Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Monday, October 19, 2009
Let the Wild Rumpus Start
Where the Wild Things Are is Spike Jonze's near perfect adaptation of Maurice Sendak's dark children's book. Jonze has created a work beautifully inspired by Sendak's book and yet uniquely his own vision. The film is an emotional rollercoaster that is breathtaking in its beauty and yet grounded in the realities of childhood.
From the frenetic opening scenes in which Max (Max Records) is a bundle of energy bounding around the house, Jonze captures the energy and loneliness of Max's life. These brief scenes of a regular dysfunctional every-family become the references for Max's adventure on the island of the Wild Things.
The film transcends the sum of its parts, and what incredible parts Jonze has assembled. In Max, Jonze has found the perfect lead. Records has such a range of emotion and expressiveness, he seduces you within the first moments of the film. It's an expression of such nuance that he barely moves a muscle when his teacher says the sun is going to die, and yet the horror he's feeling is devastatingly shared. Records is supported by great voice work from James Gandolfini, Chris Cooper, Lauren Ambrose, Forest Whitaker, and, particularly, Paul Dano and Catherine O'Hara. Catherine Keener is also fine as Max's mom.
The creative elements are equally important and equally fine. The cinematography and art directions are simply breathtaking. Max's home is 20009-real, and the island seems to flow perfectly from Max's mind, or the mind of any lonely child relying on his imagination to combat that loneliness.
Karen O and Carter Burwell provide a score that also supports the film. The music is essential to the effectiveness of the film. Jonze always foregrounds the score, giving it a dramatic level of importance.
This is not an uplifting children's tale. Where the Wild Things Are is dark, haunting and glorious. Max is "exercising" his demons. We experience the film through the wide eyes of a child but with the knowing perspective of an adult. That makes for a serious, layered experience in which not a frame, a note or a line is wasted.
Oh, how I loved this film. Let the wild rumpus start!
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Taking Woodstock
Taking Woodstock is Ang Lee's loving portrait of the 1969 music festival in Bethel, NY. Based on Elliot Tiber's memoir of the same name, the film follows Elliot over the summer preceding the "3 days of peace and music."
I can only describe Taking Woodstock as a docudrama on ecstasy. There is such love and affection for the subject. Lee loves the music (though there should be more of it); he loves the sex and the lack of inhibition (and there's a good amount of it. He even loves the drugs (except for the brown acid, of course). The result is a film that is completely seductive, as long as you go along for the trip and let yourself be seduced.
The film is populated with dozens of people, as you might expect, and it's amazing to see such a strong impact from actors in the tiniest of roles (many uncredited). Demitri Martin is excellent as Tiber. Ultimately, it's his journey we're following, and his transformation over the summer of 1969 is beautiful and oh so subtle. Martin gives a nuanced performance that is both quirky and deep.
Imelda Staunton and Henry Goodman are breathtaking as Elliot's parents, Jake and Sonia. While nothing about these characters would scream "subtle," the performances are incredibly nuances. These three get the bulk of the screen time, but it's not that the myriad of other characters simply provide a context. The large cast is critical to the feelings that wash over you throughout the film. They are all Elliot's spirit guides.
Jonathan Groff is so seductive as promoter Michael Lane, his sensuality alone seems to bring the concert off (and kept my heart beating faster for the entire film). Nothing rattles. Emile Hirsch plays Viet Nam veteran Billy. Half crazed and half transformed, when Billy yells, "I love this hill!" tears welled up in my eyes. And it's the tiniest of moments, easy to miss. Liev Schreiber, Paul Dano and Kelli Garner all make indelible impressions in brief moments.
The film is a powerful and emotional journey, but not a perfect one. The massive undertaking means that characters disappear. Groff disappears for far too long. His sensuality is needed in the final acts. Conversely, Mamie Gummer takes far too long to register, though her final scene is wonderful. And the journey is a personal one. The film won't resonate strongly with everyone.
The biggest problem with the film is that it contains no concert material. The music from the concert is always heard in the distance, and Elliot never quite makes it. This is a problem because it's so obviously missing.
Certain events can change the trajectory of our lives. The lasting interest in Woodstock 40 years out is that it changed the trajectory of so many lives. It's quite intimate and beautiful to see Elliot become comfortable in his own skin, to come to peace with who he is during this summer of love.
It's also relevant today. There's something going on in our culture now that makes Hair the most successful revival of the Broadway season and Taking Woodstock so powerful. Maybe the age of peace and love is returning in some trippy form. At Woodstock, half a million people came to share, care for and love one another. The myth may have overpowered the fact even before the concert ever took place, but it showed us that we're all connected and that's a lesson really worth remembering.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Briefly, Wolverine is a decent summer flck. The first of the origins series features Hugh Jackman as an early (pre-Civil War) mutant with claws. Fast forward through all the wars since then and Logan is now a little unstable. Naturally, that means the next step is to pump him full of atomantium and make him indestructible. There are too many moments that defy any sort of logic, but overall Wolverine has some cool special effects and an engaging story.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
State of Play
I'm a big fan of the British television series, State of Play, upon which the film is based. The film largely quotes the plot elements of the series, but a 2.5-hour distillation of a 6-hour miniseries won't allow for much more than that. The result is a slightly better than mediocre film that's a little too muddled and complex to be successful.
The film moves the location from London to Washington, D.C., but the key elements of a congressman (Ben Affleck) caught in a sex scandal while investigating an energy company. Think Gary Hart meets Halliburton, if you're not too old or too young for those references. The catalyst for the plot is the death of Congressman Steve Collins' assistant. The subsequent investigation by reporters from the Washington Globe (Russell Crow and Heather McAdams) drives the plot.
The film has a timely feel. The fading state of newspapers and the public feeling about war profiteers gives State of Play some emotional heft. Making McAdams' character a political gossip blogger feels a little cheap, however.
The acting is ho hum until quite late when Jason Bateman and Jeff Daniels get a bit of screen time. Helen Mirren is largely wasted as the newspaper editor of the Globe.
State of Play has enough plot twists to keep it interesting, but it never rises much beyond that.
The film moves the location from London to Washington, D.C., but the key elements of a congressman (Ben Affleck) caught in a sex scandal while investigating an energy company. Think Gary Hart meets Halliburton, if you're not too old or too young for those references. The catalyst for the plot is the death of Congressman Steve Collins' assistant. The subsequent investigation by reporters from the Washington Globe (Russell Crow and Heather McAdams) drives the plot.
The film has a timely feel. The fading state of newspapers and the public feeling about war profiteers gives State of Play some emotional heft. Making McAdams' character a political gossip blogger feels a little cheap, however.
The acting is ho hum until quite late when Jason Bateman and Jeff Daniels get a bit of screen time. Helen Mirren is largely wasted as the newspaper editor of the Globe.
State of Play has enough plot twists to keep it interesting, but it never rises much beyond that.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Duplicity
Since the Bourne films, Tony Gilroy has apparently lost interest in telling a linear story. Michael Clayton left people befuddled well into the third act, and his latest, Duplicity is about the same. Events happen that seem to make no sense, but a flashback 15 or 45 minutes later makes things sensical.
The star driven Duplicity works surprisingly well. Julia Roberts and Clive Owen are alternately perplexing, infuriating and fascinating. The question of trust--or lack thereof--hangs like a thick fog over the entire film. This adds intrigue to the mix, and Roberts and Owen are particularly adept the banter that Gilroy has crafted for them.
Make no mistake, this is a star vehicle. But the supporting performances--especially Kathleen Chalfant, Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti--are what elevate the film above typical mid-winter toss offs.
The story is consistently engaging even though it's late into the film before you have a sense of what's going on. It's also clear from the audience reaction that it clicks at different times for different people and even then not always accurately.
Michael Clayton was dark and complex. Duplicity plays more like a variation on a theme: part romcom, part corporate thriller, part J. Roberts star vehicle. But it works well.
The star driven Duplicity works surprisingly well. Julia Roberts and Clive Owen are alternately perplexing, infuriating and fascinating. The question of trust--or lack thereof--hangs like a thick fog over the entire film. This adds intrigue to the mix, and Roberts and Owen are particularly adept the banter that Gilroy has crafted for them.
Make no mistake, this is a star vehicle. But the supporting performances--especially Kathleen Chalfant, Tom Wilkinson and Paul Giamatti--are what elevate the film above typical mid-winter toss offs.
The story is consistently engaging even though it's late into the film before you have a sense of what's going on. It's also clear from the audience reaction that it clicks at different times for different people and even then not always accurately.
Michael Clayton was dark and complex. Duplicity plays more like a variation on a theme: part romcom, part corporate thriller, part J. Roberts star vehicle. But it works well.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Mel on the Reader
I saw The Reader finally, and it's still tormenting me. I think it's a good film with excellence in it. Of course, Kate Winslet is truly extraordinary and deserving of the Oscar she received. But in my view, David Kross gives an even more exceptional performance as 15- to 21- year old Michael Berg that makes the first two-thirds of the film far stronger than the last third, in which Ralph Fiennes gives a competent performance as the older Michael. The last act is saved more by a wonderful performance by Lena Olin than by a satisfying conclusion.
The Reader has multiple complexities that make it hard to either digest or weigh its point of view. There's the affair between a 15-year-old boy and a 30+-year old Hannah. There's the subsequent discovery that Hannah was a guard at Auschwitz. There's the trial, in which the antagonism and set-up from her co-defendents leads one to sympathize with Hannah. There are no easy questions or answers here.
In the end, though, the film is more perplexing than thoughtful. By the time Michael connects the dots to discover a critical piece of information about Hannah's life, his feelings have been buried so deep the film seems aimless. This creates an almost impossible task for Fiennes.
Dissertations will probably be written on the affair between Hannah and Michael. Is the affair another manifestation of her inhumanity? Is it as simple as a first-love for a boy with a women who has put her past behind her? Is it a tribute to the beauty and power of sex? Certainly, it is beautiful. Both Winslet and Kross are beautiful and generally naked and in bed for a good chunk of the film.
David Hare and Stephen Daldry did fine work with The Hours, but as troubling and complex as The Reader is, it misses.
The Reader has multiple complexities that make it hard to either digest or weigh its point of view. There's the affair between a 15-year-old boy and a 30+-year old Hannah. There's the subsequent discovery that Hannah was a guard at Auschwitz. There's the trial, in which the antagonism and set-up from her co-defendents leads one to sympathize with Hannah. There are no easy questions or answers here.
In the end, though, the film is more perplexing than thoughtful. By the time Michael connects the dots to discover a critical piece of information about Hannah's life, his feelings have been buried so deep the film seems aimless. This creates an almost impossible task for Fiennes.
Dissertations will probably be written on the affair between Hannah and Michael. Is the affair another manifestation of her inhumanity? Is it as simple as a first-love for a boy with a women who has put her past behind her? Is it a tribute to the beauty and power of sex? Certainly, it is beautiful. Both Winslet and Kross are beautiful and generally naked and in bed for a good chunk of the film.
David Hare and Stephen Daldry did fine work with The Hours, but as troubling and complex as The Reader is, it misses.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Watchmental
After seeing some of the violence and reading some of the reviews, I was hesitant to see Watchmen. I despised 300, so Zack Snyder wasn't a draw. I'm not a fanboy of Alan Moore's graphic novel. But hey, not much is opening until May and it's on the IMAX. If you're going to really appreciate the violence in a movie, it should be on a screen five stories high.
That said, although the film is fundamentally flawed, it has much to recommend. The 3 hours definitely feel like 3 hours, but this is due to a considerable amount of time devoted to the backstory of each of the Watchmen before the plot kicks into full gear. The art direction is stellar in its own right, and it does a fine job of referencing the style of the novel. The story is dark and compelling, a worthy adaptation.
The violence is, in fact, over the top. Like 300, the violence in Watchmen is mostly stylized. It is also gory and intense. And in all honesty, as much as I was dreading it, the violence largely works. Largely. Snyder is not above a little gratuitous violence.
The soundtrack was, for me, the films biggest misfire. Watchmen, for the two of you who don't know, is sent during Richard Nixon's fourth term in the mid-1980's. The cold war is at its peak, and superheroes are hardly tolerated. Watchmen creates an alternate reality, but Dylan and Simon and Garfunkle seem out of place. And the backstory on Dr. Manhattan, the one superhero with super powers, is accompanied by various moments from Philip Glass's score for Koyaanisqatsi.
Watchmen is not getting its just due from the critics, but judging from the sold-out show I attended and the huge lines as I left, people are showing up. Not everyone is liking it--it's hardly likable--but its leading to some great discussions about the nature of heroism, the darkness of our times, and humankind's salvation.
That said, although the film is fundamentally flawed, it has much to recommend. The 3 hours definitely feel like 3 hours, but this is due to a considerable amount of time devoted to the backstory of each of the Watchmen before the plot kicks into full gear. The art direction is stellar in its own right, and it does a fine job of referencing the style of the novel. The story is dark and compelling, a worthy adaptation.
The violence is, in fact, over the top. Like 300, the violence in Watchmen is mostly stylized. It is also gory and intense. And in all honesty, as much as I was dreading it, the violence largely works. Largely. Snyder is not above a little gratuitous violence.
The soundtrack was, for me, the films biggest misfire. Watchmen, for the two of you who don't know, is sent during Richard Nixon's fourth term in the mid-1980's. The cold war is at its peak, and superheroes are hardly tolerated. Watchmen creates an alternate reality, but Dylan and Simon and Garfunkle seem out of place. And the backstory on Dr. Manhattan, the one superhero with super powers, is accompanied by various moments from Philip Glass's score for Koyaanisqatsi.
Watchmen is not getting its just due from the critics, but judging from the sold-out show I attended and the huge lines as I left, people are showing up. Not everyone is liking it--it's hardly likable--but its leading to some great discussions about the nature of heroism, the darkness of our times, and humankind's salvation.
Friday, December 26, 2008
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is stunning filmmaking. It had me on an emotional edge for much of its rather lengthy 2:48. It ponders significant philosophical questions within a technological marvel of such subtlety it's easy to forget that the film is special effects laden.
Brad Pitt (Benjamin) and Cate Blanchette (Daisy)--through the wonders of digitization--each play their characters from mid-teen to death. Or in Pitt's case from 80-ish to his mid-teens. This adds a poignancy that is critical to the film's success and makes for an even more curious case.
Benjamin ages backwards in a world moving forward. He's born in a crippled, arthritic body and dies in a child's body confused by dimentia. Daisy is Benjamin's enduring love, but they can only consummate that love as their ages converge for a few short years. There's a sadness, then, that runs throughout The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, but there's also such beauty in the lives of Benjamin, his family and his love.
The acting is fantastic, with Pitt and Blanchette doing great work. The moment Benjamin first lays eyes on Daisy you see this wide-eyed young man peering out of this septuagenarian body. For Benjamin, what you see is never what is inside his body--except for middle age. Pitt, though sometimes too detached, is exactly right. Blanchette is the fire and emotion in the film. Tilda Swinton also gives a stunning, brief performance. Her reappearance late in the film via television sets the final act of the film in motion stunningly.
It's odd to be writing words like "stunning" or "fire" in a film that succeeds because it is so subtle. But it is a truly fine film--one of the best of the year--and frequently breathtaking.
Brad Pitt (Benjamin) and Cate Blanchette (Daisy)--through the wonders of digitization--each play their characters from mid-teen to death. Or in Pitt's case from 80-ish to his mid-teens. This adds a poignancy that is critical to the film's success and makes for an even more curious case.
Benjamin ages backwards in a world moving forward. He's born in a crippled, arthritic body and dies in a child's body confused by dimentia. Daisy is Benjamin's enduring love, but they can only consummate that love as their ages converge for a few short years. There's a sadness, then, that runs throughout The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, but there's also such beauty in the lives of Benjamin, his family and his love.
The acting is fantastic, with Pitt and Blanchette doing great work. The moment Benjamin first lays eyes on Daisy you see this wide-eyed young man peering out of this septuagenarian body. For Benjamin, what you see is never what is inside his body--except for middle age. Pitt, though sometimes too detached, is exactly right. Blanchette is the fire and emotion in the film. Tilda Swinton also gives a stunning, brief performance. Her reappearance late in the film via television sets the final act of the film in motion stunningly.
It's odd to be writing words like "stunning" or "fire" in a film that succeeds because it is so subtle. But it is a truly fine film--one of the best of the year--and frequently breathtaking.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
An Allegory for Our Times
I'm always a little suspicious when your first thought about a movie is that someone set out to create a allegory for our times. I'm all for allegory, but it needs to flow naturally from the story rather than sublimate the story.
That's what happens with The Day the Earth Stood Still, the remake starring Keanu Reeves and Jennifer Connelly. The story lumbers along as we learn whether humankind can be trusted to save the environment. Klaatu (Reeves) says no, so he's prepared to wipe people off the earth. Can Klaatu be convinced that we can be responsible protectors of our planet before he destroys it?
The only interesting question to ponder is whether Klaatu is a good guy or a bad guy. Ultimately, that's not enough to make the film interesting.
The story is never particularly engaging and the special effects never quite thrilling. The acting is leaden. Reeves justifies a deadpan persona as part of his alien in America characterization. Connelly and Kathy Bates, as the secretary of defense, are just plain weak.
The Day the Earth Stood Still is a mediocre film. Not a horrible way to spend a snowy afternoon, but nothing memorable after an hour. Story first, message later folks.
That's what happens with The Day the Earth Stood Still, the remake starring Keanu Reeves and Jennifer Connelly. The story lumbers along as we learn whether humankind can be trusted to save the environment. Klaatu (Reeves) says no, so he's prepared to wipe people off the earth. Can Klaatu be convinced that we can be responsible protectors of our planet before he destroys it?
The only interesting question to ponder is whether Klaatu is a good guy or a bad guy. Ultimately, that's not enough to make the film interesting.
The story is never particularly engaging and the special effects never quite thrilling. The acting is leaden. Reeves justifies a deadpan persona as part of his alien in America characterization. Connelly and Kathy Bates, as the secretary of defense, are just plain weak.
The Day the Earth Stood Still is a mediocre film. Not a horrible way to spend a snowy afternoon, but nothing memorable after an hour. Story first, message later folks.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Role Models
I really enjoyed Role Models. I laughed hard, thoroughly enjoyed the story and thought the chemistry among the four leads was wonderful. Paul Rudd and Seann William Scott are energy drink peddlers who have a really bad day. That leads to 150 hours of community service in Sturdy Wings (think Big Brothers) with the oldest misfit Angus (Christopher Mints-Plasse) and the youngest, the foulmouthed, breast obsessed Ronnie (Bobb'e J. Thompson). The kids help the adults get beyond their self-centeredness.
The film works as a buddy comedy, but the addition of Jane Lynch (I'd nominate her for best supporting actress for this role) is inspired brilliance. She is absolutely incredible and adds this layer of social bite and laugh-out-loud humor to the film.
The film is not a gross-out comedy, to my relief, but it's not for the faint of heart where language is concerned. That said, I don't think there was a wasted swear word (and there are hundreds) in the film.
Writer/Director David Wain has a gift for taking overplayed ideas and turning them into quality comedies. Would that Judd Apatow take a lesson from him. His Hot Wet American Summer is also a fine film, a riff on the teen camp comedy. Role Models riffs on the buddy movie to great effect.
This is one I'll see again.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Hellboy II: The Golden Army
"Straight from the mind of, yes, visionary director Guillermo del Toro" is pretty much the only way to describe the strong Hellboy II: The Golden Army. The story is compelling and, like all del Toro films, visually compelling. Red (Ron Perlman) is back to save the world with his bull-in-a-china-shop approach to crime fighting. He's ably supported by the fiery Liz (Selma Blair) and the smoky Johann Krauss (voiced by Seth McFarlane).
I found the second entry in the Hellboy series to be far more compelling than the first. In this installment, the mythical world is rebelling because the human world has largely been ignoring or marginalizing the mythical dimension. The mythical beasts, led by Prince Nuada (Luke Goss) plot world domination. Nuada is set on pulling together the three pieces of the crown that will give its owner full control over the golden army.
This is del Toro's vision and the mythical beings feel like cousins to those in the far darker Pan's Labyrinth. But the psychological exploration that is del Toro's strength is very present here. Hellboy is one of those mythical beings trying to find his place in the world, and even as he strikes at the villains, he understands he is snuffing out a piece of himself. Add to that the natural marital tension that arises between Liz and Red, and the film rises far above the typical summer action fare.
I found the second entry in the Hellboy series to be far more compelling than the first. In this installment, the mythical world is rebelling because the human world has largely been ignoring or marginalizing the mythical dimension. The mythical beasts, led by Prince Nuada (Luke Goss) plot world domination. Nuada is set on pulling together the three pieces of the crown that will give its owner full control over the golden army.
This is del Toro's vision and the mythical beings feel like cousins to those in the far darker Pan's Labyrinth. But the psychological exploration that is del Toro's strength is very present here. Hellboy is one of those mythical beings trying to find his place in the world, and even as he strikes at the villains, he understands he is snuffing out a piece of himself. Add to that the natural marital tension that arises between Liz and Red, and the film rises far above the typical summer action fare.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Hancock
I might be able to forgive Hancock for the three homophobic jokes in the first 10 minutes, but I can't forgive it for being agonizingly dull. The film tries to give a little meat to the comic-action-superhero genre, but it rarely succeeds. Will Smith in angsty, I-don't-know-who-I-am mode is just not that interesting.
Hancock is an amnesiac superhero who drinks, berates those he saves and is, as almost everyone he saves or comes across notes, an asshole. He saves Jason Bateman from an oncoming train, and Bateman, a PR man, then decides to help Hancock reform his image. Turns out, all is not as it seems, and we get about an hour of Hancock going through his identity crisis.
The gay-sex innuendo is really out of place. There might actually have been a funny head-up-your-ass moment if the joke hadn't already been beaten to death.
I'm all for good summer diversion, but Hancock is more annoying than diverting.
Hancock is an amnesiac superhero who drinks, berates those he saves and is, as almost everyone he saves or comes across notes, an asshole. He saves Jason Bateman from an oncoming train, and Bateman, a PR man, then decides to help Hancock reform his image. Turns out, all is not as it seems, and we get about an hour of Hancock going through his identity crisis.
The gay-sex innuendo is really out of place. There might actually have been a funny head-up-your-ass moment if the joke hadn't already been beaten to death.
I'm all for good summer diversion, but Hancock is more annoying than diverting.
Would You Believe...?
Get Smart is the best film in years. How about the best film this year? Okay, how about a film worth seeing on a Saturday afternoon when you have nothing else to do.
Well, it's definitely the latter, but I must admit, I think it's even better than that. The creative team certainly misses many opportunities to connect Get Smart to the political moment (the one attempt, James Caan's George Bush reading to kids during imminent attack falls totally flat), but it turns out to be a lot of fun.
Steve Carrel is a different kind of Maxwell Smart. He may be inept, but he is the hero and he does heroic things and not by accident. He's supported by a fine Anne Hathaway and a pretty decent cast that gets the humor and sticks the jokes and the pratfalls.
Get Smart looks like it's doing well enough to warrant a sequel, and I'm okay with that.
Well, it's definitely the latter, but I must admit, I think it's even better than that. The creative team certainly misses many opportunities to connect Get Smart to the political moment (the one attempt, James Caan's George Bush reading to kids during imminent attack falls totally flat), but it turns out to be a lot of fun.
Steve Carrel is a different kind of Maxwell Smart. He may be inept, but he is the hero and he does heroic things and not by accident. He's supported by a fine Anne Hathaway and a pretty decent cast that gets the humor and sticks the jokes and the pratfalls.
Get Smart looks like it's doing well enough to warrant a sequel, and I'm okay with that.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
My Movie is a Mashup
Wanted is an adrenaline rush that tries to redefine the action genre. It feels fresh more because it's a mash-up of other groundbreaking films rather than because its fresh on its own terms.
Those unfamiliar with the excellent Night Watch will likely find the work of directorTimur Bekmambetov to be thrilling. Bekmambetov uses a graphic, stylistic approach to his films that engages the audience in different ways.
Bekmambetov has woven his unique style into the fabric of predecessors like Fight Club and Matrix. James McAvoy is Wesley Gibson, a disaffected young man, whose boss treats him like dirt, whose best friend is cheating with his girlfriend, whose dead-end life sucks. He is the chosen one, however, and it takes Fox (Angelina Jolie) to bring it out of him.
While Wanted draws heavily from these films, it also charts its own complex, dark story about a fraternity of assassins (known as The Fraternity) who take down one to save a thousand. But the world has changed in the thousand years of The Fraternity's existence, and Wesley has to navigate these new complexities as he follows his destiny as a member of the group. He also embarks on a quest to kill the man who killed his father.
McAvoy and Jolie bring the required amount of bad-ass to their roles. McAvoy makes the transformation from tool to super action figure believable and interesting. Jolie adds a dark edge to her action persona. Morgan Freeman is pretty unidimensional. Think Jon Voight in Mission Impossible, rather than Laurence Fishburn in Matrix.
Ultimately, Wanted is not a great movie, but it is, fortunately, a film that has greatness in it. Even when it falters it intrigues and excites.
Those unfamiliar with the excellent Night Watch will likely find the work of directorTimur Bekmambetov to be thrilling. Bekmambetov uses a graphic, stylistic approach to his films that engages the audience in different ways.
Bekmambetov has woven his unique style into the fabric of predecessors like Fight Club and Matrix. James McAvoy is Wesley Gibson, a disaffected young man, whose boss treats him like dirt, whose best friend is cheating with his girlfriend, whose dead-end life sucks. He is the chosen one, however, and it takes Fox (Angelina Jolie) to bring it out of him.
While Wanted draws heavily from these films, it also charts its own complex, dark story about a fraternity of assassins (known as The Fraternity) who take down one to save a thousand. But the world has changed in the thousand years of The Fraternity's existence, and Wesley has to navigate these new complexities as he follows his destiny as a member of the group. He also embarks on a quest to kill the man who killed his father.
McAvoy and Jolie bring the required amount of bad-ass to their roles. McAvoy makes the transformation from tool to super action figure believable and interesting. Jolie adds a dark edge to her action persona. Morgan Freeman is pretty unidimensional. Think Jon Voight in Mission Impossible, rather than Laurence Fishburn in Matrix.
Ultimately, Wanted is not a great movie, but it is, fortunately, a film that has greatness in it. Even when it falters it intrigues and excites.
Sex and the City
I was a big fan of Sex and the City during all of its HBO years, but I must admit I was okay that it signed off after six years. I felt the tale of these four women had run its course. I was also kind of excited that, four years later, we could catch up with them again...like old acquaintances that you want to catch up with from time to time.
That being said, it was nice catching up with them, but nothing truly special. A colleague told me it was about as perfect as a Sex and the City film could be. I can't say I agree. If the television show is going to morph to film, it needs to be bigger--bigger issues, bigger consequences and bigger fashions. That is there, but the annoyance factor is also amplified.
While Sex and the City is all about the women, the men provided a moderating factor that grounded the show and kept it interesting. The men are largely missing from the film. Even Big--among the least interesting of the characters, though he's more 3-dimensional than in the series. But the film is about Carrie and Miranda and Charlotte and Samantha. Wait, once more... But the film is about Carrie and Samantha and some Charlotte.
The women have grown. The film treats them largely with dignity (Samantha and her nastiness not so much).
So, it was a pleasant afternoon with people I used to hang with, but not an intimate moment with a dear friend I hadn't seen in awhile. It will be nice to see them again in a few years.
That being said, it was nice catching up with them, but nothing truly special. A colleague told me it was about as perfect as a Sex and the City film could be. I can't say I agree. If the television show is going to morph to film, it needs to be bigger--bigger issues, bigger consequences and bigger fashions. That is there, but the annoyance factor is also amplified.
While Sex and the City is all about the women, the men provided a moderating factor that grounded the show and kept it interesting. The men are largely missing from the film. Even Big--among the least interesting of the characters, though he's more 3-dimensional than in the series. But the film is about Carrie and Miranda and Charlotte and Samantha. Wait, once more... But the film is about Carrie and Samantha and some Charlotte.
The women have grown. The film treats them largely with dignity (Samantha and her nastiness not so much).
So, it was a pleasant afternoon with people I used to hang with, but not an intimate moment with a dear friend I hadn't seen in awhile. It will be nice to see them again in a few years.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Quick Take: Iron Man
I'm finally getting around to reviewing Iron Man as it's leaving the theaters. Of the potential summer blockbusters, Iron Man has been the best so far. Robert Downey is great in the role, supported by a great Gwyneth Paltrow. The battle scene at the end of the film is anti-climactic rather than a climax to the film. But the path to get there is always engaging.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Speed Racer
So, I've finally had a chance to see the first three intended blockbusters of the 2008 summer season now that commencement is over. Of course, I'm saying intended, since Speed Racer has yet to break $40 million in its second weekend and Prince Caspian, which was expected to pull $80 million in its first weekend is "falling short," according to the blogs. Certainly, attendance out here in the hinters was sparse at all three films, though word is that Iron Man has legitimately earned the blockbuster label.
Let's take them in order, folks.
Given the brutal reviews Speed Racer was getting, I decided to hedge my bets and travel 90 minutes to the IMAX to see it. I was certainly taking a risk that five stories of Speed would be better than five feet of Speed on the local screen. And the Wachowskis have done interesting things with sound that attracted me to the larger experience, too.
Are the reviews right? Pretty much. Speed Racer is pitched at 10-year-old boys, and unlike the great kids films, it offers very little for the adult chaperone to chew on. The storytelling is muddled; character development is non-existent. Visually, the film is sometimes interesting and often headache inducing.
But the Wachowski brothers do interesting things and, flawed as Speed is, there are interesting things here. The film creates its own universe with its own rules. It doesn't rigidly follow its own rules, like, say, the Buffyverse, but it allows for curious things to happen. The visual style, that slips not so effortlessly back and forth into animation, keeps things moving (if not necessarily interesting).
The actors are reduced to cartoon characters, though generally with less depth. There's little opportunity for Emile Hersch (Speed), John Goodman (Pops) or Matthew Fox (Racer X) to do more than draw a passing familiarity to their animated selves. Any depth of character comes from our familiarity with the original cartoon. They're less wasted than irrelevant.
I could go through the plot, but it, too, is largely irrelevant. So what is relevant to the film. Largely, its the races. The animation is slick. The "Racerverse" has its own rules of gravity and geography that make the races is intriguing.
Mostly, though, there's far too little that is interesting or relevant in Speed Racer. It hardly invoked my fond memories of the cartoon I watched as a kid. It didn't bring out the sense of wonder in the kid that's inside me now. And it didn't even give me the adrenalin rush that even a bad Wachowski film usually does.
Let's take them in order, folks.
Given the brutal reviews Speed Racer was getting, I decided to hedge my bets and travel 90 minutes to the IMAX to see it. I was certainly taking a risk that five stories of Speed would be better than five feet of Speed on the local screen. And the Wachowskis have done interesting things with sound that attracted me to the larger experience, too.
Are the reviews right? Pretty much. Speed Racer is pitched at 10-year-old boys, and unlike the great kids films, it offers very little for the adult chaperone to chew on. The storytelling is muddled; character development is non-existent. Visually, the film is sometimes interesting and often headache inducing.
But the Wachowski brothers do interesting things and, flawed as Speed is, there are interesting things here. The film creates its own universe with its own rules. It doesn't rigidly follow its own rules, like, say, the Buffyverse, but it allows for curious things to happen. The visual style, that slips not so effortlessly back and forth into animation, keeps things moving (if not necessarily interesting).
The actors are reduced to cartoon characters, though generally with less depth. There's little opportunity for Emile Hersch (Speed), John Goodman (Pops) or Matthew Fox (Racer X) to do more than draw a passing familiarity to their animated selves. Any depth of character comes from our familiarity with the original cartoon. They're less wasted than irrelevant.
I could go through the plot, but it, too, is largely irrelevant. So what is relevant to the film. Largely, its the races. The animation is slick. The "Racerverse" has its own rules of gravity and geography that make the races is intriguing.
Mostly, though, there's far too little that is interesting or relevant in Speed Racer. It hardly invoked my fond memories of the cartoon I watched as a kid. It didn't bring out the sense of wonder in the kid that's inside me now. And it didn't even give me the adrenalin rush that even a bad Wachowski film usually does.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay
What to do on a Saturday afternoon when you have to see a movie because it's been weeks. Well, April 25 did not bring an grand openings, though the promise of the summer movie season is just a week away. After reading a very positive review by A.O. Scott in the New York Times, I decided to check out Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay. Truth be told, the film has a little something to chew on.
Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay is not your typical stoner comedy. In fact, our heroes are not stoned or looking for bud for a large chunk of the film. Kumar's love of weed moves him to smuggle dope and a bong onto his flight to, where else, Amsterdam. When he says "bong" people hear "bomb" and hijinx ensue. Harold and Kumar are delivered to Gitmo, but escape two minutes later and spend the rest of the film being chased across the south.
The film has lots of laughs, and not just scatological humor (though such humor figures prominently as expected). Much of the humor and the plot are driven by judgments people make based on the appearance of others. That gives Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay a resonance that most stoner comedies never achieve.
The film is definitely deeply flawed, but a late scene with W alone makes the film worth an afternoon at the movies. The cameo by Neil Patrick Harris as "Neil Patrick Harris" is also worth the price of admission.
Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay is not your typical stoner comedy. In fact, our heroes are not stoned or looking for bud for a large chunk of the film. Kumar's love of weed moves him to smuggle dope and a bong onto his flight to, where else, Amsterdam. When he says "bong" people hear "bomb" and hijinx ensue. Harold and Kumar are delivered to Gitmo, but escape two minutes later and spend the rest of the film being chased across the south.
The film has lots of laughs, and not just scatological humor (though such humor figures prominently as expected). Much of the humor and the plot are driven by judgments people make based on the appearance of others. That gives Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay a resonance that most stoner comedies never achieve.
The film is definitely deeply flawed, but a late scene with W alone makes the film worth an afternoon at the movies. The cameo by Neil Patrick Harris as "Neil Patrick Harris" is also worth the price of admission.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
The Assassination of Jesse James
It's March 2008, so it's a little late to be talking about the best films of 2007. But I just had the opportunity to see The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. This is a film unfairly overlooked by the Academy, one of the best of the year and easily in my top five.
Casey Affleck got great reviews (and a nomination) for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. It's a stellar performance and deserving of a win. He's supported by strong work from Brad Pitt, Sam Rockwell and in small roles Sam Shepherd, Mary Louise Parker and Zooey Deschanel.
The film is beautifully shot with an incredible score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis. Like There Will Be Blood, the score works as a character the way it's integral to the story.
At 2:40, the film is longer than it needs to be, but it's never boring, just slow moving. There are moments here and there where The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is in danger of losing its way, but it never happens.
Casey Affleck got great reviews (and a nomination) for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. It's a stellar performance and deserving of a win. He's supported by strong work from Brad Pitt, Sam Rockwell and in small roles Sam Shepherd, Mary Louise Parker and Zooey Deschanel.
The film is beautifully shot with an incredible score by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis. Like There Will Be Blood, the score works as a character the way it's integral to the story.
At 2:40, the film is longer than it needs to be, but it's never boring, just slow moving. There are moments here and there where The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is in danger of losing its way, but it never happens.
Persepolis
The film of Marjane Satrapi's graphic memoirs, Persepolis, by Satrapi, is superb. Yes, it's animated. Yes, it's in black and white, and, yes, it's in French. But the film is alternatingly charming and raw, just like the books on which it's based.
Satrapi was born and raised in Iran during the last years of the Shah and during the Islamic revolution. The books provide more of a context than the film, but Satrapi does a marvelous job of capturing the strength of the women, herself included, as Marjane's world changes. She head's to Vienna for her adolescent years and then returns to Iran again, only to leave for good. The film rarely feels like an adaptation.
Persepolis works well in French, and the animation is stunning and creative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
