Today I saw Heartbreaker, starring Vanessa Paradis and Romain Duris.
We all have loved ones with partners we'd like to trade. Whether they be adulterous or simply annoying, at some point we all fantasize about breaking said couples up, but seldom follow through.
However, if there were a breakup-for-hire third party who we could solicit to do our dirty work, would we take the risk?
Many would, according to the premise of this film.
Alex (Duris) makes a living seducing women out of their current relationships with the help of his sister and her dim-witted husband. He makes it a rule not to break up what he perceives to be "happy" couples and ends his pairings immediately after accomplishing his task.
The father of Juliette (Paradis) has commissioned him for a rush-project of sorts—her wedding to a Brit they're not fond of is due to take place in a matter of days, so Alex will have to work fast to win her over.
During his "research" of the client, he learns she loves George Michael music and quickly rigs the car with vintage Wham! hits (though the way he achieves it seems needlessly elaborate). He also begins memorizing her favorite movie, Dirty Dancing, to learn the dance moves of Patrick Swayze's character.
Alex poses as Juliette's bodyguard to gain 24/7 access to her, and like many formulaic romantic comedies, he doesn't like her at first. She is the pampered princess; he the working-class simpleton.
Of course that changes, and he begins to make progress on his mission, but this is where the movie lost me. Vanessa is model-beautiful and her husband-to-be is Prince Charming handsome. Alex is skinny, somewhat unclean and sloppy. His actions are so exaggerated he comes off as a buffoon and the way he conveys his "love" for the things she adores isn't terribly convincing.
Throw in the slapstick nature of the supporting characters (his sister and brother-in-law, and her sex-crazed best friend) and all of the sweetness of the idea here is gone.
I enjoyed the leading lady's performance, but without a believable match for her to have to decide between, this film just couldn't work as it was intended.
I may have to cleanse my palette and throw good-old Dirty Dancing into the DVD player.
~~~
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Friday, September 24, 2010
The Town
On Wednesday, I saw The Town, starring Ben Affleck and Rebecca Hall.
Doug MacRay (Affleck) was the good kid from a bad Boston family. Dad is behind bars, mom has disappeared and his best friend, troublemaker Jim (Jeremy Renner) has taken him in as an adopted brother.
When we meet Doug and Jim, they're robbing a bank with their friends, and we see that Doug shows compassion for their hostage Claire (Hall), while Jim is more prone to aggression, beating an assistant manager savagely because he suspects he tripped the alarm.
Following the crime, the group needs to be sure the witness won't talk, so Doug follows Claire, quickly learning the emotional ramifications of what they did to her. He shows genuine compassion for her pain during a meet-cute at a laundromat and they begin dating.
Meanwhile, overzealous FBI agent Adam Frawley (Jon Hamm) is determined to put a stop to this dangerous group and begins to put the pieces of the crime together.
From there it's a cat-and-mouse chase of further violence, action and mayhem leading up to a tense ending that had me holding my breath.
Affleck as a director is clear in his aim to make Boston its own character. Shots of the city are alternately beautiful and harrowing, depending on the neighborhood, and the ever-present accents never let us forget where they are.
He's also good at action scenes, getting just enough angles to keep it interesting without confusing us.
As for the performances, Jeremy Renner stands out as exceptionally evil, while Affleck appears sincere and conflicted at the life he's chosen vs. the life that was chosen for him.
Although it's a formulaic good-guy, bad-guy story, with the intent that the audience will root for the redeeming bad guy, I still enjoyed the ride and look forward to see what Affleck will come up with next.
~~~
Doug MacRay (Affleck) was the good kid from a bad Boston family. Dad is behind bars, mom has disappeared and his best friend, troublemaker Jim (Jeremy Renner) has taken him in as an adopted brother.
When we meet Doug and Jim, they're robbing a bank with their friends, and we see that Doug shows compassion for their hostage Claire (Hall), while Jim is more prone to aggression, beating an assistant manager savagely because he suspects he tripped the alarm.
Following the crime, the group needs to be sure the witness won't talk, so Doug follows Claire, quickly learning the emotional ramifications of what they did to her. He shows genuine compassion for her pain during a meet-cute at a laundromat and they begin dating.
Meanwhile, overzealous FBI agent Adam Frawley (Jon Hamm) is determined to put a stop to this dangerous group and begins to put the pieces of the crime together.
From there it's a cat-and-mouse chase of further violence, action and mayhem leading up to a tense ending that had me holding my breath.
Affleck as a director is clear in his aim to make Boston its own character. Shots of the city are alternately beautiful and harrowing, depending on the neighborhood, and the ever-present accents never let us forget where they are.
He's also good at action scenes, getting just enough angles to keep it interesting without confusing us.
As for the performances, Jeremy Renner stands out as exceptionally evil, while Affleck appears sincere and conflicted at the life he's chosen vs. the life that was chosen for him.
Although it's a formulaic good-guy, bad-guy story, with the intent that the audience will root for the redeeming bad guy, I still enjoyed the ride and look forward to see what Affleck will come up with next.
~~~
Monday, September 20, 2010
The Tillman Story
Tonight I saw The Tillman Story, a documentary about the late Pat Tillman.
It's a story that's far too familiar: a good American man wants to serve his country so he enlists in the military, goes on a tour of duty and is killed in the line of fire.
Only Pat Tillman wasn't just any soldier—he was a former football star who gave up millions of dollars and the promise of doing something he loved for the rest of his life to fight for the US.
Sent to Iraq (alongside his younger brother, who enlisted at the same time), Private Tillman was killed on Earth Day in 2004 by members of his own troop. First, the military claimed Tillman was a hero in combat against the enemy. Then, when word got out that it was truly friendly fire that got him, they billed it as an "accident." But the men who served alongside Pat knew better, and eventually, they spoke.
Tillman's mother, Mary, simply wanted the truth she was entitled to, and that's what this film is about.
It's about a family's struggle for answers, a group of soldiers who were friends of Tillman and wanted the truth to come out, and a collective of high-level government officials who covered up the real story so they could turn the Tillman death into a public relations stunt in favor of the war.
Talking head interviews with Tillman's family and fellow soldiers are the bulk of the film, but the commentary is never dull. We see footage of formal hearings, scenes from his memorial service in San Jose, and video from the actual day he died, in the area where he perished.
The movie is at once frustrating and devastating, but there is validity in its existence if only to expose the corrupt powers-that-be to anyone left who may mistake them for honorable.
Refreshing as well is the approach Tillman's mother has, which indicates she doesn't want her son to be thought of as a hero any more than any other soldier who traded his life for his country.
Though the lack of closure in the matter may make you angry as you leave the theater, you'll be proud to know that true Americans like the Tillmans still exist.
~~~
It's a story that's far too familiar: a good American man wants to serve his country so he enlists in the military, goes on a tour of duty and is killed in the line of fire.
Only Pat Tillman wasn't just any soldier—he was a former football star who gave up millions of dollars and the promise of doing something he loved for the rest of his life to fight for the US.
Sent to Iraq (alongside his younger brother, who enlisted at the same time), Private Tillman was killed on Earth Day in 2004 by members of his own troop. First, the military claimed Tillman was a hero in combat against the enemy. Then, when word got out that it was truly friendly fire that got him, they billed it as an "accident." But the men who served alongside Pat knew better, and eventually, they spoke.
Tillman's mother, Mary, simply wanted the truth she was entitled to, and that's what this film is about.
It's about a family's struggle for answers, a group of soldiers who were friends of Tillman and wanted the truth to come out, and a collective of high-level government officials who covered up the real story so they could turn the Tillman death into a public relations stunt in favor of the war.
Talking head interviews with Tillman's family and fellow soldiers are the bulk of the film, but the commentary is never dull. We see footage of formal hearings, scenes from his memorial service in San Jose, and video from the actual day he died, in the area where he perished.
The movie is at once frustrating and devastating, but there is validity in its existence if only to expose the corrupt powers-that-be to anyone left who may mistake them for honorable.
Refreshing as well is the approach Tillman's mother has, which indicates she doesn't want her son to be thought of as a hero any more than any other soldier who traded his life for his country.
Though the lack of closure in the matter may make you angry as you leave the theater, you'll be proud to know that true Americans like the Tillmans still exist.
~~~
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Going the Distance
This morning I saw Going the Distance, starring Drew Barrymore and Justin Long.
Erin (Barrymore) is a grad student interning at a New York newspaper when she meets Garrett (Long), a record label talent searcher, disgruntled with the changing industry.
They have a meet-cute over a Centipede arcade game and fall in love at first sight. The couple's chemistry is believable (perhaps because they're a real-life pairing) and we can't help it that we want them to be together.
But what happens when two people find perfect bliss and then have to part indefinitely?
At first, nothing. When Erin returns to the West Coast to finish her degree, we experience the romance of long distance. There are late night phone calls, webcam chats and surprise visits. Absence is making the heart grow fonder.
Then, there's the realization that when each of them wakes up in the morning, the other is not lying next to them. That can hurt, especially when one is at a point in there life where major decisions are going to need to be made.
Erin is faced with such a decision regarding her career and her living situation (she's 31 and still bunking with her big sis). Does she sacrifice relationship for career or vice versa? The question may be a no-brainer for those who already have families, but for the single folk out there (especially the women) it's a much tougher call.
The story in this film is a simple one, but the writing and delightful presence of the leads makes it more than watchable. It's an enjoyable representation of modern relationships that all of us Gen Xers can surely relate to in one way or another.
I felt special kinship with Erin when she told her lover that she did in fact like saying "I told you so" when he was wrong. Those words have come out of my mouth more than a few times with partners, and it was nice to see a fictional person behaving so honestly.
This movie avoids typical rom-com clichés with just enough reality to keep us invested and the laughs come easily.
A refreshing change from the status quo.
~~~
Erin (Barrymore) is a grad student interning at a New York newspaper when she meets Garrett (Long), a record label talent searcher, disgruntled with the changing industry.
They have a meet-cute over a Centipede arcade game and fall in love at first sight. The couple's chemistry is believable (perhaps because they're a real-life pairing) and we can't help it that we want them to be together.
But what happens when two people find perfect bliss and then have to part indefinitely?
At first, nothing. When Erin returns to the West Coast to finish her degree, we experience the romance of long distance. There are late night phone calls, webcam chats and surprise visits. Absence is making the heart grow fonder.
Then, there's the realization that when each of them wakes up in the morning, the other is not lying next to them. That can hurt, especially when one is at a point in there life where major decisions are going to need to be made.
Erin is faced with such a decision regarding her career and her living situation (she's 31 and still bunking with her big sis). Does she sacrifice relationship for career or vice versa? The question may be a no-brainer for those who already have families, but for the single folk out there (especially the women) it's a much tougher call.
The story in this film is a simple one, but the writing and delightful presence of the leads makes it more than watchable. It's an enjoyable representation of modern relationships that all of us Gen Xers can surely relate to in one way or another.
I felt special kinship with Erin when she told her lover that she did in fact like saying "I told you so" when he was wrong. Those words have come out of my mouth more than a few times with partners, and it was nice to see a fictional person behaving so honestly.
This movie avoids typical rom-com clichés with just enough reality to keep us invested and the laughs come easily.
A refreshing change from the status quo.
~~~
Sunday, September 12, 2010
I'm Still Here
Today I saw the documentary I'm Still Here about the Joaquin Phoenix's career transition.
Casey Affleck directs this sad film about the fall of a once-great actor through biased eyes (he married Phoenix's sister, Summer, in 2006) and as a result the story feels too calculated to be authentic, even if it's not a hoax.
The story begins with childhood footage of the famous Phoenix siblings performing a song-and-dance routine for a sidewalk full of gawkers. You get the sense perhaps you're supposed to pity these kids, as if they had no choice, but from all I've read of their commune-like upbringing, it's hard to believe that was the case.
Joaquin's older brother River was the true star of the family, and had it not been for his senseless fatal overdose, probably would've become one of the greatest actors of our time. Joaquin has never matched that magnitude of talent, but he's certainly displayed the potential to (he's been nominated twice for an Oscar).
In 2008, after receiving praise for his work in the critically acclaimed Two Lovers, Joaquin allegedly decided to quit acting once and for all, and begin a recording career in hip-hop. The fact that he commissioned Affleck to begin filing at precisely this time is why I say "allegedly."
He plays to the camera as someone who is "on" in every frame. Whether he's doing lines of cocaine (yes, I thought this was especially tasteless considering the manner in which his brother died), dancing and fondling hookers at his house, or ranting at one of his many pointless assistants, he's undoubtedly performing.
There are a series of funny exchanges between Phoenix and Sean "P Diddy" Combs, who is too smart not to notice that his entire genre of music may be mocked by Phoenix if he consents to produce him. Joaquin is disrespectful, showing up late and unprepared, and Combs gives it right back to him in the form of much-needed tough-love lecturing. It was the best part of the film.
In addition to that train wreck, there are plenty more (the now famous Letterman appearance; a scorned assistant retaliating in the most vile way imaginable), which makes this entire documentary nothing more than a meandering reality show. And no, I didn't appreciate the "bathroom" scenes.
I'm Still Here is meant to leave you wondering if it was all a hoax or if Phoenix was really delusional enough to think he could transition from being a serious, successful actor to a flashy, hip-hop star overnight.
I'm sure (and hopeful) it's probably the former, but whatever the case, I like Phoenix a hell of a lot less after seeing it.
~~~
Casey Affleck directs this sad film about the fall of a once-great actor through biased eyes (he married Phoenix's sister, Summer, in 2006) and as a result the story feels too calculated to be authentic, even if it's not a hoax.
The story begins with childhood footage of the famous Phoenix siblings performing a song-and-dance routine for a sidewalk full of gawkers. You get the sense perhaps you're supposed to pity these kids, as if they had no choice, but from all I've read of their commune-like upbringing, it's hard to believe that was the case.
Joaquin's older brother River was the true star of the family, and had it not been for his senseless fatal overdose, probably would've become one of the greatest actors of our time. Joaquin has never matched that magnitude of talent, but he's certainly displayed the potential to (he's been nominated twice for an Oscar).
In 2008, after receiving praise for his work in the critically acclaimed Two Lovers, Joaquin allegedly decided to quit acting once and for all, and begin a recording career in hip-hop. The fact that he commissioned Affleck to begin filing at precisely this time is why I say "allegedly."
He plays to the camera as someone who is "on" in every frame. Whether he's doing lines of cocaine (yes, I thought this was especially tasteless considering the manner in which his brother died), dancing and fondling hookers at his house, or ranting at one of his many pointless assistants, he's undoubtedly performing.
There are a series of funny exchanges between Phoenix and Sean "P Diddy" Combs, who is too smart not to notice that his entire genre of music may be mocked by Phoenix if he consents to produce him. Joaquin is disrespectful, showing up late and unprepared, and Combs gives it right back to him in the form of much-needed tough-love lecturing. It was the best part of the film.
In addition to that train wreck, there are plenty more (the now famous Letterman appearance; a scorned assistant retaliating in the most vile way imaginable), which makes this entire documentary nothing more than a meandering reality show. And no, I didn't appreciate the "bathroom" scenes.
I'm Still Here is meant to leave you wondering if it was all a hoax or if Phoenix was really delusional enough to think he could transition from being a serious, successful actor to a flashy, hip-hop star overnight.
I'm sure (and hopeful) it's probably the former, but whatever the case, I like Phoenix a hell of a lot less after seeing it.
~~~
Friday, September 03, 2010
Cairo Time
Tonight I saw Cairo Time, starring Patricia Clarkson and Alexander Siddig.
Juliette (Clarkson) travels to Cairo to meet her husband who works for the UN as a refugee camp organizer in Gaza. He is (not surprisingly) detained, so he sends a friend to entertain her in his absence.
Tareq (Siddig) is a handsome, never-married Egyptian who runs a café, yet appears wherever Juliette needs him, whenever she needs him.
With additional husband delays, the waiting gets to be too much and restless Juliette begins to explore the city on her own. She finds this to be unsafe and solicits the company of Tareq as her informal tour guide. They cruise along the Nile, taste the "best coffee in the world" and get to know one another in a sweet, innocent way. She teases him about the girl who got away; he flatters her with jokes about her foreign pronunciation. They fall in love.
As we witness their chemistry develop, the director puts us in the places they are visiting in an almost visceral way. When the noise of Cairo is too intrusive for Juliette speak with her husband on the phone or to sleep, we're annoyed right along with her; when she takes constant sips of her bottled water on a dusty bus to the desert, we become thirsty with dryness.
The two main actors are perfect in their roles and the few supporting characters who show up are like seasoning on a pleasantly spicy dish.
The pace of the film is unimaginably slow, yet never dull. Watching a friendship grow into something unexpected is both exciting and frightening. Contemplating what one would do in a similar situation and wondering which man deserves Juliette's love keeps our minds going as the landscape quietly draws us into its mystery.
Also to be appreciated is the way the pyramids are savored in minimal, powerful scenes. There are no obligatory helicopter perspectives of the landmarks, nor do they steal the show (though they are breathtaking as seen from the characters' perspectives).
I'd recommend seeing Cairo Time on your own time, when you have the luxury of lingering right along with it.
~~~
Juliette (Clarkson) travels to Cairo to meet her husband who works for the UN as a refugee camp organizer in Gaza. He is (not surprisingly) detained, so he sends a friend to entertain her in his absence.
Tareq (Siddig) is a handsome, never-married Egyptian who runs a café, yet appears wherever Juliette needs him, whenever she needs him.
With additional husband delays, the waiting gets to be too much and restless Juliette begins to explore the city on her own. She finds this to be unsafe and solicits the company of Tareq as her informal tour guide. They cruise along the Nile, taste the "best coffee in the world" and get to know one another in a sweet, innocent way. She teases him about the girl who got away; he flatters her with jokes about her foreign pronunciation. They fall in love.
As we witness their chemistry develop, the director puts us in the places they are visiting in an almost visceral way. When the noise of Cairo is too intrusive for Juliette speak with her husband on the phone or to sleep, we're annoyed right along with her; when she takes constant sips of her bottled water on a dusty bus to the desert, we become thirsty with dryness.
The two main actors are perfect in their roles and the few supporting characters who show up are like seasoning on a pleasantly spicy dish.
The pace of the film is unimaginably slow, yet never dull. Watching a friendship grow into something unexpected is both exciting and frightening. Contemplating what one would do in a similar situation and wondering which man deserves Juliette's love keeps our minds going as the landscape quietly draws us into its mystery.
Also to be appreciated is the way the pyramids are savored in minimal, powerful scenes. There are no obligatory helicopter perspectives of the landmarks, nor do they steal the show (though they are breathtaking as seen from the characters' perspectives).
I'd recommend seeing Cairo Time on your own time, when you have the luxury of lingering right along with it.
~~~
Thursday, September 02, 2010
The American
Tonight I saw The American, starring George Clooney and Violante Placido.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #97, so tune in on September 13 for our review.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #97, so tune in on September 13 for our review.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
The Last Exorcism
Tonight I saw The Last Exorcism, starring Patrick Fabian and Ashley Bell.
Cotton Marcus (Fabian) is a Southern reverend who claims more to be a trained actor than a genuine voice of God. He agrees to let a film crew create a documentary about his "last exorcism" so he can expose all of his tricks and reveal the practice to be a universal sham.
His subject is a 16-year-old farm girl named Nell (Bell). She seems sweet enough during the daytime, but at night her Bible-bouncing father reports that demons emerge and she kills random pets/livestock.
With her father and brother as witnesses, Cotton performs his "exorcism" complete with fake sounds and a shaking bed, which he controls with fish wire. He proclaims the demons gone and leaves with a fat paycheck to a nearby motel.
Unfortunately, something is still the matter with Nell and she materializes at the motel, desperately in need of assistance. Cotton and the filmmakers take her to a hospital, but once she returns home, they learn she's hurt her brother. After another hospital trip, the reverend tries to convince the father to get her psychiatric help, but he doesn't believe in it.
Cotton (who really turns out to be somewhat of a decent fellow) feels responsible for Nell in some way, so he decides to help her himself and keeps digging to learn the truth.
The film is perfectly enjoyable/believable up to this point, then it all takes a turn for the worse.
One minor twist leads to a few different theories about Nell's evil, then the answer is given to us in an ending that makes you doubt the same screenwriter wrote the first half of the film.
The script did an excellent job of building the suspense and wonder through well-developed, complex characters and then left us alone with a convention that's been overused since film was invented.
What a shame.
~~~
Cotton Marcus (Fabian) is a Southern reverend who claims more to be a trained actor than a genuine voice of God. He agrees to let a film crew create a documentary about his "last exorcism" so he can expose all of his tricks and reveal the practice to be a universal sham.
His subject is a 16-year-old farm girl named Nell (Bell). She seems sweet enough during the daytime, but at night her Bible-bouncing father reports that demons emerge and she kills random pets/livestock.
With her father and brother as witnesses, Cotton performs his "exorcism" complete with fake sounds and a shaking bed, which he controls with fish wire. He proclaims the demons gone and leaves with a fat paycheck to a nearby motel.
Unfortunately, something is still the matter with Nell and she materializes at the motel, desperately in need of assistance. Cotton and the filmmakers take her to a hospital, but once she returns home, they learn she's hurt her brother. After another hospital trip, the reverend tries to convince the father to get her psychiatric help, but he doesn't believe in it.
Cotton (who really turns out to be somewhat of a decent fellow) feels responsible for Nell in some way, so he decides to help her himself and keeps digging to learn the truth.
The film is perfectly enjoyable/believable up to this point, then it all takes a turn for the worse.
One minor twist leads to a few different theories about Nell's evil, then the answer is given to us in an ending that makes you doubt the same screenwriter wrote the first half of the film.
The script did an excellent job of building the suspense and wonder through well-developed, complex characters and then left us alone with a convention that's been overused since film was invented.
What a shame.
~~~
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Hubble 3D
This morning I saw the documentary Hubble 3D.
Though I never had aspirations of becoming an astronaut, I have always wanted to know what it felt like to see earth from a distance. The closest I came until today was when astronaut Nicholas Patrick came to our school a few years back and brought a video of footage he'd taken in space. Though that was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, I was surrounded by classes of antsy Kindergarteners, so it was hard to focus on the depth of what I was seeing.
Watching Hubble 3D in a quiet, dark theater on an IMAX screen so large it felt like it was surrounding me was a much more immersive experience.
Despite its short length (approx. 45 minutes running time), this film does have a plot. After the tragedy of the Columbia mission, NASA canceled the next scheduled mission to repair the Hubble telescope, a massive eye into the universe that took 10,000 people to create. Without the necessary fixes, the telescope would be rendered useless and years of hard work and money would be lost.
Thankfully, the engineers at NASA devised a plan that removed some of the risk from attempting another mission (basically having an extra shuttle ready if the astronauts became stranded in space) and in April of 2009, a brave team of heroes made the trip.
What we see in this film is their trip—a joyous, nerve-wracking, heart-pumping mission where they only had one chance to get it right. Their demeanor is surprisingly light-hearted, though their work couldn't be more dangerous. These folks are celebrating a lifetime of learning that earned them this place in history.
As we watch the careful maneuvering of an uncooperative tool, we feel like holding our breath (though if we watched the news at all last year, we already know the outcome). Although that alone is remarkable enough to keep us riveted, what's most amazing are the photographs that Hubble graces us with. The glistening close-ups of stars and energies that are billions of light years away.
Leonardo DiCaprio narrates what we're seeing sincerely, though the amount of times he plugs the Utopian qualities of earth becomes borderline preachy.
I'd recommend this film to people of all ages—especially Americans. I found myself getting goosebumps each time they showed a shuttle countdown. Perhaps that's because my earliest memory of space travel is watching the Challenger explode live on television in my 5th grade classroom. I remember my otherwise-stoic teacher bursting into tears and feeling sick that a class of students in New Hampshire would never again see their own teacher (Christa McAuliffe, the first teacher sent to space, was aboard).
In high school, I visited the memorial to the Challenger astronauts at Arlington National Cemetery and became nauseous with remembrance. Earlier this month I saw the trees that had been planted in their honor at the Johnson Space Center. Astronauts sacrifices, to me, are just as profound as those who serve bravely in our military.
Films like Hubble 3D remind us of their courage.
~~~
Though I never had aspirations of becoming an astronaut, I have always wanted to know what it felt like to see earth from a distance. The closest I came until today was when astronaut Nicholas Patrick came to our school a few years back and brought a video of footage he'd taken in space. Though that was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, I was surrounded by classes of antsy Kindergarteners, so it was hard to focus on the depth of what I was seeing.
Watching Hubble 3D in a quiet, dark theater on an IMAX screen so large it felt like it was surrounding me was a much more immersive experience.
Despite its short length (approx. 45 minutes running time), this film does have a plot. After the tragedy of the Columbia mission, NASA canceled the next scheduled mission to repair the Hubble telescope, a massive eye into the universe that took 10,000 people to create. Without the necessary fixes, the telescope would be rendered useless and years of hard work and money would be lost.
Thankfully, the engineers at NASA devised a plan that removed some of the risk from attempting another mission (basically having an extra shuttle ready if the astronauts became stranded in space) and in April of 2009, a brave team of heroes made the trip.
What we see in this film is their trip—a joyous, nerve-wracking, heart-pumping mission where they only had one chance to get it right. Their demeanor is surprisingly light-hearted, though their work couldn't be more dangerous. These folks are celebrating a lifetime of learning that earned them this place in history.
As we watch the careful maneuvering of an uncooperative tool, we feel like holding our breath (though if we watched the news at all last year, we already know the outcome). Although that alone is remarkable enough to keep us riveted, what's most amazing are the photographs that Hubble graces us with. The glistening close-ups of stars and energies that are billions of light years away.
Leonardo DiCaprio narrates what we're seeing sincerely, though the amount of times he plugs the Utopian qualities of earth becomes borderline preachy.
I'd recommend this film to people of all ages—especially Americans. I found myself getting goosebumps each time they showed a shuttle countdown. Perhaps that's because my earliest memory of space travel is watching the Challenger explode live on television in my 5th grade classroom. I remember my otherwise-stoic teacher bursting into tears and feeling sick that a class of students in New Hampshire would never again see their own teacher (Christa McAuliffe, the first teacher sent to space, was aboard).
In high school, I visited the memorial to the Challenger astronauts at Arlington National Cemetery and became nauseous with remembrance. Earlier this month I saw the trees that had been planted in their honor at the Johnson Space Center. Astronauts sacrifices, to me, are just as profound as those who serve bravely in our military.
Films like Hubble 3D remind us of their courage.
~~~
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The Other Guys
On Sunday I saw The Other Guys, starring Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg.
Allen Gamble (Ferrell) is a pencil pusher who does accounting work for the police department; his partner Terry Hoitz (Wahlberg) is a bad ass detective who is relegated to desk duty after an unfortunate shooting incident.
Two of the most respected (and reckless) cops have just lost their lives in the line of duty and Terry thinks it's high time he and Allen—the other guys—take their place. Because Allen enjoys working at a desk, Terry has to threaten him to get him to go along with his plan. Soon they're both risking their jobs and lives in hot pursuit of a high-profile white collar criminal, all from the front seat of Allen's cherry red Prius.
Sound ridiculous? Of course it is, but it's meant to be and that's why it works.
Not for one moment do we ever forget that these two characters are meant to mock every buddy cop movie in the history of cinema. Never for a second do we mind.
Ferrell's deadpan delivery of a straight-man wanting to do the right thing and Wahlberg's naturally angry tough guy attitude make it hard for us to picture anyone else in their roles.
And speaking of perfect casting—don't even get me started on Eva Mendes. As Allen's sexy wife, Dr. Sheila Gamble, she shows more pitch-perfect comedic chops than any female in recent memory. Her alluring cleavage may be why she was considered; her acting is obviously why she was chosen. I've never enjoyed her more than I did here.
In addition to the acting, there are small yet hilarious reminders (such as quiet, cheesy saxophone music) that we're in a cop film. There are also random references (one that will make you want to pop in a T.L.C. record) that make no sense but somehow fit well in the context of the film.
I haven't laughed this hard at a movie since The Hangover. If you need a reason to smile, make sure to get to this movie.
~~~
Allen Gamble (Ferrell) is a pencil pusher who does accounting work for the police department; his partner Terry Hoitz (Wahlberg) is a bad ass detective who is relegated to desk duty after an unfortunate shooting incident.
Two of the most respected (and reckless) cops have just lost their lives in the line of duty and Terry thinks it's high time he and Allen—the other guys—take their place. Because Allen enjoys working at a desk, Terry has to threaten him to get him to go along with his plan. Soon they're both risking their jobs and lives in hot pursuit of a high-profile white collar criminal, all from the front seat of Allen's cherry red Prius.
Sound ridiculous? Of course it is, but it's meant to be and that's why it works.
Not for one moment do we ever forget that these two characters are meant to mock every buddy cop movie in the history of cinema. Never for a second do we mind.
Ferrell's deadpan delivery of a straight-man wanting to do the right thing and Wahlberg's naturally angry tough guy attitude make it hard for us to picture anyone else in their roles.
And speaking of perfect casting—don't even get me started on Eva Mendes. As Allen's sexy wife, Dr. Sheila Gamble, she shows more pitch-perfect comedic chops than any female in recent memory. Her alluring cleavage may be why she was considered; her acting is obviously why she was chosen. I've never enjoyed her more than I did here.
In addition to the acting, there are small yet hilarious reminders (such as quiet, cheesy saxophone music) that we're in a cop film. There are also random references (one that will make you want to pop in a T.L.C. record) that make no sense but somehow fit well in the context of the film.
I haven't laughed this hard at a movie since The Hangover. If you need a reason to smile, make sure to get to this movie.
~~~
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Get Low
On Sunday I saw Get Low, starring Robert Duvall and Bill Murray.
It will be the topic of our next Cinebanter episode, so tune in August 30 for our review.
It will be the topic of our next Cinebanter episode, so tune in August 30 for our review.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Eat, Pray, Love
Tonight I saw Eat, Pray, Love starring Julia Roberts and Javier Bardem.
I can understand why some people won't like this film.
Jaded, cynical critics are practically forbidden from publicly praising any movie based on a "woman's journey," especially if that woman is an upper-middle-class white thirtysomething that seemed to have it all when she lost her mind.
As a critic who can admittedly be jaded and cynical much of the time, if I hadn't read the book I doubt I would've gone near the multiplex, but here's the thing: I did read the book, and I loved it.
Maybe it was timing? I don't know. I had just suffered the worst breakup of my life in the year prior to this book being released, so perhaps the story was literary tonic for me in the aftermath. All I know is that once I began reading it, I began calling other women in my life to see if they'd read it, and if they hadn't I was buying extra copies or loaning mine out so they could.
The film, based closely on the book, focuses on Liz Gilbert (Roberts)—a successful writer in Pennsylvania who decides she doesn't like being married, though nothing concrete is really wrong with her marriage. She breaks her husband's heart into a million pieces by suddenly walking out on him, then she embarks on an affair with a Much Younger Man, basically chewing him up and spitting him out too. Actions like this can leave one feeling very guilty and empty inside, so that's where the journey begins.
Liz decides to restore balance in her life by traveling for a year. It sounds terribly cliché and the fact that she had the money and time to do this makes many sour in jealousy, but amidst all of those privileges, it's hard not to feel sorry for how lost her soul truly is.
First, she ventures to Italy where she falls in love with the language and most importantly, the food. The book goes into greater detail, but the movie still brims with pasta and wine and pizza [Eat], so we're okay. In Rome, she also makes friends who encourage her to stop and smell the roses, which proves to be a valuable suggestion later in her trip. If only the film had captured more of Italy's ambiance, this section would have been more satisfying.
Second, she heads to India to learn how to Pray. This proves to be the most difficult task for anxiety-ridden Liz until she meets Richard from Texas (Richard Jenkins). Richard is an emotionally wounded tough guy who tells it like it is and nicknames her "Groceries" (due to her fondness for food). In the book, the guy is barely likable; in the movie, Jenkins makes you weep for him. Seriously, if there is a performance to be noted in this film, it is Richard Jenkins. Every time he enters a frame we hang on his every word because we know we'll be entertained or even moved. He's enormously endearing and when it's time for him to leave in the film, we almost wish we could go with him.
Last, Liz lands in Bali where she inevitably falls in Love (though that's the last thing she planned to do). Felipe (Bardem), her lover, is sexy and warm and charming all at once and she is strong-willed putty in his hands. Roberts and Bardem don't have any special chemistry, but they're pleasant enough to watch as two divorcees finding their way back to beating hearts.
Overall, the film stays very faithful to the book. Nothing crucial is cut; no major portion of the story altered to meet Hollywood standards.
It's not the greatest work of cinema, but it's certainly not awful or hard to watch. That said, if you hated the book, chances are you'll hate this too.
But I didn't.
~~~
I can understand why some people won't like this film.
Jaded, cynical critics are practically forbidden from publicly praising any movie based on a "woman's journey," especially if that woman is an upper-middle-class white thirtysomething that seemed to have it all when she lost her mind.
As a critic who can admittedly be jaded and cynical much of the time, if I hadn't read the book I doubt I would've gone near the multiplex, but here's the thing: I did read the book, and I loved it.
Maybe it was timing? I don't know. I had just suffered the worst breakup of my life in the year prior to this book being released, so perhaps the story was literary tonic for me in the aftermath. All I know is that once I began reading it, I began calling other women in my life to see if they'd read it, and if they hadn't I was buying extra copies or loaning mine out so they could.
The film, based closely on the book, focuses on Liz Gilbert (Roberts)—a successful writer in Pennsylvania who decides she doesn't like being married, though nothing concrete is really wrong with her marriage. She breaks her husband's heart into a million pieces by suddenly walking out on him, then she embarks on an affair with a Much Younger Man, basically chewing him up and spitting him out too. Actions like this can leave one feeling very guilty and empty inside, so that's where the journey begins.
Liz decides to restore balance in her life by traveling for a year. It sounds terribly cliché and the fact that she had the money and time to do this makes many sour in jealousy, but amidst all of those privileges, it's hard not to feel sorry for how lost her soul truly is.
First, she ventures to Italy where she falls in love with the language and most importantly, the food. The book goes into greater detail, but the movie still brims with pasta and wine and pizza [Eat], so we're okay. In Rome, she also makes friends who encourage her to stop and smell the roses, which proves to be a valuable suggestion later in her trip. If only the film had captured more of Italy's ambiance, this section would have been more satisfying.
Second, she heads to India to learn how to Pray. This proves to be the most difficult task for anxiety-ridden Liz until she meets Richard from Texas (Richard Jenkins). Richard is an emotionally wounded tough guy who tells it like it is and nicknames her "Groceries" (due to her fondness for food). In the book, the guy is barely likable; in the movie, Jenkins makes you weep for him. Seriously, if there is a performance to be noted in this film, it is Richard Jenkins. Every time he enters a frame we hang on his every word because we know we'll be entertained or even moved. He's enormously endearing and when it's time for him to leave in the film, we almost wish we could go with him.
Last, Liz lands in Bali where she inevitably falls in Love (though that's the last thing she planned to do). Felipe (Bardem), her lover, is sexy and warm and charming all at once and she is strong-willed putty in his hands. Roberts and Bardem don't have any special chemistry, but they're pleasant enough to watch as two divorcees finding their way back to beating hearts.
Overall, the film stays very faithful to the book. Nothing crucial is cut; no major portion of the story altered to meet Hollywood standards.
It's not the greatest work of cinema, but it's certainly not awful or hard to watch. That said, if you hated the book, chances are you'll hate this too.
But I didn't.
~~~
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
The Girl Who Played with Fire
Yesterday I saw The Girl Who Played with Fire, starring Noomi Rapace and Michael Nyqvist.
Anyone who has read the novel this film was based on cannot help but compare the two, so I'll start by saying the filmmakers again did a good job of paring down the author's too-wordy text into simpler dialog, but I wish they hadn't changed certain details for the screen.
To explain them would be to spoil plot points for those who haven't yet seen the film, so I won't go into detail, but I will say that unless they payoff their changes in the third installment, I don't understand why they did it.
I also thought Lisbeth (Rapace) appeared less intelligent in this film, and that's something that could've easily been fixed by letting the camera linger on her smirks or having other characters reference her brilliance (as they do many times in the book).
My final complaint would be that Zala (Georgi Staykov) wasn't menacing enough for the monster that he is supposed to be. I was neither afraid nor repelled by his film version and felt that I should've been. Perhaps the director could've treated us to a few flashbacks with Liseth's mom?
On the good side: the casting again is superb. There isn't one person who doesn't fit the image of their literary likeness and act with conviction.
I also enjoyed the chemistry between Liseth and her girfriend Mimmi (Yasmine Garbi) and the tension between Blomkvist (Nyqvist) and Berger (Lena Andre).
In addition, as someone who is admittedly squeamish, I appreciated that the bloody scenes were not at all gratuitous and the violence true-to-life instead of ridiculous.
All in all, a satisfying middle to this thrilling trilogy.
~~~
Anyone who has read the novel this film was based on cannot help but compare the two, so I'll start by saying the filmmakers again did a good job of paring down the author's too-wordy text into simpler dialog, but I wish they hadn't changed certain details for the screen.
To explain them would be to spoil plot points for those who haven't yet seen the film, so I won't go into detail, but I will say that unless they payoff their changes in the third installment, I don't understand why they did it.
I also thought Lisbeth (Rapace) appeared less intelligent in this film, and that's something that could've easily been fixed by letting the camera linger on her smirks or having other characters reference her brilliance (as they do many times in the book).
My final complaint would be that Zala (Georgi Staykov) wasn't menacing enough for the monster that he is supposed to be. I was neither afraid nor repelled by his film version and felt that I should've been. Perhaps the director could've treated us to a few flashbacks with Liseth's mom?
On the good side: the casting again is superb. There isn't one person who doesn't fit the image of their literary likeness and act with conviction.
I also enjoyed the chemistry between Liseth and her girfriend Mimmi (Yasmine Garbi) and the tension between Blomkvist (Nyqvist) and Berger (Lena Andre).
In addition, as someone who is admittedly squeamish, I appreciated that the bloody scenes were not at all gratuitous and the violence true-to-life instead of ridiculous.
All in all, a satisfying middle to this thrilling trilogy.
~~~
Friday, August 06, 2010
Middle Men
Tonight I saw Middle Men, starring Luke Wilson and Giovanni Ribisi.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #95, so tune in August 16 for our review.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #95, so tune in August 16 for our review.
Monday, August 02, 2010
Salt
Tonight I saw Salt, starring Angelina Jolie and Liev Schreiber.
Like a pinball that's just been thrust into play, Evelyn Salt (Jolie) begins oh so calmly, then darts from one thing to another with reckless abandon. She's an employee of the CIA who has unexpectedly been accused of spying for the Russians. Because you can never be too careful, the higher ups want to hold her for questioning, but Evelyn is terrified the Soviets who are framing her will go after her (innocent, non-CIA) husband, so she escapes her own high security office building and heads home to warn him. When she arrives, he's already gone so she must continue on the run until she locates him. Or fulfills her Russian mission. You decide.
Along the way, her colleague/friend Ted Winter (Schreiber) does his best to defend her honor, but he can only do so much. The fact that she ran doesn't look good to the authorities and she's too skilled to let the boys track her down for a simple interrogation.
Everything you'd expect from an action thriller is here: high speed chases through traffic, security guards getting pistol whipped by a badass, confusion regarding who is on who's side and good old-fashioned Russian hatred for America.
Now, before you ask what decade the film is set in (present day, if you must), might I remind you that just last week our country (in real life) deported a handful of Russian spies who had been working in respectable American companies, living family lives in the suburbs like so many normal patriots.
With that out of the way, I can say that much of the film is completely unbelievable. There is no man's ass Evelyn can't kick; no weapon she is unprepared to use; no otherwise fatal car crash that she can't walk away from without a scratch. It's ridiculous.
But it's also undoubtedly fun, in a classic, Cold War sort of way.
What I found refreshing is that before every strategic move is made, there's not someone scrambling a signal on a cell phone or cracking some mysterious code on a laptop. In fact, the only typing we really see is in reference to launching a missile, and that I can forgive.
Plus, though she's a sexy woman who purses her lips on more than one occasion, the writers didn't make Evelyn too girlie. You never see her check her makeup in a mirror or even use her sexuality to win anyone over. The only indication you get that she has capacity for normal female emotion is the tenderness we see when she's with her husband. She must really love him.
So if you can get past the cheesy lines and the 80s explosions and the same-old spy twists, you might just have a good time with this flick.
~~~
Like a pinball that's just been thrust into play, Evelyn Salt (Jolie) begins oh so calmly, then darts from one thing to another with reckless abandon. She's an employee of the CIA who has unexpectedly been accused of spying for the Russians. Because you can never be too careful, the higher ups want to hold her for questioning, but Evelyn is terrified the Soviets who are framing her will go after her (innocent, non-CIA) husband, so she escapes her own high security office building and heads home to warn him. When she arrives, he's already gone so she must continue on the run until she locates him. Or fulfills her Russian mission. You decide.
Along the way, her colleague/friend Ted Winter (Schreiber) does his best to defend her honor, but he can only do so much. The fact that she ran doesn't look good to the authorities and she's too skilled to let the boys track her down for a simple interrogation.
Everything you'd expect from an action thriller is here: high speed chases through traffic, security guards getting pistol whipped by a badass, confusion regarding who is on who's side and good old-fashioned Russian hatred for America.
Now, before you ask what decade the film is set in (present day, if you must), might I remind you that just last week our country (in real life) deported a handful of Russian spies who had been working in respectable American companies, living family lives in the suburbs like so many normal patriots.
With that out of the way, I can say that much of the film is completely unbelievable. There is no man's ass Evelyn can't kick; no weapon she is unprepared to use; no otherwise fatal car crash that she can't walk away from without a scratch. It's ridiculous.
But it's also undoubtedly fun, in a classic, Cold War sort of way.
What I found refreshing is that before every strategic move is made, there's not someone scrambling a signal on a cell phone or cracking some mysterious code on a laptop. In fact, the only typing we really see is in reference to launching a missile, and that I can forgive.
Plus, though she's a sexy woman who purses her lips on more than one occasion, the writers didn't make Evelyn too girlie. You never see her check her makeup in a mirror or even use her sexuality to win anyone over. The only indication you get that she has capacity for normal female emotion is the tenderness we see when she's with her husband. She must really love him.
So if you can get past the cheesy lines and the 80s explosions and the same-old spy twists, you might just have a good time with this flick.
~~~
Saturday, July 31, 2010
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Today I saw The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, starring Michael Nyqvist and Noomi Rapace.
I'm always hesitant to see a film created from a book I enjoyed, but in this case it worked out for the best. The parts of the book I found cumbersome and verbose are eliminated, yet the story is undoubtedly fulfilled.
Mikael (Nyqvist) is a journalist who has just been convicted for committing libel against a powerful, wealthy man. Never mind that he was probably framed; he agrees to go quietly into prison once his sentence commences in six months.
Before he can begin serving that sentence, he is contacted by the people of billionaire Henrik Vanger (Sven-Bertil Taube) to research the cold case murder of his niece Harriet who went missing 40 years ago. He is reluctant to take the offer, but the money is good, and coincidentally the missing woman babysat him in youth, so perhaps he feels remotely obligated.
Mikael doesn't get too far solving the mystery until he begins working alongside Lisbeth (Rapace), a twentysomething woman he caught hacking into his computer who has major social issues (and a menacing dragon tattoo).
Together they find the pieces of the never-forgotten puzzle and get close to one another as they discover them. On the side, Liseth overcomes some horrific personal violence (and no, if you can't handle brutal rape scenes, you shouldn't see this film) and fights demons from her own past.
The film succeeds in playing this all out in a realistic way. Nothing is over-stylized and the dialog is completely believable. We care about the characters enough to want to save them and root for any connections they can build with each other. That is both a testament to the strong adapted screenplay and the perfect casting of the two main leads. Really, how will any Americans measure up to them in a remake?
This was a very satisfying screen version of a book that could have been shorter. However, if you're going to devour both the film and the book, be sure to read the book first or you may not make it to the end.
~~~
I'm always hesitant to see a film created from a book I enjoyed, but in this case it worked out for the best. The parts of the book I found cumbersome and verbose are eliminated, yet the story is undoubtedly fulfilled.
Mikael (Nyqvist) is a journalist who has just been convicted for committing libel against a powerful, wealthy man. Never mind that he was probably framed; he agrees to go quietly into prison once his sentence commences in six months.
Before he can begin serving that sentence, he is contacted by the people of billionaire Henrik Vanger (Sven-Bertil Taube) to research the cold case murder of his niece Harriet who went missing 40 years ago. He is reluctant to take the offer, but the money is good, and coincidentally the missing woman babysat him in youth, so perhaps he feels remotely obligated.
Mikael doesn't get too far solving the mystery until he begins working alongside Lisbeth (Rapace), a twentysomething woman he caught hacking into his computer who has major social issues (and a menacing dragon tattoo).
Together they find the pieces of the never-forgotten puzzle and get close to one another as they discover them. On the side, Liseth overcomes some horrific personal violence (and no, if you can't handle brutal rape scenes, you shouldn't see this film) and fights demons from her own past.
The film succeeds in playing this all out in a realistic way. Nothing is over-stylized and the dialog is completely believable. We care about the characters enough to want to save them and root for any connections they can build with each other. That is both a testament to the strong adapted screenplay and the perfect casting of the two main leads. Really, how will any Americans measure up to them in a remake?
This was a very satisfying screen version of a book that could have been shorter. However, if you're going to devour both the film and the book, be sure to read the book first or you may not make it to the end.
~~~
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Solitary Man
Tonight I saw Solitary Man, starring Michael Douglas and Jenna Fischer.
Car salesman are seldom liked and rarely respected, but you get the sense that before his dealership began running scams, Ben Kalmen (Douglas) may have been both. And when you're used to everyone adoring you and your world falls apart, it's hard to dissolve the natural arrogance that comes with the former privilege.
Susan (Fischer), Ben's adult daughter, just wishes he'd act his age. Instead of chasing skirts 30 years younger, she'd like for him to rebuild his life with a new job and a reasonable stability. His ex-wife Nancy (played by a cleavage-bearing Susan Sarandon) is apparently still fond of him, and his current girlfriend Jordan (Mary-Louise Parker) chooses to look the other way as he cheats his way around their relationship.
All hell breaks loose when Ben takes Jordan's daughter Allyson (Imogen Poots) to a college interview out of town and sleeps with a barely legal girl. The consequences don't dent his conscience, but they do wreak havoc on his finances, his reputation and his ability to start a new car dealership.
Faced with eviction and homelessness, Ben turns to his daughter for help until he also betrays her and she's forced to cut him off. He has also received word that he may have heart trouble, but instead of getting the necessary tests to find out either way, he puts himself on a steady diet of baby aspirin and alcohol.
The entire film is a character study of a man choosing to live his life the way he pleases, regardless of the consequences. It's not that he doesn't love his family, or respect the natural 'order' life is meant to impose; he just feels his charm will overcome any situation too difficult to bear, and when that doesn't work, he just moves on.
Michael Douglas plays Ben superbly without an ounce of self-loathing, complete with slimy appeal. You really believe he would easily talk these young women into his bed because despite his flaws, he's sexy and smooth.
Supporting characters are also perfectly cast—Sarandon as the wistful, yet independent divorcée, Danny Devito as a long-lost friend and Jenna Fischer, an innocent, wounded daughter.
The ensemble is strong, the writing (which could've easily been one-note) is sharp without being too precious, and the direction is organic enough to make you feel as if you're in New York and Boston alongside the characters.
I have no idea why this interesting indie with an all-star cast isn't getting more attention.
~~~
Car salesman are seldom liked and rarely respected, but you get the sense that before his dealership began running scams, Ben Kalmen (Douglas) may have been both. And when you're used to everyone adoring you and your world falls apart, it's hard to dissolve the natural arrogance that comes with the former privilege.
Susan (Fischer), Ben's adult daughter, just wishes he'd act his age. Instead of chasing skirts 30 years younger, she'd like for him to rebuild his life with a new job and a reasonable stability. His ex-wife Nancy (played by a cleavage-bearing Susan Sarandon) is apparently still fond of him, and his current girlfriend Jordan (Mary-Louise Parker) chooses to look the other way as he cheats his way around their relationship.
All hell breaks loose when Ben takes Jordan's daughter Allyson (Imogen Poots) to a college interview out of town and sleeps with a barely legal girl. The consequences don't dent his conscience, but they do wreak havoc on his finances, his reputation and his ability to start a new car dealership.
Faced with eviction and homelessness, Ben turns to his daughter for help until he also betrays her and she's forced to cut him off. He has also received word that he may have heart trouble, but instead of getting the necessary tests to find out either way, he puts himself on a steady diet of baby aspirin and alcohol.
The entire film is a character study of a man choosing to live his life the way he pleases, regardless of the consequences. It's not that he doesn't love his family, or respect the natural 'order' life is meant to impose; he just feels his charm will overcome any situation too difficult to bear, and when that doesn't work, he just moves on.
Michael Douglas plays Ben superbly without an ounce of self-loathing, complete with slimy appeal. You really believe he would easily talk these young women into his bed because despite his flaws, he's sexy and smooth.
Supporting characters are also perfectly cast—Sarandon as the wistful, yet independent divorcée, Danny Devito as a long-lost friend and Jenna Fischer, an innocent, wounded daughter.
The ensemble is strong, the writing (which could've easily been one-note) is sharp without being too precious, and the direction is organic enough to make you feel as if you're in New York and Boston alongside the characters.
I have no idea why this interesting indie with an all-star cast isn't getting more attention.
~~~
Sunday, July 18, 2010
When Good Things Happen to Good People
I love that I have a reason to blog with such a headline.
Now let me explain:
In June of 2003, I attended an uber-geek event called the "U2 Fan Celebration" at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum in Cleveland. I had recently joined a local U2 group through the meetup.com website, and made friends here in Seattle who shared my love of the band—they were also willing to travel to Ohio for worship.
I'd already seen the U2 exhibit in February when it opened, but was determined to return in June, not just for the special events surrounding the celebration, but because I was an avid reader of a fan site called @U2, where I was addicted to a humor column by a guy named Answer Guy. This site was co-hosting the event, and its owner and several staffers were going to be there. I was a fan of these fans, and couldn't wait to meet them.
The first night I got lucky enough to sit with a few of them at the dinner table. Present were @U2 founder Matt McGee, @U2 cartoonist Kelly Eddington, and Aaron Sams, who runs a site called U2 Wanderer. I remember immediately bonding with Kelly over the fact we were both wearing Sally Hansen silver nail polish, and enjoying the lighthearted energy of the collective group. Everyone was so naturally kind and welcoming.
Here's a photo of Kelly and Matt at the Hard Rock Café that night:
That weekend at the museum was nothing short of amazing. Aside from enjoying all the U2 content that was surrounding us, I came away feeling like part of the @U2 family.
When I returned to Seattle, I was flattered to learn that Kelly had featured me in one of her cartoons (that's me on the right on page 2). Though non-U2 friends made fun of me for appearing as a "fanatic," on a fan site, I couldn't have been more honored to have this artist reproduce me in such a way.
I stayed in close touch with my new friends, and in 2004, Matt gave me the opportunity to write as a contributor for the site. In 2005, just in time for U2's Vertigo tour, I was promoted to news writer, which changed my life.
@U2 threw an amazing party in my hometown of Portland, Ore. that year, in honor of the site's 10th birthday. And though I was already on staff, I still felt like a fan of all of these geniuses that had come before me. Many of them I met for the first time that weekend; others I spent time catching up with as if I were at a family reunion. Fans of the site were sweet to all of us, but the clear stars of the party were Answer Guy and Kelly the cartoonist, and it was easy to see why. Answer Guy was a naturally funny, sharp writer with a gift for sarcasm, and Kelly was a talented artist with a sense of humor that only enhanced her already-great writing.
Here's a photo of Kelly and me that night (she was making me a bracelet out of Christmas tinsel), taken by our mutual friend Michelle:
I was finally part of the crowd that I so longed to be associated with, and I considered my role on @U2 as a great privilege (5 years later, I still do). But as with all organizations and workplaces, people get married, switch their focus and move on. That's what happened with our brilliant Kelly, who was always putting out consistently wonderful, time-consuming cartoons. I was devastated when she announced her departure (as were thousands of fans who looked forward to her work each month), but as a friend I was glad that she'd found a more satisfying happiness in married life.
Since then, I've followed her blog, Alizarine, religiously, often making many of her delicious recipes and envying her idyllic home surrounded by the occasional woodchuck and deer. I was especially happy to see that she decided to follow her dreams and take a year off to paint. If only more of us were that courageous.
I've also branched out myself, focusing on my first love of film—co-creating the movie review podcast Cinebanter, which just turned four yesterday. My partner? A guy called Michael, who used to go by the name "Answer Guy."
Of course, all self-respecting film critics owe Roger Ebert for setting the bar so high and I am no exception. I immediately joined "The Ebert Club" when memberships were sold earlier this year, and consider him one of the best Tweeters on all of Twitter...so you can only imagine my delight today when I noticed that Roger was Tweeting about a certain watercolor artist, and that artist was Kelly!
You can read the full exchange on Kelly's blog, but basically Roger responded to her response to his earlier Tweet about film criticism books never getting their due in the background of films. She had done a painting recently that included one of his books on her shelf, and he not only wrote back in our club's blog, he Tweeted the sweetest endorsement for her art to his 180,000+ followers. As a result, Kelly's website has been getting countless hits, and I know of at least one painting that has already sold.
Congratulations Kelly, and thank you Roger, for recognizing the talent of my gifted friend.
It's so wonderful when good things happen to good people.
~~~
Now let me explain:
In June of 2003, I attended an uber-geek event called the "U2 Fan Celebration" at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum in Cleveland. I had recently joined a local U2 group through the meetup.com website, and made friends here in Seattle who shared my love of the band—they were also willing to travel to Ohio for worship.
I'd already seen the U2 exhibit in February when it opened, but was determined to return in June, not just for the special events surrounding the celebration, but because I was an avid reader of a fan site called @U2, where I was addicted to a humor column by a guy named Answer Guy. This site was co-hosting the event, and its owner and several staffers were going to be there. I was a fan of these fans, and couldn't wait to meet them.
The first night I got lucky enough to sit with a few of them at the dinner table. Present were @U2 founder Matt McGee, @U2 cartoonist Kelly Eddington, and Aaron Sams, who runs a site called U2 Wanderer. I remember immediately bonding with Kelly over the fact we were both wearing Sally Hansen silver nail polish, and enjoying the lighthearted energy of the collective group. Everyone was so naturally kind and welcoming.
Here's a photo of Kelly and Matt at the Hard Rock Café that night:
That weekend at the museum was nothing short of amazing. Aside from enjoying all the U2 content that was surrounding us, I came away feeling like part of the @U2 family.
When I returned to Seattle, I was flattered to learn that Kelly had featured me in one of her cartoons (that's me on the right on page 2). Though non-U2 friends made fun of me for appearing as a "fanatic," on a fan site, I couldn't have been more honored to have this artist reproduce me in such a way.
I stayed in close touch with my new friends, and in 2004, Matt gave me the opportunity to write as a contributor for the site. In 2005, just in time for U2's Vertigo tour, I was promoted to news writer, which changed my life.
@U2 threw an amazing party in my hometown of Portland, Ore. that year, in honor of the site's 10th birthday. And though I was already on staff, I still felt like a fan of all of these geniuses that had come before me. Many of them I met for the first time that weekend; others I spent time catching up with as if I were at a family reunion. Fans of the site were sweet to all of us, but the clear stars of the party were Answer Guy and Kelly the cartoonist, and it was easy to see why. Answer Guy was a naturally funny, sharp writer with a gift for sarcasm, and Kelly was a talented artist with a sense of humor that only enhanced her already-great writing.
Here's a photo of Kelly and me that night (she was making me a bracelet out of Christmas tinsel), taken by our mutual friend Michelle:
I was finally part of the crowd that I so longed to be associated with, and I considered my role on @U2 as a great privilege (5 years later, I still do). But as with all organizations and workplaces, people get married, switch their focus and move on. That's what happened with our brilliant Kelly, who was always putting out consistently wonderful, time-consuming cartoons. I was devastated when she announced her departure (as were thousands of fans who looked forward to her work each month), but as a friend I was glad that she'd found a more satisfying happiness in married life.
Since then, I've followed her blog, Alizarine, religiously, often making many of her delicious recipes and envying her idyllic home surrounded by the occasional woodchuck and deer. I was especially happy to see that she decided to follow her dreams and take a year off to paint. If only more of us were that courageous.
I've also branched out myself, focusing on my first love of film—co-creating the movie review podcast Cinebanter, which just turned four yesterday. My partner? A guy called Michael, who used to go by the name "Answer Guy."
Of course, all self-respecting film critics owe Roger Ebert for setting the bar so high and I am no exception. I immediately joined "The Ebert Club" when memberships were sold earlier this year, and consider him one of the best Tweeters on all of Twitter...so you can only imagine my delight today when I noticed that Roger was Tweeting about a certain watercolor artist, and that artist was Kelly!
You can read the full exchange on Kelly's blog, but basically Roger responded to her response to his earlier Tweet about film criticism books never getting their due in the background of films. She had done a painting recently that included one of his books on her shelf, and he not only wrote back in our club's blog, he Tweeted the sweetest endorsement for her art to his 180,000+ followers. As a result, Kelly's website has been getting countless hits, and I know of at least one painting that has already sold.
Congratulations Kelly, and thank you Roger, for recognizing the talent of my gifted friend.
It's so wonderful when good things happen to good people.
~~~
The Kids Are All Right
Today I saw The Kids Are All Right, starring Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo.
Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Moore) are modern family mamas. They're married lesbians living the dream in California with two nearly grown children; one boy, one girl. One from each of their wombs, produced by the same anonymous sperm donor father.
Joni (Mia Wasikowska) has turned 18 and is preparing to leave for college at the end of summer. Her brother, Laser (Josh Hutcherson) is pressuring her to inquire about their biological father because he is not yet of age, but dying of curiosity about his identity.
Finally persuaded, Joni contacts Paul (Ruffalo) and the three arrange to meet. The encounter goes well, and soon Paul has become a positive part of their lives, much to the dismay of their mother Nic, the most controlling (yet also responsible) of the family. Soon both children are spending quality time with him and Jules is designing his backyard (she's a landscape architect that just started her own business).
From here, things go awry as they do in many families: there is jealousy, betrayal, conversations no one ever wants to have—the family, once seemingly harmonious—is falling apart.
Nic, who is the instigator of much of the drama, is played almost too neurotic by Annette Bening. Of course there are people with her issues everywhere in life, but without anything redeeming to credit her with (aside from her obvious love of the family), it's hard to be on her side. In contrast, Mark Ruffalo's Paul is written to be so accepting and universally cool that I wanted to jump through the screen and start my own family with him. And really, he's not my type.
The real prize for acting, and remaining believable throughout the film goes to Julianne Moore. Her Jules is conflicted and honest and wounded and needy and likable all at once. She's one of those characters you can't help but forgive (and would probably do so in life if she existed), and I can't credit just the writing for that achievement. Moore's ability to morph into an entirely different spirit each time she graces the screen is in full form here.
Both children also do fine, though I would've liked more character development for Laser, and overall I would've favored an ending that didn't frustrate me.
I guess not everything about an enjoyably watchable movie can be satisfying.
~~~
Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Moore) are modern family mamas. They're married lesbians living the dream in California with two nearly grown children; one boy, one girl. One from each of their wombs, produced by the same anonymous sperm donor father.
Joni (Mia Wasikowska) has turned 18 and is preparing to leave for college at the end of summer. Her brother, Laser (Josh Hutcherson) is pressuring her to inquire about their biological father because he is not yet of age, but dying of curiosity about his identity.
Finally persuaded, Joni contacts Paul (Ruffalo) and the three arrange to meet. The encounter goes well, and soon Paul has become a positive part of their lives, much to the dismay of their mother Nic, the most controlling (yet also responsible) of the family. Soon both children are spending quality time with him and Jules is designing his backyard (she's a landscape architect that just started her own business).
From here, things go awry as they do in many families: there is jealousy, betrayal, conversations no one ever wants to have—the family, once seemingly harmonious—is falling apart.
Nic, who is the instigator of much of the drama, is played almost too neurotic by Annette Bening. Of course there are people with her issues everywhere in life, but without anything redeeming to credit her with (aside from her obvious love of the family), it's hard to be on her side. In contrast, Mark Ruffalo's Paul is written to be so accepting and universally cool that I wanted to jump through the screen and start my own family with him. And really, he's not my type.
The real prize for acting, and remaining believable throughout the film goes to Julianne Moore. Her Jules is conflicted and honest and wounded and needy and likable all at once. She's one of those characters you can't help but forgive (and would probably do so in life if she existed), and I can't credit just the writing for that achievement. Moore's ability to morph into an entirely different spirit each time she graces the screen is in full form here.
Both children also do fine, though I would've liked more character development for Laser, and overall I would've favored an ending that didn't frustrate me.
I guess not everything about an enjoyably watchable movie can be satisfying.
~~~
Inception
Yesterday I saw Inception, starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Ellen Page.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #94, so tune in August 2 for our review.
It will be the topic of Cinebanter #94, so tune in August 2 for our review.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)