Confessions of a Dangerous Mind

One of my New Year's resolutions: rewatch Charlie Kaufman films. I just don't like his movies, but film nuts seem to like him, so I'll give him another go. He wrote this adaptation of the autobiography of the host of "The Gong Show" and "The Dating Game." The host claims in his spare time he was a government assassin. He seems nuts. The film does a nice job of portraying Chuck Barris's character as someone who was probably, for all intents and purposes, totally schizo, but without it coming across as comic or condescending.

The film's decent, but not really Kaufman-esque, which I don't mind. My Wikipedia research indicates Kaufman is upset because George Clooney (who directed) edited the script and didn't consult with Kaufman. You know what, Charlie? Suck it up. You're not that great a writer, and there's nothing wrong with a director trying to make the incoherent coherent. One can only imagine the pretentious fantasy world Kaufman envisioned, or the fourth-wall-ish ideas he had for this gem of a film idea. Even though I'm not the biggest Clooney-as-director fan ("Michael Clayton" blew like the wind), I will say this is probably better than what Kaufman had in mind.

Bad Taste

Peter Jackson's first film, a gory zombie/alien action/adventure/comedy. If I made this over the weekend with my friends and a budget of $30, I'd be very proud of myself. But it really begs the question how this director was given hundreds of millions of dollars to make "The Lord of the Rings." It certainly wasn't on the basis of this film. So what was it? "The Frighteners"? "Dead Alive"? Someone tell me!!!

Baghead

One of the so-called DIY, mumblecore movies. According to Wikipedia, these movies are characterized by "ultra-low budget production (often employing digital video cameras), focus on personal relationships between twenty-somethings, improvised scripts, and non-professional actors." However, to my mind, these movies are characterized by bad acting, bad scripts, and a complete lack of story. I must say, though, of the mumblecore movies I've seen, "Baghead" is by far the best. Considering how the others I've seen are unwatchable, that's not saying much. But still, the movie has a good premise: a pair of couples go to a cabin for the weekend to write a movie, but things go awry when a man with a bag on his head makes an unexpected appearance. What follows is supposed to be horror, I guess, but "Halloween" was more terrifying and was also made on a fairly small budget. So if you want to see horror, watch "Halloween," but if you want to watch mumblecore horror . . . just watch "Halloween" instead.

Though this critic watched the whole thing, the Just Bourne Critic was not as excited and continued to sleep. Thus, this critic happened to catch most of "Something New" on the Oxygen channel. A few observations. One, viewers of the Oxygen channel must love diets and perfume. Two, I was left with a few questions about "Something New." Usually in a movie like this, where two opposites attract, each one learns a little about his- or herself before they come together at the end. Here, he never changed; she never taught him anything. That seemed odd to me. Also, we never really get to see his friends. Again, in the opposites attract genre, I think it's typical to see both sides. But since "Something New" is told from her perspective, and it's all about how she changes and how her friends and family view the situation, I'm willing to live with those aspects of the film. After watching it, some may ask themselves, why would any man put up with someone who can be condescending, high-strung, and high-maintenance. If you want the answer, take another look at the actress.

The Still Sleeping Critic also let this critic catch some of "Fargo" on AMC, where the language is edited. A few observations. One, it's a great film. Two, the f-word was used as an adjective three times before I stopped watching, and each time it was replaced with a different dubbed word: frozen, frugal, and then fruitless. Interesting.

The Duchess

The movie everyone wanted -- the real story of the Duchess of Devonshire, which plays like a cross between "Marie Antoinette" and "The Other Boleyn Girl." No wait, I was wrong. No one was asking for that movie. Nor should they.

The House Bunny

Five seconds in, I was like, "Jesus Christ." A few minutes later I was more like, "Oh my God." But then I settled in and the movie found its stride and I enjoyed it. It never really rises above being a second-rate "Legally Blonde" or a shameless plug for Playboy, but it has its moments, almost all of them courtesy of Anna Faris. My favorite parts were when she said "Good morning, Pooter. You're looking dapper," and said Natalie in her Exorcist voice. They don't sound funny, but if you watch it, you'll know what I mean. Come to think of it, I was so amused by this movie that in retrospect, "The House Bunny" made "Burn After Reading" look like "Manhattan."

War, Inc.

Tepid political satire about the synergy (in the Teddy K. sense) of American imperialism, multinational corporations, and Hilary Duff. I don't claim to have seen the whole film, but if the first half hour is any indication of the rest of the film, "War, Inc." is terrible.

Burn After Reading

"Hi. We're the Coen brothers. We just won some Oscars, so you'll watch whatever we make."

I was not impressed with this story of the CIA, the gym Hardbodies, and a bunch of incomparably stupid "adults." The plot doesn't sustain interest, but it doesn't have to if the jokes are funny. Which brings me to the jokes. The jokes aren't funny, aside from a few amusing moments with Brad Pitt. In fact, it was so not funny that in retrospect, "Hamlet 2" made "Burn After Reading" look like "Hannah and her Sisters."

On the plus side, I saw this two times today and still had time to fit a run in.

Hamlet 2

A high school drama teacher's life is a "parody of a tragedy." He's a terrible teacher and a terrible playwright and he's losing his job. In a last-ditch effort to save drama at his school, he has his students (who he mistakenly thinks are troubled teens) perform his original work, "Hamlet 2," which involves a time machine, Jesus, and musical numbers.

At first it comes dangerously close to being a spoof of "Dangerous Minds" along the lines of "Scary Movie," "Epic Movie," etc. But it rises above that and reminds me of Tobias directing "Romeo and Juliet" and "Rushmore." Worth watching, and one of the funnier films I've seen in awhile.

Sunrise

Ah, the sweet story of a man who tries to kill his wife so he can live with his mistress, but then has a change of heart and learns to appreciate the one he's with. It's not a talkie, so we hear organ music and see overacting, but the cinematography was probably good at the time.

The Lord of the Rings

I've now seen the extended versions and the regular versions. Can't say I know what the difference is (more of Grond in the extended?), but they're both good. However, this time this critic watched it with the Riddler, who made me wonder, why doesn't Gandalf use more magic, where are the non-white Middle Earth inhabitants, why didn't Gandalf use magic this time, why does Sauron look like a vah-jay-jay, again with the magic. I don't have the answers. Maybe they're in the book. And maybe the book gives a more explicit PTSD explanation for why Frodo leaves the Shire at the end.

The Band's Visit

The story of an Egyptian police band trying to find its way to an Arab cultural center in Israel to play a gig. As luck would have it, they get lost along the way and end up in a small Israeli town. It starts out quite funny in a straight-faced, staid kind of way. But then it tries to be serious and explore the love lives of the characters and it goes somewhat downhill. However, the latter half isn't bad enough to ruin the film, in part because, contrary to what I expected, it's not one of those can't-we-all-get-along movies. There's too many of those. This isn't one.

Chop Shop

This film chronicles the lives of a poor brother and sister in the chop shop district of New York City. Aside from some characters going to the baseball stadium and the viewer hearing the fans chant "Mets" over and over, I'm not sure there's anything that would lead you to believe it doesn't take place in a third world country. Well, maybe the license plates, but I wasn't paying attention to those. I like that eye-opening quality of "Chop Shop," observing how the other half lives.

But the main characters are children, and unless we're talking about an Iranian film like "Children of Heaven" or "The Color of Paradise," that's usually not good enough to carry the film. Here, the actors aren't the best, they don't come across as very sympathetic, and they certainly don't carry the film.

Twilight

Before I saw this movie, I had already written the review I wanted to post: "If I ever see this movie again, I'm going to need two tickets. One for me, and one for the man with a gun to my head. And hopefully he's paying."

But after actually watching "Twilight," I can't say that, because the movie is good. And I want to emphasize, the movie is good. Not the acting, not the script, not the story, not the special effects. Bella and Edward weren't the greatest actors. Bella, though, had a certain indefinable quality that made her appropriately cast: she's fairly normal looking, but a viewer can comfortably look at her for long periods of time. Edward is, frankly, not too easy on the eyes, which is for me a significant problem. But this critic's lady friends inform him that Edward is in fact hot. So I guess for the target audience, Edward was appropriately cast as well.

I attribute everything good in the movie to the director, Catherine Hardwicke. She made "Thirteen," and the better parts of "Twilight" brought to mind that film, such as the realistic, poignant drama between Bella and her father. For me, the most memorable parts of the movie were when Bella and Edward were with each other (and they weren't called on to act too much, which spoiled some scenes). With the tone set by New Age-y, angsty, emo music (in case you can't guess, I have no idea how to describe the music, but it was good), the camera lingers on them, and they sigh and fail to complete their sentences and stare at each other. Just when things start to heat up, the camera drifts away before things get too saucy. As far as content goes, it's a soft PG-13, but it's sexier than a few R-rated Alyssa Milano films I've seen. And overall, I think it captures very well the world of teenagers and at the same time creates an escapist fantasy out of all the problems teenagers face.

The bottom line is, I will not read the books, and if Hardwicke does not direct the sequel, there's a good chance that the review I wanted to write for "Twilight" will be perfectly appropriate for that movie.

The Dark Knight

I stand corrected: Christian Bale does take his shirt off. When he's on the boat with the Russian ballet, we catch a side glimpse for a split second. But for the record, I don't think that counts.

After a second viewing, I stand by my original review. The Joker scenes are great, like when he's leaning out the window of the car or robbing the bank. I like the premise, that a terrorist turns a whole city into chaos. And I like how Alfred describes the Joker: "Some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn."

But the non-Joker parts drag. The turning of Two-Face still makes no sense, and I think the movie would have been better served by losing an hour, losing Two-Face, and focusing on the Joker.

Man on Wire

A documentary about one man's lifelong desire to walk a tightrope between the Twin Towers. It's a fascinating story, and it has some great, hauntingly beautiful images of -- get this -- a man on a wire. But the film feels incomplete. We see the man and his posse of followers, and we wonder, what do these people do for money, how do they have years to spend just planning the event and practicing in the backyard, why do hippies from the US hang out with this French guy, in short who are these people? It's also confusing what was authentic footage and what was reenacted, and if it was authentic, who was filming and why. That's too many questions for such a simple film.

Wanted

Here's how it starts: "A thousand years ago . . . A clan of weavers formed a secret society of assassins. They silently carried out executions to restore order to a world on the brink of chaos. They called themselves the Fraternity. Six weeks ago . . ."

Loses you at weavers, doesn't it? That's where it lost me.

What follows is equal parts "Lucky Number Slevin" (without the Kansas City Shuffle), "Shoot 'Em Up" (without the carrot humor), and "Fight Club" (without the coolness). A better title for this film would have been, "Not Wanted."

The Incredible Hulk

Like "Iron Man," but a lot worse. The Hulk looks great in the beginning, when he's just a creature lurking in the shadows. But as soon as we see the full thing, the CGI doesn't do it.

Edward Norton? Really? And Liv Tyler? Please.

Black Caesar

A powerful story, shoddily told. Not all poorly filmed films are unwatchable, though.

WALL-E

An hour-and-a-half version of the Bjork video "All is Full of Love," with touches of "Toys" and "Event Horizon." The story between WALL-E and EVE is sweet, but when the overweight humans get in the picture, the movie loses momentum fast. It's no "Finding Nemo."