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.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
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.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Humboldt County
Tonight I saw Humboldt County, starring Jeremy Strong and Chris Messina.
The story follows Peter (Strong), a bright medical student severely lacking in social skills, who follows a girl (Fairuza Balk) to Humboldt County and remains stranded with her family (though she disappears) for a long period of time.
The family is made up of hippie grandparents (Brad Dourif and the lovely Frances Conroy) who are raising their son and granddaughter, caring for random stray guests and harvesting large amounts of marijuana in the California forest where they reside.
Peter is a fish out of water in their carefree, illegal world, but soon acclimates to their casual lifestyle and befriends the son (Messina), who is more concerned about protecting his crops than preserving his life.
The film begins cleverly, with a very funny opening scene. And the strong presence of Fairuza Balk injects the landscape with a fresh dose of character but unfortunately lulls upon arrival at the hippie homestead (which could've been a set double for Aunt Sarah's pad in Six Feet Under).
The token child is charming and Peter's self-discovery is endearing, but overall, the writing felt too formulaic to be original.
The directors, however, did a fine job of framing the film and providing a very exciting climactic scene at the end. Just don't arrive expecting to see newness in the characters or the story.
Go see this instead for the gorgeous shots of Arcata, California and that beautiful nearby coastline.
The story follows Peter (Strong), a bright medical student severely lacking in social skills, who follows a girl (Fairuza Balk) to Humboldt County and remains stranded with her family (though she disappears) for a long period of time.
The family is made up of hippie grandparents (Brad Dourif and the lovely Frances Conroy) who are raising their son and granddaughter, caring for random stray guests and harvesting large amounts of marijuana in the California forest where they reside.
Peter is a fish out of water in their carefree, illegal world, but soon acclimates to their casual lifestyle and befriends the son (Messina), who is more concerned about protecting his crops than preserving his life.
The film begins cleverly, with a very funny opening scene. And the strong presence of Fairuza Balk injects the landscape with a fresh dose of character but unfortunately lulls upon arrival at the hippie homestead (which could've been a set double for Aunt Sarah's pad in Six Feet Under).
The token child is charming and Peter's self-discovery is endearing, but overall, the writing felt too formulaic to be original.
The directors, however, did a fine job of framing the film and providing a very exciting climactic scene at the end. Just don't arrive expecting to see newness in the characters or the story.
Go see this instead for the gorgeous shots of Arcata, California and that beautiful nearby coastline.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Burn After Reading
Tonight I saw Burn After Reading, starring John Malkovich and Frances McDormand.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #60, which is available for download here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #60, which is available for download here.
Monday, September 01, 2008
Frozen River
Today I saw Frozen River, starring Melissa Leo and Misty Upham.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #59: click here to download it.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #59: click here to download it.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Tropic Thunder
Tonight I saw Tropic Thunder, starring Ben Stiller and Robert Downey Jr.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #58, which is available here.
It was the topic of Cinebanter #58, which is available here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)