Thursday, January 31, 2008
Wild Things
Malena
"Malena" is gorgeously shot, with an always scrolling camera that shows all the rooms and landscapes from every angle without cutting too much. When it does use cuts, it's with a deft touch. For instance, there's a scene where Bellucci is waiting outside a door for someone to drop a key down to her while the kid looks on. The film alternates between shots of him and of her, and while the shots of the kid are all the same distance, the shots of Bellucci alternate between long-range, medium, and close-up, in sync with the kid's emotional attachment to her as she goes through the motions of sneaking into this guy's house and the kid feels further from her when he thinks she's seeing another man. Though the result isn't perfect, people put thought into this movie, which is more than can be said for most these days.
Italian films always seem like the people are overacting, but I think that's just what Italians are like. Not Italian-American, but Italian-Italian. Big arm gestures and people shouting things like "badachoota, bona mitza, badababah." My viewing of the classic 6-hour "The Best of Youth" was hampered in parts by this trait, but maybe if I watched it again, I could accept it, or at least look past it.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
Into the fray comes Twin Galaxies, a non-profit video game high score records organization where volunteer referees do things like -- for no money -- watch 8 videotapes of 48 hours of footage to verify someone's high score on a game called Nibbler. Opposed to Twin Galaxies is a guy who calls himself Mr. Awesome who's miffed nobody recognizes his Missile Command high score. You can't make this up.
When Twin Galaxies rejects Steve's high score for various reasons, Steve sets out on a righteous, frustrating mission to be acknowledged as the best. And we know he's the best because when he plays Donkey Kong, the documentarian plays things like Joe Esposito's "You're the Best" and Survivor's "Eye of the Tiger." What ensues is fascinating, sad, enraging, and inspirational. The climax builds tension more effectively than most thrillers out there, and the ending is perfect. And it's all true. This is as good as movies get.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Gates of Heaven
Monday, January 28, 2008
R-Point
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Rambo
Rambo lives in Thailand, and a church group from the United States asks him to take them upriver to Burma, where the military is committing genocide against the Karen ethnic group. Before he goes, we witness several exchanges between Rambo and members of the church group, all to the effect that if they're not bringing weapons, they're not changing anything, and they should just go home. When he finally does take them up the river, the violence starts in earnest, and it never lets up. We see the military massacring civilians and Rambo massacring the military. And in the end, "Rambo" wraps up the Rambo series a lot better than last year's "Rocky Balboa" wrapped up the Rocky series.
The story is lean and focused, short and direct, not getting distracted in useless subplots. This movie is about 90 minutes long, and that's a good thing. More films should be this short. That's part of why I liked "Vacancy" so much. "300" would have been a lot better if it were half an hour shorter. If it's short, that means the filmmakers trimmed the fat and are showing you only what is necessary to tell the story. It shows, I think, that more thought was put into the film. Instead, nowadays people can't decide what's useful and what isn't, so they put everything into the movie, and a lot of times, it ruins the experience. But I digress.
"Rambo" is not pleasant to watch, but it is good, and I think there's value in seeing it. In one notable sequence, "Rambo" shows the Burmese military committing horrific acts against the Karen people, including the lopping off of body parts and even some close-up killings of children with bayonets. Unlike the film "Hotel Rwanda," which tried to convey the horrors of genocide within the framework of a PG-13 movie (and for the most part it succeeded), "Rambo" is not so subtle and wants it in your face so you can't look past it. The explicit nature of the film is the political message, much like last year's powerful "The Devil Came on Horseback," which used mountains of photographic evidence to show the Sudanese genocide in the Darfur region. In "Rambo," the images leave an indelible impression of the horrors being committed, and -- possibly, arguably -- of the horrors that need to be committed to stop it. And the film also carries a more personal message, of finding oneself and remaining true to who you are. For Rambo, that's being a killing machine: "You either live for nothing, or you die for something." While it's completely understandable that some people would not want to see this, for those who do, it's curiously thought-provoking and it accomplishes everything it set out to do.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Total Recall
Friday, January 25, 2008
Norbit
Atonement
"Atonement" is basically two very different films. It starts as a tale about the unreliability of perceptions, not too unlike documentaries like "After Innocence" and all the stories of people being freed from prison after being convicted based on faulty eyewitness testimony. We see various people at a large English estate before England entered World War II. For the most part, it's rich people being bored. But we also see Briony, a young girl, witness two encounters between Keira Knightley and James McAvoy, who looks like a poor man's Russell Crowe. Briony interprets these incidents to show McAvoy is a sex-crazed psychopath. The film then immediately shows the events leading up to these encounters and we see that Briony was mistaken. Then Briony sees another girl being raped and, even though she saw the perpetrator in the dark and only for a split second, she says she believes it was McAvoy. Hmm, was she right? The point of this film can't be whether or not McAvoy did it, because it's pretty obvious who was responsible.
The film next moves to England participating in World War II in France. Briony and Knightley are nurses, and McAvoy is a soldier. With gruesome scenes of war wounds and characters mourning over their lives' turns, the film's theme switches to showing the vicissitudes of fate, how random events can lead to dramatic consequences. "Irreversible" conveyed something similar, but much more memorably and provocatively. But whereas the first half of "Atonement" uses changes in time to further the story, the latter half switches too much between past and present and the device is a crutch more than anything else.
The problem isn't the acting, with decent performances by Knightley and McAvoy. Some decent directing was also present, especially in a several minute shot on a French beach that shows hundreds and hundreds of soldiers going about their daily routine, and is at times comical, nationalistic, terrible, and bewildering. Doesn't quite pack the punch of the long shots in "Children of Men," but it's still good.
The problem is in the story. There's no reason the two halves go together. We watch an hour of rich people being bored, and then we watch how war can be bloody, mundane, and horrific. They have nothing to do with the other. Also, the title begs the question, has the character who has sinned atoned for her sins? The answer is a resounding, unqualified no. It's not even a close call. There's nothing to debate at the end of the movie. Did Briony make up for what she did? No, no, no. So what's the point of this movie?
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Four Weddings and a Funeral
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Giant
Killer of Sheep
Cinderella
Factory Girl
"Factory Girl" is way too fawning about Sedgwick and Andy Warhol and everyone else at the Factory, which was the place where they hung out and made terrible movies and not much else. It's full of lines like, "You're a superstar," and "You've got the whole world on a string." There's a difference between saying it and showing it. And there's no sense of irony here, no critique of a culture that would make people like this famous. The movie does show a downside to Sedgwick's life, but it's that she got into drugs and died too young, not that she didn't do anything with her life. As if the movie doesn't go over the top in making Sedgwick so glamorous, the credits even feature interviews with real people who knew her and talk about what a wonderful person she was -- it's unwatchable.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Hard Eight
There Will Be Blood
"There Will Be Blood" --
aside from being the ad slogan for "Saw II" -- is director Paul Thomas Anderson's epic about the American experience and the forces -- capitalism, entrepreneurial ingenuity, and religion -- that have shaped it.
Much of this movie reminded me of "The New World," another American historical epic told in part by the use of iconic images. One example is in the beginning sequence, with the discordant strings, where Plainview holds up his hand, covered with oil, for others to see, reminiscent of a preacher testifying, signaling a coming conflict with religion. The film also features several parallel sequences that frame the narrative. Plainview in the beginning and the end finds himself in two very different ditches. Sunday makes Plainview speak to the congregation and say what a sinner he's been, knowing full well Plainview doesn't believe it. And later in the film, Sunday gets his comeuppance.
The main conflict in the story is between the oilman and the preacher. Plainview is self-aware. He knows exactly what he's selling and how to sell it, and he knows what he wants. And when he's telling people of all the benefits he'll bring to their community when they let him use their land, we the viewers know -- because Day-Lewis conveys it in his portrayal -- that Plainview is not making promises he plans to keep, but is merely telling the people what they want to hear.
But I get no sense that Eli Sunday's character knows what he really is. He comes across more like a nutter than a businessman who is selling religion. The dialogue was written so that the actor playing Sunday might have tried to convey this self-awareness -- I'm thinking of where he asks Plainview to introduce him at the inaugural well blessing, where he confronts his dad about how stupid the deal they made was, and where he's baptizing Plainview. But Paul Dano doesn't really convey that he knows he's a self-promoting fraud who, deep down, is not too dissimilar from Plainview. Instead, I see him as sincere, a little callow, and a weakling. To the extent this lack of self-awareness was on purpose, I think it was a mistake, as the movie would have been a lot more interesting to have that similarity between Sunday and Plainview. To the extent Anderson and Dano meant to have Sunday be self-aware, I don't think they succeeded.
I said in a previous post that I didn't see a major career for Paul Dano, and I stand by that statement. To be fair, very few people could have acted opposite Day-Lewis in this movie and succeeded. But regardless of that, to have him in conflict with Day-Lewis is no conflict; Sunday is clearly outmatched, and there's never any question that Plainview will roll right over him. That may be the point, but I would have liked it if it was more of a fair fight. But of course, then you'd have to find an actor that could go toe-to-toe with Day-Lewis, and that's an awfully short list. Possibly Gael Garcia Bernal would have worked. He's shown he can convey the fraud ("Bad Education"), the poor man with a subtle, wounded pride ("Y Tu Mama Tambien"), and the sincere believer ("The Motorcycle Diaries"). And to top it off, he's handsome with seductive eyes; it'd be more believable that people would follow him than a scrawny sapling like Dano.
The ending -- "I'm finished" -- turns the previous 2 and a half hours into a joke, the punch line of which is the name of the movie. But I dig it. Unlike the Coen brothers in "No Country for Old Men," Anderson knows how to end a movie. The last line is also as pregnant with meaning as that in "Bad Education." And the final confrontation between Plainview and Sunday is great. It's almost too outlandish and over-the-top, but it's clear that the fight's been building up the whole movie, so when all their pent-up emotions come out, it's believable because the film has earned it.
Can't Hardly Wait
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Old School
Year of the Dog
The Nanny Diaries
Saturday, January 19, 2008
3:10 to Yuma
Friday, January 18, 2008
Exiled
Sorum
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
No Country for Old Men
I don't want to come across as a negative nancy, so I'll say this right out: this is a good movie. The use of expansive landscape shots in the beginning effectively incorporates nature as another character, setting the tone and mood like in "Mountain Patrol." The Coen brothers also build a great deal of suspense whenever Bardem's character, Anton Chigurh (not pronounced "sugar"), is closing in on Brolin. These sequences draw not a little from horror film, and outdo most recent ones by a long shot. "No Country" also signals a return to form for the Coen brothers, being much closer to their superior early work ("Blood Simple," "Fargo," "Miller's Crossing") than their more recent "The Man Who Wasn't There." Bringing their trademark style -- violent and quirky, with healthy doses of black humor -- the Coen brothers may be the perfect choice to bring Cormac McCarthy's amoral world to the screen. Plus, Bardem was creepy as hell.
But the film was not without its flaws. Harrelson was woefully miscast and outmatched acting-wise, but his role is thankfully brief. For awhile, the film is also distractingly similar to "Fargo": a crime gone bad, told alongside the parallel story of police investigating it, with all the characters interacting with the local yokels. The main difference is that the Coen brothers made "Fargo" as funny as "No Country" is terrifying. True, the film is adapted from a book, so what could the Coen brothers do? But still, to have that similarity invites the comparison, and one can't help but think of "Fargo" as the better film. And for a chase film that does so well in building suspense, "No Country" peters out towards the end, tying up loose ends in a distant way that feels tacked on. It's off-putting to know you're watching the denouement while you're wondering, where was the climax?
El Mariachi
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Whispering Corridors
This is one of the many times I've thought I watch too many movies. I actually know of a whole subgenre in Korean film of movies about ghosts haunting all-female schools. This, "Memento Mori," and "Wishing Stairs" are part of a series, but there are others inspired by "Whispering Corridors." To my mind, "Memento Mori" is the best of this subgenre. It's basically "Whispering Corridors 2," but with a different cast, different characters, and different themes. It addresses Sapphic love among students and is an unlikely combination of "Brokeback Mountain," "Ringu," and "King Kong." It's unlike anything else I've ever seen.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Cello
Friday, January 11, 2008
Juno
There's nothing here. Not since "Network" has there been such forced and aggressively bad dialogue. It's not funny or engaging, no matter how many jokes and quips spew out of the characters' mouths. And the music was God-awful. It was like listening to every song that wasn't good enough to make it into "Once," only "sung" by William Hung.
If I had to point out the positive things in the film, I could find them, but they're minor. Jennifer Garner was actually decent. And Allison Janney's character -- the stepmother -- was more nuanced than I thought she would be.
I keep reading movie critics talk about how great a year 2007 was for movies, and I still don't see it. "Juno" was supposed to be great, and it's really not. I still can only think of 5 movies that would make it into my top 10 of the year.
Pretty in Pink
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Shoot 'Em Up
You can imagine the possibilities. Owen and Bellucci are having sex. Men with guns burst into the room. They continue having sex while Owen kills them. At the end, he says, "Talk about shootin' your load." Classic. Or consider, after shooting many people in a room to death, he turns to a man still left alive and says, "So what do you think of the Second Amendment now?" It has the best smart-aleck answer to "How'd you know that?": "You didn't hear of my Nobel Prize?" Owen also kills several people with a carrot, which he is always eating.
This film is a lot like "Crank," another clever non-stop action movie, and both of them, despite the action, bored me at times. But, I must say, some of the action sequences in "Shoot 'Em Up" are so preposterous (in a good way) that they have to be seen to be believed.
The film is also hampered by the third wheel, Paul Giamatti. He can't act. He's a male Judi Dench: an overrated one-note actor. Whenever anyone needs a snooty sprig, an uptight person in power, i.e. Queen, rich heiress, domineering boss, they call Dame Dench. When directors want a worthless schlub, Giamatti's their man. The difference is that Dench is sometimes worth watching (the Bond films), while Giamatti never is ("Sideways," "Cinderella Man," etc.). The distressing thing about him, though, is that now he's branching out and getting action roles. When will people learn?
Sunshine
Another thing this film shows, though, is that every decent idea for space movies has already been done by "2001," "Alien," and "Event Horizon."
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
3:10 to Yuma
"3:10 to Yuma" does well in showing how characters become weathered when camping out and fighting in the plains and cities and mines, but as a story, it's lacking. The plot is there, but the direction is lacking. The gun battles -- of which there are a few -- seem perfunctory and lack tension. And the in-between sober dialogue of justice and father-son relationships doesn't reach the levels it should to serve as the crux of the film.
The ending veers sharply towards incomprehensibility. The last five minutes show the whole film was meant as a vehicle to show what a father will do for his sons. But Ben Wade (Russell Crowe), the mass murdering robber who grew up without parents, is an unlikely partner for Christian Bale's character in this mission. If it had been better executed, or if there had been more build-up in the rest of the film, it might fly. But as it stands, it's unsatisfying.
Sunday, January 6, 2008
Lost in Translation
Saturday, January 5, 2008
The Mask of Zorro
It's ok.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Stardust
It's a pretty good straight-to-DVD movie, except that it played in theaters. It's a decent fantasy in the genre of quasi-children's kings-and-witches-and-magic stories. But it won't have the staying power of "Labyrinth" or "The Princess Bride."
Claire Danes can't act. That's a sign of how bad a year 2007 was for movies: movies were so bad this year, I was actually impressed by a Claire Danes movie.
The Bourne Supremacy
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Hot Rod
La Vie en Rose
Aside from the musical, the biopic is the most worthless of all film genres. Each has exceptional movies ("Singing' in the Rain" and "Citizen Kane" come to mind -- I'll count "Citizen Kane" even though it's a fictional biopic), but by and large, biopics are too long, self-indulgent, and lack any coherent, engaging narrative arc. You can watch "Ali," "Walk the Line," and "Ray" all you want, and you may never be able to tell what the story is. "Capote" and "The Last King of Scotland" are based on books, so they escape that biopic trap, but with these films too, the viewer is left with nothing but the feeling that they watched nothing more than an impression.
This leads to the primary characteristic of these movies, which is also the chief flaw -- the movie focuses on one actor and requires the audience to watch this person for 2 and a half hours, only to say at the end, "Yeah, that's probably what that person was like." Why should we have to sit through such a long imitation of someone? Who expects this of us? And why do we do it?
Fictional films that have adopted the biopic format are infinitely superior: "Boogie Nights" can hold its own against any true biopic in the last 30 years. That's because fictional films don't feel the need to include every detail of a person's life, whether it matters or not, and don't have to include characters that don't matter. For instance, in this film, there's a scene where a woman talks to Edith Piaf, and Piaf is overjoyed at the praise from this particular woman, but we have no idea who the woman is, and then at the end she sees an "old friend" at her last concert, and we can't remember who he is because he probably doesn't matter.
The Bourne Identity
"Identity" is definitely more plot-driven, whereas "Ultimatum" relies on almost exclusively action sequences to propel the story forward. "Identity" also has the great Franka Potente as my love interest, Marie. She should be in more movies. This is also the finest work of director Doug Liman, whose interesting career trajectory took him from the slick "Swingers," to this shining example of early-21st Century new-fu action cinema, to the devastatingly terrible "Mr. and Mrs. Smith," a film so bad it should have put a nail in the coffin of everyone involved.
By "Ultimatum," I am a tightly wound revenge machine, similar to Jack Bauer in "24." In "Identity," though, I'm more like someone from the TV show "Heroes": an ordinary person with extraordinary capabilities. "Identity" dwells more on me learning of my powers and coming to grips with the person I was.
The most poignant moment in "Ultimatum" is when I tell the other agent at the end, "Look at us. Look at what they make you give." This line was originally spoken in "Identity" by Clive Owen's character, The Professor; spoken to me in the woods before The Professor dies. It's a nice theme to the whole series: the misuse of American power at the expense of people in furtherance of a questionable goal.