat Factory, if you must know) on Sunday, mindlessly sifting through racks, when a bright burst of piano came over the sound system and I immediately envisioned a perfectly coiffed Peter Cetera standing in front of an Asian panel. Tonight it's very clear began the song, one of my favorites from the 80s, called "Glory of Love" and from that moment I was paralyzed with nostalgia.
I began freely singing along (despite the fact there were other shoppers, workers, etc. nearby), challenging myself to remember every word (I did) and managing my visions, which were random bits and pieces of a video I must have watched at least a thousand times in 1986.
It was all about Karate Kid II. I remembered Mr Miyagi looking proudly on as the Karate Kid fought for his life. I remembered the beautiful Asian girl he was sweet on, appearing from behind a fan to entice him. I also remembered the way the doors of the panel would burst open as Peter led up to the chorus (standing alone, as he sang).
And then I thought to myself: that video was so much better than the movie.
And then it occurred to me that there were dozens of 80s videos that were far superior to the movie of the soundtrack on which they appeared.
Immediately I was flooded with memories of beloved songs that positively carried the films they promoted.
Exhibit A: "Against All Odds" by Phil Collins
Again, we have a lone man who semi-recently had left a successful band (Cetera had abandoned Chicago; Collins had taken leave from Genesis), standing on a stage that doesn't pretend to be part of the film set, but dares its singer to conjure up the emotion of what's going on in the film (in this case, adultery). We see the "happy" couple dancing around, sharing cocktails, getting close. We see an ancient pyramid and a scary little head that sometimes takes the place of Phil's. Then we see The Evil Other Guy (James Woods), who happens to be light years sexier than the alleged husband, and well, all hell breaks loose. All the while Phil is singing a heartbreaking, beautiful song about his real-life wife—who was the only one who really knew him at all—breaking his heart with an unexpected divorce. The song lives on. I doubt anyone has seen the mediocre film since the summer the song was selling it on MTV.
Exhibit B: "St. Elmo's Fire (Man in Motion)" by Jack Parr
Keeping up with the pattern, we have an older single man doing the singing, happening upon a group of recent graduates that are getting themselves into all sorts of trouble. Throughout the video he acts as somewhat of a stalker, witnessing all of the cool scenes from their movie. They flirt their way through a bar; we see meaningful close-ups of each cast member (Judd Nelson! Rob Lowe! Mare Winningham!); we see a fire scene correspond to the "burning up" part of the lyrics. And then the bridge comes: it's a montage of the coolest of cool things these cats do. Andrew McCarthy laying on his back as he dances on the bed, Emilio Estevez bravely kissing Andie MacDowell. Then that thing happens where the singer becomes "part of the gang" and Jack Parr is all of a sudden having a jukebox conversation with Demi Moore. The song rocks. And the film is a teenage classic—but not because it's good.
Exhibit C: "Live to Tell" by Madonna
Note to all young persons who may be reading this: Madonna was in her prime in these years. This was pre-Madge, pre-Guy, pre-Malawi babies, etc. and the sister could sing. She had snagged Sean Penn and had yet to produce a book called "Sex."
Anyway, the video starts with our Lone (Fe)male sitting vs. standing in a dramatic, dark room. We can only see her perfectly coiffed blonde hair, the top of her floral dress and her face, which features her mouthing the words somewhat softly (despite the perfect lipstick). We soon cut to slices of the film At Close Range, which stars Christopher Walken and her first husband. They appear to be "shooting" buddies and we see them doing buddy things until the song takes a creepy turn (really, it is somewhat creepy—she could actually WRITE MUSIC back then) and we see Sean (who unfortunately looks 13) with a terrifying, evil look on his face, holding a gun to Christopher's head. Yikes. I can't remember exactly how the movie turns out (it was long ago that I saw it), but I know it didn't create as much tension as that brilliant 80s video did.
The moral of the story: it's a shame these videos (or at least the songs for them) outlasted the actual films they sought to promote. But it's more of a shame in the music video world that they just don't make 'em like they used to.
```
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Sin Nombre
Last night I saw Sin Nombre, the debut feature from writer/director Cary Fukunaga.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #70. Click here for that episode.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #70. Click here for that episode.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Earth
Today I saw Disney's Earth, starring polar bears, birds, caribou, walruses, buffalo, elephants, lynx, lions and whales.
Narrated by James Earl Jones, the 'story' here isn't as linear as March of the Penguins or various Animal Planet shows like Meerkat Manor, but it does take us through a year on our planet with the absence of humans (except for that voice, of course).
We start with a polar bear mother and her two cubs who are being introduced to the surface of the earth for the first time. It's hard to visualize these mammoth balls of fluffy fur as the notoriously mean creatures they really are when our first glimpse has them sliding helplessly across glaciers, struggling for footing, and frolicking about. But toward the end of the movie when we meet Dad attacking a mound of walruses with reckless abandon, we see how these families have long survived the conditions.
In another portion of the film, we watch a lone lynx creeping through an icy forest, searching for a rare meal. Later, a fuzzy family of lynx makes the initial peek seem like the cameras were pointed toward an uncommon Serial Killer Lynx, because these kids are just too darned cute to be evil.
But really, the moral of the story is: An Eye for an Eye.
I realize that nature is harsh and that all species are important to the food chain for whatever reason, but that didn't make it any easier for me to watch a wolf chase down a caribou calf and take a chunk out of its backside, or prevent me from tearing up when a baby elephant gets separated from its pack during a dust storm and follows the wrong trail to try to catch up with them.
What I'm saying is: if I had kids, I'm not quite sure I'd let them see this until they were 10 or 12.
There are some scary scenes in addition to the ones I just mentioned—lions roaring during a nighttime thunderstorm, another "chase" scene involving a cheetah that doesn't end well for the prey, etc. I found myself turning away much more than I'd expected.
That said, there are some amazing scenes I could've stared at all day, such as the birds of paradise who were "preparing for dates" with females and a humpback whale calf's first swim through its new home in the ocean.
The lengths the cameramen and women must have gone to to gain this footage is nothing short of impressive (and we see glimpses of them during the credits; hopefully there will be more footage on the eventual DVD), and sitting back and taking it all in, you really do realize just how insignificant you are in the grand scheme of this planet.
Even more of a reason to be good to our Mother Earth, if you ask me.
~~~
Narrated by James Earl Jones, the 'story' here isn't as linear as March of the Penguins or various Animal Planet shows like Meerkat Manor, but it does take us through a year on our planet with the absence of humans (except for that voice, of course).
We start with a polar bear mother and her two cubs who are being introduced to the surface of the earth for the first time. It's hard to visualize these mammoth balls of fluffy fur as the notoriously mean creatures they really are when our first glimpse has them sliding helplessly across glaciers, struggling for footing, and frolicking about. But toward the end of the movie when we meet Dad attacking a mound of walruses with reckless abandon, we see how these families have long survived the conditions.
In another portion of the film, we watch a lone lynx creeping through an icy forest, searching for a rare meal. Later, a fuzzy family of lynx makes the initial peek seem like the cameras were pointed toward an uncommon Serial Killer Lynx, because these kids are just too darned cute to be evil.
But really, the moral of the story is: An Eye for an Eye.
I realize that nature is harsh and that all species are important to the food chain for whatever reason, but that didn't make it any easier for me to watch a wolf chase down a caribou calf and take a chunk out of its backside, or prevent me from tearing up when a baby elephant gets separated from its pack during a dust storm and follows the wrong trail to try to catch up with them.
What I'm saying is: if I had kids, I'm not quite sure I'd let them see this until they were 10 or 12.
There are some scary scenes in addition to the ones I just mentioned—lions roaring during a nighttime thunderstorm, another "chase" scene involving a cheetah that doesn't end well for the prey, etc. I found myself turning away much more than I'd expected.
That said, there are some amazing scenes I could've stared at all day, such as the birds of paradise who were "preparing for dates" with females and a humpback whale calf's first swim through its new home in the ocean.
The lengths the cameramen and women must have gone to to gain this footage is nothing short of impressive (and we see glimpses of them during the credits; hopefully there will be more footage on the eventual DVD), and sitting back and taking it all in, you really do realize just how insignificant you are in the grand scheme of this planet.
Even more of a reason to be good to our Mother Earth, if you ask me.
~~~
Stick It in Detroit
This morning I saw Stick It in Detroit, starring and directed by Robert Phelps.
Todd (Phelps) is a factory worker in the city of Detroit. Like many men, he still hangs out with the same buddies from his neighborhood that he grew up with. None of them seem remotely as bright or promising as Todd, but this doesn't seem to matter to him. He has a steady job, a steady girlfriend and all is right with the world.
That is, until success comes knocking at his door. When he is offered a promotion in Georgia, he's forced to choose between abandoning his comfort zone (and probably his girlfriend, who isn't sweet on the idea of moving south) or taking an opportunity that may never arise again and bettering his career.
The concept of the movie is a good one; the execution left a lot to be desired.
As a film critic, I make no secret of the fact I detest bathroom humor. I'm not entirely against low-brow comedies (after all, I proudly own Airplane and Fast Times at Ridgemont High), I just don't find feces funny.
And therefore, folks like me are pretty much disqualified from finding genuine laughs within this movie.
Entire scenes are built around visits to the toilet, and other "fantasy" scenes that could be funny in another context, seem out of place among the vulgarity.
The acting and directing are fine, but unfortunately the story can't be saved by these two factors.
Obnoxious friends and dead-end lives just aren't my idea of quality comedy.
~~~
Todd (Phelps) is a factory worker in the city of Detroit. Like many men, he still hangs out with the same buddies from his neighborhood that he grew up with. None of them seem remotely as bright or promising as Todd, but this doesn't seem to matter to him. He has a steady job, a steady girlfriend and all is right with the world.
That is, until success comes knocking at his door. When he is offered a promotion in Georgia, he's forced to choose between abandoning his comfort zone (and probably his girlfriend, who isn't sweet on the idea of moving south) or taking an opportunity that may never arise again and bettering his career.
The concept of the movie is a good one; the execution left a lot to be desired.
As a film critic, I make no secret of the fact I detest bathroom humor. I'm not entirely against low-brow comedies (after all, I proudly own Airplane and Fast Times at Ridgemont High), I just don't find feces funny.
And therefore, folks like me are pretty much disqualified from finding genuine laughs within this movie.
Entire scenes are built around visits to the toilet, and other "fantasy" scenes that could be funny in another context, seem out of place among the vulgarity.
The acting and directing are fine, but unfortunately the story can't be saved by these two factors.
Obnoxious friends and dead-end lives just aren't my idea of quality comedy.
~~~
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Adventureland
Tonight I saw Adventureland, starring Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart.
James (Eisenberg) has just completed his college degree and looks forward to graduate school with aspirations of travel writing; his parents have recently fallen on hard times and tell him in no uncertain terms that if he plans to attend Columbia (where he's been accepted), he'll have to earn the tuition himself that summer. As he's always been the "mow the lawn for money" kind of kid, he has trouble finding work and ends up at Adventureland, a local amusement park with all of the typical rides, games and characters that come with such a place.
Assigned to "Games," James befriends fellow booth slaves Joel (Martin Starr), a Jewish athiest clearly too smart for the job, and Emily (Stewart), who will be headed to NYU in the fall, and just happens to be beautiful.
Without warning, James falls for Emily, and she for him, but the situation is complicated by the sexy maintenance man Connell (Ryan Reynolds), who is married, but sleeping with Emily.
James doesn't know this, nor does Emily know that James accepted a date with Lisa P. (Margarita Levieva), the resident hottie at Adventureland, when she hurt his feelings during a double date of theirs. Drama ensues.
Recounting it in those few paragraphs, this sounds like formulaic fluff with classic love triangles and summer romance conventions, but for some reason it plays better than that.
The chemistry between Eisenberg and Stewart does seem genuine—and that helps—but more than that, there's a heart that lies deeper in the characters, which enables us viewers to empathize instead of judge. Hasn't everyone made a mistake in a relationship at some point? Probably so, and though this film may make you remember those mistakes, it will also (hopefully) remind you that you have to learn some lessons before you get it right. That is, if your human.
Furthermore, the situations in Adventureland are completely believable, and even the silliest of characters (Frigo) are somewhat real, despite how obnoxious their behavior is.
And since the story takes place in the 80s, my nostalgia radar picked up on several relics from the past, which added a nice ambiance to the overall feel of the film. I recognized the plastic bracelets and heart earrings the girls were wearing, the headband Frigo was sporting, and appreciated the brilliant soundtrack featuring Falco and Crowded House, which played naturally in the background.
Adventureland is a refreshing change from the usual bathroom-humor-laden "college" films involving frat houses and shock jokes. Instead of gratuitous language, you have appropriately timed outbursts that may contain a word or two; instead of clichéd sex scenes, you witness kisses that you would remember all of your life if you were living as one of the characters.
I hope other filmmakers will take a cue and make more smart comedies like this one, that come with a side of heart.
James (Eisenberg) has just completed his college degree and looks forward to graduate school with aspirations of travel writing; his parents have recently fallen on hard times and tell him in no uncertain terms that if he plans to attend Columbia (where he's been accepted), he'll have to earn the tuition himself that summer. As he's always been the "mow the lawn for money" kind of kid, he has trouble finding work and ends up at Adventureland, a local amusement park with all of the typical rides, games and characters that come with such a place.
Assigned to "Games," James befriends fellow booth slaves Joel (Martin Starr), a Jewish athiest clearly too smart for the job, and Emily (Stewart), who will be headed to NYU in the fall, and just happens to be beautiful.
Without warning, James falls for Emily, and she for him, but the situation is complicated by the sexy maintenance man Connell (Ryan Reynolds), who is married, but sleeping with Emily.
James doesn't know this, nor does Emily know that James accepted a date with Lisa P. (Margarita Levieva), the resident hottie at Adventureland, when she hurt his feelings during a double date of theirs. Drama ensues.
Recounting it in those few paragraphs, this sounds like formulaic fluff with classic love triangles and summer romance conventions, but for some reason it plays better than that.
The chemistry between Eisenberg and Stewart does seem genuine—and that helps—but more than that, there's a heart that lies deeper in the characters, which enables us viewers to empathize instead of judge. Hasn't everyone made a mistake in a relationship at some point? Probably so, and though this film may make you remember those mistakes, it will also (hopefully) remind you that you have to learn some lessons before you get it right. That is, if your human.
Furthermore, the situations in Adventureland are completely believable, and even the silliest of characters (Frigo) are somewhat real, despite how obnoxious their behavior is.
And since the story takes place in the 80s, my nostalgia radar picked up on several relics from the past, which added a nice ambiance to the overall feel of the film. I recognized the plastic bracelets and heart earrings the girls were wearing, the headband Frigo was sporting, and appreciated the brilliant soundtrack featuring Falco and Crowded House, which played naturally in the background.
Adventureland is a refreshing change from the usual bathroom-humor-laden "college" films involving frat houses and shock jokes. Instead of gratuitous language, you have appropriately timed outbursts that may contain a word or two; instead of clichéd sex scenes, you witness kisses that you would remember all of your life if you were living as one of the characters.
I hope other filmmakers will take a cue and make more smart comedies like this one, that come with a side of heart.
Monday, March 30, 2009
I Love You, Man
Yesterday I saw I Love You, Man, starring Paul Rudd and Jason Segal.
We all know men like realtor Peter Klaven (Rudd): good looking, well-groomed, straight guys who surround themselves with armies of female friends, but lack severely in the 'dude' department.
We also know men like Sydney Fife (Segal): fun-loving, independent bachelors who are left behind after all of their buddies graduate into marriage and fatherhood.
What a genius idea to bring these two characters together.
The stage is set with Peter, madly in love with Zooey (Rashida Jones), proposing to her in a romantic city setting. She excitedly accepts his proposal and the wedding plans are thrust into motion. The only small problem is that she has several attendants and he doesn't even have a best man.
So...he tries to find one, by going on "man-dates" with random guys he's set up with by family and friends (Jane Curtain is a great cast bonus as his mom). After many comical attempts, his best man soul mate appears at one of his open houses (when he's "not looking" as true love usually appears) and changes everything.
Instead of Peter's world revolving around Zooey, it begins to revolve around Sydney, because he's never enjoyed such a friendship before. While she's happy for him at first, of course jealousy does eventually set in and both relationships are put in jeopardy.
Aside from a few unnecessary "gross" scenes involving vomit and a dog relieving itself, this was a very refreshing, cute movie with a host of appealing characters.
Rashida Jones shines as the likable finance, Jon Favreau is hilarious as an angry husband of one of Zooey's friends, and Andy Samburg plays the groom's openly gay brother in a realistic, non-stereotypical way.
If you need a laugh, check it out.
We all know men like realtor Peter Klaven (Rudd): good looking, well-groomed, straight guys who surround themselves with armies of female friends, but lack severely in the 'dude' department.
We also know men like Sydney Fife (Segal): fun-loving, independent bachelors who are left behind after all of their buddies graduate into marriage and fatherhood.
What a genius idea to bring these two characters together.
The stage is set with Peter, madly in love with Zooey (Rashida Jones), proposing to her in a romantic city setting. She excitedly accepts his proposal and the wedding plans are thrust into motion. The only small problem is that she has several attendants and he doesn't even have a best man.
So...he tries to find one, by going on "man-dates" with random guys he's set up with by family and friends (Jane Curtain is a great cast bonus as his mom). After many comical attempts, his best man soul mate appears at one of his open houses (when he's "not looking" as true love usually appears) and changes everything.
Instead of Peter's world revolving around Zooey, it begins to revolve around Sydney, because he's never enjoyed such a friendship before. While she's happy for him at first, of course jealousy does eventually set in and both relationships are put in jeopardy.
Aside from a few unnecessary "gross" scenes involving vomit and a dog relieving itself, this was a very refreshing, cute movie with a host of appealing characters.
Rashida Jones shines as the likable finance, Jon Favreau is hilarious as an angry husband of one of Zooey's friends, and Andy Samburg plays the groom's openly gay brother in a realistic, non-stereotypical way.
If you need a laugh, check it out.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
I'm humbled and honored...
...to be listed among the Top 100 Movie Blogs on OnlyGoodMovies.com.
To see the full roster, click here:
http://www.onlygoodmovies.com/blog/thoughts-on-film/the-100-best-movie-blogs/
To see the full roster, click here:
http://www.onlygoodmovies.com/blog/thoughts-on-film/the-100-best-movie-blogs/
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
The Class
Tonight I saw The Class, starring François Bégaudeau.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #67, which will be available March 30, so tune in then for our review.
```
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #67, which will be available March 30, so tune in then for our review.
```
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Sunshine Cleaning
Today I screened Sunshine Cleaning, starring Amy Adams and Emily Blunt.
Rose (Adams) is a maid, a single mother and a mistress. Her job is dead-end, her son Oscar (Jason Spevack, a dead wringer for the kid in Love Actually) has issues in school, and her married boyfriend is her former high-school sweetheart.
Her sister Nora (Blunt) is less responsible, less balanced, and also has employment challenges. Her father (Alan Arkin), a loving grandfather with his heart in the right place, is a failing salesman.
Life could be better for this family.
One day after Rose and her boyfriend are finished making love in a seedy motel, he tells her of a thriving business he's observed through his own work as a detective: crime scene cleanup. He figures with her experience cleaning houses, she could easily transition to this higher-paying enterprise, and he'll help provide the connections she needs to get started.
Before long, she's enrolled in bio-hazard sanitation classes and has enlisted the help of her sister to act as her sole employee. Because she has a knack for business and an infinitely positive attitude, Rose soon launches the successful Sunshine Cleaning.
All goes well in the first weeks of business (those who are squeamish like me: beware of the first few crime scenes they clean up), then a plot twist, which is completely believable, changes the game for the whole family.
The ending draws to a satisfying close and leaves you hoping that the path the family is on will continue.
Everyone in this film does a superb job of playing their part (even if Alan Arkin's character is just a reprise of his role in Little Miss Sunshine, minus the porn), and hopefully the vastly underrated Amy Adams will finally step out of her "innocent girl" typecasting with this role.
Sunshine Cleaning is a lighthearted drama brought to life by a competent and complementary cast. It feels, sounds and looks like real life.
Go see it.
Rose (Adams) is a maid, a single mother and a mistress. Her job is dead-end, her son Oscar (Jason Spevack, a dead wringer for the kid in Love Actually) has issues in school, and her married boyfriend is her former high-school sweetheart.
Her sister Nora (Blunt) is less responsible, less balanced, and also has employment challenges. Her father (Alan Arkin), a loving grandfather with his heart in the right place, is a failing salesman.
Life could be better for this family.
One day after Rose and her boyfriend are finished making love in a seedy motel, he tells her of a thriving business he's observed through his own work as a detective: crime scene cleanup. He figures with her experience cleaning houses, she could easily transition to this higher-paying enterprise, and he'll help provide the connections she needs to get started.
Before long, she's enrolled in bio-hazard sanitation classes and has enlisted the help of her sister to act as her sole employee. Because she has a knack for business and an infinitely positive attitude, Rose soon launches the successful Sunshine Cleaning.
All goes well in the first weeks of business (those who are squeamish like me: beware of the first few crime scenes they clean up), then a plot twist, which is completely believable, changes the game for the whole family.
The ending draws to a satisfying close and leaves you hoping that the path the family is on will continue.
Everyone in this film does a superb job of playing their part (even if Alan Arkin's character is just a reprise of his role in Little Miss Sunshine, minus the porn), and hopefully the vastly underrated Amy Adams will finally step out of her "innocent girl" typecasting with this role.
Sunshine Cleaning is a lighthearted drama brought to life by a competent and complementary cast. It feels, sounds and looks like real life.
Go see it.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Don't miss our live blogging at Cinebanter.com!
Join MichaelVox and me over at our Cinebanter Web site as we live blog the Oscars® (and the red-carpet, pre-show happenings, etc.) - it's our third year doing it and we hope to hear from all of you via our "comments" section throughout the broadcast.
The fun will start in early afternoon (Pacific Time). See you there!
The fun will start in early afternoon (Pacific Time). See you there!
Monday, February 16, 2009
Live Action Short Film Nominees (Oscars® 2009)
Tonight I saw all five of the nominated films in the Live Action Short category. I'll present my reviews in the order they were shown.
AUF DER STRECKE
The lengthiest of the nominees, Switzerland and Germany's narrative about a mall security guard who is in love with a bookshop clerk, feels like it could go a number of ways.
First, you see him apprehending shoplifters and wonder if the whole short will be a series of these situations, then once you see him zeroing in on Sarah (the bookshop clerk) with the security camera, you think he may be stalking her.
In a sense, he is.
So much that he makes sure to ride the same subway home and inadvertently witnesses a tragedy connected to her because of it.
Will he reveal what he saw? Will it make any difference to her if he does?
A lot happens in the 30 minutes to allow you to ponder these possibilities...which is what makes it good.
The ending, however, could've been better.
NEW BOY
Ireland's dramedy based on a Roddy Doyle short story packs a lot of punch.
It tells us of Joseph's arrival in an Irish elementary school and the adjustments that come with such a shift.
Joseph, we learn through flashbacks, is from war-torn Africa and is still dealing with the horrors he experienced in his homeland.
Christian is the resident troublemaker who does everything in his power to make the new kid feel out of place.
True to form, there's a tattletale and a short-tempered teacher who round out the cast (and the story).
Will the new boy survive in his new surroundings?
Amazingly, 11 minutes is all you need to find out.
TOYLAND
This heart-wrenching, yet profound holocaust story from Germany is reminiscent of LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, as it is centered around adults making the horrors of war metaphorical (concentration camps are referred to as "Toyland") to protect their children.
The friendship of two boys is in jeopardy as one is Jewish and the other is not.
What transpires is a beautiful exploration of "what if" and perhaps the best ending I've seen to a movie in recent years.
THE PIG
In this Denmark film, an old man is having "butt surgery" and takes comfort in a whimsical painting of a pig that faces his hospital bed.
He appears to have no loved ones attending to him, and is told he may in fact have cancer (though what he is having the surgery for is less serious). The pig makes him smile and chuckle to himself—so much that he tells the nurse he likes it.
Unfortunately, when he wakes from surgery it is gone at the request of his Muslim roommate.
After that, as an audience member you're asked to determine the definition of tolerance—and then react to a twist at the end that could change your mind.
MANON ON THE ASPHALT
In this French film, a young woman (Manon) is happily riding her bike around the winding streets of her town when she is struck by a car.
After that, she narrates instructions, regrets and meaningful memories about her life as she "floats" near her body and witnesses the unfolding events (folks gathering in the street, medics arriving).
It's a brief exploration of what could happen to any of us at any time, and more so a painful reminder that we should be living every day to the fullest—reminding those we love how much we appreciate them.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
So which film would I pick to win the Oscar®? Really, I think they're all worthy, but if I had to narrow it to one it would have to be TOYLAND.
Please remember to tune into the Cinebanter Live Blog for the Spirit Awards this Saturday and of course, the Oscars® on Sunday.
AUF DER STRECKE
The lengthiest of the nominees, Switzerland and Germany's narrative about a mall security guard who is in love with a bookshop clerk, feels like it could go a number of ways.
First, you see him apprehending shoplifters and wonder if the whole short will be a series of these situations, then once you see him zeroing in on Sarah (the bookshop clerk) with the security camera, you think he may be stalking her.
In a sense, he is.
So much that he makes sure to ride the same subway home and inadvertently witnesses a tragedy connected to her because of it.
Will he reveal what he saw? Will it make any difference to her if he does?
A lot happens in the 30 minutes to allow you to ponder these possibilities...which is what makes it good.
The ending, however, could've been better.
NEW BOY
Ireland's dramedy based on a Roddy Doyle short story packs a lot of punch.
It tells us of Joseph's arrival in an Irish elementary school and the adjustments that come with such a shift.
Joseph, we learn through flashbacks, is from war-torn Africa and is still dealing with the horrors he experienced in his homeland.
Christian is the resident troublemaker who does everything in his power to make the new kid feel out of place.
True to form, there's a tattletale and a short-tempered teacher who round out the cast (and the story).
Will the new boy survive in his new surroundings?
Amazingly, 11 minutes is all you need to find out.
TOYLAND
This heart-wrenching, yet profound holocaust story from Germany is reminiscent of LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, as it is centered around adults making the horrors of war metaphorical (concentration camps are referred to as "Toyland") to protect their children.
The friendship of two boys is in jeopardy as one is Jewish and the other is not.
What transpires is a beautiful exploration of "what if" and perhaps the best ending I've seen to a movie in recent years.
THE PIG
In this Denmark film, an old man is having "butt surgery" and takes comfort in a whimsical painting of a pig that faces his hospital bed.
He appears to have no loved ones attending to him, and is told he may in fact have cancer (though what he is having the surgery for is less serious). The pig makes him smile and chuckle to himself—so much that he tells the nurse he likes it.
Unfortunately, when he wakes from surgery it is gone at the request of his Muslim roommate.
After that, as an audience member you're asked to determine the definition of tolerance—and then react to a twist at the end that could change your mind.
MANON ON THE ASPHALT
In this French film, a young woman (Manon) is happily riding her bike around the winding streets of her town when she is struck by a car.
After that, she narrates instructions, regrets and meaningful memories about her life as she "floats" near her body and witnesses the unfolding events (folks gathering in the street, medics arriving).
It's a brief exploration of what could happen to any of us at any time, and more so a painful reminder that we should be living every day to the fullest—reminding those we love how much we appreciate them.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
So which film would I pick to win the Oscar®? Really, I think they're all worthy, but if I had to narrow it to one it would have to be TOYLAND.
Please remember to tune into the Cinebanter Live Blog for the Spirit Awards this Saturday and of course, the Oscars® on Sunday.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Wendy and Lucy
Tonight I saw Wendy and Lucy, starring Michelle Williams and Lucy.
Have you ever been in a situation where one bad thing happened and then another followed, and another, until you felt as if the whole universe was against you?
This is how you'll feel watching events unfold in the life of Wendy (Williams), a young girl from Indiana who is headed to Alaska to work in a Ketchikan cannery.
We first see her playing with her dog Lucy (Lucy) in the woods and learn she is in Oregon. After she wakes up to a security guard telling her she's not allowed to sleep on Walgreen's property, she realizes her car won't start. And thus begins her own personal spiral to hell.
With one bad choice, her world soon spins out of control and we're held emotionally hostage wanting so badly for it to all turn out okay for her. Why do we care? This is what makes the movie good: we have very few clues as to what put Wendy in this situation, yet her almost numb responses to each event make us unimaginably sympathetic. She seems like a decent person who is just down on her luck—and haven't we all been down on our luck at one point in our lives or another?
The film moves at a slow, quiet pace, but is never boring. The few supporting characters that emerge (the security guard, the mechanic, etc.) feel as though they're real people who we may actually encounter when we have car trouble ourselves; the dog is undeniably sweet.
And Michelle Williams amazing performance makes this very human story work.
See this movie—you'll painfully cringe at her misfortune while joyfully tearing up at the sight of the kindness she experiences.
Have you ever been in a situation where one bad thing happened and then another followed, and another, until you felt as if the whole universe was against you?
This is how you'll feel watching events unfold in the life of Wendy (Williams), a young girl from Indiana who is headed to Alaska to work in a Ketchikan cannery.
We first see her playing with her dog Lucy (Lucy) in the woods and learn she is in Oregon. After she wakes up to a security guard telling her she's not allowed to sleep on Walgreen's property, she realizes her car won't start. And thus begins her own personal spiral to hell.
With one bad choice, her world soon spins out of control and we're held emotionally hostage wanting so badly for it to all turn out okay for her. Why do we care? This is what makes the movie good: we have very few clues as to what put Wendy in this situation, yet her almost numb responses to each event make us unimaginably sympathetic. She seems like a decent person who is just down on her luck—and haven't we all been down on our luck at one point in our lives or another?
The film moves at a slow, quiet pace, but is never boring. The few supporting characters that emerge (the security guard, the mechanic, etc.) feel as though they're real people who we may actually encounter when we have car trouble ourselves; the dog is undeniably sweet.
And Michelle Williams amazing performance makes this very human story work.
See this movie—you'll painfully cringe at her misfortune while joyfully tearing up at the sight of the kindness she experiences.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Vertigo
Today I saw Vertigo, starring Jimmy Stewart and Kim Novak.
I feel incredibly privileged that my first viewing of this (today) was on the big screen—70 mm no less, as part of the Seattle Cinerama's special series.
What a stunning film! From the opening scene that leaves its main character hanging over tall buildings to the sloped streets of San Francisco, this has to be one of the most beautifully shot films ever made.
The story begins with Scottie (Stewart) fretting over his case of vertigo with Midge (Barbara Bel Geddes), an artist who is clearly in love with him. But he isn't in love with her—at least not anymore—he's interested instead in the "ghost" of Madeline (Novak) a woman he (for lack of a better term) stalks and eventually rescues from the cold San Francisco Bay.
The plot thickens as Scottie finds himself immersed in a murder he's soon accused of, but nothing seems to bother him as much as his broken heart and longing for Madeline.
There is sympathy due not only for Scottie's genuine lost love, but also for his desperation. And Scottie is not the only one to be sad for—all of the women in the film deserve a bit of pity for their trouble, whether it be pining for a man in love with someone else, or being a pawn in an elaborate illegal and immoral scheme.
The way Hitchcock shoots Scottie's pursuit of these women makes the viewer feel as if they are the voyeur—peeking behind a sacred curtain of action the rest of the world is not privy to.
The colors come through almost magically; a calming mix of greens and blues, punctuated only by the leading lady's red lipstick. The lighting, of course: genius.
There is an especially amazing scene toward the end, where Scottie's woman is emerging from the bathroom to greet him looking a certain way. She opens the door and we see what looks like a thick San Francisco fog clouding her silhouette moving toward his reacting face. The viewer sees her as he sees her—mystical and majestic—until her presence comes into full light.
This is a film to be savored on a giant screen, in the dark, with a full audience reacting to its every hue.
I'm so glad that's how I experienced it.
I feel incredibly privileged that my first viewing of this (today) was on the big screen—70 mm no less, as part of the Seattle Cinerama's special series.
What a stunning film! From the opening scene that leaves its main character hanging over tall buildings to the sloped streets of San Francisco, this has to be one of the most beautifully shot films ever made.
The story begins with Scottie (Stewart) fretting over his case of vertigo with Midge (Barbara Bel Geddes), an artist who is clearly in love with him. But he isn't in love with her—at least not anymore—he's interested instead in the "ghost" of Madeline (Novak) a woman he (for lack of a better term) stalks and eventually rescues from the cold San Francisco Bay.
The plot thickens as Scottie finds himself immersed in a murder he's soon accused of, but nothing seems to bother him as much as his broken heart and longing for Madeline.
There is sympathy due not only for Scottie's genuine lost love, but also for his desperation. And Scottie is not the only one to be sad for—all of the women in the film deserve a bit of pity for their trouble, whether it be pining for a man in love with someone else, or being a pawn in an elaborate illegal and immoral scheme.
The way Hitchcock shoots Scottie's pursuit of these women makes the viewer feel as if they are the voyeur—peeking behind a sacred curtain of action the rest of the world is not privy to.
The colors come through almost magically; a calming mix of greens and blues, punctuated only by the leading lady's red lipstick. The lighting, of course: genius.
There is an especially amazing scene toward the end, where Scottie's woman is emerging from the bathroom to greet him looking a certain way. She opens the door and we see what looks like a thick San Francisco fog clouding her silhouette moving toward his reacting face. The viewer sees her as he sees her—mystical and majestic—until her presence comes into full light.
This is a film to be savored on a giant screen, in the dark, with a full audience reacting to its every hue.
I'm so glad that's how I experienced it.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
New in Town
Today I saw New in Town, starring Renée Zellweger and Harry Connick Jr.
In every fish-out-of-water comedy there is a level of formulaic predictability, but in this film, that formula shoots right off the charts.
Lucy (Zellweger) is a single Miami executive sent to small-town Minnesota to assess the productivity of a plant making snack bars. Ted (Connick Jr.) is a widowed, single father who happens to be the union representative at said plant.
Can you guess what happens from there? I sure could—and I was unfortunately right on every count.
There are the obligatory "Oh my gosh, it's cold in the Midwest" and "look at the simple locals drinking beer at the nearby tavern" scenes, and just for good measure there are also ladies scrapbooking (instead of the usual quilting). Plus, everyone but the two leads have an annoying, exaggerated Minnesota accent, probably to remind us: they're in Minnesota!
Lucy is clearly more educated than anyone in the town (and the only one who dresses in the current decade); Ted is the obvious workers' hero who all of the women swoon for (yes, Connick remains sexy despite the blue-collar-beard and tired flannel).
Their meet-cute comes in the form of a dinner party hosted by Lucy's "executive assistant" Blanche (Siobhan Fallon), and results in Lucy and Ted immediately hating each other through Blatant Sexual Tension.
Lucy soon becomes a damsel in distress, Ted comes to her rescue and the plot continues from there (or doesn't, if you've seen any formulaic romantic comedies in the past 25 years).
The shame of it is that Zellweger and Connick are great actors and actually have a refreshing chemistry together. They sort of "fit" in a way, and that connection could have been put to such good use in a movie with a better screenplay.
One scene that showed potential has the two on Ted's couch after his teenage daughter leaves for a dance and the characters talk to one another as real people would. It's a romantic scene with both leads exhibiting more depth than they do anywhere else in the movie.
Sadly, it was the only one of its kind.
```
In every fish-out-of-water comedy there is a level of formulaic predictability, but in this film, that formula shoots right off the charts.
Lucy (Zellweger) is a single Miami executive sent to small-town Minnesota to assess the productivity of a plant making snack bars. Ted (Connick Jr.) is a widowed, single father who happens to be the union representative at said plant.
Can you guess what happens from there? I sure could—and I was unfortunately right on every count.
There are the obligatory "Oh my gosh, it's cold in the Midwest" and "look at the simple locals drinking beer at the nearby tavern" scenes, and just for good measure there are also ladies scrapbooking (instead of the usual quilting). Plus, everyone but the two leads have an annoying, exaggerated Minnesota accent, probably to remind us: they're in Minnesota!
Lucy is clearly more educated than anyone in the town (and the only one who dresses in the current decade); Ted is the obvious workers' hero who all of the women swoon for (yes, Connick remains sexy despite the blue-collar-beard and tired flannel).
Their meet-cute comes in the form of a dinner party hosted by Lucy's "executive assistant" Blanche (Siobhan Fallon), and results in Lucy and Ted immediately hating each other through Blatant Sexual Tension.
Lucy soon becomes a damsel in distress, Ted comes to her rescue and the plot continues from there (or doesn't, if you've seen any formulaic romantic comedies in the past 25 years).
The shame of it is that Zellweger and Connick are great actors and actually have a refreshing chemistry together. They sort of "fit" in a way, and that connection could have been put to such good use in a movie with a better screenplay.
One scene that showed potential has the two on Ted's couch after his teenage daughter leaves for a dance and the characters talk to one another as real people would. It's a romantic scene with both leads exhibiting more depth than they do anywhere else in the movie.
Sadly, it was the only one of its kind.
```
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
The Wrestler
Tonight I saw The Wrestler, starring Mickey Rourke and Marisa Tomei.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #66, which is available here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #66, which is available here.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Gran Torino
Tonight I saw Gran Torino, starring Clint Eastwood and Bee Vang.
Walt Kowalski (Eastwood) is an old curmudgeon who fought in the Korean War and apparently never got over it--the agony of combat or the racism. The film begins after he's lost his beloved wife Dorothy and her priest (Christopher Carley) attempts to solicit a confession from him (per the dearly departed's wishes). That fails miserably, as do his repeated attempts, because Kowalski is an unhappy, non-religious man.
He dislikes his son and daughter-in-law's suggestions to move him to a retirement home, he dislikes the appearance and behavior of his teenage granddaughter, and most of all he dislikes the Asians who to him have taken over his tidy Midwestern neighborhood.
His Hmong next door neighbors have two teenage children: the outspoken, spunky Sue (Ahney Her) and the timid Thao (Vang). Thao is constantly harassed by a cousin who happens to be the ringleader of a gang, and is forced into attempting to steal Walt's classic Gran Torino one night. He doesn't succeed, but Walt still comes to his rescue days later when the gang is having somewhat of a riot on his lawn (hence, the already-famous "get off my lawn" line).
The neighborhood, so grateful for his heroism, begins showering him with gifts of gratitude, which he refuses or promptly carries to the garbage. He only softens when Sue charms him and invites him to a barbecue at a time when he's too drunk to refuse. Soon he gains a new appreciation for their food and their company, and even begins to take the former car thief under his wing.
The film is a lot sweeter than I expected it to be, and most of it moves along as a comedy with very inappropriate (yet admittedly funny) racial slurs. The characters address many issues: the effects of war, racism, gang violence, cultural traditions/repressions and poverty.
There are no "slow" moments, though Eastwood does pretty much growl through the first 45 minutes. If it were anyone but him it wouldn't work, but he pulls it off and still shines, playing his real age.
The performances by Vang and Her are also great and I have high hopes we'll be seeing more of them in the years to come.
I wouldn't claim the film as an Oscar hopeful, but I would recommend it as a satisfying piece of entertainment, based on real social dilemmas.
Walt Kowalski (Eastwood) is an old curmudgeon who fought in the Korean War and apparently never got over it--the agony of combat or the racism. The film begins after he's lost his beloved wife Dorothy and her priest (Christopher Carley) attempts to solicit a confession from him (per the dearly departed's wishes). That fails miserably, as do his repeated attempts, because Kowalski is an unhappy, non-religious man.
He dislikes his son and daughter-in-law's suggestions to move him to a retirement home, he dislikes the appearance and behavior of his teenage granddaughter, and most of all he dislikes the Asians who to him have taken over his tidy Midwestern neighborhood.
His Hmong next door neighbors have two teenage children: the outspoken, spunky Sue (Ahney Her) and the timid Thao (Vang). Thao is constantly harassed by a cousin who happens to be the ringleader of a gang, and is forced into attempting to steal Walt's classic Gran Torino one night. He doesn't succeed, but Walt still comes to his rescue days later when the gang is having somewhat of a riot on his lawn (hence, the already-famous "get off my lawn" line).
The neighborhood, so grateful for his heroism, begins showering him with gifts of gratitude, which he refuses or promptly carries to the garbage. He only softens when Sue charms him and invites him to a barbecue at a time when he's too drunk to refuse. Soon he gains a new appreciation for their food and their company, and even begins to take the former car thief under his wing.
The film is a lot sweeter than I expected it to be, and most of it moves along as a comedy with very inappropriate (yet admittedly funny) racial slurs. The characters address many issues: the effects of war, racism, gang violence, cultural traditions/repressions and poverty.
There are no "slow" moments, though Eastwood does pretty much growl through the first 45 minutes. If it were anyone but him it wouldn't work, but he pulls it off and still shines, playing his real age.
The performances by Vang and Her are also great and I have high hopes we'll be seeing more of them in the years to come.
I wouldn't claim the film as an Oscar hopeful, but I would recommend it as a satisfying piece of entertainment, based on real social dilemmas.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Revolutionary Road
Tonight I saw Revolutionary Road, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #66, which is available here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #66, which is available here.
Monday, January 05, 2009
The Reader
Tonight I saw The Reader, starring Kate Winslet and David Kross.
Based on the bestselling book by Bernard Schlink, the story begins in Germany when Michael (Kross) falls ill on the way home from high school and is found by Hanna (Winslet), an older woman who works on the local trains. She cleans him up and helps him to his home—a random act of kindness not soon forgotten by the boy, who returns three months later when he recovers to offer her flowers in gratitude.
One thing leads to another and the two become passionate lovers. However, it's not just an affair based on sex; it's a meaningful relationship filled with endless lovemaking that's precluded by the young man reading to his partner. Hence, the title.
Before I go any further, I'm in agreement that seeing a film where a woman in her mid-thirties teaches a teenage boy how to make love may seem embarrassing, but let me reassure you that the scenes between Winslet and Kross are incredibly tender, yet sensual, and do the original book every justice (note: I read it years ago and loved it, so I was prepared to be let down by the film). In fact, watching them act so convincingly makes you want to grab a lover and re-invent foreplay with a couple of classic novels. But I digress...
The lovers part before the boy becomes a man and he doesn't encounter Hanna again until he is a law student several years later, sitting in on a Nazi crime trial in which she is a defendant. It seems she was once an Auschwitz prison guard.
From there, the film is a collection of spoilers so I will tell the story no further, but I have to say that if this isn't the year Winslet takes home the Oscar, for this role, there is a conspiracy brewing in the Academy.
She is beyond phenomenal as a tough, yet tender woman following suit in life, making bad decisions she knows are wrong in her heart but is not wise enough to correct. The amount of acting Winslet does in her expressions would allow one to turn off the sound and still feel the gravity of the emotion in the film. I've liked her in every role I've seen her in, but I don't know that she's ever been this good.
Also wonderful is the young David Kross (so young in reality, they had to wait for his 18th birthday to shoot his graphic sex scenes with Winslet), who shows the right balance of innocence and pain as their lives unfold.
Finally, I never thought I'd envision the man who played the most convincingly horrific Nazi 14 years ago, turn the tides and be just as authentic as a citizen shocked by the brutality of the Holocaust. Bravo, Mr. Fiennes.
I can't think of many ways this story could've been told better—and that's why for me it ranks as one of the best films of 2008.
Based on the bestselling book by Bernard Schlink, the story begins in Germany when Michael (Kross) falls ill on the way home from high school and is found by Hanna (Winslet), an older woman who works on the local trains. She cleans him up and helps him to his home—a random act of kindness not soon forgotten by the boy, who returns three months later when he recovers to offer her flowers in gratitude.
One thing leads to another and the two become passionate lovers. However, it's not just an affair based on sex; it's a meaningful relationship filled with endless lovemaking that's precluded by the young man reading to his partner. Hence, the title.
Before I go any further, I'm in agreement that seeing a film where a woman in her mid-thirties teaches a teenage boy how to make love may seem embarrassing, but let me reassure you that the scenes between Winslet and Kross are incredibly tender, yet sensual, and do the original book every justice (note: I read it years ago and loved it, so I was prepared to be let down by the film). In fact, watching them act so convincingly makes you want to grab a lover and re-invent foreplay with a couple of classic novels. But I digress...
The lovers part before the boy becomes a man and he doesn't encounter Hanna again until he is a law student several years later, sitting in on a Nazi crime trial in which she is a defendant. It seems she was once an Auschwitz prison guard.
From there, the film is a collection of spoilers so I will tell the story no further, but I have to say that if this isn't the year Winslet takes home the Oscar, for this role, there is a conspiracy brewing in the Academy.
She is beyond phenomenal as a tough, yet tender woman following suit in life, making bad decisions she knows are wrong in her heart but is not wise enough to correct. The amount of acting Winslet does in her expressions would allow one to turn off the sound and still feel the gravity of the emotion in the film. I've liked her in every role I've seen her in, but I don't know that she's ever been this good.
Also wonderful is the young David Kross (so young in reality, they had to wait for his 18th birthday to shoot his graphic sex scenes with Winslet), who shows the right balance of innocence and pain as their lives unfold.
Finally, I never thought I'd envision the man who played the most convincingly horrific Nazi 14 years ago, turn the tides and be just as authentic as a citizen shocked by the brutality of the Holocaust. Bravo, Mr. Fiennes.
I can't think of many ways this story could've been told better—and that's why for me it ranks as one of the best films of 2008.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Frost/Nixon
Today I saw Frost/Nixon, starring Michael Sheen and Frank Langella.
It's easy to see why this film is generating so much Oscar® buzz.
The story rewinds history to focus on the landmark interviews of Richard Nixon (Langella) following his resignation conducted by British talk show host David Frost (Sheen). We see more of Frost's side of the journey than we do Nixon's, but that makes the exchanges all the more compelling.
Adding spice to the story like a well-crafted meal are the excellent cast of supporting characters: Kevin Bacon as Nixon's adviser Jack Brennan, and on the Frost production team Matthew Macfadyen as John Birt, Sam Rockwell as James Reston, Jr. and Oliver Platt as Bob Zelnick. All do a magnificent job of conveying the tension surrounding both of their players' participation.
The weeks leading up to the interview are similar to what one would picture as training for a boxer preparing for a fight. There's discussion of tactics (moves) and some obvious hitting below the belt once the two are in the ring.
The dialogue is smart, funny and—even if not verbatim to the actual events—entertaining. The sense of empathy you're made feel for the former fallen President is shocking, but not unwelcome. In rooting for Frost (as the script so desperately asks you to), you can't help but respect the authenticity of Nixon's convictions.
All in all it was a brilliant, blood-pumping spotlight into an intersection of politics and entertainment that may never be repeated. And in this sea of tear-jerking films that are showing this season, that's pretty satisfying.
It's easy to see why this film is generating so much Oscar® buzz.
The story rewinds history to focus on the landmark interviews of Richard Nixon (Langella) following his resignation conducted by British talk show host David Frost (Sheen). We see more of Frost's side of the journey than we do Nixon's, but that makes the exchanges all the more compelling.
Adding spice to the story like a well-crafted meal are the excellent cast of supporting characters: Kevin Bacon as Nixon's adviser Jack Brennan, and on the Frost production team Matthew Macfadyen as John Birt, Sam Rockwell as James Reston, Jr. and Oliver Platt as Bob Zelnick. All do a magnificent job of conveying the tension surrounding both of their players' participation.
The weeks leading up to the interview are similar to what one would picture as training for a boxer preparing for a fight. There's discussion of tactics (moves) and some obvious hitting below the belt once the two are in the ring.
The dialogue is smart, funny and—even if not verbatim to the actual events—entertaining. The sense of empathy you're made feel for the former fallen President is shocking, but not unwelcome. In rooting for Frost (as the script so desperately asks you to), you can't help but respect the authenticity of Nixon's convictions.
All in all it was a brilliant, blood-pumping spotlight into an intersection of politics and entertainment that may never be repeated. And in this sea of tear-jerking films that are showing this season, that's pretty satisfying.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Slumdog Millionaire
Today I saw Slumdog Millionaire, starring Dev Patel and Irrfan Khan.
I have mixed emotions about this story, perhaps because I went in expecting too much or maybe because its distinction is earning it an exorbitant amount of praise.
The setting is an Indian ghetto so horrific it's hard to watch. Our main character Jamal (Patel) has just made it to a record high on the game show "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" and been arrested under suspicion of cheating. His interrogator, played by the always-great Irrfan Khan, repeatedly orders his policeman to torture Jamal until he finally realizes those tactics aren't doing any good, and decides to listen to what his captor insists is the truth.
This leads to the audience getting a virtual flashback into Jamal's entire childhood, which includes unspeakable suffering and eventually a forced separation from his brother and would-be girlfriend. Explaining why he's telling all of these life stories would somewhat spoil the film, but I can say that the screenwriter ties everything up in a very clever way.
There is also an unmistakable authenticity to the film because Director Danny Boyle risked his life (and that of his cast and crew) to shoot on location in the incredibly dangerous slums of Mumbai. There is no question that this helps the viewer sympathize with the characters and grasp their desperation.
Unfortunately, for me the weak link was the star—Dev Patel. We toggle between him sitting on the set of the game show and sitting in the police inspector's office, reacting to the questions he's being asked in both circumstances. Despite the vast contrast of these inquiries, his expression is the same: a confused "What's my name?" sort of stare that doesn't really suit either situation.
This lack of varied expressions made it even harder for me to believe Latika (Freida Pinto), one of the most breathtakingly beautiful women on the planet, would remain hopelessly in love with him throughout all of their trials and tribulations.
And speaking of Latika, I would've liked the love story to have more time to grow, even if it needed to be at the end.
All in all, it's an original story that moves very quickly toward a somewhat predictable ending that was diluted by its main actor.
Worth seeing? Sure. Best Picture candidate? I don't think so.
I have mixed emotions about this story, perhaps because I went in expecting too much or maybe because its distinction is earning it an exorbitant amount of praise.
The setting is an Indian ghetto so horrific it's hard to watch. Our main character Jamal (Patel) has just made it to a record high on the game show "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" and been arrested under suspicion of cheating. His interrogator, played by the always-great Irrfan Khan, repeatedly orders his policeman to torture Jamal until he finally realizes those tactics aren't doing any good, and decides to listen to what his captor insists is the truth.
This leads to the audience getting a virtual flashback into Jamal's entire childhood, which includes unspeakable suffering and eventually a forced separation from his brother and would-be girlfriend. Explaining why he's telling all of these life stories would somewhat spoil the film, but I can say that the screenwriter ties everything up in a very clever way.
There is also an unmistakable authenticity to the film because Director Danny Boyle risked his life (and that of his cast and crew) to shoot on location in the incredibly dangerous slums of Mumbai. There is no question that this helps the viewer sympathize with the characters and grasp their desperation.
Unfortunately, for me the weak link was the star—Dev Patel. We toggle between him sitting on the set of the game show and sitting in the police inspector's office, reacting to the questions he's being asked in both circumstances. Despite the vast contrast of these inquiries, his expression is the same: a confused "What's my name?" sort of stare that doesn't really suit either situation.
This lack of varied expressions made it even harder for me to believe Latika (Freida Pinto), one of the most breathtakingly beautiful women on the planet, would remain hopelessly in love with him throughout all of their trials and tribulations.
And speaking of Latika, I would've liked the love story to have more time to grow, even if it needed to be at the end.
All in all, it's an original story that moves very quickly toward a somewhat predictable ending that was diluted by its main actor.
Worth seeing? Sure. Best Picture candidate? I don't think so.
Thursday, January 01, 2009
Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Today I saw Vicky Cristina Barcelona, starring Javier Bardem and Scarlett Johansson.
The writer and director of this film, Woody Allen, is to me the Prince (as in Artist-formerly-known-as) of the film industry: he has a writing style all his own, he's quirky, he's short, he's neurotic and he cranks out more material than the vast majority of his contemporaries. The material-cranking is a good thing for those who are entertained by everything he does; not so much for true film connoisseurs. But the law of probability does work in his favor from time to time, and this movie is no exception.
Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Cristina (Johansson) are American friends who spend a summer in Barcelona. Early in the trip they meet Juan Antonio (Bardem), a Bohemian artist who has eyes for both of them. Though Cristina is the one clearly suited for him, the soon-to-marry Vicky becomes conflicted by her feelings for him as well. And that's all before Juan's ex-wife Maria Elena (Penélope Cruz), who is prone to attempting murder and suicide, returns to her former home.
There are so many minor twists and turns that take place, it would be spoiling the film to reveal them, but I will say that in the true spirit of Woody Allen, there is plenty of sex, love, passion, confusion, indifference and unsatisfaction among the characters.
The movie moves at a pleasantly quick place, breezing through Spain as if on a cruise of the country, and the performances are excellent by all. Bardem is especially charming with his refreshing comedic deliverance during scenes with Cruz.
All in all, this dialogue-driven ride is just a story about a few friends and lovers, but it's certainly a fun tale to witness.
The writer and director of this film, Woody Allen, is to me the Prince (as in Artist-formerly-known-as) of the film industry: he has a writing style all his own, he's quirky, he's short, he's neurotic and he cranks out more material than the vast majority of his contemporaries. The material-cranking is a good thing for those who are entertained by everything he does; not so much for true film connoisseurs. But the law of probability does work in his favor from time to time, and this movie is no exception.
Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and Cristina (Johansson) are American friends who spend a summer in Barcelona. Early in the trip they meet Juan Antonio (Bardem), a Bohemian artist who has eyes for both of them. Though Cristina is the one clearly suited for him, the soon-to-marry Vicky becomes conflicted by her feelings for him as well. And that's all before Juan's ex-wife Maria Elena (Penélope Cruz), who is prone to attempting murder and suicide, returns to her former home.
There are so many minor twists and turns that take place, it would be spoiling the film to reveal them, but I will say that in the true spirit of Woody Allen, there is plenty of sex, love, passion, confusion, indifference and unsatisfaction among the characters.
The movie moves at a pleasantly quick place, breezing through Spain as if on a cruise of the country, and the performances are excellent by all. Bardem is especially charming with his refreshing comedic deliverance during scenes with Cruz.
All in all, this dialogue-driven ride is just a story about a few friends and lovers, but it's certainly a fun tale to witness.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
This morning I saw The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, starring Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #65, so tune in on January 12 for our review.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #65, so tune in on January 12 for our review.
Monday, December 29, 2008
Doubt
Yesterday I saw Doubt, starring Meryl Streep and Phillip Seymour Hoffman.
It's a drama (with a hint of comedy) about a Catholic school in the Bronx, in 1964. Sister Aloysius (Streep) is the stereotypical "mean nun" who administers wicked punishments to the children and is quick to judge her colleagues. Father Flynn (Hoffman) is a kind, warm-spirited priest who pays special attention to Donald (Joseph Foster), who is the first black student admitted to the school.
After witnessing a few normal situations at the school (kids misbehaving in class, nuns breaking bread together in silence, etc.), the writer wastes no time in letting us know that suspicion looms over Father Flynn regarding his relationship with Donald.
Amy Adams, in a role tailor made for her expertise in playing innocence, is Sister James, a naive teacher who notices a behavioral change in Donald after he returns from a private visit with the father. She soon tells Sister Aloysius, who is immediately anxious to expose and expunge the certainly guilty priest.
From there the movie places its title into your reactions as an audience member. Is this miserable woman just making life difficult for a man because he is a man? Is this kind-hearted priest who has a natural rapport with his congregation and students capable of such unspeakable harm? Is Sister James too inexperienced to correctly read the signs of abuse in one of her students?
All of the doubts they weave into your mind will have you taking sides with yourself, or perhaps the person sitting next to you. But they won't definitely answer the questions, which is what makes the film good.
What also makes the film good are the performances. It's not shocking that Streep's accent is dead-on 60s New Yorker, and it's no surprise that Hoffman can be equally endearing and creepy, but the unexpected thrill is seeing the two battle it out on screen as if they were performing live theater. It's hard to take your eyes off of them.
Also great are supporting players Amy Adams as the sugar-sweet Sister James, and Viola Davis as the pained mother of young Donald. Both infuse their characters with mannerisms, expressions and speech patterns that perfectly illustrate their plight.
What makes the film bad is the ending. It betrays one of the characters they've crafted so brilliantly and makes no sense in the context of the resolution.
Shame it had to end that way.
```
It's a drama (with a hint of comedy) about a Catholic school in the Bronx, in 1964. Sister Aloysius (Streep) is the stereotypical "mean nun" who administers wicked punishments to the children and is quick to judge her colleagues. Father Flynn (Hoffman) is a kind, warm-spirited priest who pays special attention to Donald (Joseph Foster), who is the first black student admitted to the school.
After witnessing a few normal situations at the school (kids misbehaving in class, nuns breaking bread together in silence, etc.), the writer wastes no time in letting us know that suspicion looms over Father Flynn regarding his relationship with Donald.
Amy Adams, in a role tailor made for her expertise in playing innocence, is Sister James, a naive teacher who notices a behavioral change in Donald after he returns from a private visit with the father. She soon tells Sister Aloysius, who is immediately anxious to expose and expunge the certainly guilty priest.
From there the movie places its title into your reactions as an audience member. Is this miserable woman just making life difficult for a man because he is a man? Is this kind-hearted priest who has a natural rapport with his congregation and students capable of such unspeakable harm? Is Sister James too inexperienced to correctly read the signs of abuse in one of her students?
All of the doubts they weave into your mind will have you taking sides with yourself, or perhaps the person sitting next to you. But they won't definitely answer the questions, which is what makes the film good.
What also makes the film good are the performances. It's not shocking that Streep's accent is dead-on 60s New Yorker, and it's no surprise that Hoffman can be equally endearing and creepy, but the unexpected thrill is seeing the two battle it out on screen as if they were performing live theater. It's hard to take your eyes off of them.
Also great are supporting players Amy Adams as the sugar-sweet Sister James, and Viola Davis as the pained mother of young Donald. Both infuse their characters with mannerisms, expressions and speech patterns that perfectly illustrate their plight.
What makes the film bad is the ending. It betrays one of the characters they've crafted so brilliantly and makes no sense in the context of the resolution.
Shame it had to end that way.
```
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Seven Pounds
Today I saw Seven Pounds, starring Will Smith and Rosario Dawson.
Why didn't someone tell me to take a box of Kleenex?
The story begins as Smith's character (though I won't mention his name in the film here; you'll understand why when you see it) is screaming at a blind meat salesman—a stranger, played by Woody Harrelson, for no apparent reason. His home is lavish, his clothing is expensive and he seems to "have it all."
Next, we watch him criticize a man who is somehow in charge of a nursing home and then fight with a childhood friend (played by Barry Pepper, who I'd like to have seen more of).
The first sign of 'nice guy' exhibited by our main character comes when he tracks down Emily (Dawson) who is suffering from congenital heart failure. He poses as an IRS agent and after meeting with her (and instantly liking her), promises to freeze all of the collections on her overdue taxes.
The big question: why is he doing all of this?
We learn in (somewhat predictable) flashbacks why, and the how is revealed much later in the film (impatient folks like me will think too much later).
The main themes I took away from this story were guilt, compassion and redemption.
Though you'll cheer Will's character along in his finer moments, one must realize they're all being contrived based upon a whole lot of judgment.
But that's not to say it wasn't good.
Smith and Dawson make a wonderful match, sparking with chemistry throughout (the makeup team should also be heralded for making Dawson so sick-looking—it exhausted me just watching her), and the supporting players in Pepper, Harrelson, etc. are also perfect in their unfortunately tiny roles.
The final act draws everything together nicely and leaves you wondering if it takes a monumental mistake to provoke such altruism. Or can we even call it that, if redemption is the ultimate goal?
Why didn't someone tell me to take a box of Kleenex?
The story begins as Smith's character (though I won't mention his name in the film here; you'll understand why when you see it) is screaming at a blind meat salesman—a stranger, played by Woody Harrelson, for no apparent reason. His home is lavish, his clothing is expensive and he seems to "have it all."
Next, we watch him criticize a man who is somehow in charge of a nursing home and then fight with a childhood friend (played by Barry Pepper, who I'd like to have seen more of).
The first sign of 'nice guy' exhibited by our main character comes when he tracks down Emily (Dawson) who is suffering from congenital heart failure. He poses as an IRS agent and after meeting with her (and instantly liking her), promises to freeze all of the collections on her overdue taxes.
The big question: why is he doing all of this?
We learn in (somewhat predictable) flashbacks why, and the how is revealed much later in the film (impatient folks like me will think too much later).
The main themes I took away from this story were guilt, compassion and redemption.
Though you'll cheer Will's character along in his finer moments, one must realize they're all being contrived based upon a whole lot of judgment.
But that's not to say it wasn't good.
Smith and Dawson make a wonderful match, sparking with chemistry throughout (the makeup team should also be heralded for making Dawson so sick-looking—it exhausted me just watching her), and the supporting players in Pepper, Harrelson, etc. are also perfect in their unfortunately tiny roles.
The final act draws everything together nicely and leaves you wondering if it takes a monumental mistake to provoke such altruism. Or can we even call it that, if redemption is the ultimate goal?
Sunday, December 07, 2008
The Duchess
Today I saw The Duchess, starring Keira Knightley and Ralph Fiennes.
Note: this review does contain spoilers.
Based on British history, the film tells the story of the former 18th century Duchess of Devonshire, Georgiana (Knightley), who is coincidentally an ancestor to our modern-day Princess Diana of Wales.
Unfortunately, their blood was not the only thing these two women had in common.
They both had spunky, outspoken personalities; they both married young into the British Monarchy with every sincerity and hope for a loving union; and they both were cheated on, controlled, lied to and forced to remain in situations that made them miserable—the only difference is that Diana eventually got out.
The Duchess is a well-done exploration of Georgiana's sad life from the time she was married until the time of her eventual complacency to the husband (Fiennes) who was never good to her.
An excitable teenager when first joined together, Georgiana's biggest problems were that her husband didn't "talk" to her and intercourse was mere sex; not the lovemaking she craved.
After two daughters and two stillborn sons, the Duke was growing impatient waiting for an heir and had taken a lover in Georgiana's best (and only) friend Bess (Hayley Atwell). Although "G" (as they called her), had looked away at the Duke's countless other affairs, this one pained her greatly and she expressed her anger at the betrayal, only to be met with indifference on his part. After taking G by force, the Duke finally got his wish and produced a male heir.
The mistress, genuinely caring for her former friend, arranged for the real object of G's affection, politician Charles Grey (Dominic Cooper), to reunite with her—and reunite they did. They also produced a child, daughter Eliza, which the Duke forced the Duchess to surrender to Grey's family.
Throughout this film, the performances are delivered expertly by all actors, not least of whom is Knightley herself—this is a role that feels as if it was tailor made for her, and after watching her, it's hard to picture anyone else pulling it off quite as well. Fiennes, as always is brilliant and Atwell as the conflicted Lady Elizabeth, is pitch perfect, commanding both sympathy and rage at her actions.
The real problems are plenty and scandalous, but at the end of it all, the Duke and the Duchess faced something that millions of people throughout time have faced: a loveless marriage. As the mother of the Duchess says at the beginning of the film, true love is identified instantly—it's a feeling you get that you can't escape.
The sad thing is that when you deny this magic, and gamble your own fate by doing what society (or merely your partner) feels is "right," you're most certainly going to lose. And lose Georgiana did.
It almost makes you feel guilty enjoying the film so much.
Note: this review does contain spoilers.
Based on British history, the film tells the story of the former 18th century Duchess of Devonshire, Georgiana (Knightley), who is coincidentally an ancestor to our modern-day Princess Diana of Wales.
Unfortunately, their blood was not the only thing these two women had in common.
They both had spunky, outspoken personalities; they both married young into the British Monarchy with every sincerity and hope for a loving union; and they both were cheated on, controlled, lied to and forced to remain in situations that made them miserable—the only difference is that Diana eventually got out.
The Duchess is a well-done exploration of Georgiana's sad life from the time she was married until the time of her eventual complacency to the husband (Fiennes) who was never good to her.
An excitable teenager when first joined together, Georgiana's biggest problems were that her husband didn't "talk" to her and intercourse was mere sex; not the lovemaking she craved.
After two daughters and two stillborn sons, the Duke was growing impatient waiting for an heir and had taken a lover in Georgiana's best (and only) friend Bess (Hayley Atwell). Although "G" (as they called her), had looked away at the Duke's countless other affairs, this one pained her greatly and she expressed her anger at the betrayal, only to be met with indifference on his part. After taking G by force, the Duke finally got his wish and produced a male heir.
The mistress, genuinely caring for her former friend, arranged for the real object of G's affection, politician Charles Grey (Dominic Cooper), to reunite with her—and reunite they did. They also produced a child, daughter Eliza, which the Duke forced the Duchess to surrender to Grey's family.
Throughout this film, the performances are delivered expertly by all actors, not least of whom is Knightley herself—this is a role that feels as if it was tailor made for her, and after watching her, it's hard to picture anyone else pulling it off quite as well. Fiennes, as always is brilliant and Atwell as the conflicted Lady Elizabeth, is pitch perfect, commanding both sympathy and rage at her actions.
The real problems are plenty and scandalous, but at the end of it all, the Duke and the Duchess faced something that millions of people throughout time have faced: a loveless marriage. As the mother of the Duchess says at the beginning of the film, true love is identified instantly—it's a feeling you get that you can't escape.
The sad thing is that when you deny this magic, and gamble your own fate by doing what society (or merely your partner) feels is "right," you're most certainly going to lose. And lose Georgiana did.
It almost makes you feel guilty enjoying the film so much.
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Australia
Yesterday I saw Australia, starring Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman.
Baz Luhrman brings pre-World War II Australia to life by telling the story of Lady Sarah Ashley (Kidman), a British widow who has to relocate to the continent to save her husband's business and property after he is murdered. After many doses of typical movie-romance banter, she enlists the help of Drover (Jackman), a morally sound cattle rancher, who successfully assists her while consequently falling in love with her.
They also unofficially adopt Nullah (Brandon Walters), an aboriginal boy, who often appears to be the most resourceful and clever member of this dysfunctional, yet loyal, family.
To call the film a romance isn't really being honest—sure there are elements of it surrounding the main characters. And yes, Kidman and the ever-appealing Jackman have a respectable chemistry opposite one another. But the basis of the story is not merely their love; in fact, that part feels like more of a side dish in a meal that's more Western/war than anything else.
Because Director Baz Luhrman is in charge, that's all okay, though.
His stunning landscapes make for such a beautifully lit narrative, somehow even the hellish fires of war come out looking magical.
He also commands an almost supernaturally good performance from his youngest star, Walters, who brings so much character to Nullah, he steals the show.
Australia has all the elements of a traditional epic: deaths, rivalries, lovers torn apart, orphans, war and aristocracy, and each delivers in a satisfying, if not overwhelming way.
Many of the scenes and outcomes are predictable, but nonetheless well executed. Overall, it's an entertaining and attention-keeping film.
The biggest criticism I have is in the work's length—at nearly three hours long, I couldn't help but make mental notes along the way of portions that should have been cut.
But I'll forgive an artist as great as Luhrman for seeing his vision through to the end. Despite its flaws, the movie is still a suspense-filled visual marvel, and for that reason alone, audiences should see it on the big screen.
Baz Luhrman brings pre-World War II Australia to life by telling the story of Lady Sarah Ashley (Kidman), a British widow who has to relocate to the continent to save her husband's business and property after he is murdered. After many doses of typical movie-romance banter, she enlists the help of Drover (Jackman), a morally sound cattle rancher, who successfully assists her while consequently falling in love with her.
They also unofficially adopt Nullah (Brandon Walters), an aboriginal boy, who often appears to be the most resourceful and clever member of this dysfunctional, yet loyal, family.
To call the film a romance isn't really being honest—sure there are elements of it surrounding the main characters. And yes, Kidman and the ever-appealing Jackman have a respectable chemistry opposite one another. But the basis of the story is not merely their love; in fact, that part feels like more of a side dish in a meal that's more Western/war than anything else.
Because Director Baz Luhrman is in charge, that's all okay, though.
His stunning landscapes make for such a beautifully lit narrative, somehow even the hellish fires of war come out looking magical.
He also commands an almost supernaturally good performance from his youngest star, Walters, who brings so much character to Nullah, he steals the show.
Australia has all the elements of a traditional epic: deaths, rivalries, lovers torn apart, orphans, war and aristocracy, and each delivers in a satisfying, if not overwhelming way.
Many of the scenes and outcomes are predictable, but nonetheless well executed. Overall, it's an entertaining and attention-keeping film.
The biggest criticism I have is in the work's length—at nearly three hours long, I couldn't help but make mental notes along the way of portions that should have been cut.
But I'll forgive an artist as great as Luhrman for seeing his vision through to the end. Despite its flaws, the movie is still a suspense-filled visual marvel, and for that reason alone, audiences should see it on the big screen.
Monday, November 03, 2008
Happy-Go-Lucky
Tonight I saw Happy-Go-Lucky, starring Sally Hawkins and Eddie Marsan.
I hate it when critics oversell a film.
Going into this one, I was excited about the prospect of being uplifted by a refreshing character that always saw the glass as half full. Instead I was met with an incredibly annoying leading lady and a string of scenes that don't really mesh, but are forcibly woven together like an unfinished quilt.
Poppy (Hawkins) is an elementary schoolteacher that makes it her life's mission to cheer other people up. Or, she's just goofy. It's hard to tell in the piece-y scenes that have her alternately bouncing on trampolines, falling in love, flamenco dancing and attempting to help a troubled student. Each bit could have merit if it were allowed the chance to develop, but none of them really do.
None, except for the series of bits about her taking driving lessons. Yes—she's supposed to be a thirtysomething in a big city in England, yet she doesn't know how to drive. Suspending that disbelief, she hires a company to teach her how and gets assigned the Worst Driver on Planet Earth (Marsan). Not only is he surly to her, he's dangerous on the road and many of their scenes are borderline disturbing (and if they're not disturbing, they're excruciatingly irritating).
Is the film 100% bad? No. There are delightful (and more realistic scenes) with Poppy's sister, roommate and other friends that make you feel that you're watching a Cyndi Lauper video (in a good way), and the love story near the end is actually somewhat sweet.
I just found it hard to root for someone I wouldn't be able to be in the same room with if she were real.
I hate it when critics oversell a film.
Going into this one, I was excited about the prospect of being uplifted by a refreshing character that always saw the glass as half full. Instead I was met with an incredibly annoying leading lady and a string of scenes that don't really mesh, but are forcibly woven together like an unfinished quilt.
Poppy (Hawkins) is an elementary schoolteacher that makes it her life's mission to cheer other people up. Or, she's just goofy. It's hard to tell in the piece-y scenes that have her alternately bouncing on trampolines, falling in love, flamenco dancing and attempting to help a troubled student. Each bit could have merit if it were allowed the chance to develop, but none of them really do.
None, except for the series of bits about her taking driving lessons. Yes—she's supposed to be a thirtysomething in a big city in England, yet she doesn't know how to drive. Suspending that disbelief, she hires a company to teach her how and gets assigned the Worst Driver on Planet Earth (Marsan). Not only is he surly to her, he's dangerous on the road and many of their scenes are borderline disturbing (and if they're not disturbing, they're excruciatingly irritating).
Is the film 100% bad? No. There are delightful (and more realistic scenes) with Poppy's sister, roommate and other friends that make you feel that you're watching a Cyndi Lauper video (in a good way), and the love story near the end is actually somewhat sweet.
I just found it hard to root for someone I wouldn't be able to be in the same room with if she were real.
Sunday, November 02, 2008
Changeling
Today I saw Changeling, starring Angelina Jolie and John Malkovich.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #63, which is available here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #63, which is available here.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Battle in Seattle
Today I saw Battle in Seattle, starring Woody Harrelson and Martin Henderson.
As someone who lived through the event this movie is about, I'd be lying if I said I didn't have bias going into it.
So I'm just going to divide this review into the "good" and the "bad" and call it a night:
The Good
• The documentary-like way in which the film is shot gives it an organic, authentic feel, as does the real news footage of President Clinton, Pine Street, etc.
• The acting is good by Harrelson and Charlize Theron (who plays his wife).
• The writer (Stuart Townsend, who also directed) did a good job of not "taking sides" in the narrative and displaying the fiasco for what it was—a situation that got out of hand mainly due to a third party that refused to respect the agreements that were in place.
• The person they found to play our Governor was both physically and verbally a lot like the real guy.
The Bad
• They changed the mayor's name, age and appearance (the real mayor was an older, heavy set gentleman named Paul; in the film it's Richard Greico playing someone named Jim). Why change something that is easily Google-able? They couldn't find someone that looked like the real guy? I find that hard to believe.
• The situation they put Charlize's character in is a bit ludicrous. The riots were completely out of control, and innocent people did get caught in the crossfire. But the "action" they had the cop take was too over-the-top to be believable.
• They didn't explain enough about what the WTO was trying to accomplish.
• They included shots of buildings in Seattle that didn't exist in 1999 (Qwest Field, etc.)
All in all, it's nice someone (an Irishman, no less) felt this stain in our city's past worthy of a film; I just don't see why the accuracy was so hard to achieve. Interviewing anyone who lived through it, a real story could've emerged that was more interesting than the two forced stories that made up this film.
And I'd say that even if I didn't live here.
As someone who lived through the event this movie is about, I'd be lying if I said I didn't have bias going into it.
So I'm just going to divide this review into the "good" and the "bad" and call it a night:
The Good
• The documentary-like way in which the film is shot gives it an organic, authentic feel, as does the real news footage of President Clinton, Pine Street, etc.
• The acting is good by Harrelson and Charlize Theron (who plays his wife).
• The writer (Stuart Townsend, who also directed) did a good job of not "taking sides" in the narrative and displaying the fiasco for what it was—a situation that got out of hand mainly due to a third party that refused to respect the agreements that were in place.
• The person they found to play our Governor was both physically and verbally a lot like the real guy.
The Bad
• They changed the mayor's name, age and appearance (the real mayor was an older, heavy set gentleman named Paul; in the film it's Richard Greico playing someone named Jim). Why change something that is easily Google-able? They couldn't find someone that looked like the real guy? I find that hard to believe.
• The situation they put Charlize's character in is a bit ludicrous. The riots were completely out of control, and innocent people did get caught in the crossfire. But the "action" they had the cop take was too over-the-top to be believable.
• They didn't explain enough about what the WTO was trying to accomplish.
• They included shots of buildings in Seattle that didn't exist in 1999 (Qwest Field, etc.)
All in all, it's nice someone (an Irishman, no less) felt this stain in our city's past worthy of a film; I just don't see why the accuracy was so hard to achieve. Interviewing anyone who lived through it, a real story could've emerged that was more interesting than the two forced stories that made up this film.
And I'd say that even if I didn't live here.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Ask and you shall receive...
I enjoy chatting with many of you via e-mail about films and television shows, and I've found that I get a lot of the same questions asked over and over again, so I thought I'd answer them here, in one blog entry, and then if folks ask again, I can simply send them the link.
Here goes:
1) What are the podcasts that you participate in called?
Cinebanter (my movie review podcast with Michael Cummins of San Jose), @U2 (the U2-fan podcast produced by a site that I write for) and formerly the U2 Chatcast (created by a friend, Dan Eliot, who manages U2Source.com). They are all available on iTunes (and there is a Cinebanter link in the sidebar of this blog).
2) Do you write any other blogs?
Yes. In addition to this, I have a MySpace blog (also linked from the sidebar here) and as a staff writer, I contribute to the @U2 blog from time to time.
3) What is your day job?
I am a Public Relations/Marketing Manager for a gifted elementary school in Washington State. Before that I was a fashion advertising writer for 8 years.
4) Where are you from?
Originally, Portland, Oregon, but I've lived in several places (Columbia, MO, Mesa, AZ, etc.)
5) Did you go to college?
Yes. I hold a Bachelor's degree with distinction in English from Columbia College in Missouri.
6) Are you married?
No.
7) Do you have children?
No.
8) What is your favorite movie of all time?
This is a tough one. Sentimentally, I'd vote for Back to the Future or Before Sunrise, but on merit probably Gone With the Wind.
9) What is your favorite TV show of all time?
Family Ties
10) Do you like any bands besides U2?
Yes. The Beatles are actually my favorite band. U2 is my favorite "living" band. I also love Joe Jackson, Duran Duran, Cheap Trick and Billy Joel, in addition to scores of others.
11) If you went to the store to buy a DVD, what would it be?
My Amazon Film Wishlist is in the sidebar. See for yourself.
Here goes:
1) What are the podcasts that you participate in called?
Cinebanter (my movie review podcast with Michael Cummins of San Jose), @U2 (the U2-fan podcast produced by a site that I write for) and formerly the U2 Chatcast (created by a friend, Dan Eliot, who manages U2Source.com). They are all available on iTunes (and there is a Cinebanter link in the sidebar of this blog).
2) Do you write any other blogs?
Yes. In addition to this, I have a MySpace blog (also linked from the sidebar here) and as a staff writer, I contribute to the @U2 blog from time to time.
3) What is your day job?
I am a Public Relations/Marketing Manager for a gifted elementary school in Washington State. Before that I was a fashion advertising writer for 8 years.
4) Where are you from?
Originally, Portland, Oregon, but I've lived in several places (Columbia, MO, Mesa, AZ, etc.)
5) Did you go to college?
Yes. I hold a Bachelor's degree with distinction in English from Columbia College in Missouri.
6) Are you married?
No.
7) Do you have children?
No.
8) What is your favorite movie of all time?
This is a tough one. Sentimentally, I'd vote for Back to the Future or Before Sunrise, but on merit probably Gone With the Wind.
9) What is your favorite TV show of all time?
Family Ties
10) Do you like any bands besides U2?
Yes. The Beatles are actually my favorite band. U2 is my favorite "living" band. I also love Joe Jackson, Duran Duran, Cheap Trick and Billy Joel, in addition to scores of others.
11) If you went to the store to buy a DVD, what would it be?
My Amazon Film Wishlist is in the sidebar. See for yourself.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Rachel Getting Married
Tonight I saw Rachel Getting Married, starring Anne Hathaway and Rosemarie DeWitt.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #62, which is available here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #62, which is available here.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Transsiberian
Tonight I saw Transsiberian, starring Emily Mortimer and Woody Harrelson.
An American couple who has just completed some sort of religious or philanthropic mission is continuing their journey through Russia by railway to see the sites and experience a European adventure.
Roy (Harrelson) is the goody-two-shoes of the two, seeing life through a crystal clear pair of rose-colored glasses. His wife Jessie (Mortimer) is less trusting of others, which we learn is due to her own wild past.
All seems well on the trip until they meet Carlos and Abby—a Spaniard man in his thirties and his twenty-year-old American girlfriend. They all share a train car and become fast friends...or do they?
On one of their pit stops, Roy misses the train and the other three get a hotel room at the next stop ahead to wait for him.
Everything that happens after this point is a spoiler, so I can't go any further, but the twists and turns the story takes are not only unexpected, but alternately horrifying and thrilling.
I can't imagine anyone's blood pressure not raising upon a first viewing of this film. It's got action and mystery rolled into clear and present danger, topped off with a bit of love.
Mortimer is phenomenal in her most complex role to date, and Harrelson is oddly convincing as a Bible-bouncing do-gooder.
If you want to sit uncontrollably on the edge of your seat for an hour and 47 minutes, go see this film.
An American couple who has just completed some sort of religious or philanthropic mission is continuing their journey through Russia by railway to see the sites and experience a European adventure.
Roy (Harrelson) is the goody-two-shoes of the two, seeing life through a crystal clear pair of rose-colored glasses. His wife Jessie (Mortimer) is less trusting of others, which we learn is due to her own wild past.
All seems well on the trip until they meet Carlos and Abby—a Spaniard man in his thirties and his twenty-year-old American girlfriend. They all share a train car and become fast friends...or do they?
On one of their pit stops, Roy misses the train and the other three get a hotel room at the next stop ahead to wait for him.
Everything that happens after this point is a spoiler, so I can't go any further, but the twists and turns the story takes are not only unexpected, but alternately horrifying and thrilling.
I can't imagine anyone's blood pressure not raising upon a first viewing of this film. It's got action and mystery rolled into clear and present danger, topped off with a bit of love.
Mortimer is phenomenal in her most complex role to date, and Harrelson is oddly convincing as a Bible-bouncing do-gooder.
If you want to sit uncontrollably on the edge of your seat for an hour and 47 minutes, go see this film.
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist
Tonight I saw Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist starring Michael Cera and Kat Dennings.
When you find your musical soul mate—the one who has the same concert pick for the inevitable time machine "what if?" and the person who understands why you tingle at the sound of certain songs, it's as if all is right with the world.
Searching for that soul mate is the hard part.
In this film, a heartbroken Nick (Cera) makes volumes of mix CDs for the ex-girlfriend who has dumped him, and they ultimately land in the hands of Norah (Dennings), who seems to genuinely appreciate them (though she doesn't know who Nick is).
After a meet-cute at one of Nick's concerts (did I mention he's the only straight guy in a gay band?), the two end up in the same car on the same night with the same purpose: to find Norah's lost drunken friend, and later to find the band "Where's Fluffy?"
The rest of the film is formulaic fluff at its best (though I really could've done without the vomit scenes, even if this is meant for a teenage crowd), though the overall charm of the story saves it.
Cera is adorable in his usual nice-guy role (note: I like him so much I'd REALLY like to see him branch out a bit and try a different genre next time) and Dennings feels as if she's part Kelly McDonald, part Ione Skye, circa 1991—in a good way. They make a lovely couple.
New York City also shines in a raw yet welcoming light and well, the music isn't so bad either.
If you want to feel nostalgiac for that first love who "got" the Beatles (or whomever your band might have been) right along with you, see this film.
Just beware you may be the oldest person in the crowd.
When you find your musical soul mate—the one who has the same concert pick for the inevitable time machine "what if?" and the person who understands why you tingle at the sound of certain songs, it's as if all is right with the world.
Searching for that soul mate is the hard part.
In this film, a heartbroken Nick (Cera) makes volumes of mix CDs for the ex-girlfriend who has dumped him, and they ultimately land in the hands of Norah (Dennings), who seems to genuinely appreciate them (though she doesn't know who Nick is).
After a meet-cute at one of Nick's concerts (did I mention he's the only straight guy in a gay band?), the two end up in the same car on the same night with the same purpose: to find Norah's lost drunken friend, and later to find the band "Where's Fluffy?"
The rest of the film is formulaic fluff at its best (though I really could've done without the vomit scenes, even if this is meant for a teenage crowd), though the overall charm of the story saves it.
Cera is adorable in his usual nice-guy role (note: I like him so much I'd REALLY like to see him branch out a bit and try a different genre next time) and Dennings feels as if she's part Kelly McDonald, part Ione Skye, circa 1991—in a good way. They make a lovely couple.
New York City also shines in a raw yet welcoming light and well, the music isn't so bad either.
If you want to feel nostalgiac for that first love who "got" the Beatles (or whomever your band might have been) right along with you, see this film.
Just beware you may be the oldest person in the crowd.
Sunday, October 05, 2008
Religulous
Today I saw the Bill Maher documentary Religulous.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #61, which is available for download here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #61, which is available for download here.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Choke
Tonight I saw Choke, starring Sam Rockwell and Angelica Houston.
Victor Mancini (Rockwell) is a seemingly incurable sex addict who makes a living as a "historical interpreter" (a.k.a. colonial theme park tour guide) in between meaningless sexual encounters and frequent visits with his mother Ida (Houston), who is suffering from dementia or Alzheimer's or both.
The film is billed as a comedy, though "tragic comedy" would be more accurate. Rockwell's disheveled appearance and quirky speech patterns have him resembling a thirtysomething rendition of Dana Carvey, which is distracting when we're supposed to loathe him or simply feel enormous pity for him.
The film isn't primarily about sex (darn); it's more about a man whose life resembles a jigsaw puzzle of mystery that we're led to believe is exciting, but unfolds only to reveal more darkness.
We find sadness in Victor's orphan past, sadness in his dead-end present, sadness in his bleak future—and I haven't even mentioned the girl he's fallen for.
Despite all of that, I can't say I was bored, or that the acting was bad, because really it was quite good. But so much of the main character's numbness (and so many scenes from which the film draws its title) was hard to witness, I can't say I enjoyed it either.
There were some very funny situations and clever twists, but for me that wasn't enough of a payoff for the depressing mood it left me in.
Victor Mancini (Rockwell) is a seemingly incurable sex addict who makes a living as a "historical interpreter" (a.k.a. colonial theme park tour guide) in between meaningless sexual encounters and frequent visits with his mother Ida (Houston), who is suffering from dementia or Alzheimer's or both.
The film is billed as a comedy, though "tragic comedy" would be more accurate. Rockwell's disheveled appearance and quirky speech patterns have him resembling a thirtysomething rendition of Dana Carvey, which is distracting when we're supposed to loathe him or simply feel enormous pity for him.
The film isn't primarily about sex (darn); it's more about a man whose life resembles a jigsaw puzzle of mystery that we're led to believe is exciting, but unfolds only to reveal more darkness.
We find sadness in Victor's orphan past, sadness in his dead-end present, sadness in his bleak future—and I haven't even mentioned the girl he's fallen for.
Despite all of that, I can't say I was bored, or that the acting was bad, because really it was quite good. But so much of the main character's numbness (and so many scenes from which the film draws its title) was hard to witness, I can't say I enjoyed it either.
There were some very funny situations and clever twists, but for me that wasn't enough of a payoff for the depressing mood it left me in.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Ghost Town
Today I saw Ghost Town, starring Ricky Gervais and Greg Kinnear.
If you're in the mood for a lighthearted, clever-but-predictable ride, go see this movie.
A dentist who isn't so good with people, Dr. Pincus (Gervais), dies for seven minutes during a "routine operation" and returns with the ability to see and communicate with ghosts. And the ghosts have a lot of unfinished business they'd like him to attend to.
Frank (Kinnear) is guilty for being a bad husband in life, and wants to see his widow (Téa Leoni) happy, so he asks Dr. Pincus to intervene on his behalf and prevent her from marrying another man who he doesn't deem good enough for her.
Dr. Pincus reluctantly agrees to the plan, hoping all of the other spirits will go away after he fulfills this one wish, and ultimately falls in love with the widow himself.
Along the way, there are laugh-out-loud one-line jokes that only Gervais could deliver properly (which is why they work) and a tender love story that develops without being "too perfect."
It's the right blend of hilarity and heart, with a lot of redemption tossed in for good measure (even adulterers can go to heaven).
Ultimately, a pleasant alternative to formulaic meet-cute miasmas.
If you're in the mood for a lighthearted, clever-but-predictable ride, go see this movie.
A dentist who isn't so good with people, Dr. Pincus (Gervais), dies for seven minutes during a "routine operation" and returns with the ability to see and communicate with ghosts. And the ghosts have a lot of unfinished business they'd like him to attend to.
Frank (Kinnear) is guilty for being a bad husband in life, and wants to see his widow (Téa Leoni) happy, so he asks Dr. Pincus to intervene on his behalf and prevent her from marrying another man who he doesn't deem good enough for her.
Dr. Pincus reluctantly agrees to the plan, hoping all of the other spirits will go away after he fulfills this one wish, and ultimately falls in love with the widow himself.
Along the way, there are laugh-out-loud one-line jokes that only Gervais could deliver properly (which is why they work) and a tender love story that develops without being "too perfect."
It's the right blend of hilarity and heart, with a lot of redemption tossed in for good measure (even adulterers can go to heaven).
Ultimately, a pleasant alternative to formulaic meet-cute miasmas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)